>> on al jazeera america >> techknow our experts take you beyond the lab >> there's about five million points of data >> and explore the technology changing our world. only on al jazeera america the cdc blocked by congress from even studying gun violence. we're joined by a congress woman and nra member who was a top doctor at the cdc. also a man supposed to be making history on everest left mourning a friend after the deadly avalanche. plus russian forces allegedly kidnap seven international observers in ukraine. and has the u.s. become an

oligarc oligarchy? hello, i'm antonio mora welcome to "consider this." here is more on what is ahead. ♪ >> arurgent video conference with european leaders earlier today. >> the move comes as the situation in and around slaviansk and other cities becomes more tense. >> if the situation gets worse and sanctions are broaden that will have a more severe impact. >> some climbers are packing up their bags and leaving. >> sherpa guides have begun to leave the base camp. >> the sherpas know it's not safe. >> house bill 60 will protect law-abiding citizens. >> reporter: republican governor signed a deal making it legal to have loaded weapons in bars, churches, and some government buildings. we begin with new calls to

research the causes and possibly cures for gun violence in america at a time when gun supporters who reject that research seem to be on a role. some 70,000 people are expected to at ten the national rifle association's annual meeting. on the agenda, passing a federal law that would allow gun owners to pack their guns where conceal is banned. and this governor signed a deal that would allow loaded guns to be brought into bars, churches, school zones, government buildings even airports. >> we believe in the right of the people to defending themselves, and therefore, we believe in the second amendment. and today i will put into law a gun bill that harolds, self-defense, personal liberties and public safety. >> little wonder that jack

kingston has changed his tune now that he is complaining for the senate. he rejects calls to research gun violence. he said the president's request to fund propaganda for his gun-grabbing initiatives will not be included in the appropriation's bill. we're joined by carolyn maloney who is pushing for the cdc to conduct firearm research. and mark rosenberg, as the former director of the national center for injury prevention, he lead the cdc's gun violence research in the 1990s. thank you both for being with us. after newtown, congressman kingston was quite vocal about the fact that he felt more research needs to be done on gun violence, and now he has

completely changed his tune. what do you say to him? >> what is so threatening about doing research? we research everything as -- as researchers can point out. alone are we with gun safety research in that they are initiatives to prohibit it. i would say no area should be so -- so -- so walled off that we can't research and find cures and solutions. i thought after sandy hook that there would be a lot of progun safety, but research, we need it in order to build a case, and the amount of gun violence in our boerld is staggering. 33,000 people a year die from gun violence, 32 people aday die from gun violence. and in 2012, 91 children died from gun violence. why not research and see what

works. >> public laws in general isn't set without some research to back it up. >> absolutely. by stopping the data, they are stopping progress in congress and senator markey and i have a bill in to allocate $10 million to the stern of disease control for gun safety research. >> dr. rosenberg you are an nra member, i know you like to shoot -- i should say we invited the nra to participate in this discussion and they did not respond. what can research on gun violence do for us? >> well, i think we have two really tough problems to solve. one is, as you mentioned that 30,000 people a year are killed by guns, so you want to prevent some of those deaths, especially suicides, and many, many of those deaths that are very preventable, but we have another

problem at the same time, and that is that our gun rights are threatened. the rights of legitimate gun owners are under threat. and what we have got to do is find a way both to reduce fire arm injuries and deaths and to protect the rights of legitimate gun owners. if we only wanted to do one of those, we probably wouldn't need research. if all you wanted to do was protect the rights of legitimate gun owners, then don't allow any discussion about guns -- don't allow that to go on. if all you wanted to do was prevent firearm injuries and deaths then take guns away from all civilians, but we want to solve both problems at the same time, and there are ways to do it, but if you want to figure out what works to achieve both of these goals at the same time, you need to do research to find out the answer. and right now we don't know what works. we don't know that letting more

