BMI (body mass index) is dangerously misleading, and I have wasting
Tarragon
on 4/11/12 8:39 am
on 4/11/12 8:39 am
I'm about 6'1" to 6'2". Two years out.
My weight went down to 170 and my psych told me if it went lower he'd take me off my ADD medication because one of its side effects is weight loss and I am underweight.
I didn't feel underweight, so I looked up my BMI and saw that according to the BMI for men, I'd have to lose 30 more pounds to pass out of the normal range into the underweight range. I thought my psych doctor might be wrong.
My weight continued downward to 158.
I spoke with my regular doc (GP) and asked if I should get on enzymes, and he said he didn't see any reason for it.
A few days later, I met my surgeon for a follow-up and he said, "I can tell just by looking at your face that you're malnourished, you have malnutritive wasting as evidenced by the hollows in your temples." He put me on enzymes and said if I don't gain at least 20 pounds back (preferably 40) he'll revise my DS to lengthen my common channel (which is 100 cm). The following day I met with an internist about another problem and he said the exact same thing and agreed with the enzymes and revision of they don't work.
First, I think the BMI is horrible when I have wasting disease at 18 pounds over the threhhold for normal weight. That's dangerous; it made me think my rGP doctor was right and if I hadn't seen my surgeon or internist, I might have let my weight go down into the 140s before seeking a second opinion. Also, three doctors able to see I'm underweight but my regular not being able to see it even when I suggest it to him equals bye-bye to that GP.
Moral(s) of the story: when in doubt, check with your DS surgeon! Also, the BMI is bunk!!
My weight went down to 170 and my psych told me if it went lower he'd take me off my ADD medication because one of its side effects is weight loss and I am underweight.
I didn't feel underweight, so I looked up my BMI and saw that according to the BMI for men, I'd have to lose 30 more pounds to pass out of the normal range into the underweight range. I thought my psych doctor might be wrong.
My weight continued downward to 158.
I spoke with my regular doc (GP) and asked if I should get on enzymes, and he said he didn't see any reason for it.
A few days later, I met my surgeon for a follow-up and he said, "I can tell just by looking at your face that you're malnourished, you have malnutritive wasting as evidenced by the hollows in your temples." He put me on enzymes and said if I don't gain at least 20 pounds back (preferably 40) he'll revise my DS to lengthen my common channel (which is 100 cm). The following day I met with an internist about another problem and he said the exact same thing and agreed with the enzymes and revision of they don't work.
First, I think the BMI is horrible when I have wasting disease at 18 pounds over the threhhold for normal weight. That's dangerous; it made me think my rGP doctor was right and if I hadn't seen my surgeon or internist, I might have let my weight go down into the 140s before seeking a second opinion. Also, three doctors able to see I'm underweight but my regular not being able to see it even when I suggest it to him equals bye-bye to that GP.
Moral(s) of the story: when in doubt, check with your DS surgeon! Also, the BMI is bunk!!
Thanks for this post and it made me realize that I need to pay attention. I have lost 166lbs and as of today weigh 145. I think that we me looking at BMI and numbers when we should take in account the fact that we might have loose skin that add weight but if it was removed we would weigh a lot less.
MARTINA
Rockmart Georgia
HW: 315 CW: 117 GW: First goal 150 met 3/23/2012, Second goal 135
Rockmart Georgia
HW: 315 CW: 117 GW: First goal 150 met 3/23/2012, Second goal 135
Tarragon
on 4/12/12 2:41 am
on 4/12/12 2:41 am
You're absolutely right, I have a good deal of loose skin, in addition to (as He who can't be Named mentioned), denser, heavier bones as a leftover from carrying all that extra weight those years. so my "real" weight is probably close to 140 if not lower.
That's why the BMI is so bad, it doesn't take into account individual factors. According to the BMI, every pro bodybilder is obese or morbidly obese!
That's why the BMI is so bad, it doesn't take into account individual factors. According to the BMI, every pro bodybilder is obese or morbidly obese!
He who can't be Named
on 4/11/12 11:12 am
on 4/11/12 11:12 am
I personally don't think we look good when we lose down to a weight that we used to be, that we felt was reasonably slim. It always looks bad, and the only thing I can figure is that we now have sturdier, heavier bones due to carrying the excess weight (well, cuz that's a fact) and at least for some time, heavier muscle mass as well. A smaller percentage of our weight is actually fat after big weight loss than it used to be.
Some times dingle berries are the lowest hanging fruit.