Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low-Carb Studies & Research / Media Watch > LC Research/Media
User Name
Password
FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   ^
Old Fri, Aug-18-06, 02:26
Demi's Avatar
Demi Demi is offline
Posts: 26,664
 
Plan: Muscle Centric
Stats: 238/153/160 Female 5'10"
BF:
Progress: 109%
Location: UK
Default Obese indicator could be flawed

The Daily Mail
London, UK
17 August, 2006


Doctors have cast doubt on the standard way of measuring whether people are obese or overweight.

New research suggests shortcomings in the system of Body Mass Index (BMI) in identifying whether someone is at risk of dying prematurely.

Studies show that heart patients identified as 'overweight' by BMI actually survived longer than those judged to have a 'normal' weight.

This is because the system fails to identify if a person's excess weight is muscle rather than fat.

If someone is heavy because of muscle, they are less likely to die younger - and should not be classed as overweight - compared to someone whose excess weight is mostly fat.

According to the BMI, which has formed the basis of defining healthy and abnormal weight for more than 100 years, more than half the UK population is overweight and a further 20 per cent obese.

It is used in clinical trials to assess the health risks associated with being overweight, with increasing weight associated with health problems such as heart disease, diabetes and cancer.

BMI is calculated by dividing a person's weight in kilograms by their height in metres squared.

Someone with a BMI of less than 18.5 is considered underweight, between 18.5 and 24.9 lies within the 'normal' range, and 25 to 29.9 is classified as 'overweight'. Clinical obesity is defined by a BMI of 30 or greater.

But it is becoming widely recognised that the BMI can be misleading in predicting who is at risk because muscle is heavier than fat. As a result fitter people will show up as overweight because they are more muscular.

Many experts now want waist circumference or waist-to-hip ratio, which indicates levels of abdominal fat, adopted as a more accurate guide.

An international study in 52 countries found waist-to-hip ratio was the most reliable predictor of heart attack risk.

Dr Colin Waine, chairman of the National Obesity Forum, said the mighty New Zealand rugby star, Jonah Lomu has a BMI of 32, yet could hardly be described as 'obese'.

He said "The thing about BMI is that it's been used in nearly all the studies, so you can't just drop it.

"But its big fault is that it says nothing about body composition.

"That's why we say that as well as reading BMI, people should recognise waist circumference.

"We think it should become a normal clinical tool used to complement to BMI, because it does correlate quite closely with visceral fat, which is the dangerous fat."

This additional fat is packed around the organs in the abdomen and is more 'metabolically active', releasing more of the acids that raise heart disease risk, along with factors that increase blood pressure and blood sugar.

The new research by US researchers from the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, pooled data from 40 studies involving about 250,000 people with heart disease.

It found, as expected, that severely obese patients had a higher risk of heart-related death - but overweight patients, as defined by BMI scores, had better survival and fewer heart problems than those with a normal BMI.

People with normal BMI were less likely to die than people with a low BMI.

The better outcomes for overweight patients were most likely due to muscle, which weighs more than fat, says a report in The Lancet medical journal.

Dr Francisco Lopez-Jimenez, who led the study, said "Rather than proving that obesity is harmless, our data suggest that alternative methods might be needed to better characterise individuals who truly have excess body fat, compared with those in whom BMI is raised because of preserved muscle mass."

Judy O'Sullivan, medical spokesperson for the British Heart Foundation (BHF) said: "Body mass index (BMI) measures whether you are the best weight for your height.

"When assessing the risk of developing coronary heart disease, or dying from it, what really matters is how much fat you are carrying in your abdomen.

"BMI is related to, but is not, an absolute measurement of abdominal fat. Therefore, it is not surprising this study shows for some patients BMI does not accurately measure their risk of dying from heart disease.

"The most important thing to consider is your body shape and weight. Eating less and being more active is an effective way of controlling both and improving your heart health."



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/li...in_page_id=1770
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Fri, Aug-18-06, 07:06
liddie01's Avatar
liddie01 liddie01 is offline
Butter is Better!
Posts: 5,894
 
Plan: Atkins OWL
Stats: 234/220.4/160 Female 5"8.5"
BF:its back again!
Progress: 18%
Location: Mount Carmel, Pa.
Default

i think all my excess weight is at my waistline
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Fri, Aug-18-06, 09:07
gryfonclaw's Avatar
gryfonclaw gryfonclaw is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 360
 
Plan: Not sure yet
Stats: 253/218/155 Female 69 inches
BF:D:
Progress: 36%
Default

I think this qualifies as one of those "No shit, Sherlock" articles.

Also, I hate when they throw around the whole "muscle is heavier than fat" thing. No it's not. A pound of fat weighs the same as a pound of muscle. One is just more dense than the other.
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Fri, Aug-18-06, 09:19
Nancy LC's Avatar
Nancy LC Nancy LC is offline
Experimenter
Posts: 25,843
 
Plan: DDF
Stats: 202/185.4/179 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 72%
Location: San Diego, CA
Default

I think they're probably aware that most people understand that by volume, muscle weighs more.
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Fri, Aug-18-06, 09:33
ValerieL's Avatar
ValerieL ValerieL is offline
Bouncy!
Posts: 9,388
 
Plan: Atkins Maintenance
Stats: 297/173.3/150 Female 5'7" (top weight 340)
BF:41%/31%/??%
Progress: 84%
Location: Burlington, ON
Default

Muscle does weigh more than fat, by volume. Of course a pound of anything weighs the same as a pound of anything else. I don't suppose anyone would argue that feathers weigh less than a bowling ball, but obviously a pound of feathers weighs the same as a pound of bowling ball. The only way to compare is by volume. If you control for weight (look at a pound of both) the measurement is size. A pound of fat is bigger than a pound of muscle.

It's all the same as saying muscle weighs more than fat.
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Fri, Aug-18-06, 10:06
MyJourney's Avatar
MyJourney MyJourney is offline
Butter Tastes Better
Posts: 5,201
 
Plan: Atkins OWL / IF-23/1 /BFL
Stats: 100/100/100 Female 5'6"
BF:
Progress: 34%
Location: SF Bay Area
Default

Quote:
Studies show that heart patients identified as 'overweight' by BMI actually survived longer than those judged to have a 'normal' weight.


Quote:
This is because the system fails to identify if a person's excess weight is muscle rather than fat.

If someone is heavy because of muscle, they are less likely to die younger - and should not be classed as overweight - compared to someone whose excess weight is mostly fat.


Are they saying that the reason these overweight heart patients live longer because they are more muscular than fat? When I think of heart patients I don't normally think of bodybuilders. Could it be that somehow the fat was protective in some way and that's why those classified as "overweight" lived longer than those that were considered normal?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 19:08.


Copyright © 2000-2024 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.