people carry concealed weapons in public will save lives and promote security. we don't even know that that will protect telerights of legitimate gun owners. so we're asking politicians to sign bills when they have no idea what the impact of those bills would be. it's not fair for us to ask politicians to pass on bills when we don't give them the evidence about what works and what doesn't. we're flying blind in an area that's critically important to our health and safety. >> on your website you mention a whole bunch of different initiatives that you have got. including making gun trafficking illegal, requiring universal background checks for gun buyers, and others, but isn't it a forgone conclusion in an election year, none of that is

going to move forward? >> well, you can always try. and his point is true, you can find common ground. there is no reason why you can't research how to prevent gun deaths and absolutely protect the right to bare arms. none of my bills would take guns away from a law-abiding person, but as we learned in webster new york many mentally ill people get illegal guns. and right after sandy hook a man got a straw purchaser to get illegal guns and set fire to his house and proceeded to kill fire officers and police officers who were coming to save him. so it's multi-facetted issue. we need to look at mental health, and cut down on illegal gun trafficking. it's not a felony to traffic and sell illegal guns in our

country. this is an outrage. most nra members that i know tell me they absolutely support this bill. the anti-gun safety movement in congress is so deep and strong that even the nra supports we can't pass. >> dr. rosenberg, chris cox has said that where cdc research is concerned that their certain is . . . so is the issue, should the cdc not be the place where the research is conducted because of that association with disease prevention? >> first you need to realize when people don't like the results that they are getting from honest scientific research, they try to discredit the researcher and methods. and the nra did not like the result that suggested that

having a firearm in your home not only doesn't protect you, but puts you at 300% more risk that someone in your family will be killed in a homicide, and 500% more risk that someone in your family will be killed in a suicide. so the nra didn't like the fact that teleresearch showed that having your gun in your home put you at more risk. in fact cdc is the only agency that has the background in and the skills to look at the broader picture. nih can look at problems of mental illness, and what happens when the mentally ill have firearms, the department of justice can look at what happens when convicted fell lens and criminals have firearms, but cdc can look at what is the impact on the population as a whole? they have the tools to do it, and they do very high quality

research. we trust them with our lives in other areas. >> do you agree? >> absolutely. >> because there is funding for research at other agencies. >> absolutely. and the ban is unique to gun safety. i don't know of any other area where you are literally banned from doing this type of research. the president did an executive order that said that research could take place in this order, and it makes it clear that the dickey amendment did not prohibit research for gun safety. >> i want to bring up one more thing with you dr. rosenberg. the cdc has not been funded to do anything on gun safety since the 1990s, but you have written we have spent billions of dollars on prevention of auto accidents, to understand how traffic accidents are killing people, that has been incredibly successful.

do you think research in this field can do the same thing? >> without question, it can. and jay dickey the congressman who opposed cdc and who's amendment took away the funding for firearm research has over the years become a friend, and we both agree that this research is so important. it's a matter of life and death, and jay dickey could today say that was a mistake and we need to do everything we can to get this research going again. >> important discussion given how many people are dying. >> thank you. >> and doctor appreciate you both for joining us. >> thank you so much. >> thank you. it's important to be here. >> thank you for focusing on this important issue. switching to the crisis in ukraine, pro-russian activists continued to hold buildings and man road blacks in the eastern region. they control the city of

slaviansk where they reportedly seized a bus carrying international observers. and with russian troops reportedly within 1100 yards of ukraine's border at one point, acti acting yushgian president warned . . . meanwhile president obama threatened russian president vladimir putin with a new round of sanctions if russia continued to stall on de-escalating the crisis. >> president putin is not a stupid man, and i think recently acknowledged that this has already had an impact. and certainly if the situation gets worse and sanctions are broadened to an entire sector, that will have a more severe impact. >> for more i'm joined from london by the u.s. ambassador to

the organization for security and cooperation in europe, the osce. what have you heard about the certain observers in slaviansk? can you confirm that they have been detained? >> i have seen the reports about the terrorist tactic of kidnaps which is really disturbing, and certainly we becry that. there is an ocse monitoring mission on the ground. the reports are these are not members of that monitoring mission. separately there are military observers invited by ukraine under a document called the vienna document, that have been rotating through over the last couple of months. the reports seem to indicate that this is a team of those observers, and of course yes ear very concerned about their well-being, and we decry this kind of terrorist tactic of

