Aren't you a little tired of the "Obesity Epidemic"?

Hexahedra

1.) Has anyone else noticed that clothing stores are making their clothes smaller???
2.) If obesity is such a epidemic right now, why is organic food, fruits and veggies are expensive but I can buy a box of little debbies for 1.50???

1. Clothes are actually getting bigger even as manufacturers retain the same numbering standard. Google "vanity sizing". If you can't fit into the same size anymore, that's because you have expanded faster.
2. Some non-organic food, veggies and fruits can be had for 1.50. There's a whole range of nutritious food between the organic kind and sugar snacks, forgoing little debbies doesn't mean you can get nothing but expensive organic stuff.

belinus

Going back to the original post, the changing of the BMI really has nothing to do with the fact that "everyone is overweight!" because the BMI was never really a valid measure to begin with. It only speaks to averages and says nothing about lean/fat weight. I remember when it first started gaining traction there as an article critical of the BMI because according to it the boxer Evander Holyfield was obese. Just looking at the guy you can tell he was not (this was around 15-20 years ago IIRC).

The problem I have with the label is that it only focuses on the end result problem and not the root sources of the problem which are two fold. I am going to tackle the elephant in the room and call out the first one which is personal responsibility and a lot of obese people lack it. I think we have all dealt with personal responsibility issues so I am going to leave it at that.

The other major problem is the quality of food in this country has gone down dramatically over the years. A Duke study found that branded food nutritional quality has dropped dramatically over the last 20 years. The fads come and go such as the fear of fat a few decades ago lead to the low-fat craze which spiked the level of sugars in food to maintain taste resulting in fat being stored.

Then there is the whole processing of foods. When I was in college my TV used to by my alarm clock and one morning a Susan Powter infomercial happened to be playing on the channel when it came on to wake me up. I was half listening to it when she said the following: "We can trace the rise in heart disease in this nation to the invention of a very long shelf-life. You read the ingredients and it is 'gum blah blah blah', 'yum blah blah blah', 'some blah blah blah', and it's tomato juice. THERE'S NO TOMATO IN THE TOMATO JUICE!" I always quote that when I get into an argument with my mother because she eat Kroger Carbmaster Yogurt while I spend twice as much on Chobani. One day in her kitchen I read the label of hers to her. Then I read a label of mine. Chobani has 20 calories more than twice with the Kroger Carbmaster has but all my ingredients were in English with the exception of the active cultures Chobani lists. Hers were all chemicals and preservatives.

Dovetailing that is the fact that we accept poison in our food. Americans eat things that virtually (if not actually) all of Europe bans along with other nations like Canada and Japan. One example I like to use is Mt Dew and similar drinks because they contain a flame retardant. They process vegetable oil in the same chemical family as the one that is added to your couch material to keep it from burning as quickly. All in the name of keeping citrus oils from separating in the drink. Pepsi phased out BVO in Gatorade this year after a Change.Org petition reached over 200,000 signatures but still keeps in in Mt Dew.

belinus

1. Clothes are actually getting bigger even as manufacturers retain the same numbering standard. Google "vanity sizing". If you can't fit into the same size anymore, that's because you have expanded faster.

And in some cases shifting the location of the manufacturing also changes the size. I have shirts made in Pakistan that fit me fine and some shirts, both of the same brand, made in Bangladesh that fit smaller. Same brand, same numerical size. When I got my last batch I noticed they had moved back to Pakistan.

Hellbent_Heidi

You can also buy a bag of frozen veggies for that price as well. It drives me mad when people say things like this. Yes little debbies might be 1.50, but you can also buy veggies for 1.50!!!

:flowerforyou:

Thank you! I'm so tired of people using this excuse. Regardless of the price...its not news that eating a box of Little Debbies isn't good for you, so its not like you're being 'tricked' into eating that instead. Its simply not cheaper to eat junk food.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/health/story/2012-05-17/healthy-food-cost-USDA/55018070/1

gfroniewski

I think there is an undeniable problem with obesity in this country. I also think it is fair to call it an epidemic, albeit loosely. While not "an infectious disease", obesity is a problem that we are well aware of and continues to spread as the years go on. We need to take control! It isn't BMI, it isn't food prices...it's us.

LAW_714

Nearest farmer's market is 25 miles away? In Alabama? Color me skeptical on this one. Perhaps not an "official" farmer's markets, but you can hardly throw a stone and not hit a farm stand last time I was in Alabama.

