Why BMI is flawed — and how to redefine obesity (www.nature.com)

submitted 11 months ago by Bebo@literature.cafe to c/science@beehaw.org

8 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The main diagnostic test for obesity — the body mass index — accounts for only height and weight, leaving out a slew of factors that influence body fat and health.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Steve@communick.news 28 points 11 months ago

BMI isn't really flawed, it's misused.

It wasn't created to be used with individuals. It was created as a statistical tool to compare populations.

[-] OhNoMoreLemmy@lemmy.ml 7 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

It doesn't really work at that either.

You can't use it tell if soccer players are fatter on average than rugby players or if Japanese people are fatter than Samoans. Or even if men are fatter on average than women.

But these are population questions.

[-] middlemuddle@beehaw.org 11 points 11 months ago

I think that's just more examples of it being misused. BMI may be useful to compare populations in certain instances. It has value in being easily calculated based off data that is often easy to obtain. But, there are many situations where it would be inappropriate to use BMI for statistical comparison. That doesn't mean it's entirely useless.

[-] OhNoMoreLemmy@lemmy.ml 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I mean BMI is also useful for comparing individuals in certain instances. That's why doctor's use it.

It's a crappy measure, but it's good enough for a range of use. You just have to be thoughtful enough to say, yeah it's not going to work for this person.

I'm not anti BMI, I'm just opposed to people repeating statements like "BMI is useful to compare populations" which don't really mean anything.