kidnapping people and holding them hostage. >> what was the role of the observers in eastern ukraine? and are you surprised that pro-russian militants might be involved in this? >> russia is a signatory of thef vienna document, and i wish i could say i'm surprised, but considering the egregious misdeedsover the russian federation over the last few months unfortunately this appears to be another escalation. and the tensions we are seeing, those would not be happening without the russian involvement. and now we have situation of hostage taking, and it underscores how critically important it is for russia to stop being destructive and start being constructive.

>> have osce observers seen anything to show that russia has been doing anything to be constructive? i know angela merkel spoke to vladimir putin ta told him they needed to do something. >> they are doing absolutely nothing good and everything bad. and as you said last week in geneva there was an off-ramp offered to the russian federation. this was a chance for them to put their actions behind their words. and the agreement outlined very concretely some initial steps towards deescalation, and the ukrainian government snapped in to action immediately, took many steps within 24 hours, they introduced a new amnesty law in the parliament, the prime minister made public commitments to open transparent

constitutional reform process. we made public reassurance to russian speaking your next questionians, and made pressure on those remains on the mie done to pull down barricades and open up the streets, and the russians have done nothing. >> and talking about what the russians are saying and doing, russi rush foreign minister said . . . that's the russian narrative, that what they are trying to do is a peace keeping mission, because russians and pro-russian people are suffering at the hands of this new ukrainian government. how concerned are you that this could turn into open conflict? >> of course nobody wants conflict, but what the russian

foreign minister, and foreign ministry accuse others of their own sins. the united states and our european partners have been very clear about what we want out of this. we want to support the ukrainian people in choosing their own destiny. that is what our goal is. the russian federation is fomenting the unrest, trying to cause problems, they are using their agents to foe meant this unrest, and they need to stop it. >> the acting president was beating the war drums on friday in response to claims that russian's military might being sent across the border. he said . . . now i understand that ukraine is

a sovereign state, but with statements like that it sure sounds like they are preparing for conflict. >> what is escalating tensions is the fact that the russians have amassed 10s of thousands of troops on the border. they are feeding a propaganda war, it's just not true. they have attempted to provoke a response. they are working round -- the russians are working round the clock to sew the seeds of restriction and been trying to invoke reaction over the last couple of months. but i don't think there's anything escalating about a government saying they intend to defend their borders. >> and this isn't just the germans and the americans, it's eastern european leaders and pretty much the rest of the

world. ambassador appreciate you joining us. thank you very much. >> thanks for having me. coming up in the wake of the deadliest incident in everest history, we'll hear from an american who's guide was killed. and some stories that you probably haven't heard of what migrant goes through to cross southern border. >> antonio after years of debate the city of minneapolis will no longer observe columbus daye daye. while you are watching join the conversation on twitter and on our facebook and google plus pages. the womb >> a divisive issue >> god is life , so it's his to take >> see a 10 year old girl who's pregnant, and you tell me that's what god wants... >> a controversial law >> where were you when the babies lives were being saved? >> are women in texas paying the price? >> who's benefiting from

restricting access to safe abortions? >> fault lines... al jazeera america's hard hitting... ground breaking... truth seeking... breakthrough investigative documentary series access restricted only on al jazeera america >> i'm joie chen, i'm the host of america tonight, we're revolutionary because we're going back to doing best of storytelling. we have an ouportunity to really reach out and really talk to voices that we haven't heard before... i think al jazeera america is a watershed moment for american journalism

new avalanches on mount everest friday along the same root where 16 sherpas died last week. no one was hurt in the latest avalanches, but now it is almost certain that nobody will be able to reach the peak from the nepal side this year. joining us is the man who had hoped to be the oldest american to reach the peak. ed good to have you with us. i'm very sorry for your loss and what you went through. i would like to start with the latest news more avalanche on friday? >> yes, that's true. there has been a series of them.

