Effect of Breakfast Skipping and Late Night Eating on BMI with Type 2 Diabetes

Post by ilyt » Tue, Aug 08, 2023, 5:09 PM UTC

wredue wrote: post #61

gizmo wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do people keep making this argument? It's a terrible argument. BMI and body fat are extremely strongly correlated. People with a very high BMI are all obese or morbidly obese. And people with a very low BMI are almost all underweight. BMI is a very simple, easy to calculate and useful metric. It works across countries and across time. BMI is just one metric. It doesn't tell you everything and knowing only the BMI…

It’s because people take their BMI and become shocked about where they land. It takes like a small beer gut to land in to obese. BMI isn’t generally used as a picture of overall health anyway. More often, it’s used as a measure for health issue probability. As Texas BMI raises, it can be used to calculate the increasing chances of a huge variety of health problems.

Post by ilyt » Tue, Aug 08, 2023, 5:18 PM UTC

deprecative wrote: post #98

howeyc wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They defined late as 2 hours before bed. No consistency of when bed is across the group. Breakfast was 5am to 10am. Looks like no control over food intake. For all we know, breakfast skippers might eat 2lbs of sugar for lunch in this study.

My guess would be that it's people drinking diet soda, salad dressing, sugar+cream in their twenty coffees before lunch, and/or bread. It's entirely based on my experience with folks at the office. I, myself, don't eat breakfast for anxiety / gallbladder removal reasons (I also don't eat lunch when I'm not at/close to home for it), and my fat ass is from a horrid soda addiction as a kid.

Post by paulpauper » Tue, Aug 08, 2023, 5:23 PM UTC

scarby2 wrote: post #94

wombat-man wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you maybe hoping for a metric of general healthiness? Measuring body fat accurately on your own is tough. Most people know their height and can find a scale to use so you can get a rough idea of what bucket you're in. It's good for most people. If you're working out and pretty athletic idk why you'd stress about your bmi being a little high.

sadly it's often misused. When there are things like BMI qualifications on medical interventions or where jobs have physical requirements. I knew a guy who really wanted to join the fire service but couldn't meet the BMI requirements as he was in the 'obese' BMI bucket, In this case he was just very broad and very muscular (built like the colloquial brick shithouse). By their requirements jonah lomu would not have be…

Post by auxfil » Tue, Aug 08, 2023, 5:29 PM UTC

paulsutter wrote: post #79

wombat-man wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yeah... but the likelihood that you have a high BMI because you're just so jacked is low. It's not perfect, but it's a good metric.

Although this has little bearing on the study, BMI works best for people of average height. Tall thin people have a high BMI, and unthin short people have a low BMI. Math reason: the square term for height is incorrect, people are three dimensional and a cube would be more appropriate (the formula is (lbweight/(inchheight^2 * 703))). Check the BMI of tall and short people that you know in this chart: https://www.canc…

Post by jncfhnb » Tue, Aug 08, 2023, 5:40 PM UTC

wombat-man wrote: post #45

jncfhnb wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s really not a good metric. It’s incredibly noisy. “Are you fat” isn’t something that needs a noisy metric. And it makes analyses messy when bmi is used as a measure of fatness.

Are you maybe hoping for a metric of general healthiness? Measuring body fat accurately on your own is tough. Most people know their height and can find a scale to use so you can get a rough idea of what bucket you're in. It's good for most people. If you're working out and pretty athletic idk why you'd stress about your bmi being a little high.