The optimal waist / weight ratio (WWR) theory () is one of the most compatible with evidence regarding the lowest mortality body mass index (BMI).
But why do we need the WWR when we already have the BMI? This was a question that a reader asked me in connection with a post on the John Stone transformation ().
The montage below shows photos of the John Stone transformation with the respective WWR and BMI measures.
Well, which one is the most useful measure, WWR or BMI?
7 comments:
Which ever measure best measures the presence of visceral fat is the one to use. And that would be WWR.
My research is this area is leading me to belive that visceral fat is the main driver of diseases of civilization.
Hi Richard. Your research is in line with most of the published research on the topic. Interestingly though, visceral fat mass is very easy to mobilize.
Yes VF is easily mobilized if you do have a well functioning metabolic system.
However, if you are metabolically damaged or elderly, visceral fat is difficult to mobilize. Thus visceral fat to most overweight Americans is a major problem.
Ned, I'm curious. Aside from the observation that he looks better in photo two vs. photo one, do you truly think he is healthier in photos three or four based on his body shape?
Hi Nick. I think that the WWRs are a good reflection of his health status.
When I say that visceral fat is “easy” to mobilize, I mean relatively easy. It still requires intense exercise, of the type that raises GH levels.
According to the sequence of pictures, the key health indicator appears to be tanning--at least in Caucasians.
Post a Comment