July 31st, 2010 by Stand Team

It is common to hear the Body Mass Index (BMI), and even us we refer often to him. This measure, a product of the calculation between the height and weight of the individual, which result in a figure that enters within certain ratings that serve to measure their health.

Thus, lower levels to 19 are cataloged as underweight, while levels between 19 and 25 are taken as normal weight. The higher levels to 25 are considered overweight, and the increased to 30 already are regarded as obesity.

These ratings are very hard, and often allege that are not sufficiently contemplative as to have a complete picture of the health of an individual, based on a hard data that serves more than to categorize the reality. Others, however, are a useful tool to understand the health of an individual. What point of view is the correct?

I think that neither one nor the other have every reason to his side. Take the IMC as a measure canonical freckle to be a reductionist view and simplistic, while out would deprive us of having a good approximation strategy primary to hear the levels of health of an individual.

Then, in terms taxonomic BMI is an advantage, but loses utility if you handle as the sole criterion for evaluation. The word of the doctor is, once again, the more worthy of being heard. By your party, or trust too much or decrease IMC, again the terms means are the most suitable.