OT - Grr NHS weight flyer

"Roos Eisma" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Well, according to the latest NHS Tayside door-to-door leaflet I am now
obese.
I was never very impressed with the BMI method for my body shape, but
the NHS think that even that is too complicated for the general audience
and have now issued the following guidelines:

BMI isn't a particularly accurate way of measuring fatness. My workmate is
5ft 10ins and a bodybuilder and he's classed as obese if you use the BMI.
It's better to measure your body fat content, either with the calliper
system or the electronic meters.
--
Simon M.

"Roos Eisma" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

So do they expect me to have the same waist as someone half my height...?

Roos - 32 inches breathing in, 30 breathing out 🙂

Just noticed there's a feedback form on the last page, and an email
address...

<crystal ball> I see an email being written... </crystal ball>

Cheers, helen s

On 1/2/05 11:09 am, in article [email hidden], "Simon

Mason said:

"Roos Eisma" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Well, according to the latest NHS Tayside door-to-door leaflet I am now
obese.
I was never very impressed with the BMI method for my body shape, but
the NHS think that even that is too complicated for the general audience
and have now issued the following guidelines:

BMI isn't a particularly accurate way of measuring fatness. My workmate is
5ft 10ins and a bodybuilder and he's classed as obese if you use the BMI.
It's better to measure your body fat content, either with the calliper
system or the electronic meters.

How do the electronic meters do it? I have always been suspicious of 'Fat
measuring scales', assuming that they would just calcualte BMI on the fly.

Would a better measure be:

shoe size * height/weight

That takes into account things like build. (I have the shoe size of someone
5 inches taller, and the weight of someone a foot taller ;-)

I still counted as obese (borderline very obese) whilst being able to do
120mile rides and a sub half hour ten..

...d

Simon Mason said:

"Roos Eisma" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Well, according to the latest NHS Tayside door-to-door leaflet I am now
obese.
I was never very impressed with the BMI method for my body shape, but
the NHS think that even that is too complicated for the general audience
and have now issued the following guidelines:

BMI isn't a particularly accurate way of measuring fatness. My workmate is
5ft 10ins and a bodybuilder and he's classed as obese if you use the BMI.
It's better to measure your body fat content, either with the calliper
system or the electronic meters.
--
Simon M.

Yes. I have a mate who won a silver medal in the British 100kg Power
Lifting championships a few years ago. Built like a truck. He filled out
a form just before a medical. The told him once they read he remarks
they had classified him as obese. He actually moved some of the test
equipment to the end of the scales an dstopped before he broke it. He
didnt do too well on he aerobic tests or flexibility though,

David Martin said:

How do the electronic meters do it? I have always been suspicious of 'Fat
measuring scales', assuming that they would just calcualte BMI on the fly.

Since height is needed for BMI I think the crude on-the-fly calculation
can be ruled out.

I would guess that the body's resistant varies with the amount of fat.
It can't be a straightforward relationship as the non-basic scales have
different settings for different builds: Athletic, Lean, Slob, etc..

Quoted message said:

Would a better measure be:

shoe size * height/weight

That takes into account things like build. (I have the shoe size of someone
5 inches taller, and the weight of someone a foot taller ;-)

Hmm, bragging about your shoe size, eh? You'll be buying a sports car next.

Colin

Roos Eisma said:

Well, according to the latest NHS Tayside door-to-door leaflet I am now
obese.
I was never very impressed with the BMI method for my body shape, but
the NHS think that even that is too complicated for the general audience
and have now issued the following guidelines:

"What is a healthy weight?
Obesity is related to body size. You can check your size by measuring
around your waist with a tape. Health risks are greater when the waist is
more than 94 cm/37 inches in men, or 80 cm/32 inches in women."

So do they expect me to have the same waist as someone half my height...?

Roos - 32 inches breathing in, 30 breathing out 🙂

Just noticed there's a feedback form on the last page, and an email
address...

