|
United States10501 Posts
A new study says the average age of video-game players in the United States is 35, and oh, by the way: They're overweight and tend to be depressed.
The average America is 45 and overweight and depressed. We are 10 years ahead of the curve. I think that makes us gifted.
|
On August 19 2009 09:42 DM20 wrote: No researcher worth their salt would have used BMI.
and why is that?
|
On August 19 2009 09:26 GhostKorean wrote: While it is true that some gamers need to exercise more often, they shouldn't stereotype all gamers like this.
I exercise quite a lot every day and I'm still overweight. GG me.
|
On September 02 2009 03:11 Louder wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2009 09:26 GhostKorean wrote: While it is true that some gamers need to exercise more often, they shouldn't stereotype all gamers like this. I exercise quite a lot every day and I'm still overweight. GG me.
Eat less imo.
|
On August 28 2009 09:28 Boundz(DarKo) wrote: This is america. Not gamers.
Yeah, pretty much. Gaming is so mainstream now that it's not really associated with the fat, nerd loner in Europe anyways.
|
On September 01 2009 22:43 MutaDoom wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2009 22:15 PobTheCad wrote: the more time you spend on games = the less time you have spending doing things that you could relate to the average person at a workplace or social gathering. Wrong. What about gamers at work? well i was talking about starcraft since this is a starcraft site don't know about you but SC isn't a popular topic at my workplace
|
On August 19 2009 09:27 Folca wrote: Well in the general point of view, this is definitely true.
I agree.
obviously gamer = game addiction
|
On September 02 2009 17:22 PobTheCad wrote:Show nested quote +On September 01 2009 22:43 MutaDoom wrote:On September 01 2009 22:15 PobTheCad wrote: the more time you spend on games = the less time you have spending doing things that you could relate to the average person at a workplace or social gathering. Wrong. What about gamers at work? well i was talking about starcraft since this is a starcraft site don't know about you but SC isn't a popular topic at my workplace
Yep.
Starcraft and videogames are for Nerds/Kids, don't try to talk about videogames with normal people : P
...
Its not ironic, its true!
|
Personally excercise increases my sc play and focus because I get more energy and focus.
There is no reason you shouldn't be able to be fit while playing starcraft. If you aren't then go do something about it.
|
Im not overweight and Im not depressed, so it doesn't fit on me.
|
|
Gamers = Fat, No-lifers = I believe. Gamers = Median Age: 35 = Oh Hell No
Go play RuneScape for one day and the amount of 10-11 year olds you will encounter is enough to counterbalance the entire 50+ Year-Old Range of any game.
|
It's not like videogames make you fat and depressed, it's more like fat depressed teenagers find their opportunity to socialize by playing videogames over the internet. Dumb "study".
|
On September 02 2009 20:23 WeSt wrote: It's not like videogames make you fat and depressed, it's more like fat depressed teenagers find their opportunity to socialize by playing videogames over the internet. Dumb "study".
opportunity to socialize by playing videogames over the internet !?
WTF man LoL
|
On September 02 2009 02:34 NastyMarine wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2009 09:42 DM20 wrote: No researcher worth their salt would have used BMI. and why is that? BMI is a flawed measure of healthy body composition because it relies only on weight which is too simplistic a measure to give an indication of a persons health. people with different body types may have very different BMIs for their ideal weights, many professional athletes would be considered obese on their BMIs alone for example, since muscle weighs more than fat
|
This really quite annoyed me.
The hypothesis was that video-game players have a higher body mass index — the measure of a person's weight in relation to their height — and "a greater number of poor mental health days" versus nonplayers, said Dr. James B. Weaver III of the CDC's National Center for Health Marketing. The hypothesis was correct, he said.
It's been a while since my university stats courses but I seem to remember that you cannot confirm any hypothesis with empirical data - you can only fail to disprove it...
The study was done in 2006; the results analyzed in 2008.
I'd quite like to know when their hypothesis was drawn up in that case. Wouldn't it be convenient if they decided they wanted to "prove" that gamers are overweight and depressed in 2008 and picked out a study that "supported" the conclusion they wanted to reach? (I know they probably didn't do this but I'm in angry mode)
While the study helps "illuminate the health consequences of video-game playing," it is not conclusive, its researchers say, but rather serves to "reveal important patterns in health-related correlates of video-game playing and highlights avenues for future research."
Now I can't tell if the people who wrote the study were spinning it like this or if it's just journalists putting a ridiculous twist on it. Either way, attempting to claim that the overweightness and depression is caused by video games is just completely invalid.
...
I mean, I can just sit over here and say "I have a hypothesis that overweight, depressed people from Seattle are more likely to be gamers than average", pick up their results and all of a sudden by their (flawed) methods, I'm using the exact same study to claim that being overweight and depressed drives people to video games.
[/rant]
|
msnbc... need i say more? lol
|
|
|
|