5 ms·

I fail to see how in any world underweight is worse unless its a baby. This is coping, losing weight to a target healthy weight is always good,

chrisseaton 6y ago
For many healthy people, losing weight to reach a government ideal of 'healthy' means dropping useful muscle mass. Which is not good.
- NikolaeVarius 6y ago
  What. 90% of people do not have any musculature worth talking about. Where are your sources? For 99% of people losing weight will be the problem
  - chrisseaton 6y ago
    The Army Sergeant Major of the British Army is 'overweight', for example. (He's done interviews about it.) That's obviously nonsense and he doesn't need to lose any weight at all. The idea of 'overweight' is meaningless.
    - ZephyrBlu 6y ago
      Is he jacked, or fat? If he's jacked, then yes of course he doesn't need to lose weight. That is a tiny proportion of the population though.
      - chrisseaton 6y ago
        He's jacked, but the original comment was 'losing weight to a target healthy weight is always [ALWAYS] good'. It sounds like you agree that's a false statement?
        ZephyrBlu 6y ago
        The original comment was making a generalization that was pretty fair considering that the proportion of the population that has enough muscle mass to cause them to be 'overweight' is pretty small. Obviously "always" is wrong. Almost nothing is absolute.
        chrisseaton 6y ago
        > Obviously "always" is wrong. Bingo.
  - geomark 6y ago
    Brings to mind the MRI scans of the thighs of an elderly athlete versus an elderly sedentary man https://www.bettermovement.org/blog/2012/use-or-lose-looks-like https://www.bettermovement.org/blog/2012/use-or-lose-looks-l...
- austhrow743 6y ago
  If you define many as like 2% maybe.
  - chrisseaton 6y ago
    GP said 'losing weight to a target healthy weight is always good'. 'Always' is not true.
    - hombre_fatal 6y ago
      Well, encumbering "losing weight" with a bad method like losing muscle or breakfast cocaine or cutting fat off your belly with a knife to do it isn't an attack on losing weight, but a misunderstanding of their claim.
- throwawayboise 6y ago
  Since most people are average, there is an average "healthy weight" target. Of course individually, it's really about the ratio of lean mass to fat.
fullstop 6y ago
I was denied life insurance once because I was underweight. Maybe, statistically, it's true. I have since gained weight and now have life insurance.
perardi 6y ago
Wow, no, stunningly wrong. Being underweight is highly correlated with poor health outcomes in seniors. (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16886095/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16886095/) Obesity is obviously bad there, but being underweight is just as dangerous.
- tw04 6y ago
  "In seniors" would be the key word there. For the average American they'd be far, far better off being slightly underweight than being obese.
  - perardi 6y ago
    The parent comment was “I fail to see how in any world underweight is worse unless its a baby.” Pretty decent chunk of the world is seniors these days.
- coldtea 6y ago
  "is highly correlated". Correlated, not caused by being underweight. Studies on actual cause has shown the opposite (eating to the point of being underweight raising lifespan).
geomark 6y ago
Does anyone know if the thresholds for being "overweight" and "underweight" have changed over time? I mean, with so many people getting heavier and heavier has the standard crept up so that "underweight" isn't even skinny anymore?
- david_allison 6y ago
  Typically BMI (mass/height^2), which hasn't changed. Excluding the fact that average height has increased gradually over time.
  - projektfu 6y ago
    I believe they have changed the cut-offs because they noticed that cardiovascular issues started to occur at lower BMI than previously thought.
    - david_allison 6y ago
      I didn't know this. Thanks! It was lowered in July 1998 ("overweight" was reduced to 25 from men: 27 and women: 28) https://www.nytimes.com/1998/06/04/us/us-to-widen-its-definition-of-who-is-fat.html https://www.nytimes.com/1998/06/04/us/us-to-widen-its-defini... https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/04/14/a-number-that-may-not-add-up/ https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/04/14/a-number-that-may-...
kikokikokiko 6y ago
In fact being slightly underweight is one of the only sure ways to increase your life expectancy. Restrictive calories diet.

chrisseaton 6y ago

For many healthy people, losing weight to reach a government ideal of 'healthy' means dropping useful muscle mass. Which is not good.

