

Body Mass Index Underestimates Obesity Prevalence - tokenadult
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0033308

======
paulsutter
The formula for BMI is simply wrong. It's based on a square of the height.
This would be great if we were two dimensional, but we're three dimensional.

Tall people routinely have high BMIs and short people have low BMIs. I'm 6'5",
and though I am at the 20th percentile of weight for people of my height, I
have a BMI that indicates borderline obesity. And I'm skinny with about 12%
bodyfat.

It's just a weird measure. I'm not sure why anyone uses it.

------
artsrc
Since obesity does not matter, who cares what measure you use?

"when we look at objectively measured fitness determined by a maximal exercise
test on a treadmill and objectively determined body composition, not self
reported height and weight, or not even just body mass index but hydrostatic
weighing to estimate percent fat, skin folds, waist circumference, we look at
all of those things and the conclusion we come to again and again is that it
is low fitness that is a much more important predictor of mortality than is
body mass index, fat distribution, overall percent body fat."

"In our analyses over and over again fitness wipes out the hazard associated
with obesity."

[http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/healthreport/he...](http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/healthreport/health-
effects-of-exercise/3216368)

------
superprime
it's sloppy the other way around too. you can have low body fat and still have
high BMI.

i'm more muscular than average but have pretty low body fat (consistently
<14%). but because of the BMI calculation I'll often get told I should lose
weight when I get a checkup (unless they have half a brain and look before
they speak).

