Israel Bans Models under BMI 18.5

Options
2456

Replies

  • Awkward30
    Awkward30 Posts: 1,927 Member
    Options
    I'm not saying this is the best idea in the universe, but you could eat at a surplus for a couple months, put on a pound of muscle, and be over 18.5 and able to work.
  • 1ConcreteGirl
    1ConcreteGirl Posts: 3,677 Member
    Options
    My BMI is 18.3. And I am healthy. Should I be fired?

    OFF WITH HER HEAD!
  • BinaryPulsar
    BinaryPulsar Posts: 8,927 Member
    Options
    A better measurement could be to simply pass the "bill of health" through their doctor with a thorough examination. Seems easy enough (and the doctor will take BMI as well as other factors into consideration).

    Yeah, but the idea is not necessarily for the health of the models, it's for the imagery exposed to teenagers. Images of what would be considered underweight people, healthy or not, might present the same unrealistic ideals to people. I don't know, really, I'm just thinking out loud. I haven't had a chance to fully digest the concept yet.

    Slim teenagers like to feel "normal" also.
  • BinaryPulsar
    BinaryPulsar Posts: 8,927 Member
    Options
    My BMI is 18.3. And I am healthy. Should I be fired?

    OFF WITH HER HEAD!

    :laugh:
  • EngineerPrincess
    EngineerPrincess Posts: 306 Member
    Options
    Photoshop disclaimers: good. Ban based on BMI? That is a TERRIBLE way to battle eating disorders. MANY girls have a natural bmi of under 18.5 and eat like horses, I did until I was in my very late teens. What we need to teach girls is that their worth isn't based on their looks, not slightly regulate the weight of girls on the catwalk. High fashion is art and models are basically hangers for clothes-- and I haven't met many girls who actually watch high fashion shows and say "I want to look like that." I've heard that said about victorias secret models, but those girls are usually over 18.5 and over anyway. In my experience (and I've known a LOT of people with eating disorders), high fashion isn't the *cause* of eating disorders, it's always emotional and mental issues first that drive someone to an extreme and disordered behavior.

    What needs to be done is spend the money educating the public on eating disorders themselves. For a lot of the girls suffering it's not even about being skinny. It's about the control, the mindset, the anxiety, so many other things. Regulations like this are a waste of time but worse, they purvey stereotypes about eating disorders that are highly incorrect.
  • MoreBean13
    MoreBean13 Posts: 8,701 Member
    Options
    A better measurement could be to simply pass the "bill of health" through their doctor with a thorough examination. Seems easy enough (and the doctor will take BMI as well as other factors into consideration).

    Yeah, but the idea is not necessarily for the health of the models, it's for the imagery exposed to teenagers. Images of what would be considered underweight people, healthy or not, might present the same unrealistic ideals to people. I don't know, really, I'm just thinking out loud. I haven't had a chance to fully digest the concept yet.

    Slim teenagers like to feel "normal" also.

    That's true. I don't really know the answer. I guess the risks associated with slim teenagers not seeing their body type portrayed have to be weighed against the risks of those who are not naturally underweight seeing imagery of underweight models. I suppose there could be backlash from naturally slim people, but I wonder if there are really health risks associated with naturally slim people wanting to be "healthy" BMI. There could be, I guess.
  • 1ConcreteGirl
    1ConcreteGirl Posts: 3,677 Member
    Options
    A better measurement could be to simply pass the "bill of health" through their doctor with a thorough examination. Seems easy enough (and the doctor will take BMI as well as other factors into consideration).

    Yeah, but the idea is not necessarily for the health of the models, it's for the imagery exposed to teenagers. Images of what would be considered underweight people, healthy or not, might present the same unrealistic ideals to people. I don't know, really, I'm just thinking out loud. I haven't had a chance to fully digest the concept yet.

    Slim teenagers like to feel "normal" also.