I think she said Mississippi not Alabama.

In Alabama, I would say that the number of famers markets would likely depend on where you are.. even in Alabama. Where I live, I can name 4 farmers markets and 2 organic farms that sell produce every week from May through October. But that's in a city. I doubt that same number of markets occur everywhere in the state.

Dovetailing that is the fact that we accept poison in our food. Americans eat things that virtually (if not actually) all of Europe bans along with other nations like Canada and Japan. One example I like to use is Mt Dew and similar drinks because they contain a flame retardant. They process vegetable oil in the same chemical family as the one that is added to your couch material to keep it from burning as quickly. All in the name of keeping citrus oils from separating in the drink. Pepsi phased out BVO in Gatorade this year after a Change.Org petition reached over 200,000 signatures but still keeps in in Mt Dew.

*shudder*
Yeesh.

On the bright side, at least if you leave your Dew in the car on a bright summer day, it won't burst into flames...

coreyreichle

Going back to the original post, the changing of the BMI really has nothing to do with the fact that "everyone is overweight!" because the BMI was never really a valid measure to begin with. It only speaks to averages and says nothing about lean/fat weight. I remember when it first started gaining traction there as an article critical of the BMI because according to it the boxer Evander Holyfield was obese. Just looking at the guy you can tell he was not (this was around 15-20 years ago IIRC).

The problem of people saying what you are saying here is: The vast majority of people are in fact, just average.

BMI is a pretty good standard for everyone except athletes. And most people are not athletes. Lean/Fat weight has little to do with anything until you are on the cutting edge of physical fitness.

Most people are not in the same condition as Holyfield, Ray Lewis, etc etc.

wolverine66

The title of your post reminded me of a song a few years back.
It was by Lazy Boy and it was called "Underwear Goes Inside The Pants" It is an awesome song with a very powerful message.

"Americans, let's face it: We've been a spoiled country for a long time.
Do you know what the number one health risk in America is? Obesity. They say we're in the middle of an obesity epidemic.
An epidemic like it is polio.

Like we'll be telling our grand kids about it one day.
The Great Obesity Epidemic of 2004.
"How'd you get through it grandpa?"
"Oh, it was horrible Johnny, there was cheesecake and pork chops everywhere."

Nobody knows why were getting fatter? Look at our lifestyle. I'll sit at a drive thru.
I'll sit there behind fifteen other cars instead of getting up to make the eight foot walk to the totally empty counter.
Everything is mega meal, super sized. Want biggie fries, super sized, want to go large.
You want to have thirty burgers for a nickel you fat mother f*cker. There's room in the back. Take it!
Want a 55 gallon drum of Coke with that? It's only three more cents."

http://www.lyricsmania.com/underwear_goes_inside_the_pants_lyrics_lazyboy.html

came here to post Greg Giraldo's "lyrics"... left impressed that someone already had.

nice. :flowerforyou:

belinus

The problem of people saying what you are saying here is: The vast majority of people are in fact, just average.

But if you have to have a litany of exceptions as to why your measure does not work, then you have an invalid measure. Because you are not really measuring what you say you are measuring. It is a composite number than does not take body composition into account. In the case I cited above, and athletes in general, overestimates fat tissue. In the reverse where there is less lean mass it will underestimate fat.

For example at my height if I had 0% body fat according to my last measure (I used hips, waist, neck) I would be overweight and .3 under being considered Obese. And I am not an athlete by any stretch of the imagination.

Iwishyouwell

Nope, I feel exactly the opposite. While I do not believe people should be belittled and discriminated against, I believe the obesity epidemic needs to be even more talked about, confronted, and dealt with.

We are out of control in the US, with many other formerly thin nations creeping up as they adopt our horrendous standards of eating AND dieting. The average person in this country couldn't even fit one leg into the pants of the average American from 40 years ago.

The government's scam nutritional recommendations, coupled with the insane processed, high carb, zero-nutrition foods we eat in massive quantities, have crippled this nation. And now, because we're so large collectively, a culture of enabling and excuses have arisen. Cloth sizing was deregulated about 30 years ago, so many of us don't even know for sure what size we're really wearing, leaving room to delude people in believing they're the same size as they use to be, or their parents were. We've made eating AND losing weight this HUGE emotional ordeal, and when things become overly emotional, they can become overly complicated. Gone is the "just do it" mentality, replaced with the "how do you feel?" approach. There are corporations making billions of dollars off enticing you into obesity, and billions more "helping" you get out of it. It's all a trap.

