Image Credit: Canva
When was the last time you measured your waistline? If you assume that BMI is the only number to focus on when it comes to your health, think twice. New research has revealed a shocking revelation—your waist circumference might be a far better predictor of men's cancer risk than BMI.
The study finds that for each 4-inch increase in waist size, a man's risk of cancer increases by a staggering 25%. Meanwhile, BMI, commonly regarded as the gold standard for assessing obesity, raises cancer risk by only 19% for the same weight gain. So, if you've been dismissing that pesky belly fat, it's time to take notice.
But why is your waistline so important? The reason is visceral fat—the hidden, deep fat that accumulates around your organs. Unlike other body fat, visceral fat is a stealthy troublemaker, causing inflammation, insulin resistance, and abnormal blood fat levels—all of which combine to create a cancer-perfect storm.
Obesity has been associated with an increased risk of numerous health conditions, including cancer, for decades. The research, though, indicates that a specific measure of the body—waist circumference—may be an even more reliable forecaster of cancer risk in men than the more frequently employed Body Mass Index (BMI). This finding emphasizes the need to pay particular attention to the distribution of fat and not merely to the weight of the body.
BMI has been the go-to measure for years for gauging health risks related to obesity. New research, though, that appears in The Journal of the National Cancer Institute indicates that waist measurement is a better predictor of cancer risk in men. According to the research, four more inches (10 cm) around the waist will add 25% to a man's cancer risk. Conversely, a 3.7 kg/m² rise in BMI (from a BMI of 24 to 27.7) increased cancer risk by only 19%.
Why is waist circumference a better predictor, then? Unlike BMI, which measures weight relative to height, waist circumference actually measures abdominal fat—specifically, visceral fat. This type of fat encircles internal organs and is also linked to higher levels of inflammation, insulin resistance, and abnormal blood lipids, all of which are factors in cancer growth. BMI, however, does not measure fat distribution, so two individuals with the same BMI can have very different levels of health risk depending on where fat is deposited on their bodies.
Interestingly, the research identified a significant difference between men and women when it came to waist circumference and cancer risk. Although waist circumference and BMI were linked with obesity-related cancers in women, the relationship was weaker than for men. An increase of 12 cm (4.7 inches) in waist size or a 4.3 rise in BMI (from 24 to 28.3) raised the cancer risk in women by just 13%—a much lower percentage than for men.
Experts credit this difference to the way that fat is stored in the body. Men are more likely to carry fat around the abdomen, especially as visceral fat, which is more metabolically active and associated with cancer-producing biological alterations. Women, by contrast, store fat in peripheral sites such as the hips and thighs, where it is less likely to drive systemic inflammation and metabolic disturbances.
A possible reason is that men tend to depot fat more in the visceral regions, whereas women tend to carry more subcutaneous and peripheral fat," wrote the researchers. "This may render waist circumference a more robust risk factor for cancer in men and account for why waist circumference provides additional risk information beyond BMI in men but not women."
The research used the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) data to define obesity-related cancers. These cancers are esophageal (adenocarcinoma), gastric (cardia), colorectal, rectal, liver, gallbladder, pancreatic, renal, and thyroid cancers, and multiple myeloma and meningioma. In men, abdominal obesity is especially significant in raising the risk of these cancers through high levels of insulin and markers of inflammation.
For women, the research proposes that both waist circumference and hip circumference may give a more accurate estimate of visceral fat and cancer risk. "Adding hip circumference to risk models could strengthen the link between waist circumference and cancer, especially in women," researchers observed.
With these results, doctors advise men to be more mindful of their waistline than only their BMI. Waist size is an easy method to gauge health risk, and its maintenance through lifestyle changes might be the key to cancer prevention.
Track Your Waist Size: Regularly measure your waist circumference and try to keep it in a healthy range (below 40 inches for men, according to medical advice).
Eat a Balanced Diet: A diet containing high fiber, lean protein, and healthy fats can assist in limiting visceral fat gain.
Exercise Consistently: Regular exercise with a combination of aerobic and strength training will help maintain a healthy waistline.
