Weighing kids/BMI at school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Scoliosis screenings are not about a student's ability to access instruction, it is a public health screening. Some states have dental screenings, some states have weight/BMI screenings and others. These are all about public health, not directly school related.

I honestly don't know why there are scoliosis screenings in school, other than that it's a quick and relatively accurate way to check for scoliosis. And if the results of the screening are positive, then the school can send a letter home telling the parents to take the child to an orthopedist.

Weight screenings, on the other hand -- well, everybody weighs something. If you're screening for weight, everybody will come up positive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well let's see.

Underweight could signal malnourishment. Malnourished children do not develop was well mentally and physically as well lnourished children (especially at younger ages).
Overweight could signal high blood pressure or diabetes. This could lead to headaches, inappropriate dips or spikes in blood sugar. Just to name a few.
Generally if you are physically unwell it can impact your ability to learn.

Then why not just measure blood pressure and blood sugar directly? That would be far more accurate. Why fiddle around with an intermediate indicator?

And yes, malnourished children do not learn well -- which is why there's a National School Lunch Program, as well as other food assistance (ideally), like food backpacks.

So you are suggesting that taking blood is less intrusive than weighing your kid.
We all know how kids love needles. Sounds great.

What do you have against the scale PP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Scoliosis screenings are not about a student's ability to access instruction, it is a public health screening. Some states have dental screenings, some states have weight/BMI screenings and others. These are all about public health, not directly school related.

I honestly don't know why there are scoliosis screenings in school, other than that it's a quick and relatively accurate way to check for scoliosis. And if the results of the screening are positive, then the school can send a letter home telling the parents to take the child to an orthopedist.

Weight screenings, on the other hand -- well, everybody weighs something. If you're screening for weight, everybody will come up positive.

http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/HealthyLiving/HealthyKids/ChildhoodObesity/Overweight-in-Children_UCM_304054_Article.jsp#.Vrqq6vkrLmE

Today, about one in three American kids and teens is overweight or obese. The prevalence of obesity in children more than tripled from 1971 to 2011.. With good reason, childhood obesity is now the No. 1 health concern among parents in the United States, topping drug abuse and smoking.

[Anonymous]

BMI is utter hogwash. My mother, dying of cancer and all skin and bones had a BMI of 26. My father, who is currently dying of cancer has one of 25, he too is all skin an ones. According to the charts, both are/were overweight. Bones have different dentists and sizes and thus weight vastly different amounts. It is the reason birds can fly.

[Anonymous]

First of all, BMI was never intended as a measure of individual health. It was designed to work on populations, within which there will always be considerable variation.

Second, statistically, people in the "overweight" category on the BMI charts have a lower risk of mortality than those in the "normal" category.

Third, or maybe second', using BMI gets a lot of people tagged as unhealthy who aren't (they're just fat) and misses a lot of people who are unhealthy but are thin.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/306129.php

Finally, pushing weight loss on people is more likely to result in disordered eating than just leaving them alone or teaching them to eat and exercise for health independent of weight. So even if you reject the fact that you can be fat and healthy, focusing on weight loss is counterproductive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well let's see.

Underweight could signal malnourishment. Malnourished children do not develop was well mentally and physically as well lnourished children (especially at younger ages).
Overweight could signal high blood pressure or diabetes. This could lead to headaches, inappropriate dips or spikes in blood sugar. Just to name a few.
Generally if you are physically unwell it can impact your ability to learn.

Then why not just measure blood pressure and blood sugar directly? That would be far more accurate. Why fiddle around with an intermediate indicator?

And yes, malnourished children do not learn well -- which is why there's a National School Lunch Program, as well as other food assistance (ideally), like food backpacks.

So you are suggesting that taking blood is less intrusive than weighing your kid.
We all know how kids love needles. Sounds great.

What do you have against the scale PP.

No, I'm saying that, if the purpose is to screen for diabetes, it's a lot more accurate to check people's blood sugar than to weigh them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:First of all, BMI was never intended as a measure of individual health. It was designed to work on populations, within which there will always be considerable variation.

Second, statistically, people in the "overweight" category on the BMI charts have a lower risk of mortality than those in the "normal" category.

Third, or maybe second', using BMI gets a lot of people tagged as unhealthy who aren't (they're just fat) and misses a lot of people who are unhealthy but are thin.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/306129.php

Finally, pushing weight loss on people is more likely to result in disordered eating than just leaving them alone or teaching them to eat and exercise for health independent of weight. So even if you reject the fact that you can be fat and healthy, focusing on weight loss is counterproductive.

