What is Digg?116 Comments
- akchrs, on 07/07/2009, -5/+45Stand up straight. Look down. Can you see your toes? Then you're ok.
- blackopsfreak06, on 07/07/2009, -5/+36I knew a friend who was a soccer player...she was in fantastic shape, weighed about 150 pounds (muscle) and her doctor calculated her BMI and informed her that she was ten pounds from obese...lols.
- yanek3, on 07/07/2009, -2/+31I don't need BMI, I can tell wether people are fat just by looking at them. Maybe I should hire out my skills
- kisforkat, on 07/07/2009, -0/+28Only for dudes. Boobs get in the way.
- Pyros7, on 07/07/2009, -0/+20While it's not perfect, we do need to find a way to tell the majority of Americans that they're fat because most of them are clueless.
I work retail...I actually heard this from a lady the other day..."What do you mean you don't stock 46-48" waist? My husband isn't THAT big!" That's after she told me he was like 5'8".
Or how about..."Why don't you have a dress shirt that'll fit me?" "Well sir, you have a 20 inch neck, that's a quadruple XL - you really need a big and tall store."
I get stuff like that all the time from people who are totally clueless that they're morbidly obese. And no, I'm not talking about athletic people. - muleskinner, on 07/07/2009, -2/+21Good for reddit. I don't visit reddit though, so this is new to me. Thus is deserves a digg.
- SystemicThought, on 07/07/2009, -3/+21The article is mostly right, but it was wrong on one point. There aren't good, accurate methods of measuring body fat that aren't overly expensive. The cheap ones are only accurate within 7-10 percent, and the expensive ones are not worth it. For the most part, methods such as the skin pincer or submersion method are about as accurate as eyeballing it.
Even waist, as the author suggests, is not a good indicator of obesity, since muscles and bone structure contribute to the waist width as well as fat.
Also - This one is better:
http://digg.com/health/The_BMI_Myth - Haptick, on 07/07/2009, -3/+20Okay, here's one for the female of the species:
Stand up straight and look down. Can you see your toes? If yes, you're okay.
If no, then which sticks out further, your stomach or breasts? If the latter, you're very fine.
If the former, are you at least 4 months or more pregnant? If yes, you're fine.
If no, then you might want to try dieting and regular exercise.
If you can't tell whether you're 4 months or more pregnant, go do society a favor and get an abortion just in case. - cherrick, on 07/07/2009, -0/+15Yes, and no. BMI is generally worthless for any individual, but it is useful when talking about a population. If a population has a very high average BMI it's safe to assume that it's not because they're all in very good shape.
- Sylphid15, on 07/07/2009, -4/+19BMI or not, the US is still the #1 producer of human fat.
Point #10 was completely unnecessary to the article. - blackopsfreak06, on 07/07/2009, -4/+17??? Making fun of the system, not my friend...
- Stavrosian, on 07/07/2009, -1/+14I like the idea that BMI charts were discovered, like there were fierce beasts guarding them in an enchanted cavern or something.
- danconia, on 07/07/2009, -2/+12"Science" is even a loose term here. I don't know what can be considered by (weight) / (height^2)...
Just about any guy with some muscle or who even occasionally picks up weights will fall into the "overweight" category. Bodyfat % FTW. - sinurgy, on 07/07/2009, -3/+13BMI easily summed up right here: http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/bmi-comparison ...
- Kazbaeden, on 07/07/2009, -0/+101 and 10 aren't actual reasons. The validity of an idea cannot be judged by its founder. If Isaac Newton was clinically insane, does that mean all of calculus and physics is wrong? Of course not.
And 10 is a consequence of BMI being bogus, junk science, not a reason for it being as such. - ArchangelZLT, on 07/07/2009, -0/+9@Haptick: Make a flow chart.
- walruspanzer, on 07/07/2009, -6/+15No surprise, It's impossible to quantify someone's physical condition with a mere number. I am in my weight window for my height and my BMI is apparently too high - its bologna.
- medlakeguy, on 07/07/2009, -0/+8dyslexia
- KublaiKhan, on 07/07/2009, -3/+11I don't know why you would be dugg down - that's a common phenomenon. Throughout high school and to this day, I have been damn close to obese according to the BMI chart. Now, I am no body builder, so I don't want to talk myself up like some kind of tough guy, but I will say (as modestly as possible) that I was and am far more muscle than fat. The chart is one-dimensional and doesn't allow for that kind of thing.
- 3tcp, on 07/07/2009, -5/+13Headline could also read "10 arguments that fat people can use to ignore proof that they are killing themselves"
- Ceaser57, on 07/07/2009, -0/+7They really had to stretch that article to get to the all important "list of ten".
- SPNKrPunk, on 07/07/2009, -0/+7"7. It suggests there are distinct categories of underweight, ideal, overweight and obese, with sharp boundaries that hinge on a decimal place.
That's total nonsense."
Well I agree with the point, but give us something a little better that a three word rebuttal. Kinda embarrassing for NPR. I thought they had higher standards that this. - inactive, on 07/07/2009, -0/+6same old ***** that has been posted several times. Yes, there are exceptions, as with verything. But 95+% of people who are in the Obese category as in the obese catorgy because htey eat too much ***** pie. NOT because they are really strong.
It was never MEANT to be used by itself. - NYConcepts, on 07/07/2009, -5/+11No offense, but you're definitely obese.
- SteveMTyler, on 07/07/2009, -0/+6nice bull *****.
http://www.bblex.de/en/calc/navy.php
they dont use BMI - KingGorilla, on 07/07/2009, -0/+5I thought that was obvious
- k3rfuffl3, on 07/07/2009, -0/+5Basically, it's meant for normal people and not those who are athletic. If you have a high BMI and you're not athletic there's a good chance you're a fat ass.
