Say hello to the Body Roundness Index.
>>75141937>BMI doesn't account for racial, ethnic, age, sex, and gender diversity.Do they not account that some races are more overweight than others, are susceptible to certain diseases, and have shorter lifespans?
This is the athlete in question.5'10" 200lbs
>>75141937What would they replace it with? I get the flaws of it, but you can use logic to get around it most of the time. I mean, it's obvious if someone is an athlete or bodybuilder instead of obese. But for regular people the metric does a pretty good job.Also, I love how the article admits that men have different biology to women, and that whites have different biology to blacks (its true, and its a fair criticism or BMI for that reason). Except the brains of course, they are 100% identical across races and genders. ;) Of course.
It's almost like BMI is an indicator, and not a diagnosis.
>>75141937>look at the rock>see that his bmi is die to his muscle>look at average fat fuck>see their bmi is due to their fatCombining bmi with a 5 second observation really does wonders
>>75141937>Bmi has long been flawed No it hasn't. Unless you're an advanced bodybuilder or you're missing limbs, it's still a fairly accurate measure to predict health outcomes and it's something everyone can do at home.
>>75142178Babies. Now.
>>75141937BMI is perfectly fine as a guide for the vast majority of people. Comparing elite athletes to the general population of fatsos is ridiculous
>>75141937How does the new system work?
>>75141937Bitch looks like that female adeptus custodes
>physicians have weighed in
>>75142184>What would they replace it with?body roundness index, can't you read? idiot
>>75142247>How does the new system work?You measure your hips and waist and those are compared to your height. Muscles are round so bodybuilders/bigger athletes will still get results that tell they are too big and you get the added "benefit" of inaccuracies in measurements done by hand.TLDR: not great
>>75142419It's not what article said you pedantic faggot.
>>75142428bitch
>>75142434That's not the article it's an excerpt.Context is a thing
Just been fucking around with an online "BRI" calculator. It's bollocks, purely designed to place more obese people back inside the healthy range so they can get morale-boosting headpats and convince themselves they dont have to make any lifestyle changes.
>>75142446So basically you're fat?
>>75142450Who? I just said I was fucking around with the parameters, I'm not fat.
>>75142455Proof?
>>75142178stan smith chin
>>75142460Last month, but still applicable
>>75142468Time stamp. It could be AI.
>>75141937How is my B.R.I bros. Be brutally meownest.
>>75142446Heh. I have a bri of 2.49, which places me in the very mean category. The recommendation the site gives is to consult a nutritionist to get my weight up, despite my bmi of 23.5.
>>75142487fluffy
>>75142207Nah you need analysis paralysis for 8 hours to come in to conclusion what is the cause of the same BMI on these individuals
>>75142188They use it to force feed petite "anorexic" women, despite BMI stupidly using height squared (2d) when people are 3d.
>>75142178That's a man
>>75142207It's almost like BMI, along with being flawed from its conception, is completely superfluous if you or anyone you know has eyes.
>>75142446Where the fuck are they getting the body fat calculations on this? 40% would be obese.
>>75142178God DAYUM
>>75142390Watch out Michelle Obama, might steal your husband.
>>75142509Are they force feeding petite anorexic women with you in the room, anon?Can I see?
>>75142703go away pigfucker. sedentary women can have normal bf despite being "underweight", the ones with twig for arms who find bodyweight squats hard.
>>75142221>No it hasn't. Unless you're an advanced bodybuilder or you're missing limbs, it's still a fairly accurate measure to predict health outcomes and it's something everyone can do at home.No. They also changed it in '98 to make everyone normal overweight overnight. BMI is shit on all levels and anyone disagreeing with that just didn't do their research End of story.>>75142446>purely designed to place more obese people back inside the healthy rangeWhich is exactly how the BMI worked before 1998. Again, you didn't do your research. Stop posting.
>>75142832I wasn't saying anything against thin women anon. I just think you're a schizo.
>>75141937Funny thing is that the fact that BMI was created based on male data means that it's overly generous towards women, who should have an even lower ideal weight than men at the same height due to lower muscle mass
>>75141937BMI is accurate though.We have proven that men and women at specific BMIs regardless of muscle or fat have less diseases and negative outcomes compared to those of higher BMIs.Heart disease for instance directly correlates to higher BMI even if you're active.Heart just wears out faster because it has more mass it has to take care of.