before i move on, i would like to come mend al jazeera to bringing this issue to the public's attention. you guys were there from the beginning and all the way through, so congratulations on doing something wonderful for these people. >> thanks. and i know this was everything but wonderful for you. you saw the deadly avalanche and you believe ash is still buried there. >> ash is still there, there are additional avalanches. the ministers have seen them and heard them and felt them. i was in a helicopter pad talking off the other day coming back here, and i saw it, and i saw the minister's hospital there, yet when we were asked by reporters aliving in lupa had they been earthquakes, i can still see the minister holding up his hand saying no, no, no. it's nothing.

it is very dangerous time. so we're hoping that the climbers -- the very 'em -- emphatic climbers won't force and bully sherpas in to coming and risking their lives in the future. but still the government is denying any dangers, and it's a tough situation. >> let's talk about that, because after the deadly avalanche there have been all sorts of reports of all sorts of conflicts on the mountain. sherpas in general did not want to climb this year in honor of those who died. some reports say that some sherpas did want to continue the climb, and there was this duel pressure from the government which makes a lot of money from expeditions and from the mountaineering companies? >> i didn't see any problems

when the sherpas. they were absolutely united. it was the pressure from the large tour guides companies putting pressure on the government, and, you know, there's -- some people have this attitude -- and i guess they need to have them -- that they'll do anything to summit the mountain, everest, and they get carried away with that and loose site of what real ta is, and the safety of themselves and the sherpas. the sherpas are fearful of being fired so they might be coerced in to going. but the sherpas know when something is dangerous and they were staying away. the sherpas have decided to create what is called the wall of shame, they are going to put monuments on the way up for any foreign hiker that summits this year, saying that they did it over the dead bodies of the sherpas and with additional

dangers, so any of these guys think they are going to be climbing for their ego, they will have the wall of shame so people know who they are for the next 50 years. >> i know you have launched an online fund to raise money for ash's family and other families of victims. is the government going to help out? >> we're hoping to get concessions from the government. we really don't care right now, thanks to you and al jazeera, and many of the other networks, we're racing quite a bit of money, every penny of which will go to the sherpas, the 16 that died and their families. the government may have a problem with a program called the government liaison, where the people are asked -- they hire these people to help. this column that left on the

18th of april, left at 3:00 in telemorning. we have been told, and we're investigating it right now, that the liaison officers who were there to check off the names of all of the sherpas were two hours late. they overslept. as a result, we -- we lost 16 people, and had they had two hours additionally they would have been up at the camp above what would have been a harmless avalanche. so we're look going that, because this liaison program sucks a lot of money out of these permits, and if we find out they do anything, we're going to bring that to everyone's attention too. >> you spent a lot of time and spent 6 figures to try to be the oldest american to reach the peak. you are going to be 68 before the next climbing season. will you try again? >> i shall.

i'll be there. the mountain is great. it's magnificent, if i don't dwell on it, and i'm not obsessed with it, she'll let me summit. >> well, ed my condolences again, thank you for joining us, and wish you the best of luck. >> thank you. house speaker john boehner publicly mocked his colleagues for not tackling the issue of immigration this year. the new al jazeera series borderland tracks six people as they follow the journeys of three migrants who died in the arizona dessert. one opinion tries to convince a woman not to cross the border with her daughter.

>> as you are walking through the dessert if you can't make it anymore, would you turn around and come back? >> i -- i totally understand, but just by stepping foot in that dessert you are sacrificing her. i have been in that dessert and i couldn't be there for an hour. and i can't see a child making it. please if you feel tired just stop. there are people that can help you. >> ivan is one of borderland's executive producer. the next episode airs here on sunday at 9:00 pm eastern. ivan, your goal, i know was to give a 360 degree view of the