    That's true. I don't really know the answer. I guess the risks associated with slim teenagers not seeing their body type portrayed have to be weighed against the risks of those who are not naturally underweight seeing imagery of underweight models. I suppose there could be backlash from naturally slim people, but I wonder if there are really health risks associated with naturally slim people wanting to be "healthy" BMI. There could be, I guess.

    This is just anecdotal, but I knew a guy who was so freaking skinny... just, like 6'0 and 130 lbs. Hugging him was like hugging a marionette, all bony sticks poking me everywhere.

    He was very good friends with my roommate, who told me he confided in her that he was so upset about being unable to gain weight that he sometimes cried of frustration. I think it happens. And not just with girls.
  • BinaryPulsar
    BinaryPulsar Posts: 8,927 Member
    Options
    Photoshop disclaimers: good. Ban based on BMI? That is a TERRIBLE way to battle eating disorders. MANY girls have a natural bmi of under 18.5 and eat like horses, I did until I was in my very late teens. What we need to teach girls is that their worth isn't based on their looks, not slightly regulate the weight of girls on the catwalk. High fashion is art and models are basically hangers for clothes-- and I haven't met many girls who actually watch high fashion shows and say "I want to look like that." I've heard that said about victorias secret models, but those girls are usually over 18.5 and over anyway. In my experience (and I've known a LOT of people with eating disorders), high fashion isn't the *cause* of eating disorders, it's always emotional and mental issues first that drive someone to an extreme and disordered behavior.

    What needs to be done is spend the money educating the public on eating disorders themselves. For a lot of the girls suffering it's not even about being skinny. It's about the control, the mindset, the anxiety, so many other things. Regulations like this are a waste of time but worse, they purvey stereotypes about eating disorders that are highly incorrect.

    I agree with this.

    Absolutely seeing models is not the cause of eating disorders. The causes of eating disorders are much deeper than that. It's not about trying to look like a model. It is a slow suicide based on deep emotional pain and trying to gain a feeling of control that has nothing to do with being skinny. In fact for some people being skinny may be the place they choose to express this because it is something that is easy for them to control because they are already naturally slim. Or maybe they have deeper body image issues and being slim is the only thing they think they have going for them. Telling them that being slim and all that comes with that is not normal actually makes it worse because it is not about trying to look "normal", it's about struggling with a deep feeling of never being able to be "normal". And this may be because they believe they are damaged by something much deeper than seeing models.
  • EngineerPrincess
    EngineerPrincess Posts: 306 Member
    Options
    A better measurement could be to simply pass the "bill of health" through their doctor with a thorough examination. Seems easy enough (and the doctor will take BMI as well as other factors into consideration).

    Yeah, but the idea is not necessarily for the health of the models, it's for the imagery exposed to teenagers. Images of what would be considered underweight people, healthy or not, might present the same unrealistic ideals to people. I don't know, really, I'm just thinking out loud. I haven't had a chance to fully digest the concept yet.

    Slim teenagers like to feel "normal" also.

    That's true. I don't really know the answer. I guess the risks associated with slim teenagers not seeing their body type portrayed have to be weighed against the risks of those who are not naturally underweight seeing imagery of underweight models. I suppose there could be backlash from naturally slim people, but I wonder if there are really health risks associated with naturally slim people wanting to be "healthy" BMI. There could be, I guess.

    There are indeed health risks. I was so skinny in my early teens that I realized I could eat whatever I wanted and not gain. So I did-- candy, pasta, whole pizzas, some days I ate ridiculous amounts of sugar. Where did that get me? VERY poor health from the junk I ate in order to gain. I'm hypoglycemic now, likely because I didn't eat healthy and let my sugars get out of control. I also had to totally revamp my diet because my immune system was so weak. Skinny people need to eat healthy foods too and be accepted for the weight they are, people who comment on someone being too skinny are JUST AS HURTFUL as people who shame obese people. Eating disorders to NOT HAVE TO DO WITH WEIGHT, they are a mental illness.
  • MoreBean13
    MoreBean13 Posts: 8,701 Member
    Options
    A better measurement could be to simply pass the "bill of health" through their doctor with a thorough examination. Seems easy enough (and the doctor will take BMI as well as other factors into consideration).

