news article on throwing out bmi test - ThinnerTimes - Gastric Bypass Forum, Lap Band Forum, and Vertical Sleeve Gastrectomy Forum

sierrab · 08-18-2006, 09:22 AM

Time to toss the body mass index?
Study finds standard obesity test developed a century ago is badly flawed

Updated: 4:27 p.m. PT Aug 17, 2006
LONDON - The standard measure of obesity known as body mass index, or BMI, is badly flawed and a more accurate gauge should be developed, according to doctors in the United States.

Writing in Friday’s Lancet medical journal, the researchers from the Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minn., found that patients with a low BMI had a higher risk of death from heart disease than those with normal BMI.

At the same time overweight patients had better survival rates and fewer heart problems than those with a normal BMI.

This apparently perverse result, drawn from data from 40 studies covering 250,000 people with heart disease, did not suggest that obesity was not a health threat but rather that the 100-year-old BMI test was too blunt an instrument to be trusted.

“Rather than proving that obesity is harmless, our data suggests that alternative methods might be needed to better characterize individuals who truly have excess body fat compared with those in whom BMI is raised because of preserved muscle mass,” said lead researcher Francisco Lopez-Jiminez.

300,000 die of obesity each year in U.S.
About 30,000 people in Britain die due to obesity every year and 300,000 in the United States where the condition is now thought to have overtaken smoking as the main cause of preventable death.

Body Mass Index, invented by Belgian polymath Adolphe Quetelet between 1830 and 1850, is a measure of body fat calculated from height and weight.

A figure of less than 18.5 is considered underweight, while from 18.5 to 24.9 is normal, 25 to 29.9 is overweight and anything over 30 is categorized as obese.

Intended as a broad indicator of general health, it has become a standard diagnostic tool of heart disease risk.

Waist-to-hip measure better predictor
Maria Grazia Franzosi from the Instituto Mario Negri in Milan, writing in the same issue of the Lancet, noted that a 52-country study comparing four different tests — BMI, waist-to-hip ratio, waist measure and hip measure — found that waist-to-hip was the best predictor of heart attack risk.

“BMI can definitely be left aside as a clinical and epidemiological measure of cardiovascular risk,” she said.

“Uncertainty about the best index of obesity should not translate into uncertainty about the need for prevention policy against excess bodyweight,” she cautioned.

this really interested me i think it has some merit im interested in how to calculate the whole hip to waist thing

Leanne · 08-18-2006, 10:09 AM

I will have to have my brother read this article. He has now lost over 200 lbs since his RNY last Oct. He weights 230lbs and according to the BMI chart, is still overweight and needs to weigh 170lbs to be "normal". He is now pure muscle, and the BMI charts don't take that into consideration.

He has been a bit upset, because he wanted to be "normal" for once in his life

(not that he'll ever be normal in any sence of the word!!!)

deadboy · 08-18-2006, 10:10 AM

Interesting

Hunnyblonde · 08-18-2006, 11:55 AM

This is article confirms one of my husband's arguments against wls. From the very first time a doctor suggested wls for me, my husband has been adamant that he didn't trust the BMI where I was concerned because of the amount of muscle I have compared to a woman without PCOS. We both know that I have a lot of excess weight around my abdomen area which is a concern for heart disease and a classic shape for PCOS, but he always wanted the doctors to do a fat percentage dunk test.

I too would like to know what the waist-to-hip measurement comes to for me compared to the BMI. Wonder if this one is the same thing: http://www.healthcentral.com/cholest...-2774-143.html

deadboy · 08-18-2006, 11:59 AM

That's just a rationalization. The article specifically says that 300,000 people per year die from obesity related issues. BMI being accurate or not has no bearing on that. The article only says it should no longer be used as a measure of how likely a person is to have heart disease.

LisaBoston · 08-19-2006, 09:12 AM

I am screwed if they use the hip to waist ratio.

In my teens when I was a competitive swimmer, I weighed 160-180 lbs, had a 32 inch waist and hips were 35. When I was morbid obese, there were 5 inches difference, now 94 lbs later its only 2.5 inches difference. Hmmm...

Gina in NY · 08-19-2006, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leanne

I will have to have my brother read this article. He has now lost over 200 lbs since his RNY last Oct. He weights 230lbs and according to the BMI chart, is still overweight and needs to weigh 170lbs to be "normal". He is now pure muscle, and the BMI charts don't take that into consideration.

He has been a bit upset, because he wanted to be "normal" for once in his life

(not that he'll ever be normal in any sence of the word!!!)

My trainer is a body builder - the man has no fat at all and weighs at the very LEAST - 30 pounds more than he "should". (He's not much taller than me either) Is someone going to look at him and say - lose some weight? I think not.

I think in most gyms, people learn that you have to look at fat to muscle ratio. I am willing to bet Arnold Schwarzenegger (sp) has a higher BMI than he "should", but really...