> I would be skeptical of a formula that links GH release to BMI.  It
is =
> clear that abdominal obesity and low GH are related, but not it is
not =
> clear that BMI and GH are negatively related.  For one thing, BMI is
a =
> poor measure of obesity and does not distinguish between abdominal
(the =
> most dangerous kind) and other locations of fat.  It is also true
that =
> muscular individuals tend to have high BMI (mine is over 28, an =
> indicator of obesity, while my body fat is only 6%).  Muscle is
heavy =
> and gives one a high BMI.

Thanks Art.  While i am familier with most all the research on BMI and
GH and thier inter-relationships, I had never seen a clear cut formula
relating one to the other.  I thought maybe I had missed something.

Also, I agree, BMI "in and of itself is useless".  However, BMI with
percent body fat, is a better indicator.   And location of fat is
important.  At our ctr we are now using a DEXA to do body comp scans.
Not only does it give total body comp, it also shows body comp
throughout the body (trunk, arm , leg etc).   If i had to pick just
one number to go by, I would choose body comp and not BMI.

Not only can one have a high BMI (or weight) yet be healthy because
the excess weight (by standard) is due to lean tissue, as is your
experience... one can also be of "normal" weight and have a very high
body fat % and actually be obese and unhealthy even though their
weight is "normal". I actually see quite abit of this in older women
who seem to be normal weight, but have high body fats due  to minimal
lean tissue and excess body fat.

Thanks again
Jeff