We are killing ourselves at a record pace. So much of the accepted logic about food and nutrition and exercise is ALL wrong. This epidemic is getting worse by the day, and the repercussions are stunning and tragic.

I hope we get to the point of treating obesity with the exact same seriousness as we do HIV/AIDS and cancer.

ldrosophila

You really want to feel fat compare your body weight to the standard formula for Ideal Body Weight. Anything above 120% is considered obese. For women this is 100+5xinches or a woman of 5'3" would be 100+5x3=115lbs. If you weigh 160lbs then you are 139% over your IBW or obese.

A man 100+6xinches or a man of 5'9" would be 100+6x9=154lbs

All of these numbers are pretty arbitrary in fact it should be a set of anthropometric measurements that determine your overall level of fatness.

The fact is though looking at BMI, IBW, clothing sizes, and general weight distribution the waistline is expanding in America and worldwide.

PS IBW is the standard most doctors use for a quick comparison

ldrosophila

Onto the price for food: While garbage food is cheaper, it's cheaper for a reason. It costs less to make. However, one can in fact find inexpensive produce all over, one just needs to look. Example: I buy about 90% of my produce from farmer's markets. And, I buy in season.

Do you have to eat organic to be healthy? Hardly. Do you need to "eat clean" to be healthy? Hardly. Stop looking for magic missles, and just use common sense. People don't fall all over themselves eating organic in Europe, do they? No. Do they fall over themselves "Eating Clean?" Nope.

The difference between other nations and the US largely boils down to one thing: Here, we drive 1/4 of a mile to go to the store and buy a 1/2 gallon of milk. Basically, they move more than we do, and they eat less than we do.

For the most part, I agree with you. From experience, I know I can get away with more nutritional sins when living in Germany than I can here in the rural setting of the Mississippi Delta. The lifestyles are so completely different, but then, so are the community layouts.

Germany: I don't even bother with a car. Even when I lived in a tiny out-of-the-way village, there was a small market with fresh foods (a Bioladen even!) and bakery that I could get to while my coffee brewed! Everything at my fingertips!! I walked everywhere. Fitness was built in. I loved it

Mississippi Delta: Without a car, I am dead in the water. I live in the center of town but the nearest grocery store is almost 4 miles away. I would gladly bike except there is nowhere to lock a bike (and I can promise it would not be there when I came out) AND the milk would begin spoil before I could get it home. Organics are twice as costly as their non-organic counterparts, and "fresh" is a concept I'm not sure folks really get around here. (I refuse to fight fruit flies for food for which I must pay top dollar.) So I arrange my life here to include the activities I need to stay fit. I enjoy the workouts but I resent having to fight for what I see as a basic human right.

ETA: The nearest farmer's market is 54 miles roundtrip from my house... in the next town. We advertise one here just a mile from my house, but every time I've gone, it has been a flea market with no PRODUCE in sight.

I now realize how spoiled I am. :sad:

theyre called food desserts and the seem to be a big issue in very poor rural and urban areas. It's one of the reason poor have such terrible access to produce. http://apps.ams.usda.gov/fooddeserts/foodDeserts.aspx

ldrosophila

Interesting that the fat gene et al all suddenly appeared in the last 50 years.

I dont think it's that odd considering Watson and Crick first described the helix structure of DNA in 1953. The human genome wasn't cracked till what 20-15years ago. The find new gene sequences every day some code for eye color, hair color, lean body mass, diabetes, cancer, and obesity.

MyChocolateDiet

Yeah I'm kind of tired of hearing about this..especially as some of the "rules" for containing it have creeped into schools and pediatricians offices as guidelines for all kids and I get questions/reccommendations/suggestions for my picky eating kid who is not overweight in the least and who is not helped by blanket statement policies or rec's.

ldrosophila

I never liked the term, "Obesity epidemic". To me, an epidemic is spread by germs or other infectious agents.

I gained weight by eating too much and not exercising, period.
Not because the weight charts changed, or BMI is different, or I have hypothyroidism and am postmenopausal, I caught the obesity germ and have the fat gene.

I did it to myself. Truth, no excuses.

