Make that 25 kg/m^2 Incidentally, there is no virtue in treating the units of this index literally. It's just an indicator of health [or lack of same]. D. From: Gene Mechtly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: U.S. Metric Association <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Metric Forum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: March 20, 2001 19:06 Subject: [USMA:11735] Body Mass Index >On Sun, 18 Mar 2001, Paul Trusten wrote: > >> I was once castigated on the newsgroup for stopping to explain the >> weight/mass thing, > Who did that? The distinction in *required* in SI? > >> so since then I use the terms interchangeably. > That is a common error by many who have not mastered SI, but >is not acceptable in this USMA Forum (in my opinion), and I often prod >those in this Forum who use the terms as synonyms (especially if they >seem to understand that w = m.g as well as f = m.a). > Make the distinction and I'll come to your defense if you are >castigated again for using correct SI. >> >> ... no newtons. Just kilograms. But all of that has to be manually >> converted from feet and inches, and pounds. > Software for data entry can do that conversion with little >human effort once the software is installed. > >> We do not document BMI routinely, but the software does calculate and >> document body surface area in square meters, since some drugs are dosed >> per square meter of body surface area. > How is area obtained. Are head, chest, waist, and hip >measurements required in your hospital practice as well as height? > Area calculations are much more complicated than BMI. Can you >persuade your programmer to add BMI? > >> Oddly, the height is quoted in centimeters, not in meters. > An easy example of BMI is a husky well conditioned athlete of >100 kg mass, and 2 m height. His BMI would be 100 kg/4 m2 = 25 km/m2. >Note that the 4 m2 is height squared, *not* the athlete's surface area. >Gene. >
