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

[teedubya]

I'm Doooooooomed. LOL.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/69436

Obesity Rating for Every American Included in Stimulus-Mandated Electronic Health Records

New federal regulations issued this week stipulate that the electronic health records--that all Americans are supposed to have by 2014 under the terms of the stimulus law that President Barack Obama signed last year--must record not only the traditional measures of height and weight, but also the Body Mass Index: a measure of obesity.

The obesity-rating regulation states that every American's electronic health record must: “Calculate body mass index. Automatically calculate and display body mass index (BMI) based on a patient’s height and weight.”

The law also requires that these electronic health records be available--with appropriate security measures--on a national exchange.

The new regulations are one of the first steps towards the government’s goal of universal adoption of electronic health records (EHRs) by 2014, as outlined in the 2009 economic stimulus law. Specifically, the regulations issued on Tuesday by Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and Dr. David Blumenthal, the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, define the "meaningful use" of electronic records. Under the stimulus law, health care providers--including doctors and hospitals--must establish "meaningful use" of EHRs by 2014 in order to qualify for federal subsidies. After that, they will be subjected to penalties in the form of diminished Medicare and Medicaid payments for not establishing "meaningful use" of EHRs.

Section 3001 of the stimulus law says: "The National Coordinator shall, in consultation with other appropriate Federal agencies (including the National Institute of Standards and Technology), update the Federal Health IT Strategic Plan (developed as of June 3, 2008) to include specific objectives, milestones, and metrics with respect to the following: (i) The electronic exchange and use of health information and the enterprise integration of such information.‘‘(ii) The utilization of an electronic health record for each person in the United States by 2014."

Under this mandate in the stimulus law, Secretary Sebelius issued a regulation--developed by Dr. Blumenthal--that requires that all EHRs keep track of a person’s Body Mass Index (BMI) score. Body Mass Index is a ratio between a person’s weight and height, and is used to determine whether or not someone is overweight or obese. It is the preferred method of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for measuring obesity.

Michelle Obama has made dealing with the problem of childhood obesity the main theme of her term as First Lady.

U.S. Surgeon General Regina Benjamin. (Photo by Penny Starr/CNSNews.com)
According to the CDC, “BMI provides a reliable indicator of body fatness for most people and is used to screen for weight categories that may lead to health problems.”

A person’s BMI score is used as a tool to screen for obesity or excessive body fat that could lead to other health problems. While it does not actually measure body fat directly, according to CDC, the BMI scores generally correlate with a person’s body fat percentage.

The new regulations also stipulate that the new electronic records be capable of sending public health data to state and federal health agencies such as HHS and CDC. The CDC, which calls American society “obesogenic” – meaning that American society itself promotes obesity – collects BMI scores from state health agencies every year to monitor obesity nationwide.

“Electronically record, retrieve, and transmit syndrome based public health surveillance information to public health agencies,” the regulations read.

With the spread of electronic health records, the CDC apparently will be able to collect such data more efficiently and with greater accuracy because the electronic record keeping systems can send the data automatically, eliminating the need for government – both state and federal – to keep, send, and process physical records.

[Silock]

Originally Posted by Guru

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.

[blaise]

Originally Posted by GoChiefs

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.

[007]

Originally Posted by Silock

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.

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.

[Silock]

Originally Posted by Guru

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.

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

[007]

Originally Posted by Silock

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

That chart makes a hell of a lot more sense.

[Just Passin' By]

Originally Posted by Silock

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".

Originally Posted by Silock

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.

Originally Posted by Silock

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:

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.

[Hammock Parties]

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.

[007]

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.

[Just Passin' By]

Originally Posted by GoChiefs

So Silock is anorexic? Whatever.

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

Originally Posted by GoChiefs

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.

[Miles]

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.

[Hammock Parties]

Originally Posted by Guru

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.

[Bugeater]

Originally Posted by Silock

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.

[Miles]

Originally Posted by Bugeater

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.

[Baby Lee]

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.

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by GoChiefs

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.