Obesity Rating for Every American Must Be Included in Stimulus-Mandated Electronic He

[CrusaderFrank]

Why should a non scientific and non medical stat be included in my health record?

Not only is it used by the World Health Organization, it's promoted right here in the U.S. by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention:

What is BMI?

Body Mass Index (BMI) is a number calculated from a person's weight and height. BMI is a fairly reliable indicator of body fatness for most people. BMI does not measure body fat directly, but research has shown that BMI correlates to direct measures of body fat, such as underwater weighing and dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA).1, 2 BMI can be considered an alternative for direct measures of body fat. Additionally, BMI is an inexpensive and easy-to-perform method of screening for weight categories that may lead to health problems.

How is BMI used?

BMI is used as a screening tool to identify possible weight problems for adults. However, BMI is not a diagnostic tool. For example, a person may have a high BMI. However, to determine if excess weight is a health risk, a healthcare provider would need to perform further assessments. These assessments might include skinfold thickness measurements, evaluations of diet, physical activity, family history, and other appropriate health screenings
.
Why does CDC use BMI to measure overweight and obesity?

Calculating BMI is one of the best methods for population assessment of overweight and obesity. Because calculation requires only height and weight, it is inexpensive and easy to use for clinicians and for the general public. The use of BMI allows people to compare their own weight status to that of the general population.

All acknowledge it's merely a screening tool. Except you, apparently. Yes, you're right--as a diagnostic tool it's fatally flawed. Which is why it's not used that way.

The Founding Fathers were so health conscious they put the "Tracking BMI" Clause in the Constitution, right after the "Good and Welfare" Clause, right?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

hope and change baby.

SNIP:


Thursday, July 15, 2010
By Matt Cover, Staff Writer




Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius speaks to reporters at HHS headquarters in Washington on July 1, 2010. (CNSNews.com/Penny Starr)(CNSNews.com) – New federal regulations issued this week stipulate that the electronic health records--that all Americans are supposed to have by 2014 under the terms of the stimulus law that President Barack Obama signed last year--must record not only the traditional measures of height and weight, but also the Body Mass Index: a measure of obesity.

The obesity-rating regulation states that every American's electronic health record must: “Calculate body mass index. Automatically calculate and display body mass index (BMI) based on a patient’s height and weight.”

The law also requires that these electronic health records be available--with appropriate security measures--on a national exchange.

The new regulations are one of the first steps towards the government’s goal of universal adoption of electronic health records (EHRs) by 2014, as outlined in the 2009 economic stimulus law. Specifically, the regulations issued on Tuesday by Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and Dr. David Blumenthal, the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, define the "meaningful use" of electronic records. Under the stimulus law, health care providers--including doctors and hospitals--must establish "meaningful use" of EHRs by 2014 in order to qualify for federal subsidies. After that, they will be subjected to penalties in the form of diminished Medicare and Medicaid payments for not establishing "meaningful use" of EHRs.


read it all here.
CNSNews.com - Obesity Rating for Every American Must Be Included in Stimulus-Mandated Electronic Health Records, Says HHS

First they came for the fat people, but I was not a lardass, so I did not protest...

Then they came for the ones who could not do 10 pushups

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Why should a non scientific and non medical stat be included in my health record?

Not only is it used by the World Health Organization, it's promoted right here in the U.S. by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention:

What is BMI?

Body Mass Index (BMI) is a number calculated from a person's weight and height. BMI is a fairly reliable indicator of body fatness for most people. BMI does not measure body fat directly, but research has shown that BMI correlates to direct measures of body fat, such as underwater weighing and dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA).1, 2 BMI can be considered an alternative for direct measures of body fat. Additionally, BMI is an inexpensive and easy-to-perform method of screening for weight categories that may lead to health problems.

How is BMI used?

BMI is used as a screening tool to identify possible weight problems for adults. However, BMI is not a diagnostic tool. For example, a person may have a high BMI. However, to determine if excess weight is a health risk, a healthcare provider would need to perform further assessments. These assessments might include skinfold thickness measurements, evaluations of diet, physical activity, family history, and other appropriate health screenings
.
Why does CDC use BMI to measure overweight and obesity?

Calculating BMI is one of the best methods for population assessment of overweight and obesity. Because calculation requires only height and weight, it is inexpensive and easy to use for clinicians and for the general public. The use of BMI allows people to compare their own weight status to that of the general population.

All acknowledge it's merely a screening tool. Except you, apparently. Yes, you're right--as a diagnostic tool it's fatally flawed. Which is why it's not used that way.

