this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2024
333 points (95.1% liked)

You Should Know

32986 readers
1911 users here now

YSK - for all the things that can make your life easier!

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must begin with YSK.

All posts must begin with YSK. If you're a Mastodon user, then include YSK after @youshouldknow. This is a community to share tips and tricks that will help you improve your life.



Rule 2- Your post body text must include the reason "Why" YSK:

**In your post's text body, you must include the reason "Why" YSK: It’s helpful for readability, and informs readers about the importance of the content. **



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding non-YSK posts.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-YSK posts using the [META] tag on your post title.



Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.

If you harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

If you are a member, sympathizer or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.

For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- The majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.

Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.



Partnered Communities:

You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.

Community Moderation

For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.

Credits

Our icon(masterpiece) was made by @clen15!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

"The body mass index has long been criticized as a flawed indicator of health. A replacement has been gaining support: the body roundness index." Article unfortunately doesn't give the freaking formula for chrissakes; it's "364.2 − 365.5 × √(1 − [waist circumference in centimeters / 2π]2 / [0.5 × height in centimeters]2), according to the formula developed by Thomas et al.10"

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Underwaterbob@lemm.ee 1 points 1 week ago

At 198cm (6'6") and 111kg (245lbs) BMI states that I'm on the high end of "overweight". My waist is 96cm (38"), which makes my RFM "average". I like that better.

[–] Randelung@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago

Well, it turns out they both tell me I'm a little too fat.

[–] RBWells@lemmy.world 28 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Waist to height is the only proven metric. And the problem with BMI is not that it is overestimating fat, it's that it's underestimating fat because it completely misses skinny-fat people, and the number of those is much higher than the number of jacked overweight not fat athletes.

Add to this the complicating factor that it's really torso fat that is metabolically active and dangerous to your health.

Waist should be less than half your height, you don't even need a measuring tape. Get someone to cut a string as long as you are tall, and see if it can go around your waist twice, with at least some extra length. If so, you are good, probably don't have too much torso fat.

ETA I don't understand why they need that complicated formula, why not just a ratio? The only inputs are waist and height. Never understood the point of squaring height to get BMI either, it's also just a mass to height comparison, why not a simple ratio?

[–] brlemworld@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

What if your torso is large because your large liver because alcoholism?

[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 11 points 1 week ago (2 children)

...people...have...waists...that're...half their height‽‽‽‽

[–] prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I’m a normal sized human.

72inches tall (6’) 32inch waist

I could easily see a fat dude having a 40 inch waist at 6’ tall.

[–] Malfeasant@lemm.ee 2 points 1 week ago

6' fat dude here... 46" I think... maybe only 44...

[–] RBWells@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Right, you are proportionate, waist to height as a measurement means a 7' tall guy would be healthy with a 40" waist, but a lady (or man) who is 5' tall really does need smaller than 30" to be in shape.

[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 4 points 1 week ago

Oh shoot I conflated wrists with waist😭

[–] AlpacaChariot@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago (2 children)
[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

people have wrists that are 1/6.28⋯ their height‽‽

[–] AlpacaChariot@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

That's a strong wrist. Too much self-pleasure!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mindaika@lemmy.dbzer0.com 37 points 1 week ago (5 children)

Replacing BMI with BMI2 is fine, but it’s doesn’t change the fact that most Americans are overweight or obese, and the tiny, tiny sliver of people who have a high BMI from weightlifting are insignificant relative to the ~70% that are just plain fat

[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 10 points 1 week ago

There's also a lot of people who had essential muscles replaced with fat, thus evading the overweight designation while having an imminent risk of diabetes. This reflects that.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 17 points 1 week ago (9 children)

For all the time I've been told how bad BMI is, and how it classes top athletes as obese, I can't help but notice how few of those people have the body of a top athlete.

[–] suburban_hillbilly@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That's because BMI is actually pretty good as a screening tool. It's easy, simple, and pretty damn accurate when combined with an eyeball test. To the extent that it misclassifies people it is far more likely to underclassify obesity than overclassify. The people complaining just don't want to hear it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net 10 points 1 week ago

That's an extreme case, but the point still stands. For example, right now, I'm pretty fat, because I haven't shifted the weight I gained over COVID. Even though I'm visibly way larger than I was, I'm not much heavier than I was pre-covid, because I've lost a heckton of muscle. It's insane to me that BMI will look at me pre-covid, and look at me now, and say "that's the same picture". Especially because I personally found that the best and safest way for me to lose weight was to focus on getting strong and fit first.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago (2 children)

We ran into it a bunch in the Army. As well as the fat over abs phenomenon. Very few of our BMI failures were actually fat. The Army test was really problematic because they measure your waist and neck. So you're simultaneously trying to lose belly fat, build neck muscle, and maintain energy levels for infantry training. Which is just a bit of a nightmare to be in. Meanwhile every week you're running 30-35 miles, putting 15 hours in the gym, and doing 10 hours of field exercise, all on top of any infantry training.

I think it's one of those things you either run into a lot or very little.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Nalivai@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

I bike and rock climb, I walk long walks and overall in a good shape, not great, not terrible. When the doctors see my bmi without other metrics, they immediately tell me to lose weight and don't take anything else seriously. I missed very serious illness because of that, every symptom I had was thrown into a pile of "your bmi is bad, lose weight", until one doctor was smart enough to check on me for real.
BMI is incredibly oversimplified and gives lazy or overworked doctors easy way out of doing their jobs, which kills people.

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 3 points 1 week ago

I'm not a top athlete but I do lift weights and according to my BMI I'm .5 under overweight despite my body fat percentage staying in the 15-17 range. I'm not even that big.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Seems like a good idea. Whenever I'm actively bodybuilding, my BMI is always shown as obese, and my weight shown as overweight, despite the fact that I'm 12% body fat. It's annoying, especially if it has an impact on things like insurance costs.

[–] jpreston2005@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

yeah, been weightlifting for years, and the only time the BMI chart says I'm "healthy" is when I'm at my absolute shreddiest. Looking like I'm starving myself to shoot a nude scene in a movie. And I hate that. I know that when I'm at that weight, I may look great, but I'm also at my weakest. So I hate that this chart subconsciously bullies me into trying to maintain some ridiculous 9-12% body fat range, when that's more of a body building competition range.

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'm guessing you're a female? 9-12% definitely isn't a healthy long-term fat percentage for women. Personally I think women look better with a little more padding anyways.

[–] angrystego@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Explain that to the insurance company, that seems to be the relevant problem here.

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 8 points 1 week ago (2 children)
[–] lurklurk@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

If you're frictionless too, physicists will love you

[–] Wiz@midwest.social 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Especially if he lives in a vacuum.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

The hard part will be inelastic collisions

[–] angrystego@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Ready to ponder.

[–] yamanii@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Now tell the doctors because as recently as this year one that I went to was talking about BMI.

[–] FauxPseudo@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

It's not doctors that need to know. It's the insurance companies. They wrote the policies that pay doctors based on the BMI metric. Until those policy changes happen nothing will change.

Insurance companies quietly control so much and most people don't realize it.

[–] Chewget@lemm.ee 5 points 1 week ago

BMI has been antiquated for like 15+ years, so my guess is it'll change when they die

[–] usualsuspect191@lemmy.ca 20 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (11 children)

Interesting. Found a calculator and according to this I'm "very lean" (only just) while I'm overweight (again, only just) using BMI.

Judging by the belly fat I can pinch, I'm gonna trust the BMI

load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›