So the doctor basically completely ignored the height and weight factor. Saying that my friend and I should both have a max 35 inch waist is dumb when I am 9 inches taller than her.
Yeah that's just to be more politically correct and not to offend the fatties. Let's all just confuse the issue by not using the right words like fat, overweight, obese. "Roundness" is also like that although this index makes more sense than I thought it would.
@@LauraSomeNumber No, there isn't. Not in India anyway, and I think China doesn't need either BMI or BRI. If there is such discussion in Europe, all I can say is they are progressively getting fatter. The point is that you hit the BMI limit much earlier than you hit the BRI limit. I see this new index as just a way to legitimize over-eating, commonly seen in well-off women in India. Those who can afford comfort foods (soft term for junk foods) will have it anyway. I'm speaking for just a part of India, and here even BMI isn't very relevant. India is a very populous nation with lots of women becoming affluent. 🙏
This is useless. It's just another way of telling fat people what they already know: they're fat. Medical science needs to come up with more economic, and equitable ways to help those that are really struggling. Stop gatekeeping treatments that ACTUALLY work, especially for disabled and low income people.
I see a flaw with this index. There's this apparent assumption that less than a three value for BRI is somehow underweight when it's clearly not, going by the BMI scale. In my case at 5'11" and 148 pounds I'm in the "Normal" range by 15 pounds. But with those same figures with waist measuring, all of a sudden I'm underweight? Rubbish. Someone might be who's undernourished and simply unnaturally skinny, but for what I eat for calories and fats and with running and cycling my present weight is what's expected. Your body adapts to what you do.
No. BMI has a HUGE range, plus we have known for ages - YEARS! - about the visceral fat issue and the waist circumference recommendations. If this is supposed to help the public be more informed, it's too little too late. Don't throw in this funky stuff which distracts and confuses people, instead of reinforcing what we already know and just need to keep repeating. This extra stuff is CLICK BAIT.
BMI was created for white men..not women, not Asian, black etc. It does not take into account where fat is distributed, the difference between fat and muscle, and so on. My BMI says I'm overweight by US BMI standards and obese by Asian BMI standards. No one would say that if they looked at me. My waist is 26 in, my fat is distributed in an aesthetically pleasing way in my chest and hips... And I have a higher than average amount of muscle for my height/gender. BMI is really outdated and doesn't talk about important health points. BRI is closer to what people should be looking at to determine health especially when they can't use fancy machines to determine their visceral fat and so on. I have used fancy machines because I live abroad in a country with affordable health care, and my BMI would have you believe I'm so unhealthy -no my visceral fat is a very healthy amount, not too much, not too little. I'd have been wrecking my body and health if I thought I needed to work more on my body.
I'm an Asian man and I was never fat. BMI always made sense to me. I think it is a fair measure of "fatness" and healthiness. One more thing is that BMI (or BRI) is not supposed to work for body-builders...they don't need either of 'em!
I mean considering the military had to change their physical fitness guidelines in like 1989 bc ppl were so out of shape, we should worry about our physical fitness since it does impact our ability to defend ourselves.
why not just use the height to waist ratio (or waist to height ratio)?
Because some people have skinney waists and big hips...lol
Muscular men would weigh more therefore if weight is the basis of healthiness then they'd be unhealthy.
So the doctor basically completely ignored the height and weight factor. Saying that my friend and I should both have a max 35 inch waist is dumb when I am 9 inches taller than her.
Very true. As I said elsewhere, this is just a way of legitimizing overeating.
@@harikaimal that is a strange conclusion and I don't agree.
A new way of saying that we're not fat - just big boned.
That doesn't make sense... The only "bone" in your waist is your spine...cause we're taking visceral fat, you know, around your organs.
"Moving away from these words"?! Visceral fat?! It is what it is, changing its name won't change what it is. 😅
Yeah that's just to be more politically correct and not to offend the fatties. Let's all just confuse the issue by not using the right words like fat, overweight, obese. "Roundness" is also like that although this index makes more sense than I thought it would.
You can bet there isn't much discussion to change the BMI in Europe or Asia.
Not in west europe
Yes there is.
@@LauraSomeNumber No, there isn't. Not in India anyway, and I think China doesn't need either BMI or BRI. If there is such discussion in Europe, all I can say is they are progressively getting fatter. The point is that you hit the BMI limit much earlier than you hit the BRI limit. I see this new index as just a way to legitimize over-eating, commonly seen in well-off women in India. Those who can afford comfort foods (soft term for junk foods) will have it anyway. I'm speaking for just a part of India, and here even BMI isn't very relevant. India is a very populous nation with lots of women becoming affluent. 🙏
Scoliosis also makes the BMI irrelevant, this new tool sounds equally useless.
Call it what it is: body fatness index.
The rotundity index. 😊 People should address obesity issues, and see it for what it is. Rather than hiding and packaging it.
How about BSI for BS index?
35 inches!?!?!?!?
This is useless. It's just another way of telling fat people what they already know: they're fat.
Medical science needs to come up with more economic, and equitable ways to help those that are really struggling.
Stop gatekeeping treatments that ACTUALLY work, especially for disabled and low income people.
I see a flaw with this index. There's this apparent assumption that less than a three value for BRI is somehow underweight when it's clearly not, going by the BMI scale. In my case at 5'11" and 148 pounds I'm in the "Normal" range by 15 pounds. But with those same figures with waist measuring, all of a sudden I'm underweight? Rubbish. Someone might be who's undernourished and simply unnaturally skinny, but for what I eat for calories and fats and with running and cycling my present weight is what's expected. Your body adapts to what you do.
No. BMI has a HUGE range, plus we have known for ages - YEARS! - about the visceral fat issue and the waist circumference recommendations. If this is supposed to help the public be more informed, it's too little too late. Don't throw in this funky stuff which distracts and confuses people, instead of reinforcing what we already know and just need to keep repeating. This extra stuff is CLICK BAIT.
BMI was created for white men..not women, not Asian, black etc. It does not take into account where fat is distributed, the difference between fat and muscle, and so on.
My BMI says I'm overweight by US BMI standards and obese by Asian BMI standards. No one would say that if they looked at me. My waist is 26 in, my fat is distributed in an aesthetically pleasing way in my chest and hips... And I have a higher than average amount of muscle for my height/gender.
BMI is really outdated and doesn't talk about important health points. BRI is closer to what people should be looking at to determine health especially when they can't use fancy machines to determine their visceral fat and so on. I have used fancy machines because I live abroad in a country with affordable health care, and my BMI would have you believe I'm so unhealthy -no my visceral fat is a very healthy amount, not too much, not too little. I'd have been wrecking my body and health if I thought I needed to work more on my body.
I'm an Asian man and I was never fat. BMI always made sense to me. I think it is a fair measure of "fatness" and healthiness. One more thing is that BMI (or BRI) is not supposed to work for body-builders...they don't need either of 'em!
NEW
CLEAR
WAR
and y'all worried about fat.
Thank you journalists!!!
👏 👏 👏 👏 👏 👏 👏 👏 👏 👏 👏 👏
I mean considering the military had to change their physical fitness guidelines in like 1989 bc ppl were so out of shape, we should worry about our physical fitness since it does impact our ability to defend ourselves.
Tell me you're fat without telling me you're fat.
Which branch? The Army recently changed theirs about 2020, but until then we had the same test since 1980
Round is a shape 😂