Maybe I'll catch the fitness epidemic! That's not caused by germs, either. Only by hard work and dedication and choice.
I chose to gain weight and I choose now to get fit.

There is some truth to this statement Adenovirus 36 has been implicated in being obesigenic

awake4777

When my granddaughter was 3years old we lived in Arlington, Texas. Her preschool talked a lot about "healthy foods", and "healthy choices". She is 8 years old, skinny, and very active. She is and has been in an unhealthy food environment. I think education is the key, but you must start early.

ldrosophila

Oh and OP your kitty is absolutely the cutest thing! I just want to snuggle her!

awake4777

:indifferent:

Nope, I feel exactly the opposite. While I do not believe people should be belittled and discriminated against, I believe the obesity epidemic needs to be even more talked about, confronted, and dealt with.

We are out of control in the US, with many other formerly thin nations creeping up as they adopt our horrendous standards of eating AND dieting. The average person in this country couldn't even fit one leg into the pants of the average American from 40 years ago.

The government's scam nutritional recommendations, coupled with the insane processed, high carb, zero-nutrition foods we eat in massive quantities, have crippled this nation. And now, because we're so large collectively, a culture of enabling and excuses have arisen. Cloth sizing was deregulated about 30 years ago, so many of us don't even know for sure what size we're really wearing, leaving room to delude people in believing they're the same size as they use to be, or their parents were. We've made eating AND losing weight this HUGE emotional ordeal, and when things become overly emotional, they can become overly complicated. Gone is the "just do it" mentality, replaced with the "how do you feel?" approach. There are corporations making billions of dollars off enticing you into obesity, and billions more "helping" you get out of it. It's all a trap.

We are killing ourselves at a record pace. So much of the accepted logic about food and nutrition and exercise is ALL wrong. This epidemic is getting worse by the day, and the repercussions are stunning and tragic.

I hope we get to the point of treating obesity with the exact same seriousness as we do HIV/AIDS and cancer.

. :flowerforyou:

JUDDDing

The problem of people saying what you are saying here is: The vast majority of people are in fact, just average.

But if you have to have a litany of exceptions as to why your measure does not work, then you have an invalid measure. Because you are not really measuring what you say you are measuring. It is a composite number than does not take body composition into account. In the case I cited above, and athletes in general, overestimates fat tissue. In the reverse where there is less lean mass it will underestimate fat.

For example at my height if I had 0% body fat according to my last measure (I used hips, waist, neck) I would be overweight and .3 under being considered Obese. And I am not an athlete by any stretch of the imagination.

Do you really think that there are medical doctors out there who cannot tell the difference between muscular people and fat people? If you legitimately have this concern - you should find a better doctor. Similarly, if my doctor tried to refer me for DXA or hydrostatic weighing - I'd decide that they were a moron and find a new doctor.

If you feel that you've been inappropriately labeled - get a second opinion there are legitimate outliers in any population. There are numerous more expensive tests that you can take. But BMI is fine for 90% of the people.

90% accurate and essentially free to acquire seems like a pretty awesome population level metric to me.

hmg90

Most Americans ARE overweight and unhealthy, and the amount of lifestyle-related diseases are proof of that, no matter how you want to look at BMI.
The problem discussing obesity is that it feels intrusive when somebody else minds your business. And I agree that it is plain rude for someone to come up to you and comment on it.
But a lot of people take the stance of "my body, my business". But it's not just your business. The costs related to this are immense and a REAL problem for America's economy. Obese people costs the country a lot. And for those concerned with the climate, people who eat three times more than the average person also have a much, much larger carbon footprint.
So yes, it is an "epidemic" and it has to change.

There is a lot to learn from Jamie Oliver's TED talk:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=go_QOzc79Uc

coreyreichle

The problem of people saying what you are saying here is: The vast majority of people are in fact, just average.

But if you have to have a litany of exceptions as to why your measure does not work, then you have an invalid measure. Because you are not really measuring what you say you are measuring. It is a composite number than does not take body composition into account. In the case I cited above, and athletes in general, overestimates fat tissue. In the reverse where there is less lean mass it will underestimate fat.

For example at my height if I had 0% body fat according to my last measure (I used hips, waist, neck) I would be overweight and .3 under being considered Obese. And I am not an athlete by any stretch of the imagination.

Wrong.

