The concept of an ideal weight has stood the test of time and become deeply ingrained in the public consciousness, evoking an image of perfect health. Yet, almost no one knows for whom this standard applies, what its origins are, or, for that matter, whether its validity should even be questioned.
It was a U.S. insurance company called "Metropolitan Life" that challenged this public perception. At the time, the company had no other motive than to refine its premium system. In the 1950s, it conducted a detailed study on the subject: Is there a connection between weight and mortality? If so, how does weight affect mortality? What are the risks of being overweight or underweight? For an insurance company, this was a critical question, as it allowed them to set premiums: low risk for low premiums, high risk for high premiums. The motivation was that simple.
The main criticism of the "Metropolitan Life" data is that the measurements were typically based on clothing and shoe sizes, so the quantitative relationship between height and weight could only be estimated as a rough reference. Furthermore, the individuals measured for height and weight represented only a small sample and could not be considered a representative cross-section of the population's average. Moreover, during the period from 1935 to 1953, what kind of people were eligible for insurance? Almost no one who was underweight, likely because their applications were simply rejected by insurance companies. The insurers presumed they might suffer from tuberculosis or other illnesses that caused them to be thin and underweight. At that time, if a thin person wanted to get insurance, they had to prove they were in perfect health, whereas those with normal or above-average weight were not subject to such strict scrutiny. Therefore, it is undeniable that when looking back at the insured population, the health of thin individuals was, on the whole, better than that of their heavier counterparts. Consequently, the group with high mortality rates reported by the insurance company would naturally not be these healthy thin people.
In line with this, the data analysis from the 1980 Framingham study concluded that for men, the risk of death only increased when their weight was at least 25% above the so-called ideal weight, and it rose significantly only when it exceeded 39% by that standard. The corresponding figure for women was 24%. In the same year, American scientist Ruben Andres published a summary report based on a comprehensive analysis of nearly 24 studies. The report stated: "The results of large-scale, joint studies on the relationship between overweight and mortality do not prove that obesity implies a higher risk. Therefore, it is proposed that all previous advice regarding overweight should be reconsidered, and it is highly necessary to research the potential benefits of a fuller body type."
Yet, all these scientific findings have failed to shake the deeply entrenched idea of an ideal weight. Thin, even emaciated, models remain the idols for all who aspire to beauty and slenderness. But who truly benefits from the myth of the ideal weight? The answer depends on the specific situation: First, neither those who are skeptical of it nor those who believe it and strictly diet are the beneficiaries (see *The Dieters, All Live Long*). The true beneficiaries are others: those who promise to lead people down the path to the ideal weight, those who set ambitious goals for others and get rich in the process. They are the manufacturers of low-calorie foods and various diet plans, slimming capsules and laxatives; the publishers of women's magazines and men's health journals, various informational pamphlets and diet books; and all the fitness studios, private diet counseling, and weight-loss institutions—collectively known as the weight-loss industry. Furthermore, the medical profession also benefits as it sees fit; they can simply announce new "standards" or "thresholds" for weight, cholesterol levels, iron content, and so on, and thereby "do something" while enjoying a steady stream of income.