+1 to all of this.

BMI is pretty useless as a measure of health. Like PP, I'd rather the schools spend time teaching good eating and exercise habits, which are important regardless of weight.

I have one skinny DS who has a low/normal BMI but would lie around playing videogames and eating as much sugar as he possibly could if we didn't stay on him all the time about enforcing rules around healthy eating and activity. I have one big/muscular DD who is constantly active, plays a sport with regular intense workouts, rarely eats sweets because her favorite thing to snack on is apples. Her BMI would flag her as "overweight" or "unhealthy" when her pediatrician has told us, and our own observations of her activity and eating habits show us, that she is perfectly healthy. At DD's last check up, DD made a comment about being heavier than her friends so the dr. spent a long time talking with her about all the factors that go into weight so that being heavier does not equal being "fat" and reviewed her growth charts with her to show that she's always grown consistently on the 95th percentile for both height and weight so that is normal for her. DD seemed reassured by all that but I'm sure it will be a regularly reviewed topic because the tween/teen years can be harsh on a girl whose natural body type is larger than the average.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know if it is a thing everywhere, but I think it should be.

Let's have public weigh-ins at work, too.

Actually, let's not! Or at school, either.

They do eye exams and hearing tests at school. But weight/BMI is not a health issue?

They do eye tests and hearing tests at school to make sure that the students can see/hear the instruction. Similarly, they would do weight tests to...well, what? How would the results of the weight tests be related to a student's ability to access the instruction school?

Public health. http://www.nationalguidelines.org/guideline.cfm?guideNum=4-18

I'll repeat the question: How would the results of the weight tests be related to a student's ability to access the instruction in school?

Scoliosis screenings are not about a student's ability to access instruction, it is a public health screening. Some states have dental screenings, some states have weight/BMI screenings and others. These are all about public health, not directly school related.

Exactly. They do this at my children's schools. If a parent cannot afford dental care they will provide it. They also do vision screenings and lice checks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First of all, BMI was never intended as a measure of individual health. It was designed to work on populations, within which there will always be considerable variation.

Second, statistically, people in the "overweight" category on the BMI charts have a lower risk of mortality than those in the "normal" category.

Third, or maybe second', using BMI gets a lot of people tagged as unhealthy who aren't (they're just fat) and misses a lot of people who are unhealthy but are thin.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/306129.php

Finally, pushing weight loss on people is more likely to result in disordered eating than just leaving them alone or teaching them to eat and exercise for health independent of weight. So even if you reject the fact that you can be fat and healthy, focusing on weight loss is counterproductive.

+1 to all of this.

BMI is pretty useless as a measure of health. Like PP, I'd rather the schools spend time teaching good eating and exercise habits, which are important regardless of weight.

I have one skinny DS who has a low/normal BMI but would lie around playing videogames and eating as much sugar as he possibly could if we didn't stay on him all the time about enforcing rules around healthy eating and activity. I have one big/muscular DD who is constantly active, plays a sport with regular intense workouts, rarely eats sweets because her favorite thing to snack on is apples. Her BMI would flag her as "overweight" or "unhealthy" when her pediatrician has told us, and our own observations of her activity and eating habits show us, that she is perfectly healthy. At DD's last check up, DD made a comment about being heavier than her friends so the dr. spent a long time talking with her about all the factors that go into weight so that being heavier does not equal being "fat" and reviewed her growth charts with her to show that she's always grown consistently on the 95th percentile for both height and weight so that is normal for her. DD seemed reassured by all that but I'm sure it will be a regularly reviewed topic because the tween/teen years can be harsh on a girl whose natural body type is larger than the average.

And the obesity epidemic in children is not a real health problem, and they didn't change the name of adult-onset diabetes to Type 2 because of the numbers of children with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know if it is a thing everywhere, but I think it should be.

Let's have public weigh-ins at work, too.

Actually, let's not! Or at school, either.

They do eye exams and hearing tests at school. But weight/BMI is not a health issue?

They do eye tests and hearing tests at school to make sure that the students can see/hear the instruction. Similarly, they would do weight tests to...well, what? How would the results of the weight tests be related to a student's ability to access the instruction school?

Public health. http://www.nationalguidelines.org/guideline.cfm?guideNum=4-18

I'll repeat the question: How would the results of the weight tests be related to a student's ability to access the instruction in school?