I summarized the article in one sentence. - ikzeidegek, on 07/07/2009, -0/+5I have actually wondered about the health effects of weight training...
* All 90 year olds I have ever seen are skinny and have basically no muscle
* Have seen weightlifters be left in the dust by skinny girls when hiking serious mountains
Is weight training really healthy? Shouldn't we be running instead? - Drahkir, on 07/07/2009, -0/+5Do you resemble a Volkswagen, by chance?
- Eurynom0s, on 07/07/2009, -4/+9Here's all you need to know about why BMI is bunk: BMI would have put Arnold Schwarzenegger at his peak as morbidly obese.
- supersillyus, on 07/07/2009, -0/+5Well, weight training does nothing for your overall endurance and stamina. I weight train rather extensively, but I could not run a mile to save my life. In fact, both of my brothers, who are fatter than me, can outlast me on a long run easily.
So, in the case of skinny girls and weight lifters, yeah, I could definitely see that happening. Hiking has nothing to do with strength, which is what weightlifting is all about.
To speak on your point of 90 years old though, its impossible to be that age and not experience a high degree of muscle atrophy. Even in my mid 20s, not working out in the gym for prolonged period of time leads to a smaller state. That, and the fact that weight lifting at that age can be incredibly dangerous. - HurricaneDC, on 07/07/2009, -1/+6BMI is okay for an average joe who doesn't exercise much except for, at most, riding a bike each day or doing some jogging each day. For very muscular people it's not okay because BMI doesn't account for bodyfat percentage.
- bloodhound01, on 07/07/2009, -6/+11This article is even more bogus then BMI
It providesno sources or anything, its like some dudes opinion about certain things on how BMI works.
"7. It suggests there are distinct categories of underweight, ideal, overweight and obese, with sharp boundaries that hinge on a decimal place."
"That's total nonsense."
Cool, way to back it up. - 3tcp, on 07/07/2009, -2/+6False, Australia is.
http://consumerist.com/5017949/you-thought-the-us- ... - geodebug, on 07/07/2009, -2/+6I have big feet so no problem. I think the true test is if you can see your wang (in its meditative state of course).
- canadaboy, on 07/07/2009, -8/+12Proof that this is just a crazy person's rant: "10. It embarrasses the U.S."
Wow. Evolution embarrasses Christians. Guess Evolution is wrong. Dissident speech embarrasses the Chinese, guess dissident speech is wrong. People voting against the ruling party in IRAN is embarrassing. Guess voting against the ruling party is wrong. - Twenty, on 07/07/2009, -0/+4Article was pretty lame. I was even prepared, as an NPR fanboy, to digg it up.
- bugaloobob, on 07/07/2009, -1/+5The BMI is just one of many gauges. No need to throw out the baby with the bath water. Use it as a tool. Also use your eyes (hmm, fat? thin?) and your common sense.
- trackstar103, on 07/07/2009, -2/+6dugg for spelling "bologna" correctly. oh how the vast majority of the population cannot spell half of the words they use
- inactive, on 07/07/2009, -0/+4did you really think no one would call you on your *****?
- Joshislong, on 07/07/2009, -0/+4It's an embarrassment in the same way that still not using SI of measurements is embarrassing.
- Drahkir, on 07/07/2009, -0/+4@SteveMTyler I was JUST about to call him on it too. As a seven year veteran of the Navy, that also evaluated sailors and Marines for the PFT and PRT (physical fitness test/ Physical readiness test) I can tell you for a fact that his story is *****. Not once have I seen a sailor or Marine evaluated on the BMI.
Also, who ever heard of someone being too muscular to join the Marines LMFAO XD - fury420, on 07/07/2009, -1/+4yeah, and "i have large bones" is also a rather accurate way of describing some people's physique... especially when dealing with people above 6ft.
two people of the same gender, height, weight and musculature can have very different builds, different armspan, leg length, etc... which all will impact BMI and ideal weight.
Your buddy is fat, and is in denial. Now... he may also have "big bones", but at 250lbs and 5ft 8" he's also gotta have at least 70 pounds of fat ass as well. - atai1638, on 07/07/2009, -0/+3i hate to break it to you...i seriously doubt your body fat is 3%
even very fit athletes have a body fat of 6 to 13%
sorry bro but it is likely that you are over-weight
fat people love to deny they are fat - jbmcb, on 07/07/2009, -2/+5Proof that this is just a crazy person's rant:
"Proof that this is just a crazy person's rant:"
He picks one claim out of ten that isn't really justifiable. Care to debate one of the mathematical claims? - CaughtThinking, on 07/07/2009, -0/+3Anyone who has actually taken care of their body has known for a long time BMI is not universally applicable. Leave it to the mob to expose conspiracy theories though with the help of intrepid NPR reporting.
- Stavrosian, on 07/07/2009, -0/+3Not necessarily. I'm 3 inches shorter than him, just 25 lbs lighter and my body fat falls comfortably within the healthy range. I'm not a gym fanatic or anything, my natural frame is just built that way.
Of course, most people who weigh 250 lbs at 6'2 will be obese, but there's absolutely no way to tell from those simple stats alone. There is far more involved in body composition than simple height and weight measurements, which is why the BMI is a crock of *****. The way I and many others like me are put together, we could get down below the minimum recommended healthy body fat percentage and not be a million miles away from being classified as obese. It's a stupid way to measure anything. - GeorgeWKush, on 07/07/2009, -4/+7The first time I ever heard of BMI I immediately thought of Arnold Schwarzenegger. With that single synapse I knew BMI was pure *****.
- pak314, on 07/07/2009, -0/+3Only a mad man would invent calculus.
- davdev, on 07/07/2009, -0/+3Insurance companies sure as hell do
-
Show 51 - 100 of 118 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 