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
Register FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   ^
Old Sun, May-13-12, 00:16
Demi's Avatar
Demi Demi is offline
Posts: 21,757
 
Plan: LCHF
Stats: 215/170/160 Female 5'10"
BF:
Progress: 82%
Location: UK
Default 'Forget BMI, just measure your waist and height' say scientists

Quote:
From The Telegraph
London, UK
12 May, 2012

'Forget BMI, just measure your waist and height' say scientists

People concerned about heart disease and diabetes should simply take their height and waist measurements to figure out their risk, say British researchers.


Ideally, all should aim to keep their waist measurement less than half that of their height, found the scientists.

That means a 6ft (72 inch) tall man should aim to keep his waist less than 36 inches, while a 5ft 4in (64 inch) woman should keep hers under 32 inches.

They have found that the easy-to-calculate ratio between the two is a better predictor of risk than the most widely measure of obesity, called body mass index (BMI).

The team, who analysed the health of some 300,000 people, found this ratio was a better predictor of high blood pressure, diabetes and cardiovascular events like heart attacks and strokes than body mass index.

While BMI is used almost universally in the medical profession, most people are unfamiliar with it, partially because it is not a straightforward calculation.

BMI is calculated by taking one's mass in kilograms and dividing it by the square of one's height in metres.

Dr Margaret Ashwell, former science director of the British Nutrition Foundation, and now an independent consultant, spearheaded the study. She is presenting the research at the European Congress on Obesity in Lyon, France, on Saturday.

"Keeping your waist circumference to less than half your height can help increase life expectancy for every person in the world," she said.

The ratio was also better than just taking a waist measurement, she added, as it took into account differing height between individuals and ethnic groups.

While BMI was a useful indicator, it failed to take into account the distribution of fat throughout the body.

Abdominal fat, around the heart, liver and kidneys, has been found to be worse than that on the bottom and hips, in terms of heart disease and diabetes.

Dr Ashwell suggested the waist-to-height ratio should be considered as a screening tool.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/h...scientists.html
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Sun, May-13-12, 05:58
joel381's Avatar
joel381 joel381 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,022
 
Plan: Keto IF
Stats: 275/242.8/192 Male 72
BF:
Progress: 39%
Location: Michigan
Default Sounds so simple

Quote:
Keeping your waist circumference to less than half your height can help increase life expectancy for every person in the world
Just don't kill yourself to get there...

My best chance on the keeping part was back in the 70's for sure. Back in the day no problem, what happened?
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Sun, May-13-12, 07:26
mio1996's Avatar
mio1996 mio1996 is offline
Glutton for Grease!
Posts: 1,338
 
Plan: Primal-VLC
Stats: 295/190/190 Male 76
BF:don't/really/care
Progress: 100%
Location: Clemson, SC
Default

It would be interesting to see how that measurement works out for different people. In my case I am 76 inches tall and I did feel comfortable with about a 38 inch waist but made it down to about 35 inches. I am, however, the butte of skinny jokes these days, but I take that as jealousy since the jokers are generally overweight. I also use it as an opportunity to tell people how I got this way, not that they listen
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Sun, May-13-12, 11:08
RobLL RobLL is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,648
 
Plan: generalized low carb
Stats: 205/180/185 Male 67
BF:31%/14?%/12%
Progress: 125%
Location: Pacific Northwest
Default

And I have come up with a diet to increase your heighth. There are a few bugs in it right now and FDA is objecting (Strange). And a few other life threatening side effects. I'll be a zillionairre maybe. LOL
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Sun, May-13-12, 11:59
joel381's Avatar
joel381 joel381 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,022
 
Plan: Keto IF
Stats: 275/242.8/192 Male 72
BF:
Progress: 39%
Location: Michigan
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mio1996
It would be interesting to see how that measurement works out for different people. In my case I am 76 inches tall and I did feel comfortable with about a 38 inch waist but made it down to about 35 inches. I am, however, the butte of skinny jokes these days, but I take that as jealousy since the jokers are generally overweight. I also use it as an opportunity to tell people how I got this way, not that they listen

I would be interested as well. I think 36 for me is reasonable but it may not be easy and will take some time. My gut, waist line, is getting smaller for sure.
BTW great job on losing the weight.
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Mon, May-14-12, 16:55
amergin's Avatar
amergin amergin is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 267
 
Plan: Low carb, suff. protein
Stats: 115/103/95 Male 191cm
BF:
Progress: 60%
Location: dublin
Default

This has been a bit of a hobby horse for me.
BMI assumes Mass increases proportional to the square of the linear dimensions.
Whereas the mathematics I learned at thirteen years of age says Volume, and therefore Mass, increases proportional to the Cube of the linear dimensions.
It has amazed me how this simple fact has escaped legions of "experts" (and obviously mathematical illiterates) who promote the BMI nonsense.
We truly sail on a ship of fools!
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Mon, May-14-12, 17:33
ICDogg's Avatar
ICDogg ICDogg is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,563
 
Plan: Low carb, high fat keto
Stats: 310/212/183 Male 6'0"
BF:D
Progress: 77%
Location: Philadelphia area
Default

While I would love to get down to a 36" waist I'll probably hit the BMI "normal" range before I get there.
Reply With Quote
  #8   ^
Old Mon, May-14-12, 22:15
madeyna's Avatar
madeyna madeyna is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 881
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 168/128/130 Female 5.3
BF:
Progress: 105%
Default

Thats great news for us pairs.
Reply With Quote
  #9   ^
Old Mon, May-14-12, 23:01
freckles's Avatar
freckles freckles is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 8,730
 
Plan: Atkins Maintenance
Stats: 213/141/150 Female 5'4 1/2"
BF:
Progress: 114%
Location: Dallas, TX
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mio1996
It would be interesting to see how that measurement works out for different people.


