ChiefsPlanet - Life Government will require all Americans by 2014 to have a Obesity Rating

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)

- Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)

- -

Government will require all Americans by 2014 to have a Obesity Rating (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=230762)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guru (Post 6884846)

Not trying to argue with you on it. Just stating what was reported at the time.

I know. I'm not trying to be argumentative. I think the whole "BMI is inaccurate" thing is WAY overblown. I mean, what the M.D. said in the article is COMPLETELY false, as a simple plug-in of the numbers shows.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoChiefs (Post 6883858)

The major reason is the food industry.

Unless some wealthy philanthropist decides to do the entire country a favor, the government is going to have to do something about it.

There's millions of people in this country that manage not to be obese, so that pretty much shows you're not some sort of slave to the food industry and need government intervention.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silock (Post 6884850)

I don't disagree with the overweight category, but the obese category seems awfully unforgiving. I am 6'2" and 230lbs and that is high end overweight and nearly obese on the BMI formula. Looking at me you would never expect that though.

I'm currently working to get my weight down but I find their definition of my situation as being nearly obese to be a little over the top.

I just think they need to take more in to account than just height and weight.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guru (Post 6884856)

I think that part of our problem is a sort of a desensitization of just how large people are. When we think of "obese," we think of really huge people. But those people are SO large, that they've skewed what we think of as "obese."

I like this guy's chart better. I think it has a much more forgiving range, especially for those that tend to carry around a slightly higher than average amount of muscle.

http://www.halls.md/ideal-weight/medical.htm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silock (Post 6884859)

That chart makes a hell of a lot more sense.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silock (Post 6884825)

Show me someone who's naturally 5'9", 205 and doesn't have fat to lose. That person is in an EXTREME minority, as is a natural 6'3", 241 without fat to lose.

I was 5'9" and playing college sports at 235. Zach Thomas was 5'11" and 242 (even when listed at 228, he's over the obesity threshold). LdT is listed at 5'10" 221lbs. Feel free to take a look at the linebackers at the combines for more easy examples. It's not just football, either. Tyson was "obese" at 5'11.5" 218, and Razor Ruddock was "overweight at 6'3" 224 when they fought. Kendrick Perkins is 6'10" 280 (overweight at 29.3 BMI). Dwight Howard is 6'9.5" 265, making him overweight with a 28 BMI. Rodney Harrison was just short of obese (29.0 BMI) at 6'1" 220. To call it an extreme minority is just not accurate. Cam Neely played at 6'1" 218 (overweight 28.8 BMI). Albert Pujols runs about 6'3" 230 (28.7). Here's a link to the linebackers at the 2008 combine:

http://www.sportznutz.com/nfl/draft/...inebackers.htm

Also, the issue isn't "fat to lose". Anyone who's not anorexic has "fat to lose".

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silock (Post 6884825)

EDIT: Just looking up some NFL guys, and there's hardly anyone that even comes close to those numbers. We have Steve Smith at 5'9", 185. BMI is "overweight." However, we've already established that the BMI isn't good for professional athletes. Show me someone in the gym that's even close to as big as Steve Smith with as low a body fat percentage, and again, we're talking EXTREME minority. As for 6'3", there are plenty of guys that tall in the skill positions, and hardly any of them come in anywhere close to 241. Linemen yes, but then, many linemen ARE carrying around a significant amount of fat (which isn't to say that they aren't in phenomenal shape, because they absolutely are). So on that end of the spectrum, too, it's an extreme minority. Like I said -- BMI is pretty inaccurate for NFL guys, but even then, most of them only come in in the "overweight" category, and not the "obese" category. They are super rare physical specimens that may or may not have obtained their size naturally. Super-rare, not a good fit for BMI. But most people aren't super-rare, as much as they like to think they are. Therefore, the BMI is generally a good INDICATOR, although it is hardly definitive of anything.