You're a tool.

 

[Zander]

The Nanny stater's love this intrusive shit. Repeal it.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

When I was sick, the doctor used to make a house call and my Dad paid him in cash.

Can we get something like that again?

Why is that so difficult?

 

[boedicca]

I can see a FAT TAX in the future.

hope and change baby

And Food Rationing.

 

[Mad Scientist]

New federal regulations issued this week stipulate that the electronic health records--that all Americans are supposed to have by 2014 under the terms of the stimulus law that President Barack Obama signed last year--must record not only the traditional measures of height and weight, but also the Body Mass Index: a measure of obesity.

My obese, Obama supporting Aunt isn't gonna' like this (She calls it a "lifestyle choice"). I suspect many fat Democrat voters won't either. You've heard of the VAT Tax, well here comes the Fat Tax.

How's that "Nanny State" workin' out for ya'?

 

[Douger]

Buuuuuurp.

 

[Gremlin-USA]

Buuuuuurp.

When am I going to quit signing in anywhere near, Breakfast, Lunch or Dinner

.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Why should a non scientific and non medical stat be included in my health record?

Not only is it used by the World Health Organization, it's promoted right here in the U.S. by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention:

What is BMI?

Body Mass Index (BMI) is a number calculated from a person's weight and height. BMI is a fairly reliable indicator of body fatness for most people. BMI does not measure body fat directly, but research has shown that BMI correlates to direct measures of body fat, such as underwater weighing and dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA).1, 2 BMI can be considered an alternative for direct measures of body fat. Additionally, BMI is an inexpensive and easy-to-perform method of screening for weight categories that may lead to health problems.

How is BMI used?

BMI is used as a screening tool to identify possible weight problems for adults. However, BMI is not a diagnostic tool. For example, a person may have a high BMI. However, to determine if excess weight is a health risk, a healthcare provider would need to perform further assessments. These assessments might include skinfold thickness measurements, evaluations of diet, physical activity, family history, and other appropriate health screenings
.
Why does CDC use BMI to measure overweight and obesity?

Calculating BMI is one of the best methods for population assessment of overweight and obesity. Because calculation requires only height and weight, it is inexpensive and easy to use for clinicians and for the general public. The use of BMI allows people to compare their own weight status to that of the general population.

All acknowledge it's merely a screening tool. Except you, apparently. Yes, you're right--as a diagnostic tool it's fatally flawed. Which is why it's not used that way.

There is no scientific basis for using BMI to calculate obesity, and it is not among the best methods. All it is is a simple calculation that uses tow arbitrary measurements to make a wildly inaccurate measurement of body mass. The only people who use it are those who are too lazy to use something more accurate. Did you know that the ratio of body fat to BMI varies by ethnicity?

Body mass index and percent body fat : a meta analysis among different ethnic groups

And age?

How Useful Is Body Mass Index for Comparison of Body Fatness across Age, Sex, and Ethnic Groups? -- Gallagher et al. 143 (3): 228 -- American Journal of Epidemiology

Or that waist circumference is a better measure of obesity than BMI?

Waist circumference and not body mass index explains obesity-related health risk -- Janssen et al. 79 (3): 379 -- American Journal of Clinical Nutrition

So again, why do you, repeat you, support the BMI as part of someone's health record when it is not based on anything scientific?

 

[Political Junky]

Lol

Cons fighting for the right to be fat.
Love the picture of the European vs. the American woman.

 

[boedicca]

No, we're asserting a right to privacy.

Although if someone wishes to be fat, that is his personal right. I would prefer not to pay for his health care with my taxes and not to subsidize his unhealthy lifestyle - but that is what ObamaCare imposes on me.

 

[Greenbeard]

So again, why do you, repeat you, support the BMI as part of someone's health record when it is not based on anything scientific?

I personally couldn't care less if BMI weren't included as a measure. The point is that EHRs must be capable of charting given vital signs and performing operations on them. Given the other vital signs that must be charted to meet Stage 1 Meaningful Use criteria (height, weight, blood pressure, and plots/displays of growth charts for children), BMI is the obvious choice for demonstrating a level of functionality that allows for performing operations on those vital signs. They could require multiplying height, weight, and BP together and then dividing by 42 for all I care. Instead they opted for an actual metric that, as I said, when coupled with patient-specific information has screening potential.

BMI is more interesting in the context of meaningful use functionality than something like waist circumference precisely because it's calculated entirely from other vital signs already in the EHR and isn't simply an additional required field. Meaningful use is all about demonstrating that your EHR can be used to do things.

