tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6800344987699528016.post6645537099252291699..comments2023-09-27T02:14:28.311-07:00Comments on Phat Science: Whither BMI?Dr. LaWadehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02239897162047844850noreply@blogger.comBlogger20125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6800344987699528016.post-11639479825591559452011-06-25T20:20:13.338-07:002011-06-25T20:20:13.338-07:00Are you saying that the BMI for diabetic patients ...Are you saying that the BMI for diabetic patients are different?MonaViehttp://monaviemediacenter.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6800344987699528016.post-11142111792545638232011-05-16T21:43:10.798-07:002011-05-16T21:43:10.798-07:00You made some good points there. I did a search on...You made some good points there. I did a search on the topic and found most people will agree with your blog.Penis Enlargement Pillshttp://www.factspenisenlargement.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6800344987699528016.post-39219947686157783362010-11-08T05:16:57.767-08:002010-11-08T05:16:57.767-08:00I never heard about BMI before. Thanks.I never heard about BMI before. Thanks.phenterminehttp://www.phenterminewithoutprescription.org/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6800344987699528016.post-20584338541644432292009-11-25T12:12:57.412-08:002009-11-25T12:12:57.412-08:00Dear Webmaster,
Pathology.org is the largest up t...Dear Webmaster,<br /><br />Pathology.org is the largest up to date informational database consisting of general health and disease information. The only way to combat disease and promote healthy living is to provide the public current information on health and diseases. Pathology.org consists of breaking news in the health world and offers the information needed to take preventive and combative measures to fight disease. Your website seems to be a very credible resource and would beneficial to us in the fight to combat the contraction and spread of disease. You can aid us in this fight by simply putting a banner or link up for us, making our site available to your vast public. I have included the code for the banner within this email showing you exactly what this banner will look like. Thank you for your time, effort, and work you have done, we look forward to any thoughts you may have. <br /><br />Pathology.org is awarding you as top resource and if you would like to get the banner, please email me back with the subject line as your URL to avoid Spam and also to make sure that you only get the banner.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17226532111233194505noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6800344987699528016.post-85100065579515130342009-04-19T22:42:00.000-07:002009-04-19T22:42:00.000-07:00The BMI is maligned for one very good reason. It i...The BMI is maligned for one very good reason. It is seriously flawed. My weight/height puts me well into the obese category. But despite this, I can touch my toes without bending my knees, tie my shoes, and other things obese people cannot do. Overweight, or fat? Sure, no doubt about it. But I'm 6', and 270 pounds. I just have more upper body development than most people. Even without the gut I would need to wear xx large shirts due to the width of my shoulders. Supposedly I should be about 170 pounds. But I used to weigh that,(prior to being placed on cortico steroids) and I looked like a cancer patient. The BMI sucks. A rough "yardstick" is worse than none at all when there are too many variables to be taken into account.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6800344987699528016.post-17445329962928540642008-11-18T22:24:00.000-08:002008-11-18T22:24:00.000-08:00"I think it's entirely reasonable to be picky abou..."I think it's entirely reasonable to be picky about the sample population when you're talking about one or two papers that go against what has been previously shown in a large body of literature, don't you?"<BR/><BR/>Yeah, but what you dont seem to realize is that in fact most of the literature actually supports the Flegal papers in showing that overweight (BMI 25-29) isn't associated with any higher mortality than is normal weight. The Harvard group's studies actually show the same thing - before they delete about 90% of their data to come up with an answer they like better.