>>75142850Not really, you don't know shit. BMI wa sinvented by an astronomer, not an actual scientist. It was popularizd by Ancel Keys, which you know from the bizarre starvation experiments in Minnesota, which proved that cutting calories causes mental illness, but which /fit/ interprets as the CICO bible. But that's still not the end point of the story, because BMI was never intended to be used as it is used now, that was the invention of insurance companies much later on. But that's still not the end, because afterwards. the WHO got its claws into the BMI, changed it all up and now we are where we are, dumbasses believing in "s.o.y.ence" thinking that you can totally estimate the fat content of a thing by weighing it and measuring its length.
>>75142862These are the retards I am talking about btw>>75142861>BMI is accurate though.>We have provenThe internet was a mistake. That guy's vote counts as much as mine in elections, which is not only absurd and infuritating, it's also worrying and terrifying.
>>75142866>The internet was a mistake. That guy's vote counts as much as mine in elections, which is not only absurd and infuritating, it's also worrying and terrifying.my sentiment as well
>>75142178GOOD MORNING USAIVE GOT A FEELING THAT ITS GONNA BE A WONDERFUL DAY
>>75142840Two anons if it matters, but here you go asshole, from the UK government:"1.3. Indications for nutrition support in hospital and the community1.3.1.Nutrition support should be considered in people who are malnourished, as defined by any of the following:a BMI of less than 18.5 kg/m2"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK553310
>>75142468mirin'
>>75142836What is the redpill on BMI? What is it like in 1998?
>>75142862>bunch of jewish history behind itOk, now what? It still produces decently acurate results, so why would I give a shit?
>>75142510Spot the manlet
>>75141937BMI only doesn't work if you're cheating. That's it, that's literally it. The reason it was forced memed into being "inaccurate" in the 90's and 00's was because people were way more naive back then and didn't realize that all professional bodybuilders except natural bodybuilders are frauds.
>>75143005Doesn't work if you're 4'11" or 6'5". Doesn't work if you have frame size and/or muscle mass two standard deviations from normal.Looking in the mirror works. Body fat percentage works.
>Ilona Maher who's BMI of 30 technically puts her in the cusp of obesityYou'd have to be a roided dude to have a bmi of 30 without being fat.>Google's Ilona MaherOh..
>>75142509They dont because that has never happned
>>75142236You're gonna need a uterus, bud.
>>75143024See: >>75142883"The law seeks to act in the best interests of the young person and uphold their human rights. If persuasion to drink and eat fails, and it is not otherwise possible to treat her safely, her deteriorating physical health will lead to the consideration of compulsory treatment."https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10063984/
>>75143050You didnt even read what you posted. Its totally irrelevant. It's literally about anorexics who have been hospitalized
>>75143052>You didnt even read what you posted. Its totally irrelevant. It's literally about anorexics who have been hospitalizedAnd how the fuck is that not exactly what I said?>They use it to force feed petite "anorexic" women, despite BMI stupidly using height squared (2d) when people are 3d.
>>75143056Either you are trolling or you dont know how to use quotes
>>75143056>people starving themselves to death are just "petite"
>>75143062I quoted your dumb ass above, and quoted myself below.
>>75143066Clearly not what he meant>petite women who are "anorexic"
>>75143065How could you miss the point so badly? The criticism of BMI is that it doesn't scale properly with height, and frame size to a lesser extent. If a woman is PETITE, that is SHORT and of SLIGHT BUILD, she can have a BMI of 18 but be healthy, not anorexic, but classified as "underweight", so they can legally restrain her and give her a feeding tube. I didn't write the law, I just read it.Again: "Nutrition support should be considered in people who are malnourished, as defined by any of the following:a BMI of less than 18.5 kg/m2"
>>75141937Can we just PLEASE take rights away from women? I can't see these retarded articles anymore
>>75142836The point is, having some kind of ratio between weight and height is a useful metric. Whether or not the assigned classifications are correct or not is a different discussion.