Well let's see.

Underweight could signal malnourishment. Malnourished children do not develop was well mentally and physically as well lnourished children (especially at younger ages).
Overweight could signal high blood pressure or diabetes. This could lead to headaches, inappropriate dips or spikes in blood sugar. Just to name a few.
Generally if you are physically unwell it can impact your ability to learn.

Isn't that what pediatricians are for? Well visits are for? Poor children have medicaid and access to doctors as well, so not even an argument that "not everyone can afford a doctor" holds for medical tests at schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well let's see.

Underweight could signal malnourishment. Malnourished children do not develop was well mentally and physically as well lnourished children (especially at younger ages).
Overweight could signal high blood pressure or diabetes. This could lead to headaches, inappropriate dips or spikes in blood sugar. Just to name a few.
Generally if you are physically unwell it can impact your ability to learn.

Then why not just measure blood pressure and blood sugar directly? That would be far more accurate. Why fiddle around with an intermediate indicator?

And yes, malnourished children do not learn well -- which is why there's a National School Lunch Program, as well as other food assistance (ideally), like food backpacks.

So you are suggesting that taking blood is less intrusive than weighing your kid.
We all know how kids love needles. Sounds great.

What do you have against the scale PP.

This!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Isn't that what pediatricians are for? Well visits are for? Poor children have medicaid and access to doctors as well, so not even an argument that "not everyone can afford a doctor" holds for medical tests at schools.

Yes, poor children have access to doctors. However, rich children and poor children are not always brought to doctors, and they are usually brought to school. So having public health screenings at schools makes sense, from that perspective.

[Anonymous]

I think it's great. So many children just don't understand that weight is related to unhealthy food and overeating. They just like to eat. If we're teaching PE in school, why isn't nutrition and weight also in the curriculum?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it's great. So many children just don't understand that weight is related to unhealthy food and overeating. They just like to eat. If we're teaching PE in school, why isn't nutrition and weight also in the curriculum?

Nutrition and health actually are in the curriculum -- or at least they are in my kids' schools' curriculum; I don't know about yours.

Not in my kids' schools' curriculum: getting weighed at school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First of all, BMI was never intended as a measure of individual health. It was designed to work on populations, within which there will always be considerable variation.

Second, statistically, people in the "overweight" category on the BMI charts have a lower risk of mortality than those in the "normal" category.

Third, or maybe second', using BMI gets a lot of people tagged as unhealthy who aren't (they're just fat) and misses a lot of people who are unhealthy but are thin.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/306129.php

Finally, pushing weight loss on people is more likely to result in disordered eating than just leaving them alone or teaching them to eat and exercise for health independent of weight. So even if you reject the fact that you can be fat and healthy, focusing on weight loss is counterproductive.

+1 to all of this.

BMI is pretty useless as a measure of health. Like PP, I'd rather the schools spend time teaching good eating and exercise habits, which are important regardless of weight.

I have one skinny DS who has a low/normal BMI but would lie around playing videogames and eating as much sugar as he possibly could if we didn't stay on him all the time about enforcing rules around healthy eating and activity. I have one big/muscular DD who is constantly active, plays a sport with regular intense workouts, rarely eats sweets because her favorite thing to snack on is apples. Her BMI would flag her as "overweight" or "unhealthy" when her pediatrician has told us, and our own observations of her activity and eating habits show us, that she is perfectly healthy. At DD's last check up, DD made a comment about being heavier than her friends so the dr. spent a long time talking with her about all the factors that go into weight so that being heavier does not equal being "fat" and reviewed her growth charts with her to show that she's always grown consistently on the 95th percentile for both height and weight so that is normal for her. DD seemed reassured by all that but I'm sure it will be a regularly reviewed topic because the tween/teen years can be harsh on a girl whose natural body type is larger than the average.

+2

When we were kids, my sister & I would receive a "fitness report" every year inside our report cards, My sister, who was ( & still is) very strong & fit, far exceeded the standards for her age& gender in every category (how fast & long she could run, how many sit-ups & pull-ups she could do, etc) except for BMI. It always said that she was overweight even though nobody looking at her in a bathing suit would have ever thought that she was anywhere close to being overweight -- she had very little fat on her; she just took after our mom & had a larger bone structure. This really gave her an unhealthy complex about her strong, athletic body from a young age. Looking at pictures now, she wonders how she could have ever thought she was fat. Then she remembers that it was because of those damn fitness reports