All U.S. adults could be overweight in 40 years

reuters ^ | Aug 6, 2008 | Amy Norton

[edzo4]

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - If the trends of the past three decades continue, it's possible that every American adult could be overweight 40 years from now, a government-funded study projects.

The figure might sound alarming, or impossible, but researchers say that even if the actual rate never reaches the 100-percent mark, any upward movement is worrying; two-thirds of the population is already overweight.

"Genetically and physiologically, it should be impossible" for all U.S. adults to become overweight, said Dr. Lan Liang of the federal government's Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, one of the researchers on the study.

However, she told Reuters Health, the data suggest that if the trends of the past 30 years persist, "that is the direction we're going."

Already, she and her colleagues point out, some groups of U.S. adults have extremely high rates of overweight and obesity; among African- American women, for instance, 78 percent are currently overweight or obese.

[dfwgator]

Pretty soon 50% of all Americans will exceed the median weight.

[meowmeow]

Damn - I’m probably half way through my life and only 125lbs. Better get busy...

[TC Rider]

Finally, I’m ahead of the curve on something.

[dan1123]

Extrapolation is always self-limiting;

Except with politicized science. Global warming, population studies, and evolution all make the mistake of thinking that you can extrapolate forever.

[dan1123]

And you could be a 250 lb body builder and get jacked up life insurance rates.

The faster we change from BMI to something more sane, the better. One thing amusing about BMI is that as you get taller, you have to be skinnier (have less % body fat) to be within the normal weight range. Some moron in the gov't thought volume increased by the square of the height rather than the cube.

[USFRIENDINVICTORIA]

“Some moron in the gov’t thought volume increased by the square of the height rather than the cube.”

It might also have something to do with insisting on having one BMI for both sexes. The healthy percentage of body fat is higher for women than for men. The average height of women is less than the average height of men. Basing the BMI on the square of height, rather than the cube does provide a crude means of adjusting for the B.F. % differences between the sexes.

That only works out for average height men and women. As you point out; the BMI discriminates against taller people (of both sexes); which is really unfair, if insurance rates are based on the BMI.

It's long past time to switch to a direct % body fat measurement — which you can get these days from a cheap bathroom scale.

[CPOSharky]

Jeeze, I’d be happy to be over weight in 40 years. I’d also be 107 years old.

(I guess the author really meant the adult population existing 40 years from now, not the present population 40 years from now.)

[dan1123]

It's long past time to switch to a direct % body fat measurement — which you can get these days from a cheap bathroom scale.

I don't know about the bioelectrical impedance sensors on the scales. I went through some effort trying to find a good one. I read that the measurement is affected by gender, height, and age, so I got a scale that had you enter all that data. It can swing over 10% within a day, and is often 15 to 20% higher than other measurement methods.

[autumnraine]

If you ask me, and my paranoid mind, the BMI was created to inflate the insurance rates (life and health).

[USFRIENDINVICTORIA]

True enough, you have to enter the age, height and sex data. The readings are also affected by how hydrated you are, which varies a lot throughout the day. If you take the readings at the same time each day, the sensor will give you reliable data for charting any changes.

We're in agreement about the main issue: that the BMI is totally inadequate as a criterion for such things as health insurance. No one should be required to pay a penalty for a high BMI rating — at least, without confirmation from a more accurate instrument.

If you don't trust the b.f. sensors on weigh scales; you could ask a doctor to measure the thickness of b.f. with calipers.

[dan1123]

The readings are also affected by how hydrated you are, which varies a lot throughout the day.

Funny thing, the scale also gives a % water measurement (which seems to be more stable than the fat % measurement). I don't know what could make the readings vary so wildly if it can measure water %, and has gender, height, and age data.

[dan1123]

The readings are also affected by how hydrated you are, which varies a lot throughout the day.

Funny thing, the scale also gives a % water measurement (which seems to be more stable than the fat % measurement). I don't know what could make the readings vary so wildly if it can measure water %, and has gender, height, and age data.

[Textide]

Damned if that guy didn’t try hard to be perceived as JFK Jr during that election. Thanks for the pictoral stroll down memory lane. LOL!

[USFRIENDINVICTORIA]

Interesting, I've never seen one with a % water scale — but, I haven't been in the market for one for a few years either. The b.f. estimate is derived from the difference in impedance between fat and lean body mass — so, it does seem strange that it the reports for % water are more stable than for % fat (obviously, the opposite of the actual case).