Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I have read this article just yesterday: http://healthcorrelator.blogspot.com.au/2012/06/lowest-morta...

This is basically a reference point to support the opinion that was stated here: BMI is not the only thing that matters.

Take a look at the two numbers circled in red. The one on the left is the lowest-mortality BMI not adjusting for fat mass or fat-free mass: a reasonably high 27.4. The one on the right is the lowest-mortality BMI adjusting for fat mass and fat-free mass: a much lower 21.6.

I know this may sound confusing, but due to possible statistical distortions this does not mean that you should try to bring your BMI to 21.6 if you want to reduce your risk of dying. What this means is that fat mass and fat-free mass matter.




To put this in perspective, 6'0 and 130 is a BMI of 17.6 which is off the charts. He is well below the ideal lean BMI of 21.6.


Hmm... maybe you're used to an environment with a lot of overweight people.

Anything under 18.5 is considered "underweight", just as anything over 25 is considered "overweight". 17.6 is only off by .9 points. He's less off the charts than someone 6'0 and 195lbs (BMI of 26.4)




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: