IGX

Pinky wrote:

Turdacious wrote:It was designed over 150 years ago and hasn't been appropriately updated.

What would an appropriate update look like?

The way it's used, as BD stated above, is to assess health and health risk factors-- validity is what matters. Look at the known risk factors-- blood pressure, body fat percentage, etc... It's not particularly difficult-- considering that insurance providers, health care providers, and medical researchers assess these things in standardized ways already. The tools to measure risk factors we look at now didn't really exist 150 years ago.

Pinky wrote:

Turdacious wrote:It was designed over 150 years ago and hasn't been appropriately updated.

What would an appropriate update look like?

Given the trend over the last 30 years, I think a change from kg/m^2 to kg/m^3 would be a solid start.

Have you ever dealt with an insurance provider (life or health) that looked at BMI and only BMI? I haven't.

bigpeach wrote:

Pinky wrote:

Turdacious wrote:It was designed over 150 years ago and hasn't been appropriately updated.

What would an appropriate update look like?

Given the trend over the last 30 years, I think a change from kg/m^2 to kg/m^3 would be a solid start.

Pinky wrote:Have you ever dealt with an insurance provider (life or health) that looked at BMI and only BMI? I haven't.

Have you ever been able to determine what an insurance company's rationalization for anything is, other than, "ahhh helll no we ain't payin"...?
OTOH i have dealt with pc providers who have explicitely used bmi as their sol.e reference point.

That's when it's time to switch doctors.

Pinky wrote:That's when it's time to switch doctors.

I understand you believe there to be a market based solution to every human curiosity. Back in the real world we have to deal with some significant asymmetry in patient vs. insurance/medical/drugvotainment industry relationship.

Medical care is not a normal market.

http://www.aeaweb.org/aer/top20/53.5.941-973.pdf

Blaidd Drwg wrote:

Pinky wrote:That's when it's time to switch doctors.

I understand you believe there to be a market based solution to every human curiosity. Back in the real world we have to deal with some significant asymmetry in patient vs. insurance/medical/drugvotainment industry relationship.

Wrong. I believe doctors who use BMI as their "sole reference point" are rare. If your doctor does that, you have found one of the worst.

Pinky wrote:

Blaidd Drwg wrote:

Pinky wrote:That's when it's time to switch doctors.

I understand you believe there to be a market based solution to every human curiosity. Back in the real world we have to deal with some significant asymmetry in patient vs. insurance/medical/drugvotainment industry relationship.

Wrong. I believe doctors who use BMI as their "sole reference point" are rare. If your doctor does that, you have found one of the worst.

Or you're on a managed care plan.

Pinky wrote:

Blaidd Drwg wrote:

Pinky wrote:That's when it's time to switch doctors.

I understand you believe there to be a market based solution to every human curiosity. Back in the real world we have to deal with some significant asymmetry in patient vs. insurance/medical/drugvotainment industry relationship.

Wrong. I believe doctors who use BMI as their "sole reference point" are rare. If your doctor does that, you have found one of the worst.

It's very common to use BMI as a sole reference point for making or imposing significant courses of action.

If you want to flip side example of the retarded that is BMI, Microsoft offers specific employee benefit package to induce employees to stay below the overweight line on BMI. I have a friend who gets weekly personal training and a yoga studio membership paid to drop from 185 to 155. At 185 he had visible abs and ran about 15 miles a week.

Blaidd Drwg wrote:

Pinky wrote:

Blaidd Drwg wrote:

Pinky wrote:That's when it's time to switch doctors.

I understand you believe there to be a market based solution to every human curiosity. Back in the real world we have to deal with some significant asymmetry in patient vs. insurance/medical/drugvotainment industry relationship.

Wrong. I believe doctors who use BMI as their "sole reference point" are rare. If your doctor does that, you have found one of the worst.

It's very common to use BMI as a sole reference point for making or imposing significant courses of action.

If you want to flip side example of the retarded that is BMI, Microsoft offers specific employee benefit package to induce employees to stay below the overweight line on BMI. I have a friend who gets weekly personal training and a yoga studio membership paid to drop from 185 to 155. At 185 he had visible abs and ran about 15 miles a week.

I won't argue that such corporate policies don't exist, but I don't know how common they are. (I don't think you do either.) I also know of plans that offer incentives for good health that are based on a broader set of criteria (I have such a plan), but don't know how common they are. I don't think I've ever met a doctor who doesn't understand that muscle mass can affect BMI.

Finally, I know how commonly BMI is used by researchers to look at populations, which is the appropriate use. It's used because there is no "updated" measure that can easily replace it.

I don't know how common those policies are. I do know that people, especially in a managed care scenario routinely and regularly miss-apply these kinds of statistical tools. Were the healthcare market rational, perhaps that would buff out. The fact is, it isn't rational and the effects can be significant on the individual.