If you are even considering using BMI to track your propensity to obesity, then it's applicable to you. Athletes don't bother with BMI, they use hydraulic displacement to measure body composition.

Hip-waist-neck measurements are just as bad as BMI for body composition measurements. I doubt highly you would be errantly obese, and not an athlete. You are a unique snowflake. Just like everyone else.

Iwishyouwell

I am guessing that the acceptance in question is not meant as "accepting unhealthy lifestyles." My guess is that it is a subtle critique of the fact that "healthy" is frequently used as a proxy for "skinny."

I am going out on a limb, because I can't read the person's mind who wrote it, but here's what I *think* they meant: healthy does not automatically mean thin, nor does thin automatically mean healthy. The two can certainly overlap, but it's not as black and white as we are generally taught to think. There exists a range of sizes and shapes in which people -- people who eat healthy foods and who are active -- are actually healthy.

I do think that some of the "obesity epidemic" and "healthy lifestyle" rhetoric is basically a way for people to legitimize their disgust and hatred of fat/fat people. It's true that I think if you're 10-25 pounds "overweight" it's not a big deal, likely because general weight charts are goofy and inaccurate. I had a friend in college that was 5'8" and 165 and was forever fretting she wasn't 130. She was active and guys flocked around her, but she was always told by her father that she was too big.

There's a lot of pressure out there to be a certain way and it takes strength to say, I'm doing what's right for me and that's great. I don't have to be 120 pounds. I don't have to have 17 percent body fat. For many it may be as simple as, "I want to walk up the stairs without huffing and puffing," or "I want to be able to walk a mile" (although I try not make judgments, I do think everyone should aspire to the mile walk.) I used to do a 12-mile backpacking trip every year into the Sierras, so I couldn't get out of shape that much -- except the last two years I haven't gone -- and you guessed it, I got really, really out of shape.

I think this is about being healthy and, at least for me, it's probably not going to be about getting thin. I understand that people struggle with 10-25 pounds but sometimes you have to decide if it's really worth the anxiety. Like you said, I think it would cut your running time but that's only a small part of your life. Would it be good for the rest of it? Can you maintain it or will it be a constant struggle? Would your health improve or not?

Anyway, thanks for sharing. There seems to be a lot of either/or thinking on this board and it was nice to see your post!

This just reads to me like somebody who believes an overall consistent lifestyle overhaul is just too hard, and has decided to accept their fatness. There is just so much defeatist rhetoric, and typical as this line of thinking is, it's just not going to find a lot of champions at a site where so many are overcoming their challenges and working so incredibly hard to reach, and maintain, their goals.

belinus

Wrong.

If you are even considering using BMI to track your propensity to obesity, then it's applicable to you. Athletes don't bother with BMI, they use hydraulic displacement to measure body composition.

Hip-waist-neck measurements are just as bad as BMI for body composition measurements. I doubt highly you would be errantly obese, and not an athlete. You are a unique snowflake. Just like everyone else.

But BMI is fine for 90% of the people.

No, it is not right for 90 percent of people.

"Despite the good correlation between BMI and BF %, the diagnostic accuracy of BMI to diagnose obesity is limited, particularly for individuals in the intermediate BMI ranges. A BMI cut-off of ≥ 30 kg/m2 has a good specificity but misses more than half of people with excess fat. These results help to explain the U and J-shape association between BMI and outcomes."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2877506/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Correlation_between_BMI_and_Percent_Body_Fat_for_Men_in_NCHS'_NHANES_1994_Data.PNG has an annotated chart of the above study's data and delineates the quadrants where the BMI was a poor predictor. Those data sets are more than 10% and that is just males.

In addition, the scale has been revised several times which casts further doubt in it's validity as a measure.

JUDDDing

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Correlation_between_BMI_and_Percent_Body_Fat_for_Men_in_NCHS'_NHANES_1994_Data.PNG has an annotated chart of the above study's data and delineates the quadrants where the BMI was a poor predictor. Those data sets are more than 10% and that is just males.

Leaving out half the data set (the generally less muscular half) I imagine skews this toward inaccuracy. By including women in this chart - how likely do you think it is that they would be grouped into the lower right quadrant (given that average female body fat is 25-31%)? Look at figure 2A in your first reference.