issue. and what you have done is unprecedented and powerful. you show how it effects americans near the border, and you give a clear look at just how dangerous and brutal the journey is particularly for migrants who come from central america and have to make their way all the way through mexico. >> that's right. and it was one of the more surprising things for us to realize how dangerous that journey is not just crossing into america, but in mexico and then through mexico. >> on sunday we're going to get a look at something called the beast, a cargo train that migrants by the hundreds climb on to, and spending days on it in order to move north, and it's called the beast for good reason. >> that's right. hundreds if not thousands of people have been mutilated riding it. it travels at a relatively slow pace but these people are on

there for hours and hours and days sometimes weeks. and they get tired and fall asleep, and they are at risk of being targeted by cartels, gangs, corrupt officials, and the stories that the cast have been told were absolutely heroine -- harrowing. >> yes. one of the participants was told a story of mutilation where a woman was thrown off of the train by a member of the drug cartel and was cut in half. >> i certainly feel for the people in what they are trying to achieve, but i'm really pissed off at the mexican government. i mean this train leaves every day packed with 300 people.

they have police and immigration that could stop this all along the way. so the government of mexico is enabling this whole situation where they are funneling thousands of people a week into our borders, and then they face horrendous conditions. so i'm just really not happy with what is going on here. >> does randy have a point? we all hear about the hundreds of thousands of immigrants who cross into the u.s. every year, but there is something abstract when you talk about those big numbers. but when you see hundreds on top of a train in plain sight in mexico it gives you a stronger sense of how many people are trying to get here. >> that's right. and randy does have a point. the movement of people through mexico is highly institutionalized, and the mexican authorities seem to have a fairly skit friendic approach

to the issue where on the one hand they have check points trying to prevent central americans from going north, and on the other hand you have institutions like group or better which is also a federal institution that tries to help people along the way, and then at state level you have got this police force that we exhibited, and i think in episode two that helps people as they are trekking through the jungle in order to prevent them from being attacked by gangs, but the only reason they are going through the jungle is because on the highways you have federal people trying to stop them. so there is something quite bizarre about the way this plays out in mexico. >> yeah, it's completely schizophrenic, as the show shows. and you have said that you think actually that the trek through mexico is more dangerous, even than the crossing into the

united states through the desert? >> i don't know whether it's more dangerous, but it would be at least as dangerous. and the dangers are very different. when they are traveling through mexico, they -- women especially are at risk of being raped. they are at risked of being forced to ferry drugs for the cartels in order to cross the border. women take contraceptive jabs just because they expect to get raped at some point. and wunls they cross the border the dangers are different. they are at risk of dehydration, hyperthermia, in mexico the risks are of a much more violent nature. >> it's a very powerful documentary, and addresses many important issues. congratulations on this effort

and appreciate you joining us. the next episode of borderland appears here on al jazeera america on 9:00 eastern. and talk to al jazeera features a half hour conversation with sean penn. >> edward snowden in my view may have been very well intended without question there will be some very good things that come of the information that was released, and there were some criminal activity going on in our government. i wasn't shocked by that. and there were things that were systemically criminal, and i don't think anyone in government was stocked by that. but i don't think it's responsible to do as -- as snowden did. talk to al jazeera airs throughout the wkd. time now to see what is trending on the web. >> antonio this story was trending on phrase book today.

starting this october the city of minneapolis will not observe columbus day. they will recognize the day as native americans day. the congressmen who spearheaded the change, said, quote . . . the new halladay will be reflected on all city communications, this includes the official calendar of the city council and committee meetings. state representative suzanne allen and ket ellison said they are both interested in pushing similar measures on the state and federal level. columbus day has been a federal holiday since 1987 but not all states observe it.

let us know what you think. tweet us at ajconsiderthis. are well thinker americans have an increasingly disproportion at it influence on politics? and as more americans abstains from vaccinations, the west witnesses an increase in measles. and later is a little extra weight not such a bad thing?

