trixtah: (Default)
Trixtah ([personal profile] trixtah) wrote2007-10-07 08:36 pm
Entry tags:

BMI bullshit

[one of the many many reasons I like [livejournal.com profile] saluqi so much is the way she has of pithily summarising almost anything with a perfect phrase. Handy when you're around someone like me, who rabbits on and on and on...]

Getting to the point, a couple of people on my friendslist have talked about BMI this week, and [livejournal.com profile] commodorified posted a great link to a Flickr slideshow of Illustrated BMI Categories. It graphically shows how meaningless BMI is when it comes to assessing how healthy and attractive people can seem, even with an "excessive" BMI. It's one of my particular bugbears, since my BMI is "high" too.

semi-nekkid If it's not obvious, that's a pic of me, complete with messy book pile in the background (btw, I don't need to hear that I'm "fine", or not - I'm quite self-conscious about this pic, but I don't have a problem with my size). I'm not sucking in any parts of my anatomy for the pic! I have a BMI of 28, which makes me "overweight", and not far from "obese" (which starts at 30). I am 39, 5'6" (1.68m) and weigh about 78kg at present. I normally hover around 80kg. This apparently puts me at more risk from diabetes and heart disease. Whatever.


I've had three or four days off sick in the last 2 years (2 for a gastro thingie). My blood pressure is around 115/60 (or lower). Everything else physically is completely robust (touch wood). And even if I looked like the normal conception of fat (well, maybe I do), how much is there really a correlation with this stupid BMI thing, or fatness, and actual health?


I personally feel that body fat percentage might be a better gauge of how fat or not one might be - it seems like a better metric to use for any correlations with regard to health (since visceral fat - around the heart and organs - would probably have impacts. General body fat can make your hormones work differently as well). However, body fat percentage is hard to assess without doing an autopsy (no thanks!), and I have no idea how much research has been done that shows actual correlations between fat percentage and, say, heart disease.

It seems to me the BMI is a crappy instrument that doesn't account for anything, and it can have impacts on people's lives beyond the supposed health risks. For example, I had a checkup by a corporate doctor before going permanent in my job. He pointed out to me that my BMI indicated I was "overweight" and he needed to note that on his report. I asked him if it actually seemed that I was "overweight", and what, if any, impact it would have on my job - he replied that that was what the figures said, and it needed to be on the report. He couldn't tell me what BMI figure would actually be an issue for getting the position. I actually wasn't worried that it would have an impact on the hiring process - I mean, hello, I work at a desk all day - but what was the point? I assume they do the same test with air traffic controllers - but do they do cardiograms and the like which might show real problems? My understanding was that I got the same test that ATCs do... and so it would prove precisely nothing. I believe that health insurance in the US requires medical checks that include BMI - do premiums go up? Would I get knocked back from a job if my BMI exceeded a certain amount, even if I was capable of doing the physical tasks (for example, I can most definitely do the strength tests for the police - running is another matter, heh. Short Irish legs.).

I feel like getting very feministy about the patriarchal cabal that comes up with stupid figures to try and control all of us - was BMI invented by insurance companies to enhance their profits, for example - but I'm sure you can all take that part as read. :-) But do check out the Flickr slideshow; it's extremely illuminating.
ext_8716: (Default)

[identity profile] trixtah.livejournal.com 2007-10-07 01:21 pm (UTC)(link)
Yeah, it gyps me that the diet industry now have a clobbering stick with the BMI thing, and that what I'd consider "average" (ie. me) is "overweight". Too right with the annoying portrayal of "waddling bags of fat" (hee!). Yeah, I can see it being a bit more useful at the extreme edges of the scale - it's really the fact that what is considered to be "just right" is so narrow.

As for compliments, *blush*. Thanks!

[identity profile] epi-lj.livejournal.com 2007-10-07 01:43 pm (UTC)(link)
I dunno; I'm way out toward and past the extreme. I'm not sure that the way BMI is used these days in medical practices is totally okay for people like me and that it's only really a problem when it's applied to much smaller people.

If it's a factor, then it's a factor. Being male reduces my lifespan *far* more than being fat is purported to. Would it be reasonable to refuse to look at and care for my health until I get full hormone therapy and SRS surgery? (Is there any more evidence that infinitessimally small number of fat people who manage to become thin and stay that way long-term are actually healthier than there is that my life expectancy would go up if I had hormone therapy and SRS surgery?) Even if I could be slightly healthier by being thin and there were some mystical and magical way to make me that way, say by cutting out the part of my intestinal tract that allows me to process nutrients such that I become incontinent and can't eat more than a couple of tablespoons of food without throwing up, is it still reasonable to use that as a reason to discriminate, to deny decent health care, to refuse people jobs or promotions that they're absolutely qualified for, to create bonus structures at companies that exclude me, etc.?

Is the only problem with the BMI and how it's used today really that it fingers both of us rather than just me?
ext_8716: (Default)

[identity profile] trixtah.livejournal.com 2007-10-07 01:59 pm (UTC)(link)
No, I do think the scale itself is a problem. Even at the "extremes", as you so amply point out, there will be problems with a "one scale fits all" mindset.

I had one person I had a brief involvement with who was very fat. I don't have a problem with size, but I did find myself having a problem with the fact a 30-year-old woman refused to walk 150 metres down a 10 degree slope because it was too hard for her - and she was not seeking medical care. I recognised that she had internalised the "I'm fat so I'm never going to be fit" thing, but I'm sure she had been given that message loud and clear from all kinds of people throughout her life. I tried encouraging her to go to a doctor to get whatever might be fixed, fixed, but given your experience, I'm (now) not surprised why she was adamant in her refusal.

The thing was, my last girlfriend was/is fatter, and has no problems with managing an extremely busy life... because her current doctor treats her health problems and not her weight. She did get browbeaten into an attempted gastric bypass a decade ago, and it luckily failed (after nearly killing her). Her heart got damaged by the surgery (and resulting infection), and not any goddamned weight "issues" she had previously. It makes me angry thinking of it.

[identity profile] micheinnz.livejournal.com 2007-10-07 06:52 pm (UTC)(link)
And let's not mention that the BMI category "goalposts" were all reset 5 points lower about 10 years back.

ext_8716: (Default)

[identity profile] trixtah.livejournal.com 2007-10-08 12:52 pm (UTC)(link)
What a surprise. Not.