And, while keeping in mind here that the topic here is obesity (BMI >=30), not overweight... From your link (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2877506/):

"A BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 has an excellent specificity and positive predictive value for diagnosing obesity in both sexes. This particular finding could explain why the risk for total and cardiovascular mortality usually peaks up when BMI is ≥ 30 kg/m2 and suggests that suboptimal diagnostic performance of BMI to detect excess fat could be limited only to intermediate ranges of BMI. Body mass index should continue to be used in clinical practice to identify those at the two extremes of the body weight spectrum, those with a BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 who most likely have an excess in body fat, and those with a BMI < 20 kg/m2. "

pluckabee

What gets me about the obesity epidemic is that all these thin people that have never been fat and have never lost weight are trying to give advice to fat people about losing weight.

How the hell are they supposed to know?

pkw58

No, I am not tired of the Obesity Epidemic. I was 46 pounds heavier in December 2011 and it hurt physically and emotionally. I want help in staying and getting healthier, and I want others to have access to information to do the same.

I don't think we do near enough in the US to promote healthy lifestyles. We are getting better, But have a long way to go.

juliesaturday

Wow...I can't believe I actually read through all 5 pages of comments (procrastinating writing a Russian History paper helps, haha). I pretty much agree with the "No Excuses" people. Seriously...that one post about not having a farmers market around and all these other excuses from algebravoodoo - well, coreyreichle replied with a bunch of solutions and what do you get back? Refuting every single one.

That drives me bat **** when dealing with people. I have one friend who just keeps getting fatter and fatter and I try to make suggestions and its just excuse after excuse after excuse.

Me: "Hey, why don't we go skate the sea wall Thursday"
Her: "Oh I don't think so, I'll just be getting off an 8 hour work day and will be too tired"
Me: "You have a ****ING desk job"

"Oh I don't have time to work out", "Eating healthy is too expensive", "I have a full time job"...jesus, its just painful to listen to. I used to make excuses like this all the time. Then I realized I needed to just admit I had a problem and then do something about it. Losing weight and being healthy is one of the simplest concepts in the world - but it's really hard to put into action. I know. I've been there. One of the girls on my derby team has 4 young kids, a job, plays roller derby and hockey and still manages to cook healthy meals for the family.

In short, no I am not tired of the Obesity Epidemic. I'm tired of people making excuses for being fat. If you have a psychological problem, go talk to a counsellor and stop stuffing your face.

Take this with a grain of salt, I'm just stating an opinion. I have a feeling there will be backlash on this post, but I don't really feel like arguing about this, so I am going to go back to arguing about Slavophiles and Westernizers instead! Those rascally 19th century Russians !

(This doesn't apply to people that legitimately have a thyroid problem)

coreyreichle

Wrong.

If you are even considering using BMI to track your propensity to obesity, then it's applicable to you. Athletes don't bother with BMI, they use hydraulic displacement to measure body composition.

Hip-waist-neck measurements are just as bad as BMI for body composition measurements. I doubt highly you would be errantly obese, and not an athlete. You are a unique snowflake. Just like everyone else.

But BMI is fine for 90% of the people.

No, it is not right for 90 percent of people.

"Despite the good correlation between BMI and BF %, the diagnostic accuracy of BMI to diagnose obesity is limited, particularly for individuals in the intermediate BMI ranges. A BMI cut-off of ≥ 30 kg/m2 has a good specificity but misses more than half of people with excess fat. These results help to explain the U and J-shape association between BMI and outcomes."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2877506/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Correlation_between_BMI_and_Percent_Body_Fat_for_Men_in_NCHS'_NHANES_1994_Data.PNG has an annotated chart of the above study's data and delineates the quadrants where the BMI was a poor predictor. Those data sets are more than 10% and that is just males.

In addition, the scale has been revised several times which casts further doubt in it's validity as a measure.

So, you want to toss the whole BMI standard, because it doesn't classify as over fat a segment of the population who is over fat?

Basically, what you posted says,"If BMI says you are over fat, you are. However, just because it says you are not, does not mean you are not."

And, you do realize, science is always revising it's models, to better refine them, I hope. If science was never changed, it would be called "religion".

coreyreichle

...That drives me bat **** when dealing with people. I have one friend who just keeps getting fatter and fatter and I try to make suggestions and its just excuse after excuse after excuse. ...

The hardest part for an addict is to finally admit they have an addiction. For what it's worth.

darkguardian419

not worth the strike...