    Yeah, but the idea is not necessarily for the health of the models, it's for the imagery exposed to teenagers. Images of what would be considered underweight people, healthy or not, might present the same unrealistic ideals to people. I don't know, really, I'm just thinking out loud. I haven't had a chance to fully digest the concept yet.

    Slim teenagers like to feel "normal" also.

    That's true. I don't really know the answer. I guess the risks associated with slim teenagers not seeing their body type portrayed have to be weighed against the risks of those who are not naturally underweight seeing imagery of underweight models. I suppose there could be backlash from naturally slim people, but I wonder if there are really health risks associated with naturally slim people wanting to be "healthy" BMI. There could be, I guess.

    There are indeed health risks. I was so skinny in my early teens that I realized I could eat whatever I wanted and not gain. So I did-- candy, pasta, whole pizzas, some days I ate ridiculous amounts of sugar. Where did that get me? VERY poor health from the junk I ate in order to gain. I'm hypoglycemic now, likely because I didn't eat healthy and let my sugars get out of control. I also had to totally revamp my diet because my immune system was so weak. Skinny people need to eat healthy foods too and be accepted for the weight they are, people who comment on someone being too skinny are JUST AS HURTFUL as people who shame obese people. Eating disorders to NOT HAVE TO DO WITH WEIGHT, they are a mental illness.

    I agree that Eating Disorders are much deeper than just media portrayal of thin people as ideal, but there's also evidence that there is a causal relationship between those portrayals and the development of eating disorders:

    Eating Disorders and the Role of the Media
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2533817/
    "Results: This review demonstrates that the media does contribute to the development of eating disorders."

    From the text:
    "The current evidence suggests that the negative effects of the media are more pronounced for individuals who are already at-risk or vulnerable (Stice, 2002). The meta-analytic review by Groesz et al. (2002) indicated that females who have already internalized the thin beauty ideal and/or who already have high levels of body dissatisfaction are most vulnerable. A meta-analytic review by Stice (2002) further indicated that adolescent girls with initial deficits in social support and elevations in perceived pressure to be thin are also more vulnerable to the effects of the media messages. "

    "The research on the impact of the media on body dissatisfaction, eating pathology, and negative affect indicates that the media is a causal risk factor for the development of eating disorders and negative affect (Groesz et al., 2002; Stice, 2002). Controlled experimental studies, prospective studies on perceived pressure, and naturalistic studies support the theory that media messages directly contribute to the extensive body discontent experienced by girls and women today in Western society."

    Conclusion:
    "In conclusion, the mass media surrounds us with images of the “thin ideal” for females, an ideal that has become increasingly thin since the 1950’s and thus increasingly unrealistic for most girls and women. The messages and images that focus on the value of appearances and thinness for females have a significant negative impact on body satisfaction, weight preoccupation, eating patterns, and the emotional well-being of women in western culture. Research has demonstrated that the media contributes to the development and maintenance of eating disorders. Prevention and treatment of eating disorders should therefore include media literacy, activism, and advocacy. Given the prevalence of body dissatisfaction and disordered eating in females in our society, and the associations which have been found between eating disorders and the media, it would be prudent for professionals and the public to advocate for more positive and self-esteem building messages to be conveyed to females by the media. Future research should focus on ways to counter-act the effects of the media, in order to improve body satisfaction and self-esteem for girls and women in western culture."

