"VivienB" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 11:57:33 +0100, "RichardS" noaccess@invalid
wrote:

The problem with BMI can be shown by the fact that Mr Schwarzenegger's
well
publicised vital stats from his competing days put him into the category
of
"Obese", all of the sprinters in the forthcoming Olympics will probably
also
be in that category!

So, guess which indicator our wonderful government uses to tell us all
there's a growing obesity problem....

So which indicator do you suggest would be better? Remembering, of
course, that the actual body measurements used must be simple, quick
and cheap, if GP's and Joe Public is to use them.


Well, there's the rub. There isn't an ideal quick, cheap and easy
measurement that is actually meaningful. Skin Fold Thickness isn't bad, but
that requires some skill to take and a calculation, and IIRC breaks down as
a meaningful measurement when a person has a very high body fat percentage.

But, the one thing that is sure is that BMI is fundamentally flawed.

Fat has a lower density than muscle, therefore a fit, lean person would get
a worse reading than an unfit, flabby (for want of a better word) person of
similar physical dimensions.

And that just can't be right...

--
Richard Sampson

email me at
richard at olifant d-ot co do-t uk