Your "therefore" is simply not accurate, it's really that simple. I just gave a bunch of easy examples to check on. Looking for 5'9" players that are wide in the shoulders in the NFL isn't going to pull up much, because there aren't many 5'9" players in the NFL playing anything but speed positions. Weightlifters, boxers, basketball players, football players, baseball players and more all fail the dreaded BMI test.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silock (Post 6884825)

Average build is average for a reason. It fits the vast majority of people. Again, BMI isn't perfect and I'm not claiming it is.

Average build is average because it's average, not "vast majority". Here's a government site on the matter:

Quote:

Although BMI can be used for most men and women, it does have some limits:

* It may overestimate body fat in athletes and others who have a muscular build.
* It may underestimate body fat in older persons and others who have lost muscle.

http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/publ...tm#limitations

So BMI doesn't really work with old people, athletes or people with broad shoulders/muscular bodies. It's not as if there's just a 1% "oops" rate here. It doesn't handle the muscle/fat weight difference very well.

Here, check out the sample of some "overweight/obese" people in the listed chart from the following site:

http://themiddlemanager.wordpress.co...blem-with-bmi/

I could keep citing examples, just as I could cite studies which show BMI to be problematic when it comes to predicting health issues, but there's really no need to get further afield. BMI is far too unreliable to be a worthwhile indicator, and that's really the point here.

Quote:

Anyone who's not anorexic has "fat to lose".

So Silock is anorexic? Whatever.

Pro athletes ARE in the minority. There are 32 starting NFL quarterbacks IN THE ENTIRE WORLD.

I think the main argument is that BMI is not going to be a fair assessment tool for the government to be using in this scenario. FAr as I'm concerned the government shouldn't have access to my medical records anyway. This healthcare crunch they are pushing is a load of crap.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoChiefs (Post 6884871)

So Silock is anorexic? Whatever.

The only thing I know about Silock is that he puts far too much stock in the BMI.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoChiefs (Post 6884871)

Pro athletes ARE in the minority. There are 32 starting NFL quarterbacks IN THE ENTIRE WORLD.

I didn't say that pro athletes weren't in the minority.

I really don't see how any of these charts can be remotely considered anything outside of a mere suggestion. They have a purpose as an average benchmark but that is it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guru (Post 6884872)

I think the main argument is that BMI is not going to be a fair assessment tool for the government to be using in this scenario.

Well, we don't know the specifics.

But if someone has a very, very high BMI, like above 35, it's safe to assume they're obese and probably could use some help, like enrollment in Obama's National Weight Loss Concentration Camp.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silock (Post 6884827)

Nutritionally, they're exactly the same. Taste, well, that's different. Some of that depends on how you thaw it, but you can make most anything from frozen vegetables.

But if you're trying to eat well on a budget, there's no reason NOT to buy frozen vegetables.

Oh, well how stupid of me to think taste should be a factor in what we choose to eat.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bugeater (Post 6884876)

Oh, well how stupid of me to think taste should be a factor in what we choose to eat.

Agree. Frozen vegetables usually taste like ass unless you buy the more expensive ones that are fairly good but that defeats the cheap part.

So if I read this right, ban high calorie food, ban large portions, and get a bunch of weight loss and nutrition experts working with everyone 'for free' but no government action. Makes a shit ton of sense.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoChiefs (Post 6884156)

Ed Hardy is entirely built on this concept.

Ed Hardy beer! Its Ed Hardy, so I must have it!

It's like those Krispy Kreme burgers. Probably just about nobody was eating Krispy Kreme burgers until places started advertising and selling them. Nobody was going to Krispy Kreme, buying donuts, taking them home, and putting beef and cheese between them.

Then some sadistic **** running that minor league team's concessions started doing it and now every fatass in America has to try it and you can buy it all over the place. And of COURSE it's tasty. What's not to like?

Bull ****ing shit, I live 15 minutes from that minor league team and I've never even SEEN one of these burgers except in pictures on the internet.