Comments regarding this formula for weight for height
Body Mass Index is based on height and weight. These authors offer an alternative called "Standard weight", based on sitting height and upper arm length.
But at least it’s something completely original. Their formulas are:
Male standard weight = -6.4704 – (3.1631*upper arm length) + (204.481*upper arm length2) – (4.6114*sitting height) + (74.5385*sitting height2).
Female standard weight = 4.7220 + (170.3938*upper arm length) – (848.4479*upper arm length2) + (1585.0379*upper arm length3) – (1.4922*sitting height) + 67.3340*sitting height2).
Units for upper arm length and sitting height, are expressed in meters.
measure an arm length. But in reality, nobody knows.
Wow, these are complicated formulas, which probably scares people away from using them.
Anyway, the article has a few nice quotes:
" If the reference model is accepted as the more reliable, we conclude that the use of BMI tends to under-estimate the prevalence of overweight and obesity amongst the tallest men and women, and over-estimate it amongst the shortest". and also " according to BMI, female prevalence of obesity is strongly associated with height, whereas male prevalence is not".
" The ‘standard weight’… does not define the ‘ideal’ or target weight unequivocally". ( which is their back-handed way of suggesting that their formulas could be used to define ideal weight.)
" The definition of obesity as BMI > 30 must be reconsidered if the new standard weight is adopted".
Overall, I didn’t seem any specific advantage of switching from BMI to standard weight.
Let’s recap this. It’s just a formula that is able to spew out a number that is the average weight, of someone sitting on a chair, somehow measuring their height and arm length. Does that sound useful? Does it adjust for Age? No. Should it be called Standard something-er-other? No. Why did I show this in a webpage? I don’t know.