I've said many times before that we should stop computing BMI (Body Mass Index), we should stop basing any sort of judgments on it, and we should just stop even remembering that it exists. It's a terrible measure of health, and it mistakenly classifies all sorts of people as healthy or unhealthy.
Well, now I can say the same thing again. But this time with science!
Chad Orzel, physicist and new father, says:
This will not come as a surprise to anyone who has ever put the stats for their favorite pro athlete into a BMI calculator (you want to tell Michael Strahan he's obese?), but it's nice to see it holds more widely.
He references a NYT article that I won't bother to read because, frankly, the NYT gets on my nerves.
But it says just what I said above - if you use BMI to judge a person's health, you're going to be wrong much of the time.
I agree with you on
I agree with you on this........I also loathe how some police departments do height/weight charts - stupid
1) You agree only on this?
1) You agree only on this? Surely there's something else I've written you can agree with. Perhaps I need to be more agreeable . . .
2) I don't know what police department charts you're talking about. Are they "if you weigh this much and are this tall, you're unhealthy" charts?
Ok, Let's all go eat
Ok, Let's all go eat Pizza!
Not to hate too much on your post, but the weight ranges still seem to skew to healthiness:
Last week a report in The Archives of Internal Medicine compared weight and cardiovascular risk factors among a representative sample of more than 5,400 adults. The data suggest that half of overweight people and one-third of obese people are “metabolically healthy.” That means that despite their excess pounds, many overweight and obese adults have healthy levels of “good” cholesterol, blood pressure, blood glucose and other risks for heart disease.
At the same time, about one out of four slim people — those who fall into the “healthy” weight range — actually have at least two cardiovascular risk factors typically associated with obesity, the study showed.
So, 1/3 Obese are healthy, 1/2 of Overweight are healthy, and 3/4 of Normal are healthy.... I mean, that's how I'm reading it.
BMI, like anything else, should be taken with a grain of salt. But down throw it out the window.
Just because, statistically,
Just because, statistically, BMI corresponds often to healthfulness or unhealthfulness doesn't mean that it's at all a factor in health. Correlation does not imply causation.
Let's take Joe Average. Joe is exactly average height, and his weight is exactly in the middle of the supposedly healthy BMI range. Joe is in decent health.
Then Joe decides to get in shape. He starts upping his protein intake and hitting the weight room, hard. Joe puts on 25 pounds of solid muscle. Joe dumps his girlfriend and picks up much hotter chicks with his new muscles.
Then Joe goes in for a yearly checkup with the doctor, who measures his height and weight. Oh, no! Joe's BMI is now above the "healthy" range! His doctor puts him on a diet because Joe is obviously obese. Joe's rippling abs and bulging biceps mean nothing to the doctor, who relies completely on BMI to diagnose health.
In the end, Joe's diet kills him. Thousands of beautiful women commit suicide, unable to live in a world without Joe.
Yes, healthy people often have BMI inside the supposed "healthy" range. But so do plenty of serial killers.
I don't mean that people who are 5'2" and weight 350 pounds are all actually healthy. They're not. But you can't depend on BMI to diagnose healthfulness. It just doesn't work.
LeBron James has a higher
LeBron James has a higher BMI than I do. Does that mean I'm healthier?
What, did you cut off your
What, did you cut off your arms? (legs wouldn't work)
Post new comment