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6800344987699528016.post-83008226510324918162008-09-16T18:48:00.000-07:002008-09-16T18:48:00.000-07:00Just found this site and love it. I have a questio...Just found this site and love it. I have a question, wondering if you have an answer: <BR/><BR/>We all know if takes +3,500 cals to gain a pound. However, I keep reading that studies say people who were once overweight will gain weight faster than people who never were, because the once-fat folks have extra fat cells (which were "emptied" during the weight loss). <BR/><BR/>So what does this mean, does it take a formerly fat person fewer than 3,500 cals to gain a pound? Confused...thanks.elifehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09231830597419362530noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6800344987699528016.post-89681025130606649672008-08-08T13:03:00.000-07:002008-08-08T13:03:00.000-07:00Anonymous, I chose to present the particular data ...Anonymous, I chose to present the particular data I did because there were already some nice graphs of it on the internet. That particular data may not be from a representative sample, but it is in accord with scores of other studies from varying populations. I think it's entirely reasonable to be picky about the sample population when you're talking about one or two papers that go against what has been previously shown in a large body of literature, don't you?Dr. LaWadehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02239897162047844850noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6800344987699528016.post-36796954739809060092008-08-08T11:40:00.000-07:002008-08-08T11:40:00.000-07:00I think a little bias is showing up here! You hav...I think a little bias is showing up here! You have dramatic looking graphs from completely non-representative samples. E.g. one is from a group of male health professionals 40-75 years of age. Then you say (apparently following the misleading Harvard line) that the Flegal study is the only one to find overweight not so terrible. Someone else points out that exactly the same finding was reported in 1998 on a specific page of the NHLBI clinical guidelines report. You counter with "And the report cited in the Clinical Guidelines only looked at people 55-74 years old, and so not a representative sample." Actually it is far more representative than the samples that you display in your graphs, which are not at all representative. So you seem to be using rather different standards for different studies.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6800344987699528016.post-58099923038165733242008-07-31T06:55:00.000-07:002008-07-31T06:55:00.000-07:00It's interesting you posting the cardiovascula...It's interesting you posting the cardiovascular & diabetes curves. If I recall correctly, the mortality rate curves usually show the lowest point of the curves at the 25/26 BMI mark, with category 25-30 pretty much looking as much risk as the 20-25 category is.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6800344987699528016.post-82648250955281638132008-07-16T00:55:00.000-07:002008-07-16T00:55:00.000-07:00Your blog is so informative. I hope you continue ...Your blog is so informative. I hope you continue on as this is July and I don't see any past May. Are you still out there?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01928959100096528297noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6800344987699528016.post-57771560129161632282008-06-21T01:21:00.000-07:002008-06-21T01:21:00.000-07:00On the whole no mater what you feelings about BMI ...On the whole no mater what you feelings about BMI there is one cutting question that will tell you most of what you need to know. Can you jog (and I do mean run not run hell for leather) for five minuets without getting out of breath or breaking a sweat?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6800344987699528016.post-8697063850127926762008-06-02T15:16:00.000-07:002008-06-02T15:16:00.000-07:00My knowledge of the subject is far from comprehens...My knowledge of the subject is far from comprehensive, so I can believe that there might be prior studies out there showing a general protective effect of overweight, but I haven't been able to find them. I actually went through all of the references in the Flegal paper and while there were a few studies that hinted at such a finding, they were all either not statistically significant or used non standard BMI groupings (e.g. Troiano et al., who found that having a BMI 23-28 was better than BMI < 23). And the report cited in the <I>Clinical Guidelines</I> only looked at people 55-74 years old, and so not a representative sample. So, I think these limitations, along with the fact that popular opinion and certain studies have indicated that overweight is indeed unhealthy, explains why this is still considered to be controversial.Dr. LaWadehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02239897162047844850noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6800344987699528016.post-81488256875810217752008-06-02T14:17:00.000-07:002008-06-02T14:17:00.000-07:00"The Flegal et al. paper which was the first (as f..."The Flegal et al. paper which was the first (as far as I know) to show decreased mortality in overweight people explains the discrepancy by saying that they adjusted confounding factors differently from previous reports."<BR/><BR/>The Flegal paper was by no means the first paper to report this. If you look at the 1998 NHLBI Clinical Guidelines on Overweight and Obesity report, it actually cites this information (p. 24 of the full report) 10 years ago. The Flegal paper cites some other literature and there actually have been many studies since then that report exactly the same thing. So the interesting question is why so many people still don't realize that this is a common finding.