    So I agree that the foundation of the disease is deeper than the media portrayal, but to say that the media has nothing to do with eating disorder development is, in my opinion, wrong. But, I'm also not convinced that there aren't going to be rebound problems at the other end of the spectrum, from naturally slim people, as has already been brought up. I'm not sure the consequences associated with those people have been appropriately considered- honestly, I have no idea. But I agree with you that focus should cooperatively be focused on healthy-body image campaigns, self-esteem, healthy nutrition and lifestyle education, and eating disorder prevention and awareness. I don't think the Israeli plan is totally off-base, but perhaps incomplete.
  • Louisianababy93
    Louisianababy93 Posts: 1,709 Member
    Options
    That's not fair to the models that are naturally skinny but, i understand the whole trying to relay healthy body image to people.. But they need to realize that women come in all shapes and sizes.what is healthy for my body might not be healthy for yours.I do think that there should be something on magazines stating that ,"this image has been Photoshoped" So many girls and women may think twice about trying to harm their self to try and get "the perfect" body.


    Edit: I also agree with morebean is sayin..
  • BinaryPulsar
    BinaryPulsar Posts: 8,927 Member
    Options
    I'm not saying that they should not have a cut off point. But, just cutting it right off at 18.5 seems drastic when there are so many healthy people with a BMI of 18 to 18.5 walking around, living their life. That is not the point at which people experience health problems.

    People have gotten heavier and so people think that someone with a BMI of 18.5 is too slim. And that is not the case.
  • taunto
    taunto Posts: 6,420 Member
    Options
    Its Israel. Probably needs them to be beefed up s othey can be of some use in the military. Or at the very least, so the models don't inspire other girls/guys to become anorexic which in turn hurts their military
  • snowbike
    snowbike Posts: 153 Member
    Options
    Sir Bradley Wiggins at his lightest would not be allowed to model in Israel.
  • brevislux
    brevislux Posts: 1,093 Member
    Options
    I'm very happy with it. And especially with the photoshop thing. The image people get from the media is way too distorted.
  • Oishii
    Oishii Posts: 2,675 Member
    Options
    I think a minimum BMI makes a lot of sense, but perhaps 18.5 is the wrong number. The WHO's starvation BMI is 16, but to me, when your periods have stopped would be a good indicator that your body isn't in full working order. For some people this happens at a BMI of around 20, but I wouldn't suggest that should be the minimum BMI. Hmmmm... The logic normally given for why models are so thin is that the sample clothes sizes are all the same, small size, so perhaps a set dress size would make more sense than a BMI...

    As for naturally skinny girls, I see two angles on that. Firstly, in the past, there would be the occasional very skinny model, such as Twiggy or Kate Moss, who initially stood out for their skinniness and then created a certain trend for that level of skinniness. Recently, however, there are whole photo shoots of models who, to me, look unhealthily skinny. I do not believe this means that there has been a sudden influx of 'naturally' skinny humans on the world. It is a recent fashion, nothing more or less. Secondly, if, at present, there are industry maximum BMIs (informally) and heights (more formally), why not have a minimum BMI? If normal is considered too fat, why not have something considered too thin?

    As for the media and anorexia, the prevalence of 'thinspo' suggests that images of others do have a part to play. Personally, I think two issues have become illogically interwoven: anorexia and the dangers of being underweight. Often, from what I have seen on mfp, for the mental illness of anorexia, proper help is not provided until the physical symptoms include being underweight. Equally, you can be underweight (or under fat) without having an ED, but this doesn't mean you aren't exposing yourself to risks associated with being underweight. Therefore, a teenage girl who is trying to lose weight to be as skinny as a catwalk model does not need to have an ED for this to be an unhealthy goal.

    Lots of thinking aloud here, but I hope some of the thoughts add up! I don't know if what Israel is doing will 'work' and decrease the number of deaths from anorexia, but it will be interesting to see what results it does have.
  • taunto
    taunto Posts: 6,420 Member
    Options
    I'm very happy with it. And especially with the photoshop thing. The image people get from the media is way too distorted.

    If you hate photoshop, then I really hope you hate makeup too
  • brevislux
    brevislux Posts: 1,093 Member
    Options
    I'm very happy with it. And especially with the photoshop thing. The image people get from the media is way too distorted.

