(Subtitle: How the heck do I know if I'm healthy??)
I'm currently reading "The Obesity Myth: Why America's Obsession with Weight is Hazardous to Your Health" by Paul Campos. It's good. Anyway.
He seems to be making three arguments, all of which are supported from a research perspective (I keep looking up his referenced studies and shaking my head in amazement):
1. No studies have shown any health benefits for people who go from an Overweight BMI to a Normal BMI. The only studies where, statistically, overweight people have been shown to have higher health risks in general are those studies where they are lumped in with obese people (so, for example, the mortality rate for "obese and overweight" individuals might be higher, but that doesn't really indicate anything about just the "overweight" folks). Research is spotty, but a LOT of research, both larger and smaller studies, in varying populations, has shown that the lowest mortality risk is among people in about the 23-28 BMI range (stradding "Healthy" and "Overweight").
2. Among normal, overweight, and obese individuals alike, better health outcomes are statistically correlated with LIFESTYLE changes, even if no weight loss occurs as a result of those changes (exercise, healthier diet, lots of veggies, etc), but have never been really correlated with weight loss INDEPENDENT of lifestyle changes. We have taken people of all weights and tested various lifestyle interventions, and those improve health across the board, for all weight classes. There is no way to correlate WEIGHT LOSS itself with better health outcomes, because you can't induce weight loss without lifestyle changes. So no one knows whether losing weight actually has health benefits in and of itself, or if it only has benefits because of the lifestyle changes associated.
3. People who restrict food intake, or those who lose weight and then gain some portion of it back, are at a higher risk for death than those who had never lost weight or restricted intake at all.
This book and the research I'm reading to accompany it is making me question my fundamental beliefs about my weight. See, currently, I'm at a BMI of 25.6...just barely over into that "overweight" range. I've NEVER questioned whether it was healthier to be out of that range (though I have questioned, and continue to question, whether it would be possible for my body to do so in a sustainable way). I do lead what I would consider a very healthy lifestyle - lots of physical activity, whole grains, lean proteins, massive amounts of greatly varying vegetables and fruits. Still, there's a little sense of failure in the back of my brain - a belief that I could be doing MORE to make myself healthier by getting my BMI into that "healthy" range.
Anyway, I'm wondering if people have any thoughts on this. Am I deluding myself in thinking that I might be healthier and less likely to die an early death at a sustainable, well-nourished, physically active BMI of 25.6 than I might be at a less-well-nourished, less-sustainable BMI of 22? Should we always aim as low as we can ever dream to hit on the BMI scale, or should we consider other factors? Is being moderately overweight unhealthy in and of itself, or is it only unhealthy in that it is associated with an inactive lifestyle and a poor diet?
Want to put the necessary caveats in here - I'm obviously more healthy now than I was at 295 lbs, or even 200 lbs - I can feel it in my body and would never argue it (though whether it is due entirely to the WEIGHT being off vs. to the LIFESTYLE changes is another matter). I'm talking about the few pounds separating "overweight" from "normal", and whether that distinction is useful or meaningful.