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6800344987699528016.post-42451788257550542042008-05-21T13:01:00.000-07:002008-05-21T13:01:00.000-07:00I like to read your take on the calorie restrictio...I like to read your take on the calorie restriction movement for increasing longevity.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6800344987699528016.post-52378399515940362008-05-16T12:36:00.000-07:002008-05-16T12:36:00.000-07:00Tag! http://bodychronic.blogspot.com/2008/05/voic...Tag! http://bodychronic.blogspot.com/2008/05/voices-from-body-chronic-new-feature.html<BR/><BR/>Are you interested in doing a guest blog either as a one time deal or as a series? I absolutely love your blog! It is so well researched and substantive and helpful. I have a new series on my blog called The Thin Line of Fat that explores the interconnections between the Health At Every Size/Fat Acceptance movements and chronic pain and illness. I think you'd be perfect for this, if you're willing. Let me know.<BR/><BR/>And keep up the great work!<BR/><BR/>Kim<BR/>thebodychronic@gmail.comKimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10793976372669381167noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6800344987699528016.post-15781431746710860022008-05-14T14:54:00.000-07:002008-05-14T14:54:00.000-07:00Good points, anonymous. Both at the time of the N...Good points, anonymous. Both at the time of the NHLBI report and since, there have been several papers showing increased mortality among overweight people. The Flegal et al. paper which was the first (as far as I know) to show decreased mortality in overweight people explains the discrepancy by saying that they adjusted confounding factors differently from previous reports. Epidemiology is not my area of expertise, so I wouldn't care to comment on which data are "better" but there definitely seems to be something interesting going on with overweight and mortality.<BR/><BR/>And I wouldn't say that people with an overweight BMI are being defined as "unhealthy," just that they are considered to be at increased risk for certain diseases which are among the most common causes of death. Although certainly many people, both inside and outside the medical profession, do unfairly make that leap of logic to tar all overweight people as "unhealthy."Dr. LaWadehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02239897162047844850noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6800344987699528016.post-28471080153591022942008-05-14T12:14:00.000-07:002008-05-14T12:14:00.000-07:00The 1998 NHLBI report says: "In this report, overw...The 1998 NHLBI report says: "In this report, overweight is defined as a BMI of 25.0 to 29.9 kg/m2 and obesity as a BMI of ³ 30<BR/>kg/m2. The rationale behind these definitions is based on epidemiological data that show increases in mortality with BMIs above 25 kg/m2. 28-32" That is, their rationale is about mortality, not about diabetes or heart disease risk, as in the data you showed. One of their citations is the WHO report you mentioned, and in my reading of that report, they also seem to have been thinking in terms of mortality.<BR/><BR/>Any comment on the mortality data that those committees were working with at the time? Why are they apparently different from some of the more recent studies? And any personal thoughts on whether it makes sense to define a group of people as "unhealthy," when it seems the current best data actually show they're at higher risk (than the reference "normal" group) for certain diseases and lower risk for others?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6800344987699528016.post-30962572815801531842008-05-13T09:02:00.000-07:002008-05-13T09:02:00.000-07:00I would put bone size in the same category as musc...I would put bone size in the same category as muscle mass because bone size is predominantly determined by weight (bone is constantly remodeled, so if you gain weight, you gain bone, and if you lose weight you lose it Certain individuals might have extraordinarily high or low bone mass for their body weight, but on a population basis, I don't think it's that huge a factor.Dr. LaWadehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02239897162047844850noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6800344987699528016.post-36812677246287786462008-05-13T08:41:00.000-07:002008-05-13T08:41:00.000-07:00One problem you didn't talk about is the differenc...One problem you didn't talk about is the difference in bone size. I have a huge bone structure (really, it's not just wishful thinking). My sister and I are the same height, and when we wear the same size, I weigh 20-25 pounds more than she does. By the same token, someone with a small bone structure weighs less than she does at the same size and height. BMI doesn't take that into consideration at all.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com