|
|
|
|
|
by angrais
1052 days ago
|
|
Obviously there are edge cases when applying statistical tools at a population level. That's not the purpose of BMI though. If you're pregnant or weight training then OBVIOUSLY your BMI score is not comparable to others. Most people are neither pregnant nor weight training. I'd even bet that most people haven't performed a weighted squat. >> I also think it is becoming apparent that weight alone is not as useful of a metric as was once believed. Being fat is bad for your health. That is a fact. No amount of body positivity advertisements will change that fact. It is healthier to be thinner than obese. Look at the graph above to see BMIs impact on other health outcomes. Also, if you think the obesity crisis is fake/blown up then simply go outside in most American cities and you'll see that many people are obese. > There is a subset of people who are being misidentified as unhealthy or overweight. Idk how large it is but it seems significant. Again, this is not relevant as the subset of people is so small compared with the whole population. The "data given" is included in BMI. Your relative weight is an indicator of multiple other health outcomes. |
|
Then don't.
> if you think the obesity crisis is fake/blown up
I don't think obesity is fake or overblown. That's what the article was trying to argue.
I do however think BMI has its flaws and that those flaws are pretty significant when it comes to assessing individual health.
> Being fat is bad for your health... it is healthier to be thinner than obese
There is a healthy body fat % range but it is all very dependent on someone's activity and consumption.