>>75143170>The point is, having some kind of ratio between weight and height is a useful metric. Whether or not the assigned classifications are correct or not is a different discussion.That's like saying "The point is, having a president who's a member of my party is important. Whether or not the candidate is suitable for the job is a different discussion."Maybe it is a different discussion, but you should have that one first. Having a busted-ass height/weight comparison that's worse than just eyeballing someone is simply not better than not having one at all.
>>75141937all the bitching about the BMI is so disingenuous. if you're 6' 200lbs at 10%bf, no doctor on this planet will look at the BMI and go "yeah buddie, you are overweight, we'll need to put you on a diet". he can see on first glance that you're not
>>75142178>fat tranny
>>75141937That's fine but you'll still be screened by bmi and I'll still call you overweight regardless of ffmi until you have tests confirming it's not a wearing on your knees, hips or causing positional sleep apnea.
>>75142247it's more complicated and still suffers from the same problem anywayso like usually, shit got worse because women endlessly whined that they didn't like reality
>>75141937>Obese women wouldn't stop bitching, and we caved (again)
>>75142167LOL you heard it here first, folksWeight measurements are sexist, racist, and ageist
isnt it possible that high bmi is bad for you regardless of whether its fat or muscle
>>75142446They just expanded the "Healthy zone".The race stuff is more interesting desuThey seem to make estimates on your muscle mass based on your selected race.So Whites and Blacks having the the biggest amount of muscle for the given height and weight, with Beaners and Asians being automatically seen as less muscular and more fat(as in higher BF% with the exact same height, weight as whites)
>>75143078Show me one documented time a healthy "petite" woman without an eating disorder was hospital and force fed
>>75143545How would I find that even if it's happened 1000 times, and is that the point? UK law says if they're under 18.5 BMI they can be force fed, and a skinny 4'11" girl can be 18 BMI and healthy. I guarantee they've been pressured to eat more under the implication that "help" would be escalated if they didn't. It sounds like you think someone's family or doctors would ignore their BMI if all their ribs aren't showing. If it should be ignored when looking at someone is a better indicator of health, why does everyone use it?
>>75143630I didnt see any sources in your comment so I didnt read it. You made a statement ("They use it to force feed petite "anorexic" women") - with zero evidence for the claim, and now you can't back it up. You are dismissed. I'm not going to read further responses or argue with you
>>75143642>You made a statement ("They use it to force feed petite "anorexic" women") - with zero evidence for the claimWhy is it written in law if it's never happened?Do you not think telling someone to eat more under the threat of restraining them and inserting a feeding tube if they don't to be force feeding?
>>75143670You seem to have missed this part>I'm not going to read further responses or argue with youI again didnt read your post. Keep replying if you want though, you lost the argument. Have a good day.
>>75143684You just did, idiot.
>>75143242You don’t understand bro, my BMI is 37, but i go to the gym 2-3 times per week. I’m totally ripped and jacked under this thin layer of fat but my doctor tells me to lose weight.
>>75141937I just don't get what they hope to achieve by destroying BMIPeople can still tell you're fat and weak from looking at you you knowYou can invent any measurements you want it won't change what you are
>>75142167East asians have a separate bmi indicator so this might actually be a bit more usefull in more diverse areas.
>>75143727I’d say there is a good chance that any new indicator would probably be worse for a good portion of the population. The amount of skinny fat people not being counted is most likely higher than the amount of huge jacked people being counted as obese.
>>75142184Even among bodybuilders it indicates some level of health risk. If you are a 5 foot 8 borderline manlet who is a 200 lb meatball of muscle with a BMI of over 30, your heart is still being strained more than if you were 160 lbs of pure muscle
>>75141937>The BRI ranges between 1 to 20 (1 = narrow body, 20 = more round). The BRI outputs a graph of body shape with reference to a healthy zone. The BRI was found to correlate well with measurements taken by Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis.1,2 The BRI is able to determine the presence of cardiovascular disease and diabetes but not superior to BMI, waist circumference or waist-to-height ratio.4,6,7 However, the BRI was found to be superior to the BMI and is an alternative index for assessing diabetes in people in Northeast China.5 BRI was also found to predict coronary heart disease risk in Chinese males and females.3>The BRI was found to correlate well with measurements taken by Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis.1,2>Biolectrical Impedance AnalysisLol, lmao even. Get the fuck out of here. Correlating well with objectively the worst fucking method for measuring body fat percentage.