Its the old story of being undertall for your weight!
("your" used in the generic, not personal, sense)

Tony

Just read the letter in the CTC magazine from the cyclist whose 120
member club has 8 members with current heart problems diagnosed when
they were already cyclists and three dead from heart attacks. All in
their mid 50's to 60's. That appears well above norms for the
population. Is it a statistical anomaly or is there something odd going
on? We are always told cycling's good for cardiac health but they used
to say that about smoking.

Tony

"dkahn400" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

I've got one of those and it's wildly inaccurate. It tells me my body
fat is between 7% and 12%. Now I'm not exactly a lard bucket but
there's no way I'm as lean as that.

I went on one at someone's gym and came out as 13% fat. In my work's medical
the calliper system measurement was 14%, but I don't own one, so I can't say
how accurate they are long term as I've only used it the once.

--
Simon M.

On 01 Feb 2005 10:56:58 GMT someone who may be Roos Eisma
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Well, according to the latest NHS Tayside door-to-door leaflet I am now
obese.

When you took part in the uk.rec.cycling gathering in Edinburgh last
year you looked anything but obese.

I tend to laugh at the medical mob on this issue. Decades ago my
father was told that he was overweight and must shed many kilos. He
replied that this was strange as six months before the same doctor
had told him that he was the ideal weight for his height and neither
had changed since. The doctor explained that they had a new chart.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

Tony Raven said:

Just read the letter in the CTC magazine from the cyclist whose 120
member club has 8 members with current heart problems diagnosed when
they were already cyclists and three dead from heart attacks. All in
their mid 50's to 60's. That appears well above norms for the
population. Is it a statistical anomaly or is there something odd going
on?

One possible reason for such an anomaly would be people with dodgy
hearts deciding to Do Something Positive and joining a cycle club... I
am tangentially reminded of bowling being the sport with most cardiac
casualties!

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

in message <[email hidden]>, Tony Raven

(') said:

Just read the letter in the CTC magazine from the cyclist whose 120
member club has 8 members with current heart problems diagnosed when
they were already cyclists and three dead from heart attacks. All in
their mid 50's to 60's. That appears well above norms for the
population. Is it a statistical anomaly or is there something odd
going on?

I've known an awful lot of very fit cyclists in their eighties and
nineties. Indeed, of all the very fit eighty and ninety year olds I've
ever known, I'd say at least half were cyclists.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; Madness takes its toll. Please have exact change.

Roos Eisma said:

Well, according to the latest NHS Tayside door-to-door leaflet I am now
obese.

Well, I might get a bit less lip about being a Pod Person now! ;-)

Quoted message said:

Just noticed there's a feedback form on the last page, and an email
address...

Might be worth attaching the photograph from
http://www.personal.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/tdn4.htm for them to see just
how hilariously wrong their system is...

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

"Peter Clinch" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Might be worth attaching the photograph from
http://www.personal.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/tdn4.htm for them to see just
how hilariously wrong their system is...

Indeed - fine figure of a woman :-).

Maybe they now are basing their ideal woman on lollipop headed film
actresses like Liz Hurley etc. Have a load of gay men taken over the Tayside
medical community? ;-)

--
Simon M.

Peter Clinch said:

Tony Raven said:

Just read the letter in the CTC magazine from the cyclist whose 120
member club has 8 members with current heart problems diagnosed when
they were already cyclists and three dead from heart attacks. All in
their mid 50's to 60's. That appears well above norms for the
population. Is it a statistical anomaly or is there something odd going
on?

One possible reason for such an anomaly would be people with dodgy
hearts deciding to Do Something Positive and joining a cycle club... I
am tangentially reminded of bowling being the sport with most cardiac
casualties!

Another option is that the death rate for cardiac problems is lower in
cycling, so the proportion of live cyclists with cardiac problems is higher
than the proportion of non-cyclists, cos the non-cyclists with cardiac
problems are dead.

If you see what I mean.

...d

David Hansen <[email hidden]>typed

Quoted message said:

On 01 Feb 2005 10:56:58 GMT someone who may be Roos Eisma
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Well, according to the latest NHS Tayside door-to-door leaflet I am now
obese.