I'd be interested in hearing how that works out for different peeps as well.

For me...I am 5'4 female and as the article suggests, should be less than 32" waist, but I'm about at the weight I'd like to be at and my waist is still about 35". Probably more than it should be (and could probably reduce it with some exercise), but it is what it is and I'm not at all worried that I will have probs with heart disease or diabetes.

We are ALL different and unique and that is the problem with the BMI method as well as this method....and others. They just don't take into account the fact that as individual humans we won't all fit into a nice, tidy box.
Reply With Quote
  #10   ^
Old Tue, May-15-12, 04:03
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is offline
To Good Health!
Posts: 9,491
 
Plan: IF Fung/LC Westman/Primal
Stats: 222/171/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/25.3%/24%
Progress: 96%
Location: NC
Default

At 5'9", the BMI healthy range is below 169, and that is accurate for me. My clothes fit better at 160, but my body fat tested by calipers is OK now, and my waist a squishy post-menopausal 35". I am hoping a few more pounds lost (most of it is hanging around the waistline) a few more ab exercises, and 34.5" would be a healthy goal. That, or pull the tape measure tighter.
Reply With Quote
  #11   ^
Old Tue, May-15-12, 12:13
mio1996's Avatar
mio1996 mio1996 is offline
Glutton for Grease!
Posts: 1,338
 
Plan: Primal-VLC
Stats: 295/190/190 Male 76
BF:don't/really/care
Progress: 100%
Location: Clemson, SC
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JEY100
At 5'9", the BMI healthy range is below 169, and that is accurate for me. My clothes fit better at 160, but my body fat tested by calipers is OK now, and my waist a squishy post-menopausal 35". I am hoping a few more pounds lost (most of it is hanging around the waistline) a few more ab exercises, and 34.5" would be a healthy goal. That, or pull the tape measure tighter.
That's a great idea, perhaps if I sinch the tape enough I can claim my waist is 32" I have heard conventional wisdom that a man's waist size should be no larger than the inseam length but my legs are short for my height so that would never work for me!
Reply With Quote
  #12   ^
Old Tue, May-15-12, 19:50
Merpig's Avatar
Merpig Merpig is offline
Posts: 6,109
 
Plan: IF/Fung IDM/Potato Hack?
Stats: 375/272.6/175 Female 66 inches
BF:
Progress: 51%
Location: NE Florida
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mio1996
I have heard conventional wisdom that a man's waist size should be no larger than the inseam length but my legs are short for my height so that would never work for me!
Yeah, that runs in my family too. My dad was 6'1" with a 31-inch inseam. He never in his life had a 31-inch waist, even when he was a 175 pounds and involved in athletics. He was 190 pounds when he died, just short of his 82nd birthday, and his waist was about 40 at that point.
Reply With Quote
  #13   ^
Old Tue, May-15-12, 20:17
deirdra's Avatar
deirdra deirdra is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 3,714
 
Plan: HF/vLC/GF,CF,SF
Stats: 197/136/150 Female 66 inches
BF:
Progress: 130%
Location: Alberta
Default

I'm 66" tall with an hourglass figure, so a 33" waist puts me in the obese BMI category and over 180 lbs. When my weight is in the ideal-normal range, my waist is 27-29". So I don't think this simple formula is useful for hourglass or pear-shaped people.
Reply With Quote
  #14   ^
Old Wed, May-16-12, 15:04
Plinge's Avatar
Plinge Plinge is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,136
 
Plan: No factory-processed food
Stats: 230/147/147 Male 5' 10"
BF:
Progress: 100%
Location: UK
Default

I'm glad I read this advice. To sum up, the way to be slim is to be slim.
Reply With Quote
  #15   ^
Old Wed, May-16-12, 15:09
Labhrain's Avatar
Labhrain Labhrain is offline
Real food!
Posts: 3,115
 
Plan: Lower Carb/IF
Stats: 238/155/140 Female 67 inches
BF:
Progress: 85%
Location: NorCal
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by deirdra
I'm 66" tall with an hourglass figure, so a 33" waist puts me in the obese BMI category and over 180 lbs. When my weight is in the ideal-normal range, my waist is 27-29". So I don't think this simple formula is useful for hourglass or pear-shaped people.


I'm more apple shaped and it doesn't work well for me, either. I'm 68" tall, and a 34" waist on me look plain old FAT. It sticks out, causes muffin top and just isn't my idea of what I want to end up with. No one would dispute that if they saw me with a 34" waist, either. At my thinnest, my waist was 27", but I was a bit too thin at that time. I'm comfortable with anywhere between 28"-30".

In general, though, this is still a lot better than the BMI method, I think.
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 20:39.


Copyright © 2000-2017 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.