Control Stress and Sleep: Persistent stress and inadequate sleep tend to cause weight gain, especially in the midsection of the body.
Regular Health Screenings: Early identification of cancer risk factors through regular screening can greatly enhance long-term health status.
Credit: iStock
Long considered a standard tool for assessing body weight, Body Mass Index (BMI) may not be as reliable as once believed. A new study shows that relying on BMI can incorrectly classify people as overweight or obese.
When a team of Italian researchers used the gold standard technique of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) to measure body fat in the general population, they found that the traditional WHO-approved BMI classification system misidentified a significant number of people as having overweight or obesity.
A total of 1,351 adults of mixed gender aged between 18 and 98 years were checked for their body weight using the DXA system.
The results, published in the journal Nutrients, revealed that more than one-third (34 percent) of those with obesity defined by BMI had been misclassified and should be in the overweight category.
For those with an overweight BMI, DXA showed that more than half – 53 percent – had been misclassified – three quarters of those misclassified fall into the normal weight category, while the other quarter should have been classified as having obesity.
The DXA analysis found that the prevalence of overweight and obesity across the cohort was around 37 percent overall (23.4 percent overweight, and 13.2 percent obesity, compared to 26.2 percent and 14.1 percent with BMI).
“In the past few years, there has been a lot of criticism of the BMI system due to its inability to accurately capture body fat percentage or distribution, to correctly categorise weight status based on adiposity,” said Professor Marwan El Ghoch, of the Department of Biomedical, Metabolic and Neural Sciences, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy.
Also read: Your BMI Does Not Reflect Your Health: New Study Warns How It Misses A Key Health Aspect
Despite these concerns, BMI as a weight classification system continues to be used in the general population in primary healthcare (i.e., general practitioners) and non-clinical (i.e., policy and health insurance) settings, he added.
The researchers urged revising public health guidelines to consider combining direct body composition or their surrogate measures, such as skinfold measurement or body circumference, with the waist-to-height ratio, with BMI, while assessing weight status in the general population.
In January 2025, India revamped its obesity guidelines, and the new approach focused on abdominal obesity and comorbid diseases, rather than just BMI.
According to the redefining team, it was essential to move beyond BMI-only approaches to tackle the ever-growing number of people related to other major health risks. They stated that while BMI can be a screening tool, obesity must be defined by body fat.
“BMI should be used for screening purposes, but obesity should be confirmed ideally by a measure of body fat wherever feasible, or another measure such as waist circumference, WHR, or Waist-to-height ratio,” Dr. Naval Vikram, Professor of Medicine, at AIIMS, New Delhi, was quoted as saying to IANS at the time.
Also read: 41 million children aged 5-19 living with high BMI in India: Study
It recognizes abdominal fat — closely linked to insulin resistance — as a key factor in the diagnosis. It integrates the presence of comorbidities — such as diabetes and cardiovascular disease — into the diagnostic process.
The revised guidelines also introduce a two-stage classification system, addressing both generalized and abdominal obesity.
Stage 1 Obesity: Increased adiposity (BMI > 23 kg/m²) without apparent effects on organ functions or routine daily activities.
Stage 2 Obesity: Advanced state of obesity with increased BMI more than 23 kg/2, and abdominal adiposity; excess Waist Circumference or Waist-to-Height Ratio.
Credit: Instagram
Amanda Peet, the Hollywood actress known for roles in Something’s Gotta Give, The Whole Nine Yards, and Jack & Jill, recently opened up about her breast cancer diagnosis and how informing her kids about her health became the toughest part for her.
In a New Yorker essay published March 21, the 54-year-old actress announced how a routine scan in August 2025 showed an unusual ultrasound result. Later, a biopsy detected a tumor that “appeared” small.
The Dirty John star found to be in stage 1 of lobular cancer that is “hormone-receptor-positive” and “HER2-negative,” making her “happier than the pre-diagnosis” stage.
It is because Hormone-receptor-positive and HER2-negative cancer is less aggressive and often easier to treat than more aggressive forms of breast cancer.
However, informing her children, Frances, 19, Molly, 15, and Henry, 11, about the cancer was the toughest part for her, and she had to be in the right mindset before sharing the news with them.