Quoted message said:

When you took part in the uk.rec.cycling gathering in Edinburgh last
year you looked anything but obese.

Quoted message said:

I tend to laugh at the medical mob on this issue. Decades ago my
father was told that he was overweight and must shed many kilos. He
replied that this was strange as six months before the same doctor
had told him that he was the ideal weight for his height and neither
had changed since. The doctor explained that they had a new chart.

I remember my grandmother weighing herself in Woolworth's around 4
decades ago. She was 14 stone, no doubt *far* too much for a 5'8" lady.
She died a fortnight after her 101st birthday...

I'm a mere 11 stone[1], proud of it and have no desire to change...

[1] BMI 25-26 so heavy by the books.

--
Helen D. Vecht: [email hidden]
Edgware.

Roos Eisma <[email hidden]> wrote:

: "What is a healthy weight?
: Obesity is related to body size. You can check your size by measuring
: around your waist with a tape. Health risks are greater when the waist is
: more than 94 cm/37 inches in men, or 80 cm/32 inches in women."

I'm going to go against the rest of the group and defend this here.

Yes, Roos clearly isn't overweight, but
is this *such* a bad general rule? Ditto BMI - it has problems but
quoting "X is a bodybuilder" as a reason why it is useless for most
people (who aren't fit, slim *or* muscular) always seemed a spurious
argument to me.

The great benifit of the waist size measurement is that it does correctly
account for body builders. Jonah Lomu is always quoted as the "high
BMI but not fat" example, and has something like a 28 or 30" waist (or
at least did when he was super fit)

I don't know how a 32" waist works out for women, but looking at my
male friends, those with a >37" waist are indeed overweight and could
do with losing a bit. Of course, they all think they have a 34" or 36" waist
since they can hoist their belly over the top of trousers of that size
done up tight.....

No general rule fits everyone. This one seems pretty good to me. It's also
based on some fairly recent research which showed a reasonable correlation
between waist size and heart disease (ISTR) rates.

http://www.hunterdonhealthcare.org/WebMD/Conditions/Weight_Control_Nutrition/Does_Waist_Size.asp

That page has some sublities that get lost in a quick leaflet, as one
would expect.

Arthur

--
Arthur Clune PGP/GPG Key: http://www.clune.org/pubkey.txt
It is better to light a candle than to curse the darkness

Tony Raven said:

Just read the letter in the CTC magazine from the cyclist whose 120
member club has 8 members with current heart problems diagnosed when
they were already cyclists and three dead from heart attacks. All in
their mid 50's to 60's. That appears well above norms for the
population. Is it a statistical anomaly or is there something odd
going on? We are always told cycling's good for cardiac health but
they used to say that about smoking.

Random thoughts:

Does the mid 50s to 60s relate to the 120 members or the 8 with
current heart problems?

If the 120 mebers are old then there's little point in comparing them
with averages for the population as a whole.

Also what were these "heart problems"? Are you sure that that the
incidence of these problems are not similar in the population as a
whole? A lot of people who don't take any regular excercise may simply
not be aware that they have certain kinds of "heart problems".

"Arthur Clune" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Yes, Roos clearly isn't overweight, but
is this *such* a bad general rule? Ditto BMI - it has problems but
quoting "X is a bodybuilder" as a reason why it is useless for most
people (who aren't fit, slim *or* muscular) always seemed a spurious
argument to me.

I'm not a body builder, but my BMI is 22, more or less bang in the middle of
the normal range. Yet my fat level is 14% - below the lower normal limit.

--
Simon M.

In article said:

Or indeed buy your own. I've got one of those Tanita things. I'm not
sure how accurate the body fat thing is, but they're decent electronic
scales anyway. The only thing I didn't quite realize in advance was
that you really need a hard surface to use it on. So we can't use ours
in the bathrooms - which are carpeted.

I lost over half a stone when I put a piece of plywood under my cheap
mechanical scales instead of having them directly on the carpet....