IEU Seminar: Taryn Knox

Title: Can BMI be non-stigmatising?

Abstract: There have been multiple calls to abandon the use of BMI in the clinical setting due to the weakness of the relationship between BMI and health and/or the potential for weight stigma. ^1,2In contrast, Gutin³ argues that although BMI is given excessive clinical importance,  it is ‘just a number’ – a simple calculation based on two observable facts about an individual (height and weight). Gutin argues the clinical meaning of BMI could be reformed to support weight neutrality i.e. not be stigmatising. I contend that stripping back the meaning of BMI is unrealistic due to a) the global entrenchment of diet and weight culture, b) moral value being built into the meaning of BMI and c) it being part of ordinary language. As BMI is more than ‘just a number’, it is stigmatising regardless of how it is used, meaning the Lancet Commission’s⁴ new definition of obesity remains stigmatising.

1. Gonzalez MC, Correia MIT, Heymsfield SB. A requiem for BMI in the clinical setting. Current opinion in clinical nutrition and metabolic care. 2017;20(5):314-321.
2. Tomiyama AJ, Hunger JM. the HAES® files: Body Mass Index Is Not a Good Measure of Your Health. Health At Every Size® Blog. April 14, 2016. Accessed January 21, 2021. https://healthateverysizeblog.org/2016/04/14/the-haes-files-body-mass-index-is-not-a-good-measure-of-your-health/
3. Gutin I. Body mass index is just a number: Conflating riskiness and unhealthiness in discourse on body size. Sociology of Health & Illness. 2021;43(6):1437-1453. doi:10.1111/1467-9566.13309
4. Rubino F, Cummings DE, Eckel RH, et al. Definition and diagnostic criteria of clinical obesity. The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology. doi:10.1016/S2213-8587(24)00316-4