A study indicates that people whose Body Mass Index is in the overweight range at age 50 have a significantly increased risk of early death.
We’re not talking obese here. We’re talking overweight. At 174 cm in height, I was obese until I dropped below 200 pounds.* Obesity starts at a Body Mass Index of 29.9. Overweight runs from 25-29.9. At 189 pounds this morning, I’ve a Body Mass Index of 28.3. I’d need to lose 22 more pounds to be merely on the hefty side of normal.
OK, so I know the BMI is contested and its named categories both arbitrary and stupid. What’s more, I know that the health difference between a BMI of 24.9 and 25.4 is likely marginal, and that the Heart Attack Board** won’t give me all that much of a waiver for being a few months shy of fifty.*** But what the hell, it’s a target. A hundred sixty seven pounds by January 4 2010.
*Yeah, I know I’m mixing metric and english here. Hey, it worked for NASA. Or maybe it didn’t. Anyway, I’m 5’8.5”, and most online BMI calculators don’t do fractions. So 174 cm it is.
** A wholly-owned subsidiary of the Cheese Council
***40 months, if you must know.
Chris wrote;
“A study indicates that people whose Body Mass Index is in the overweight range at age 50 have a significantly increased risk of early death.”
I’m sure that, statistically, this has merit. But, as with all things statistical, it is worse than useless for many who satisfy these criteria. Your activity level (which is obviously high), and, more significantly, your comfort with your activity level, is probably (with family history) the most important health factor.
Personal question (feel free to tell me to MMOFB); has weight been an issue for you since childhood?
Rob, why would I tell you to Measure My Old Father’s Belly?
I was not a skinny kid, precisely: stick-figure arms and legs with a slight belly. And as I’ve written before, I spent my late teens and early twenties in a state best described as “emaciated.” I started putting on poundage in my early 30s.
I am maintaining skepticsm about the study. I do think that the self-reporting issue would likely work to decrease the apparent correlation, as people are likely to undercount their weight. and if the study correlated BMI and health, then it’s not unreasonable to talk about BMI in the context of the study, as ill-fitting as it may be to other aspects of body size and health.
But I wouldn’t be surprised if there are other confounding issues, from methodological problems to unanticipated other factors.
It’s an old Latvian curse, and translates about as well as the saying “if auntie had wheels, she’d be a tram”.
My problem with studies like this (more properly, with the newspapers that sound-bite them), is that many people take them seriously. Someone somewhere, who probably has nothing to worry about, ends up panicking and changing a perfectly healthy lifestyle for the sake of a few pounds. I have the same beef about most “science” articles in newspapers. Kinda like the recent “all terror, all the time” news coverage. “Don’t panic, but here’s why you should be REALLY REALLY AFRAID”.
Fuck “normal” anyway. Er, that’s Latvian as well.
OK, that’s embarrassing.