> > If doctors and professionals are using BMI blindly > They aren't. I see, I misread your original comment. The phrasing just threw me. > How can the resul

> > If doctors and professionals are using BMI blindly > They aren't. I see, I misread your original comment. The phrasing just threw me. > How can the results be skewed if they are straightforward math from the body mass (independently of it being mostly lean or fat)? That's splitting hairs. I think you knew I meant interpretation. > this is not a problem with the indicator, nor the . It's a problem with (lack of) honesty. In fact, it IS a problem with the indicator, because it's being used as basis for large decisions, and it has the backing of the medical industry in spite of it's limitations. You conveniently skipped over the other issues I mentioned. > people who really should look at BMI for their job (i.e. doctors an nutrition professionals) are aware of its shortcomings. You yourself admit that it has shortcomings, but then defend it as what... 'better than nothing'? There are many examples if BMI being used incorrectly by those 'nutrition professionals', so it's hard to see your side of the argument.