Defined as the correlation between one’s body mass and the square of one’s height, BMI is often viewed as the ultimate tool for measuring the risks of obesity. However, a range of scholars claims that the test lacks the substance to be used in diagnosing a weight problem. When evaluating the efficacy of the tool for locating the threat of obesity at the earliest stages of its development, one must admit that the lack of accuracy makes the tool not quite trustworthy.
Moreover, the calculations of the BMI do not allow taking the characteristics of the patient, such as the percentage of body fat, the body muscle weight, etc., into account. As a result, the outcomes of the testing may affect the therapist’s understanding of the patient’s problem and the scale thereof. Surprisingly enough, the waist circumference test, though also being rather inaccurate, permits the identification of the risk of diabetes in middle-aged men, a recent study claims. However, the study results [pointed clearly to the fact that the test is only efficient in case of abnormal obesity and does not provide an adequate evaluation of subtle changes.
Assuming that BMI should not be used in determining the patient’s current health status and that the idea of measuring one’s waist circumference would not be adequate, either; instead, it is suggested that the therapist should combine the tests under analysis together with other measurement methods so that the outcomes of the evaluation should reflect the specifics of the patient’s body functioning and the current obesity status. Therefore, the myth concerning the indisputability of the BMI test results and the waist measurement outcomes has to be disproven. While BMI and waist circumference measurement can be viewed as tools assisting in identifying a problem, they should not be relied upon entirely.