I posted this in a Pit thread but people who read here may be more interested. We have had multiple past discussions about the limitations of BMI other than as a screening tool and as tool for studying populations. Waist circumference (WC) alone is also far from ideal for placing an individual on a health risk strata. I’ve recently learned of a newer tool though that seems pretty dang useful and powerful called simply “A Body Shape Index” (ABSI). It uses WC and adjusts for height and weight. Turns out
On-line tool available! Plug in your height weight age and waist circumference (not pants size, see here for how to measure, just above hip bones at end of a normal exhalation).
My ABSIz score is -1.3. From that calculator site I can click to a figure in the article (that “compare your score” link) and see that such means I am on the flat portion of the lowered mortality curve. Yea me! Where are you? Have fun!
Oh. Better ask for some opinons else this be considered a MPSIMS … would you like to see this as a value you follow at your health care provider’s more than your weight or BMI? Is this ready for prime time?
Hahahahaha. -1.3 That puts me in the healthy range. This is fun. I’ve never been considered healthy before based on these kinds of readings. Both my BMI and waist size are too high when those are measured alone.
Reading the article, it appears to be equivalent to waist/hip ratio, something doctors have used in combination with BMI for some time. Like w/h, it’s supposed to be used along with BMI.
FTR, I get scolded and told to lose weight when only BMI is considered, but told “you’re fine so long as you don’t sit on your butt all day” when w/h is taken into account.
Basically any zero and below (zero would be 50%ile) is a good number and the higher above zero the greater the risk. 1.0 (1 SD high, roughly in the top 15%) is about 50% greater mortality risk and 2.0 (2 SD, roughly top 2 to 3%) is roughly twice the mortality risk. Your -2.7 and -2.8 z-scores, if based on accurate measurements, would mean your scores are in the lowest 0.35 and 0.25% respectively. From a risk status it is not much different though than someone who is -0.5 (31%ile roughly) and only a bit better than those who are smack dab average. That said, are you following the directions for WC from the link? Again, not your pants size. Use a cloth tape measure and follow directions carefully. The data is very sensitive to accurate data in. You two both could be among the almost 3 sigma outliers but measurement error is more probable.
Nava I don’t get that from the article. The comment about waist hip ratio is in comparison to BMI alone and WC alone and that it might also be improved by adjustment for BMI and ht.
This metric appeals to me intuitively. Two people with the same weight and height, but different WC implies a lot about where the weight is. Likewise two people with same WC but one with a higher BMI implies that the higher BMI person has more muscle mass or minimally less visceral fat and more subcutaneous fat on his/her arms and legs - and is at lower health risk.
I don’t understand exactly how it works, but it certainly seems like it would be a better measurement. I read a figure that using BMI, roughly half the NFL is obese. It seems like this method would be MUCH more accurate when you take that into consideration. (Granted, some NFL players are rather beefy, but not half of them).
I don’t think this is necessarily “better” than BMI - BMI is simple and easy to see on a chart - this you need - website. The complain you hear all the time are that there are healthy people out there with high BMI’s. anyone out there with a high BMI and is healthy - is working their ass off. They don’t need a BMI to know they are healthy. The BMI is good for couch potatoes who don’t realize how fat they are.
The measurement is highly dependent on how you measure waist size. How many people posting their scores actually followed the instructions vs just using their pants size? I’m still trying to find my new tape measure - as I broke the last one :). But I know from other measurements of done of this type - 3-4 inch differences aren’t uncommon. And that makes a big diff on that “z” measure.
one red shoe, you can take your* z-score* and then can look on this graph. The z-score also varies with age but you have about the same raw score I do, so odds are that your z-score and RR are about the same as mine too.
I found another version of an online calculator here which reads the relative mortality risk (RR) for us. Makes it much easier. Using that one it tells me right off that my RR is 0.75 by ABSI and using both ABSI and BMI is 0.59. Which mean that have by ABSI 25% less mortality risk and 41% less by using both ABSI and BMI together.
Renee what you win is a new tape measure!
I do think the accurate measurement of WC is the tricky bit for this. It has be the right spot in the right way. Not pants size! My pants size is 29 to 30 depending on the brand; my WC measured as directed is 34.5 to 35 depending on the exhalation. There are also other protocols for WC out there and within their studies they are fine; but for this tool this *particular *techinique of measuring WC must be followed.
A good thing about following this metric is what happens when someone has been following a nutrition/exercise plan for a while and is getting frustrated because they are not losing any more weight, maybe even (because of a slight increase in muscle mass) gained some. This will show them the improvement. A slight decrease in WC with a slight increase in BMI significantly decreases ABSI, capturing the fact that (s)he has significantly improved body composition even as the scale disappoints. This metric better captures abdominal obesity relative to BMI and height and it really is abdominal obesity, especially in relation to muscle mass, that seems to matters most.
DataX BMI is simple to see on a chart because it has been calculated by the EMR or by someone using some set of tables or a BMI wheel. No reason the EMR cannot calculate this just as easily once WC is entered in as well. And yes, as above, the number of sigma outliers we are seeing here do speak to the difficulty of getting WC right at home. Also agreed to some degree that BMI is a screening tool only and that someone with a “high” BMI (and here we are talking over 25 to under 35, not 35 and over) who is exercising regularly and eating healthy should not be told they need to lose weight. Yes a high BMI can identify a person who is a couch potato who does not realize how fat they are. BUT. Of those with “normal” BMIs (18 to 25) 8% are metabolically unhealthy. They have relatively low muscle mass and a relatively high amount of abdominal (visceral) fat. They are low fitness and at high risk of diabetes and heart disease of a worse prognosis than the diabetes and heart disease that shows up in the obese (that “obesity paradox”). BMI as a screen will miss them; ABSI won’t.
I had a real issue with my waist size - I think I started measuring too low (at my hips). There is a noticable difference between my hips and my waist, but I was getting a two - and with a BMI of 23 and a small waist, there was no way I was a two. I think I’m closer to a .6
-2. Because I am average height but underweight by BMI and have an unusually small waist.
These measurements don’t reflect that I’m lean, fit, have visible muscle, eat a healthy high-calorie diet, enjoy good general health, and have perfect blood pressure/blood lipids etc.
Anything based on the statistics of the average healthy person doesn’t seem to apply well to me. But this score is more in my favor than BMI.
Women wouldn’t use their pants size, DSeid: they’re not measured in inches in the US. I measure my waist with a cloth measuring tape and take care not to suck in my gut because that’s cheating
I’m no great shakes at math but circumference is the outer measurement of a circle, right? I doubt you have hips between 4" and 26", which are the most typical US sizes. Not to mention an 4 fits ~36" hips and a 26W fits ~56" hips.
Where are you? Have fun!
I’m no great shakes at math but circumference is the outer measurement of a circle, right? I doubt you have hips between 4" and 26", which are the most typical US sizes. Not to mention an 4 fits ~36" hips and a 26W fits ~56" hips.