Abstract
Background: There exist several models for assessment of risk of
cardiovascular disease (CVD), including different criteria for diagnosis
of obesity, of which a major disparity is ‘definition of waist
circumference’. Case reports and comparative reviews are hereby
presented to exemplify that one cap ‘model’ does not fit all.
Cases: First case illustrates how very slim person with BMI of 17
may possess cardiovascular risk ≥22.7% compared to an obese individual
who has a BMI of 39 with CVD risk ≤8.0%. Second case
review illustrates how the same BMI and lipid models vary in outcomes
depending on gender. Third case report shows how different
‘definitions of waist circumference’ impacts on identification of
obesity, which in turn affect decision about metabolic syndrome.
Conclusion: The needs for paradigm shift and 5-step framework
are briefly highlighted.
cardiovascular disease (CVD), including different criteria for diagnosis
of obesity, of which a major disparity is ‘definition of waist
circumference’. Case reports and comparative reviews are hereby
presented to exemplify that one cap ‘model’ does not fit all.
Cases: First case illustrates how very slim person with BMI of 17
may possess cardiovascular risk ≥22.7% compared to an obese individual
who has a BMI of 39 with CVD risk ≤8.0%. Second case
review illustrates how the same BMI and lipid models vary in outcomes
depending on gender. Third case report shows how different
‘definitions of waist circumference’ impacts on identification of
obesity, which in turn affect decision about metabolic syndrome.
Conclusion: The needs for paradigm shift and 5-step framework
are briefly highlighted.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 540-544 |
| Number of pages | 5 |
| Journal | National Journal of Community Medicine |
| Volume | 7 |
| Issue number | 6 |
| Publication status | Published - 2016 |