 

[Oddball]

So again, why do you, repeat you, support the BMI as part of someone's health record when it is not based on anything scientific?

I personally couldn't care less if BMI weren't included as a measure. The point is that EHRs must be capable of charting given vital signs and performing operations on them. Given the other vital signs that must be charted to meet Stage 1 Meaningful Use criteria (height, weight, blood pressure, and plots/displays of growth charts for children), BMI is the obvious choice for demonstrating a level of functionality that allows for performing operations on those vital signs. They could require multiplying height, weight, and BP together and then dividing by 42 for all I care. Instead they opted for an actual metric that, as I said, when coupled with patient-specific information has screening potential.

BMI is more interesting in the context of meaningful use functionality than something like waist circumference precisely because it's calculated entirely from other vital signs already in the EHR and isn't simply an additional required field. Meaningful use is all about demonstrating that your EHR can be used to do things.

OK, fine....How is any of that any of your business to begin with?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

So again, why do you, repeat you, support the BMI as part of someone's health record when it is not based on anything scientific?

I personally couldn't care less if BMI weren't included as a measure. The point is that EHRs must be capable of charting given vital signs and performing operations on them. Given the other vital signs that must be charted to meet Stage 1 Meaningful Use criteria (height, weight, blood pressure, and plots/displays of growth charts for children), BMI is the obvious choice for demonstrating a level of functionality that allows for performing operations on those vital signs. They could require multiplying height, weight, and BP together and then dividing by 42 for all I care. Instead they opted for an actual metric that, as I said, when coupled with patient-specific information has screening potential.

BMI is more interesting in the context of meaningful use functionality than something like waist circumference precisely because it's calculated entirely from other vital signs already in the EHR and isn't simply an additional required field. Meaningful use is all about demonstrating that your EHR can be used to do things.

It is only obvious if it actually works. Since it doesn't, charting it is a waste of resources. not that I would expect a government shill to understand that argument, but it is the only one that matters. Why not have doctors actually determine the body fat, or even just run a tape measure around a waistline? Either of those is a more accurate measure of obesity, and thus more useful than BMI for tracking health.

 

[Douger]

NASCAR !
Look mommy ! A____ murkin !

 

[Greenbeard]

Since it doesn't, charting it is a waste of resources. not that I would expect a government shill to understand that argument, but it is the only one that matters. Why not have doctors actually determine the body fat, or even just run a tape measure around a waistline?

Because one of those actually requires time and energy and one simply performs operations on other vital signs in the EHR. Which is the point of using it (i.e. to demonstrate that your EHR has that functionality, which will become more important in Stage 2 and Stage 3).

The focus on obesity here is missing the point.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

So again, why do you, repeat you, support the BMI as part of someone's health record when it is not based on anything scientific?

I personally couldn't care less if BMI weren't included as a measure. The point is that EHRs must be capable of charting given vital signs and performing operations on them. Given the other vital signs that must be charted to meet Stage 1 Meaningful Use criteria (height, weight, blood pressure, and plots/displays of growth charts for children), BMI is the obvious choice for demonstrating a level of functionality that allows for performing operations on those vital signs. They could require multiplying height, weight, and BP together and then dividing by 42 for all I care. Instead they opted for an actual metric that, as I said, when coupled with patient-specific information has screening potential.

BMI is more interesting in the context of meaningful use functionality than something like waist circumference precisely because it's calculated entirely from other vital signs already in the EHR and isn't simply an additional required field. Meaningful use is all about demonstrating that your EHR can be used to do things.

OK, fine....How is any of that any of your business to begin with?

I am thy Government, I brought you to America to be thy Government, I love you more than you love yourself

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Since it doesn't, charting it is a waste of resources. not that I would expect a government shill to understand that argument, but it is the only one that matters. Why not have doctors actually determine the body fat, or even just run a tape measure around a waistline?

Because one of those actually requires time and energy and one simply performs operations on other vital signs in the EHR. Which is the point of using it (i.e. to demonstrate that your EHR has that functionality, which will become more important in Stage 2 and Stage 3).

The focus on obesity here is missing the point.

Correct.

The focus is American Fascism aka: Progressives.

My grandfather had a saying that stuck with me all these years for situations like this. He used to tell people to "Mind your own goddamn aristocratic business!"

 

[CrusaderFrank]

First, the Government has no authority under the Constitution, especially after the Roberts Court strikes down ObamaCare next year

Second, it's none of your business. It's between me and my doctor.