>>75142178she's so androgenic I could probably get a test boost from just sniffing her
>>75142241This post is accurate. And complaining about BMI being made for men is doubly stupid, when in reality the metric is more accurate for women than for men - you need to be a 99th percentile woman to break the BMI scale at all, while for men the bar where it stops being useful is lower (still very high though, the vast majority of people who don't blast PED's have literally nothing to think about).
>>75141937Way to go, people! Now fat is the new norm! Also, BMI can't be racist, if black people are fat than it is what it is.
>>75142390>>75142178thats a dude
>>75143867How can you tell when it's accurate and when it's not? >Just by looking at them for five seconds you can tell if they're over or under weight, how fat, and how muscular they are.BMI sounds really useful.
>>75143867Women break the BMI scale all the time, it's just inverse to the way men do, that is women quite often have a BMI in the healthy range whilst having an excess of bodyfat.But yeah BMI is more or less accurate and retards don't understand that it's a range for a reason, getting to a BMI of 24 (especially for a woman) does not remotely mean you're healthy, you may need to get down to 18. Just like a man may be better off closer to 25 and be sickly anywhere near 18. But the odds of being healthy outside the range are extremely slim.
>>75143983The purpose was to give doctors a more scientific way to say>Put the fork down, fatty but consuming fewer calories than an elephant is literal starvation to these >people, so the answer should have been to just disregard whatever they say and deny treatment when they refuse to maintain a human weight.
>>75144174Doctors can't calculate body fat percentage? Doctors aren't smart enough to use ^3 instead of ^2 since the human body occupies physical space?Even if it's just a confidence trick, look how many of us know it's bullshit and disregard it, and think less of anyone who uses it, even if they're a doctor. I call that a failure.
>>75144205>Doctors can't calculate body fat percentage?Not easily, no, it takes a fairly involved examination which takes precious time, whereas measuring height and stepping on a scale is somethibg a nurse can do. And I'm sure fatties would just conjure up some bullshit for why fat percentage doesn't count either...
How does it expect us to measure waist circumference? The original research paper used two different datasets both with different ways to measure it
>>75142178Is that a man or just a manish woman on steroids?>>75142184As far as I see it most people live pretty similar, mostly sedentary lives. For them a BMI scale is fine. But doctors need to be considerate of people that actually actively build muscle. Expanding the data to include women for women wouldn't hurt though
>>75144227You're implying a nurse can't measure body fat. Someone with a degree in phys ed or something like that measured mine.
>>75142207yeah but niggers and liberals will tell you that using your eyes to make judgements is wrong
>>75142468lean but small
>>75144227"Why does the ratio matter if I have the minimum base requirements?! You're just oppressing us with your western views of medicine and beauty!" - every fat white girl.God I hate fat people.
>>75142836Let me guess, your BMI is 30 or above but you still delude yourself into thinking you're actually healthy? Fat retard
>>75141937Just bring back calipers to measure fat.A hands on exam with your stomach and arm fat stretched should make anyone realize they have a problem.
>>75142446I just checked it, and it was surprisingly accurate for me, desu. Got the bodyfat % right on the dot, as checked by one of those electric scales at least
>>75141937>https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/983242just waist to height ratio. it is known
>>75141937hello
>>75142178Would.
>>75141937Same mfers still gonna fail that one and call it bigoted. Dont care fatties get their desserts. Cant cope your way out of heart disease and diabetes
>>75141937>(((Rony Caryn Rabin)))
>>75142866>The internet was a mistake. That guy's vote counts as much as mine in elections, which is not only absurd and infuritating, it's also worrying and terrifying.Oh you're one of those trust the science trannies right?>noooo i'm healthy at any size>Noooo BMI means nothingDirect correlation to increased disease and BMI.Because excess BMI means excess inflammation, even if it is muscle.The body can only handle so much inflammation.
>>75141937>newThis has existed for decades. Has been used for children and servicemen
>>75141937It told me I'm 22% bfWtft. 5'10 155
>>75145845>Direct correlation to increased disease and BMI.Do you have the correlations between-BMI and disease-Weight and disease-Body fat % and disease? Would like to see how they compare.
