Posted on

SATURDAY’S CHILD: Rear research findings


TONY DEYAL

SATURDAY’S CHILD: Rear research findings

Social Share
Share

“Someone tell Kim Kardashian and Beyonce Knowles to have a celebratory buck’s fizz, because a study conducted by the University of Oxford reveals women with bigger bums are stereotypically smarter and healthier. If ever there were an excuse to have another chocolate chip cookie in the hope it makes your arse bigger, this would be it.” This was from a Cosmopolitan (Cosmo) Magazine article written by Dusty Baxter-Wright and published earlier this year on February 15, 2016.    

The report continued, “In the study, which analysed data from 16 000 women, Oxford University found that women with larger than average backsides aren’t only more intelligent, but also extremely resistant to chronic illnesses… The study also indicated that women with larger bums tend to have lower levels of cholesterol and glucose, as well as higher levels of Omega 3 fats. Dinopectina, a hormone with anti-inflammatory and anti-diabetic benefits also favours those with a big butt, as well as the adipose tissue of your bum apparently preventing cardiovascular disease.  Basically, having a little junk in your trunk is a downright good thing. HOORAY.”

A similar article by Sean Levinson, in Elite Daily almost three years before, on October 23, 2013, included two titillating comments.  The first was, “This study did not include fake butts.”  The other was, “We already know girls with big butts are smarter and healthier, but they also have some things only they will understand.” A link to those special things included, “We curvy girls have many reasons to celebrate being bootylicious, including recent research that suggests women with wide hips and bigger backsides are more intelligent and more resistant to chronic illness.  We should all be proud of packing heat in our asses as well as in our hearts and brains.  But we can attribute much more than intellect or health to our lovely lady lumps – what about the fact that they make us great cuddlers and exceptional twerkers?”

One female reader was sceptical.  She asked, “Did anybody think ‘Kim Kardashian’ when they read this and then think the study probably had some flaws. LOL.”  Another added, “Kim had butt implants put in so she never got the other perk that comes with a real butt.”  This prompted, “Kim may not be as dumb as represented. She wouldn’t be where she is today if she didn’t know how to play the game.”  With the response, “Her playing games don’t make her smart – her opening her legs got her where she’s at today.” When I first saw the report of the findings, I had asked myself the same question about the same person – Ms. Kardashian and a few other ladies famous for their rear-ends.  It is not that I have any problems with ladies who are of similar construction but there have been too many contradictory research findings recently and I have become very suspicious of any claim about health or other benefits of any product even if it is built on a very secure genetic foundation. 

An article on Caffeine & Aspirin: Science’s Contradictory Claims, one of many that deal with the subject of conflicting findings said, “Most media are guilty of it. Disseminating reports and articles on exciting, ground-breaking health research that is a wellness game-changer. Trouble is, the exciting ‘news’ directly contradicts the sensational breakthroughs they reported on just last year. Two blatant examples are the opposing results of scientific research on aspirin and caffeine.  Other examples are whether vitamin D supplements actually do protect against cancer, or whether red wine is good for you or not.”

I thought that it would be worthwhile to get off my butt and track down what my Jamaican friends might call the big batty gyal intellectual quirks and perks.  I went to several sources but most of them repeated what Snopes.com had said, essentially that on 30 October, 2013, the web site Elite Daily published an article that quickly became accepted social media fact, reporting on a study that supposedly documented that “women with big butts” are “smarter and healthier” than their flat-bottomed counterparts.  That article didn’t directly link to the research in question but instead cited a January 12, 2010 ABC News piece about the same study.  Elite Daily didn’t mention the age of the original research at the time their article was published in 2013, and neither did Cosmopolitan UK when they rehashed the old news as recent information in February 2016.

Snopes concluded, “So, research undertaken in 2010 contrasting central obesity with gluteofemoral fat stores was widely misinterpreted several years later to suggest that women with big butts were ‘smarter and healthier’ than other women. In fact, the research simply reviewed already published data about different types of obesity and suggested further study based on a collected series of prior findings, and no portion of the 2010 review undertaken at Oxford University pertained to intellect. Research published in 2007 and 2008 similarly looked at waist-hip ratio but never claimed women with ‘big butts’ were ‘smarter’.”  This leads to my postscript to my Facebook friends. I know I shared the article from the Independent headlined, Eating Chocolate Regularly Improves Brain Function:  Habitual chocolate intake has been positively associated with cognitive performance in the study.  If any of you want to fact-check it go ahead. In the case of chocolate, I prefer to remain ignorant, contented and brainy.

 Tony Deyal was last seen recommending the report in the British Journal of Nutrition that a dark chocolate bar daily reduces the risk of developing diabetes and heart diseases. Besides, it tastes good.

LAST NEWS