♪ is america really a

democracy or do the wealthy now have so much influence the average citizen is powerless? a controversial new study seems to conclude that the u.s. is an ol i will garky. for more we joined by particular tin gill ins a political science professor at printston. he is also the author of the book "affluent and influence." martin good of you to join us. you don't ever use the word oligarchy in the study. but the way you define economic elite is fairly brood. we're not talking about just the top 1%. >> that's right. we look at a somewhat larger group of people at the top of the income distribution. people at the top

90th percentile. and there is variation in how much influence people have. we wouldn't dispute the allegation that the pluto kratz exist. >> you looked at answers to 1779 survey issues on public policy issues. and you found . . . but maybe the greater power you found is they have almost a veto power over things they oppose. >> that's right. when either economic elites or powerful interest groups are strongly opposed to an issue it is extremely unlikely to occur. because we have such a strong

status quo bias in our system, even policies that have a great deal of support among powerful groups, among economic elites, those policies still have only an even schans or so of being adopted. >> what about less wealthy americans, you say . . . as you were just saying now. but don't they wield power at the ballot box and through large organizations? >> it's true that those kinds of oring ganized groups, unions as well are important. and we found some modest evidence of influence through those kindsover mass-based organization. and it is also true that people do have a choice when they go to

the polls. a choice of a few candidates, maybe two in a general election, but those candidates have been vetted, if you will by people who have the resources. so for a candidate to gain office, it's true they need a constituency among the voters, but they need a constituency among donors as well. >> has anything really changed though, if you go back to the beginning, even john adams, were certainly oligarchs. >> yeah, no you are quite right about that. and in some ways our system was designed to constrain the ability to shape policy making and to restrict the involvement and influence of the public. now, of course over the centuries, we have seen the franchise expand.

we have seen many in ways a broadening of the political system to a wider swath of the public and yet what our research showed is despite the former equality that we have achieved over time, and that's certainly not complete, but that there has been of course tremendous progress on. despite that former quality we still have a situation where middle class americans get the policies they want only when they agree with the aft affluen. >> is this a reality of power everywhere. even communist revolutions have been lead from the economic elites in those countries. and presidents were not born to be economic elite but were certainly part of it by the time they got to power.

so what -- i guess what can be done about it about how much do you think it hurts us? >> i think you are right, there has probably been no society where power was equally shared among the better off and lesser-off citizens, but people at the middle have so little influence really calls in to question the nature of our democracy. you point out our political leaders tend to be drawn from sort of more exalted professional or economic strata, and that's true. the senate has often been labeled the millionaire's club. there are many liberal members of the senate including those who have incredible resources. so it's not like every member of the economic elite holds the same views, but of course there is a tendency for any group of

people to prefer policies that promote its interests, and we have seen the result of that over the last 40 or 50 years. >> we know the rich have gotten richer and other incomes are pretty much stagnant. the book is very thought-provoking, it's called "affluent and influence." coming up is fat not such a bad thing? but celebrating a monumental moment in the vaccination movement. our data dive is next. skewed in favor of the prosecution >> the fbi can't force the states to look at those cases >> the truth will set you free yeah...don't kid yourself >> the system has failed me

>> on al jazeera america >> techknow our experts take you beyond the lab >> there's about five million

points of data >> and explore the technology changing our world. only on al jazeera america ♪ >> today's data dive looks at vaccines with mile sense to good and bad. the cdc says i cases of immediatels have hit a 13-year high. unsurprising since many celebrities in california including jenny mccarthy sum ported the work of dr. wake field that claimed a connection between vaccinations and autism. his work has been widely disproven. this concern comes as a vaccination milestone

approaches. revolutionary mass trials for a polio vaccine began 60 years ago saturday. it can attack nerve cells cause paralysis often permanent. the disease reached epidemic levels in the 20th century. president franklin roosevelt was paralyzed from polo in 1921 at the age of 39. the first vaccine was developed by jonas salk. 1.8 million children were tested, leading to the vaccine becoming standard. he never got a pattern. forbes reports it could have made him $7 billion but he wanted it to be accessible to anyone with no fear of cost.

