The classic body mass index (BMI) is robust, simple – and, as we know, rather crude. In our blog post on the Body Roundness Index, we have already shown how much measurements of body shape can diverge and how little they sometimes contribute to risk assessment in everyday clinical practice. Now there is another challenger: the metabolic BMI (metBMI) .
The metBMI is not based on body measurements, but on an AI-supported model of blood metabolites. It was developed by researchers at the Universities of Leipzig and Gothenburg. The starting point is a known weakness of the BMI: up to 30% of people of normal weight already have metabolic disorders, whereas some overweight people remain metabolically normal. The BMI does not capture the functional quality of adipose tissue.
The new index is the result of a study published in Nature Medicine involving almost 2,000 participants, in which extensive multi-omics data was analysed. From over 1,000 metabolites, the authors identified a clinically manageable panel of 66 markers that accurately reflect obesity-related dysfunctions. An elevated metBMI was associated with a two- to five-fold higher risk of metabolic fatty liver, type 2 diabetes, visceral fat accumulation, insulin resistance and systemic inflammation – regardless of actual BMI. In addition, individuals with high metBMI lost around 30% less weight after bariatric surgery, suggesting metabolic ‘therapy resistance’.
Particularly exciting is the link with the gut microbiome: as metBMI increased, the diversity of gut bacteria decreased, as did their ability to produce protective short-chain fatty acids such as butyrate – a possible mechanistic link between obesity, chronic inflammation and insulin resistance.
What does this mean in practice? While the Body Roundness Index (BRI), Waist-to-Hip Ratio (WHR) and Waist-to-Height Ratio (WtHR) primarily quantify fat distribution, metBMI addresses the biological quality of adipose tissue. It could help to identify high-risk patients earlier, personalise treatment decisions and break the ‘weight equals risk’ paradigm. The scales remain important – but they now have metabolic competition.
