The study is somewhat weak in using BMI; mass alone doesn't tell you much about health. I'm near the upper end of the 'normal' BMI band but that's because I wor

The study is somewhat weak in using BMI; mass alone doesn't tell you much about health. I'm near the upper end of the 'normal' BMI band but that's because I work out a lot (after years of being underweight). BMI can't distinguish between muscle and fat. On the other hand, most people are not that athletic so it's not surprising that BMI gets used as a measure of obesity because (I guess) 90% of people who are very heavy are more fat than muscular. I don't know of an easy way to measure that though, besides the labor-intensive ones of measuring the size of individual people's fat rolls, counting skin folds, or measuring body volume by displacement and deriving density. For all that BMI is arbitrary, arguing about it doesn't alter the fact that a lot of people are obviously obese. It'd be great if people who object to the use of BMI would propose a more useful measure that's reasonably easy to compile, for both individuals and professionals. BTW this is the original study vs the press release: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(23)02750-2/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...