he had this famous exchange that was later used in a promo video. >> who owns the patent on this vaccine? >> well, the people i would say. there is no patent. would you patent the sun? >> jonas salk died at age 80. his legacy is mostly free of po -- polio. a reason to watch al jazeera america the standout television event borderland, is gritty honesty. >> a lot of people don't have a clue what goes on down here, the only way to find out, is to see it yourselves. >> taking viewers beyond the debate. >> don't miss al jazeera america's critically acclaimed series borderland on al jazeera america also available on demand >> now inroducing, the new al jazeea america mobile news app.

get our exclusive in depth, reporting when you want it. a global perspective wherever you are. the major headlines in context. mashable says... you'll never miss the latest news >> they will continue looking for suvivors... >> the potential for energy production is huge... >> no noise, no clutter, just real reporting. the new al jazeera america mobile app, available for your apple and android mobile device. download it now

in america fat is a four-letter word, and obesity an epidemic. nearly 35% of americans are clinically obese. obesity has been implicated in major diseases. earlier i spoke to a cardiologist at the heart and vascular institute in new orleans who claims overweight and even moderately overweight people live longer healthier lyes. he also says too much exercise can be bad for you. he lays it all out in his book.

good to have you with us. we have heard all sorts of conflicting information on what is good for us and what is not good for us, but we have pretty much always understanding that being fat was bad. so how can it be okay? >> our research over the last 10 to 15 years clearly makes the point that we can no longer say what many doctors and many people have thought for a long time that thinner is necessarily healthier. >> you point out that some overweight or moderately obese people who suffer from kidney failure, some cancers, actually end up doing better than thin patients. how does that work? >> our data shows that patients with various heart diseases, this could be hypertension, corn

co cornary heart disease that the overrate and obese have a better chance of survival than do their leaner counterparts with the same heart disease. >> but what do you think the reason is? >> some of it may be the fact that thin people, a lot of times have very low muscle mass, and they are physically weak. and if you have a thin person who has low muscle mass, has low-level of fitness, they have a considerably higher mortality than does a heavier person, and especially a heavier person who is more physically fit. >> most doctors tell patients they have an ideal body mass index that they should meet, but at what point does weight become

an absolute danger. because highest bmi groups still have the highest mortality. >> there was a huge study by the center of disease control published last february, it was a study of a huge number of studies of 2.9 million people that showed that the optimal survival was in a bmi group of 25 to 30, which is considered overweight, had a 6% lower mortality than the normal bmi patients -- >> what about these huge campaigns, michelle obama fighting obesity in kids, how serious of a problem is it then? >> well, i do think that what is a more serious problem is physical inactivity and low fitness, but i don't want to negate the fact that the studies that are showing that good

survival in the overweight and mildly obese do not show this in the severely overweight. bmi's above 35 are clearly at higher risk. >> so at that point -- >> that level of obesity is clearly associated with adverse health outcomes, and those people really do need to lose weight. >> you also bring up that there are issues with excessive exercise. >> absolutely. we certainly don't have a national problem with too much exercise. we have a national problem with too little exercise. only 20% of our population are probably meeting the minimal requirements for physical activity according to the federal guidelines. but there are small numbers of

people who are doing an extremely amounts of exercise, doing marathons and triathlons and exercising two and three hours a day, and there is some cardiac risk of doing this. if you monitor people after a marathon a few of them release the same enzymes released in a heart attack. so the optimal amount of courseser size is actually probably in the 30 to 45-minute range or maybe at most 60-minute range, so if one is doing more exercise than that, then they certainly are not doing it for health reasons, they are doing it for sport or ego, or camaraderie, but you can get your maximum benefits probably at somewhere between 30 and 45 minutes of aerobic exercise per day. doctor good to have you with us. thank you.

>> it was greet be with you. >> the show may be over but the conversation continues on our website, or our google and facebook pages. we'll see you next time. have a good weekend. ♪ good evening, everyone, this is al jazeera america. i'm john siegenthaler in new york. stunning words, kiev is talking about word war 3 and a growing danger of a russian invasion. that as new sanctions are announced against moscow. two saints what does the canonization of two popes mean to catholics. california drought why it may be too late to reverse the damage. and inside north korea why this nuclea