NikolaeVarius 6y ago
What. 90% of people do not have any musculature worth talking about. Where are your sources? For 99% of people losing weight will be the problem
- chrisseaton 6y ago
  The Army Sergeant Major of the British Army is 'overweight', for example. (He's done interviews about it.) That's obviously nonsense and he doesn't need to lose any weight at all. The idea of 'overweight' is meaningless.
  - ZephyrBlu 6y ago
    Is he jacked, or fat? If he's jacked, then yes of course he doesn't need to lose weight. That is a tiny proportion of the population though.
    - chrisseaton 6y ago
      He's jacked, but the original comment was 'losing weight to a target healthy weight is always [ALWAYS] good'. It sounds like you agree that's a false statement?
      - ZephyrBlu 6y ago
        The original comment was making a generalization that was pretty fair considering that the proportion of the population that has enough muscle mass to cause them to be 'overweight' is pretty small. Obviously "always" is wrong. Almost nothing is absolute.
        chrisseaton 6y ago
        > Obviously "always" is wrong. Bingo.
- geomark 6y ago
  Brings to mind the MRI scans of the thighs of an elderly athlete versus an elderly sedentary man https://www.bettermovement.org/blog/2012/use-or-lose-looks-like https://www.bettermovement.org/blog/2012/use-or-lose-looks-l...
austhrow743 6y ago
If you define many as like 2% maybe.
- chrisseaton 6y ago
  GP said 'losing weight to a target healthy weight is always good'. 'Always' is not true.
  - hombre_fatal 6y ago
    Well, encumbering "losing weight" with a bad method like losing muscle or breakfast cocaine or cutting fat off your belly with a knife to do it isn't an attack on losing weight, but a misunderstanding of their claim.
throwawayboise 6y ago
Since most people are average, there is an average "healthy weight" target. Of course individually, it's really about the ratio of lean mass to fat.

fullstop 6y ago

I was denied life insurance once because I was underweight. Maybe, statistically, it's true. I have since gained weight and now have life insurance.

perardi 6y ago

Wow, no, stunningly wrong. Being underweight is highly correlated with poor health outcomes in seniors. (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16886095/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16886095/) Obesity is obviously bad there, but being underweight is just as dangerous.

tw04 6y ago
"In seniors" would be the key word there. For the average American they'd be far, far better off being slightly underweight than being obese.
- perardi 6y ago
  The parent comment was “I fail to see how in any world underweight is worse unless its a baby.” Pretty decent chunk of the world is seniors these days.
coldtea 6y ago
"is highly correlated". Correlated, not caused by being underweight. Studies on actual cause has shown the opposite (eating to the point of being underweight raising lifespan).

geomark 6y ago

Does anyone know if the thresholds for being "overweight" and "underweight" have changed over time? I mean, with so many people getting heavier and heavier has the standard crept up so that "underweight" isn't even skinny anymore?

david_allison 6y ago
Typically BMI (mass/height^2), which hasn't changed. Excluding the fact that average height has increased gradually over time.
- projektfu 6y ago
  I believe they have changed the cut-offs because they noticed that cardiovascular issues started to occur at lower BMI than previously thought.
  - david_allison 6y ago
    I didn't know this. Thanks! It was lowered in July 1998 ("overweight" was reduced to 25 from men: 27 and women: 28) https://www.nytimes.com/1998/06/04/us/us-to-widen-its-definition-of-who-is-fat.html https://www.nytimes.com/1998/06/04/us/us-to-widen-its-defini... https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/04/14/a-number-that-may-not-add-up/ https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/04/14/a-number-that-may-...

kikokikokiko 6y ago

In fact being slightly underweight is one of the only sure ways to increase your life expectancy. Restrictive calories diet.