Being Fat isn't Always Directly Linked to Being Unhealthy. You Can be FIT AND FAT at The Same Time.

Let me educate my opponent by stating a basic debating guidelines. The affirmative side always begins a debate. Affirmative side has the burden of proof most of the times and a proper debate begins by the affirmative side stating their views, and then the opponent opposing the proposition.Con says I broke my own rule about following the debate format and tries to put all the blame on me. But once con started the debate in the wrong round himself, that diminishes the merits of his argument since one can not oppose unless the other has stated. I did the best I could to keep the debate going in a proper way, even if out of format. Once the format has already been damaged by con, I wish to continue the debate and not care much about bringing the proper format back. This debate would not have started turning into a mess had the contender given heed to the rules in the first place. I wish the contender stays on topic as well.I apologise if I offended the contender in any way.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Con believes strongly that being fat always affects the heart. His assertions tend to make everyone believe fat people almost always die of heart diseases and heart attacks. (quoting Con - "BAM! you got a fat heart attack and you're dead!" ; "or risk a fat heart attack.")But, heart diseases are based on multiple factors and weight is considered one of the important factors only when the person is very fat, or obese. I believe I should define some terms here to reinstate some clarity - Fat - Having more than average fat tissue. Fit - The state of being healthy.Health - "A state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity." WHO, 1948.When a person gains excess fat (more than they can use up immediately), it is stored in adipose tissues, to be used for energy later on. This fat wont suddenly get into arteries and clog them. Fat escapes into arteries when it is too much, in the case of obesity. I feel I have already cleared the fact that I am not supporting obesity, but my opponent doesn't seem to understand."I bought up a very good point last round that my opponent dismissed as he didn't understand."I understood the point very well. In my opinion, it wasn't a really good point. Reasons - We are not talking about the fitness of the entire population, so why would we need to discuss the survival advantage? Survival advantage is viewed for a species as a whole. Having the kind of bodies carnivores do, or amount of blubber whale have,etc. gives their species advantage. BUT IT IS CLEAR THAT THEIR WAS NO INTENTION TO TALK ABOUT A SPECIES. When I said "You can be fit and fat" I did not mean - you = entire homo sapiens species."For my opponent to counter my argument, he would have to show that humans are naturally fat and excessive fat play a role in survival."Fitness and survival abilities are different concepts when applied to a single organism. So, no I won't have to prove what con asks me to prove here because that would be straying away from topic.I have stated sumo wrestlers and power lifters as examples since you did so in the first round. I would have used only power lifters as ONE EXAMPLE in my debate had it been started the proper way. I sense Con is trying to manipulate the debate by starting the argument in the wrong round and asserting some things. If not, I apologise."To further my argument against this claim I would like my opponent to consider the impact fatties have on the health of society."We are talking about how there is a possibility that a fat person can be fit. We are NOT talking about how fat people affect the society. Con seems to have confused some terms.I hope I have made myself clear enough and dissolved any confusion.More arguments.There was a study and the best way to describe the results would be to use an example of comparing the human body with a car. You can love or hate the external looks, but you can't judge the internal efficiency. Maintenance is what matters.A parameter often used to say that fat people are unhealthy is the BMI. But it has been proved in a lot of instances that it's wrong many times. For instance, professional basketball players tend to have elevated BMI scores, even though they have so little fat and more muscle. Football players are big, but the physical activity keeps the heart problems due to excessive weight at bay.Finally, for this round, I would mention the OBESITY PARADOX. Being overweight IS ACTUALLY CONSIDERED BY SOME RESEARCHERS TO HELP PROTECT SOME PERSON FROM DISEASES LIKE CANCER, PNEUMONIA, STROKE, HYPERTENSION, etc."For determining health or fitness, hhealthy behaviors, including nutrition and physical activity, matter more than weight." (Quoting from source)People are generally stuck on the phrase 'fat is bad' because they have been told so from an early age. Too much fat is bad, yeah, obesity is a serious health condition; but just fat is not bad. I think I have proved my assertion more than enough.----------------------------------------------------------------------Just to clarify this debate to con a bit more, I say that "Being fat isn't always directly linked to being unhealthy" It should be self explanatory here but I just need to prove one instance where fat is healthy and you have to prove that no such case exists. Thank you for reading :) Have a good one.I await con's further arguments. :)