“They've been great,” Peet told E! News.
“I definitely had to get myself together before including them. The hard part was realizing that nothing is certain and there was going to be no perfect time to tell them,” she added.
Peet stated that between her diagnosis, she had also been navigating a series of family health crises — with both of her parents' final months in hospice care.
The Your Friends & Neighbors actress, in her essay, also noted that she would “only need a lumpectomy and radiation,” not a double mastectomy.
Also read: Jane Fallon Diagnosed With Breast Cancer, This Is How She Caught It Early
Invasive Lobular Carcinoma (ILC) the second most common form of breast cancer, representing 5 to 15 percent of breast cancer cases.
Rather than a distinct lump, it can appear as a thickening or "fullness" rather than a tumor.
It is often difficult to detect on mammograms, thus MRI or ultrasound are more effective for detection
It is usually hormone receptor-positive.
HR+ and HER2− breast cancer is the most common subtype and is seen among 60–75 per cent of cases.
It is not two different cancers, but rather specific, defining characteristics of the same cancer type (breast cancer). It grows:
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), breast cancer screening is a proactive checkup used to find cancer before any physical signs or symptoms appear. While screening doesn’t prevent cancer, its goal is early detection, making the disease much easier to treat.
Since every person’s body and history are different, you and your doctor should engage in informed and shared decision-making. This means discussing the pros and cons to decide together if, and when, screening is right for you.
The US Preventive Services Task Force (a group of national medical experts) provides guidelines based on the latest research:
Average Risk
Women aged 40 to 74 should generally get a mammogram every two years.
High Risk
If you have a family history or other risk factors, your doctor may recommend a different schedule or additional tests.
Credit: iStock
GLP-1 receptor agonists are a modern class of medicines that have changed the treatment of type 2 diabetes and obesity. In simple terms, they help the body respond to food more smartly. After eating, the intestine naturally sends signals that help regulate sugar and appetite levels.
GLP-1 RA medicines imitate this signal. As a result, blood sugar rises less after meals, appetite becomes more controlled, and many people feel full with smaller amounts of food. This is why these medicines are used not only for diabetes, but also for weight reduction in selected people.
These medicines are important because their benefits can go beyond sugar control alone. Studies and current diabetes guidelines show that some GLP-1 RAs can reduce body weight, improve long-term sugar levels, and lower the risk of major heart-related problems in people who have type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk.
Recent guidance also supports their use in some people with chronic kidney disease when cardiovascular risk reduction is an important goal. This does not mean every drug in the group is identical, but it means the class has become medically important for more than just lowering sugar.
For the general public, one important point is that these are not “miracle injections.”
They work best when combined with better food choices, regular walking or exercise, good sleep, and medical follow-up. They are usually started slowly because the commonest side effects are stomach-related, such as nausea, vomiting, constipation, loose motions, or a feeling of fullness.
Not everyone is suitable for them, and the decision depends on a person’s diabetes status, weight, heart or kidney disease, other medicines, and cost. Used properly, GLP-1 RAs are powerful tools that can improve health, but they should always be taken under medical supervision.
So Indian Medical Association (IMA) is planning to seek a mandate restricting prescriptions of GLP-1 drugs to certified endocrinologists/diabetologists or MD general medicine practitioners to curb indiscriminate use and safeguard patient safety as access expands, many media report in August last year about rampant misuse of GLP1 weight loss drugs by cosmetologists, physiotherapists, dermatologists, general MBBS clinicians, and even ayurveda, and other non-modern medicine practitioners.
Many MBBS, physiotherapists, and non-modern medicine practitioners are prescribing GLP1 drugs to people who neither have diabetes nor any comorbidity or acute obesity, but purely for cosmetic reasons to lose some weight that can be otherwise easily done with some lifestyle changes like exercise and diet.
It is a duty of the government to take care of it because there is a lot of misuse and misprescription that needs to be curbed immediately, because these medicines also have side effects.
We will write to the government to take necessary action to stop the misuse of the drug. We will discuss it in our meeting in the first week of April 2026.
© 2024 Bennett, Coleman & Company Limited