Found one[0], but I'm sure you could also find more. This is stuff that's often taught in health programs at universities during a section on cardiorespiratory fitness. The general idea is that a fat person who can run well can support their body, whereas a skinny person who can't run well cannot support their body.
Well, "health" isn't unidimensional, but one of the key areas (and one, but not the only, key risk area from obesity) is cardiovascular/respiratory health. Being able to run a mile (or not) is a much more direct indicator of that than obesity/non-obesity is, so at leas in that area of health, it makes sense to see an obese person who can run a mile as "healthier" than a ideal-body-fat person who cannot.
I don't want to look up a source offhand, especially since it would require some reading between the lines, but, 56% of NFL players are obese (97% are overweight), according to BMI guidelines. Going on the same "that doesn't sound right" criteria, saying they're less healthy than a skinny, sedentary person just because they have more muscle (and possibly more fat, but after all, BMI doesn't distinguish) doesn't sound right to me.
> 56% of NFL players are obese... Going on the same "that doesn't sound right" criteria, saying they're less healthy than a skinny, sedentary person just because they have more muscle (and possibly more fat, but after all, BMI doesn't distinguish) doesn't sound right to me.
It doesn't sound right to you because it isn't correct. NFL players, as a general rule, are not obese. Obesity is an excess of fat, by both the colloquial and medical definitions. BMI is an indication of obesity, which is not the same as a definition of same.
: a condition characterized by the excessive accumulation and storage of fat in the body
Medical Definition of OBESITY
: a condition that is characterized by excessive accumulation and storage of fat in the body and that in an adult is typically indicated by a body mass index of 30 or greater
"STANDARD DEFINITIONS OF OBESITY, which are based on height and weight, may not apply to former National Football League players and other groups with greater muscle mass, according to a new study"
Emphasis mine.
From your own quotation, "typically indicated by a body mass index of 30 or greater"
Ergo, a standard definition of obesity is calculated by height and weight, deemed 'BMI', which does not take muscle mass into account. Which is what my post states. BMI would state they're obese, and that says little about their actual health.
What that means is that when you see a high BMI there's a really good chance you're seeing obesity. But since obesity is defined as excess fat, the unusual cases where BMI doesn't correlate are exceptions to a rule. It should not surprise that professional athletes have bodies that are unusual and exceptional.
"an obese person who can run a mile is considered healthier than a skinny person who can't for example
Do you have a link or data to support that idea? Genuinely curious, as that doesn't sound right to me."
to which I replied
"56% of NFL players are obese (97% are overweight), according to BMI guidelines."
What exactly have you said that disagrees with that? I -agree- that ~real~ obesity, as is generally referred to, is based on fat percentage; I never said otherwise. What I said, very explicitly, was that an NFL who is considered obese ACCORDING TO BMI GUIDELINES (which are used very frequently by layman and health official alike when discussing nutrition and exercise) is actually pretty healthy; the original post questioned whether someone could be obese, able to run a mile, and still be healthier than someone who is skinny but not physically fit enough to run a mile. I addressed that with the qualifier of 'according to BMI' included.
Do you have a link or data to support that idea? Genuinely curious, as that doesn't sound right to me.