Iron Pol

Almost as soon as I walked in the door after work, last night, I was informed by my son that he isn't allowed to have juice, anymore.  This caught me off guard, as we usually allow our kids to have a bit of juice in the morning, and a bit with their snack in the evening.  Then, he told me we have to stop giving him milk, too.  That was when I decided that perhaps Mrs. Pol would be a better source of information.

The cause of all the commotion was a visit to the doctor.  Our son just turned four, and had his annual checkup.  The doctor said that based on his height and weight, our son was overweight, and we had to cut back on his diet.  Now, this caught me off guard for a couple reasons.  First, while our son is a big boy (he has consistently been at the top of the charts for height and weight), I wouldn't classify him as "overweight."  In fact, I sometimes get concerned about his willingness to NOT eat when he doesn't like his options.

Though it is always difficult to tell from pictures, this is a photo we took for Commodore's son, Mo.  There is a concern about weight in this picture, but it ISN'T our son.  Our daughter is definitely on the shorter and rounder side, but she is only two.  We will wait another year before getting overly concerned.  Our son, not so much.

The challenge is that the only basis for the doctor's conclusion is the Centers for Disease Control Body Mass Index charts.  I consider these a poor choice, at best.  And when making life decisions, they should be given only slightly more weight than a grain of salt.  Used in conjunction with common sense and various other factors, the BMI charts can provide some basic guidance.

I'll use myself as an example of why I question the value of the BMI statistic.  Consider this picture (or others from the header and profile) from IM Louisville.  At the check-in, I weighed 163 pounds.  By the end of the race, I was much closer to 160.  These pictures give a reasonable picture of where I was physically.

Using my height of 5' 10" and a weight of 160 pounds, I fall in the high-normal range of body mass index.  Only a few more pounds would classify me as "overweight."  And the loss of another 20 pounds would put me squarely in the middle of the "normal" range.  Anyone who sees me will likely confirm that such weight loss would be frightening.  I DO have a few pounds I could stand to lose, all in my gut.  I seriously doubt there is 20 pounds there, though.

When people are required to be gaunt, or "bone thin," to be "normal," there is a problem with the index.

I'll be the first to admit there is a weight problem within the United States.  I'll also be quick to agree that children often suffer for the excess of their parents.  That, however, is a judgment better made based on common sense, physical appearance, and bad trends.  The use of the body mass index charts as the sole determining factor of being "overweight" is a poor substitute for good judgment.

While we face a growing population of heavy children, we have an equally disturbing tendency to push our kids toward an unhealthy obsession with weight loss.  The same charts that indicate I am nearly overweight would classify a six foot tall woman at 137 pounds as normal.  And society continues to accept those who fall far short of that weight as the "model" of how we should look.

Be wary of anyone who uses BMI as the sole factor in evaluating you or anyone else in your life.

Leave a Reply