General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: 127 pound girl-athlete given a "fat letter" to take home from school. [View all]jeff47
(26,549 posts)My daughter's doctors are "concerned" about her BMI. She's 2. She's about the height and weight of a 4-year-old. But that doesn't fit nicely in their BMI chart, so they're "concerned" (2-year-olds are supposed to have a higher % body fat than 4-year-olds).
Poor parents: Overfeeding when times are good is protection against times going bad. Ketchup soup is much less of a problem when the kid has a little fat to withstand the "lean" week.
Kids who are strong: Falls off the BMI chart, despite the fact that they are what these schools should be aiming for.
Then there's the little problem where "ideal" BMI leads to a shorter lifespan. Why are we teaching kids to stay in the "ideal" range if that makes them die sooner? Doesn't that indicate a problem with this program?
Or perhaps parents aren't morons, and people on the outside don't know everything that is going on at home?
No, the side-effect is child obesity. The problem is child inactivity - lack of exercise. That's why the program is "Let's Move", not "Let's Diet".
BMI and it's fans are targeting a symptom instead of it's cause, and it's leading to a lot more unhealthy people - people either get too thin or they just give up and eat bag after bag of Doritos. Meanwhile, being "overweight" but exercising regularly turns out to avoid the problems in the "obesity crisis".
We chew out anti-science people when it comes to Creationism and a few other subjects. But when it comes to diet, weight and exercise, we cheer anti-science because we think it's too hard for people to understand out how to do it right. So "Low-fat diet" morphs to "Low-carb diet" instead of getting people off the couch and exercising along with some minor diet tweaks. We should stop that.