    If you hate photoshop, then I really hope you hate makeup too
    I really don't know why we even bother photoshopping. Obviously that eye-shadow will make you look like your waist is 17" and your legs are twice as long as your torso. Total waste of time.
  • MoreBean13
    MoreBean13 Posts: 8,701 Member
    Options
    I'm very happy with it. And especially with the photoshop thing. The image people get from the media is way too distorted.

    If you hate photoshop, then I really hope you hate makeup too

    There's a pretty big difference between makeup and photoshopping bodies to impossible proportions, and that's the expectations of reality and ability to replicate it. Every woman recognizes that a model does not actually have a green outline to her eyes and is wearing foundation to give the image of perfect skin- that's understood, and we can get makeup at home and recreate those looks whenever we want. Often, magazines distort pictures to give models impossible body proportions- and I don't mean unlikely, I mean not humanly possible- shaving off hips, cutting in thigh gaps, elongating legs, nipping in waists. These things are not replicable at home, and I don't think it is universally recognized as false the way makeup is.
  • BinaryPulsar
    BinaryPulsar Posts: 8,927 Member
    Options
    I think a minimum BMI makes a lot of sense, but perhaps 18.5 is the wrong number. The WHO's starvation BMI is 16, but to me, when your periods have stopped would be a good indicator that your body isn't in full working order. For some people this happens at a BMI of around 20, but I wouldn't suggest that should be the minimum BMI. Hmmmm... The logic normally given for why models are so thin is that the sample clothes sizes are all the same, small size, so perhaps a set dress size would make more sense than a BMI...

    As for naturally skinny girls, I see two angles on that. Firstly, in the past, there would be the occasional very skinny model, such as Twiggy or Kate Moss, who initially stood out for their skinniness and then created a certain trend for that level of skinniness. Recently, however, there are whole photo shoots of models who, to me, look unhealthily skinny. I do not believe this means that there has been a sudden influx of 'naturally' skinny humans on the world. It is a recent fashion, nothing more or less. Secondly, if, at present, there are industry maximum BMIs (informally) and heights (more formally), why not have a minimum BMI? If normal is considered too fat, why not have something considered too thin?

    As for the media and anorexia, the prevalence of 'thinspo' suggests that images of others do have a part to play. Personally, I think two issues have become illogically interwoven: anorexia and the dangers of being underweight. Often, from what I have seen on mfp, for the mental illness of anorexia, proper help is not provided until the physical symptoms include being underweight. Equally, you can be underweight (or under fat) without having an ED, but this doesn't mean you aren't exposing yourself to risks associated with being underweight. Therefore, a teenage girl who is trying to lose weight to be as skinny as a catwalk model does not need to have an ED for this to be an unhealthy goal.

    Lots of thinking aloud here, but I hope some of the thoughts add up! I don't know if what Israel is doing will 'work' and decrease the number of deaths from anorexia, but it will be interesting to see what results it does have.

    Just a couple of thoughts. Dress size is not a good indicator either because that has even more variability to it, and also with vanity sizing making it even more complicated. There have already been bans in certain fashions shows based on dress size. Oddly enough because of that healthy women in small sizes were not allowed to work and unhealthy women that were too thin, but fit into one size larger were allowed to work.

    The point is that there is not a magic cut off point at which a person is healthy and then .1 later they are not. The BMI is set at 18.5 with a built in margin of error already because they would not risk setting it too low. It used to be set at 18.

    Deciding if the model is too thin would be based on her BMI, combined with a thorough physical by a doctor with blood work, hormonal testing, all kinds of stuff, and whether or not she gets her period.

    Whether or not a women is healthy is between her and her doctor and is not up to a group of people on the internet to decide. Otherwise it's kind of nuts.

    How far does this extend to? First models get fired, then other types of performers, then athletes that get to 18.4 from their sport get fired.

    And one other point is just that I suppose there is enough variability in weight for maybe it not to be an issue. Sometimes when I weigh myself in the morning my BMI is 18.3, but most of the time it is 18.5 and above.