BMI
Options
Replies
-
ManiacalLaugh wrote: »roselin4love wrote: »Hello
Am Roselin.
I saw your profile here today,
i will like us to be good friends
Please reply me back direct to my personal email address,
(roselinkarume@yahoo.com)
so that i will send you my pictures and details,
there is something important i will like to discuss with you.
thanks and remain blessed.
ROSELIN.
I sooo want to mark this as possible spam, but I've done so much spam flagging lately and don't want to end up in forum jail. ;_;
Well let me give it a spam flag on your behalf then
0 -
ManiacalLaugh wrote: »roselin4love wrote: »Hello
Am Roselin.
I saw your profile here today,
i will like us to be good friends
Please reply me back direct to my personal email address,
(roselinkarume@yahoo.com)
so that i will send you my pictures and details,
there is something important i will like to discuss with you.
thanks and remain blessed.
ROSELIN.
I sooo want to mark this as possible spam, but I've done so much spam flagging lately and don't want to end up in forum jail. ;_;
I did you won't end up in jail..it's spam0 -
Like anything, one size does not fit all. It's a great tool to use, but shouldn't be your only consideration when choosing your goal. When I began, I was only concerned about pounds coming off. Now I could care less, as I just want to be stronger. I have actually gained 2 pounds in the last 3 months, but as 1, my clothes are smaller and 2, I'm doing a re-comp, this is fantastic news for me!0
-
I'm going to use it. But I agree it is only one measure.0
-
Goal weights should be based on their lean body mass and body fat %. For instance in my case 192 at 17% body fat leaves me around 160ish lean body mass. assuming that I want a healthy 10%ish body fat. I would wanna keep my weight around 175-180lbs.
Below 6-8% is extremely unnecessary and almost guaranteed to be detrimental to my lean body mass. 10-12% is very reasonable goal.
0 -
I agree that BMI should be in your tool box but not your only tool.
I am currently at 238# down from 310# about two years ago. The current wt is my high school weight and I was a basketball player ( I didn't say a good player) and a lot more muscular.
BMI says I am obese until I am at 200# and 180# until I am at the normal range. I've not seen the numbers since Jr high. I have set my goal at 200 and will use the mirror and my clothes fit to determine the bottom since I am in uncharted territory.0 -
Probably put about as much focus on it as your doctor and insurance provider/employer does.
My doctor uses BMI as a reference tool, but evidently doesn't put much stock in it since at my last visit he suggested that 170-180lbs would be a good range for me, even though that would put me in the upper overweight range. However, I also live in an area where most people are overweight or obese, and the waiting room is always full of super obese people. So 170 probably seems like a great number to my doctor.
Our insurance/employer doesn't put much stock in it either, presumably, as we don't have "incentives" or wellness plans, etc, to lower our BMI. But some do. And I believe some life insurance policies also puts stock in BMI.0 -
Personally, I don't like the BMI. It's nice to know, but definitely don't shoot for a goal weight based on your BMI. Shoot for a target body fat percentage.0
-
asflatasapancake wrote: »I'm 6'1", 198lbs and considered overweight.
I don't feel overweight.
Exactly. Someone else said it but for me, I can't rely on BMI completely because of my personal body composition. I can more confidently rely on body fat %.
0 -
asflatasapancake wrote: »I'm 6'1", 198lbs and considered overweight.
I don't feel overweight.
and realistically we all know you are not..and it's 26.1..I had ot check sorry.
but you are one of those that it isn't accurate for due to it not being able to distinguish muscle mass with body fat.0 -
At 24% BF, BMI had me at substantially overweight. Again, because it's poo for someone three standard deviations from the mean in height. Which, admittedly, isn't very many people, but that doesn't help me when the insurance company starts complaining.
Depends on sex.DeguelloTex wrote: »
What's the cutoff for a healthy body fat percentage?
Guessing he means in comparison to going by body weight percentage.DeguelloTex wrote: »
BMI skews towards underestimating body fat percentage.
Usually below 25% is considered acceptable for a man, 32% for a woman. Though as it is harder to get an accurate number for, I think there is no where near the medical correlations and research done it.
Wikipedia has this table for body fat:
Description Women Men
Essential fat 10–13% 2–5%
Athletes 14–20% 6–13%
Fitness 21–24% 14–17%
Average 25–31% 18–24%
Obese 32%+ 25%+
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_fat_percentage
0 -
DeguelloTex wrote: »
At 24% BF, BMI had me at substantially overweight. Again, because it's poo for someone three standard deviations from the mean in height. Which, admittedly, isn't very many people, but that doesn't help me when the insurance company starts complaining.
Depends on sex.DeguelloTex wrote: »
What's the cutoff for a healthy body fat percentage?
Guessing he means in comparison to going by body weight percentage.DeguelloTex wrote: »
BMI skews towards underestimating body fat percentage.
Usually below 25% is considered acceptable for a man, 32% for a woman. Though as it is harder to get an accurate number for, I think there is no where near the medical correlations and research done it.
Wikipedia has this table for body fat:
Description Women Men
Essential fat 10–13% 2–5%
Athletes 14–20% 6–13%
Fitness 21–24% 14–17%
Average 25–31% 18–24%
Obese 32%+ 25%+
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_fat_percentage
I guess at 5'7.5" I'd offer to switch heights with you if you have a way to do it.
There are all kinds of holes in that make it poor for an absolute personal standard, but the deviations cancel out when you need a quick measure for research studies and epidemiological data collection. Not to mention, you can measure it as accurately as a scale and tape measure allow, but honestly, body fat can be measured with absolute accuracy only one time.0 -
Oh, I'm not offering to switch, that's for sure.DeguelloTex wrote: »
At 24% BF, BMI had me at substantially overweight. Again, because it's poo for someone three standard deviations from the mean in height. Which, admittedly, isn't very many people, but that doesn't help me when the insurance company starts complaining.
Depends on sex.DeguelloTex wrote: »
What's the cutoff for a healthy body fat percentage?
Guessing he means in comparison to going by body weight percentage.DeguelloTex wrote: »
BMI skews towards underestimating body fat percentage.
Usually below 25% is considered acceptable for a man, 32% for a woman. Though as it is harder to get an accurate number for, I think there is no where near the medical correlations and research done it.
Wikipedia has this table for body fat:
Description Women Men
Essential fat 10–13% 2–5%
Athletes 14–20% 6–13%
Fitness 21–24% 14–17%
Average 25–31% 18–24%
Obese 32%+ 25%+
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_fat_percentage
I guess at 5'7.5" I'd offer to switch heights with you if you have a way to do it.
There are all kinds of holes in that make it poor for an absolute personal standard, but the deviations cancel out when you need a quick measure for research studies and epidemiological data collection. Not to mention, you can measure it as accurately as a scale and tape measure allow, but honestly, body fat can be measured with absolute accuracy only one time.
I think BMI is a reasonable first pass at the problem for the overwhelming majority of people. I just wish there were a way to get my insurance company to accept reasonable alternative criteria. The "tall BMI" or body fat percentage would be two candidates, imo.
0 -
I don't like BMI simply because according to the doctor people in charge where I live, I need to be at 25% for a surgery. That means losing about 20kg -- and while I do know that I need to drop that weight anyway, I'm worried that I will get to a healthy weight and be fit etc, but still not be at the right % simply because I've gained "too much" muscle. Hopefully, even if I'm a few % over, if they see that what I've got is not an excess of fat any more, I will still be able to get the surgery. (It's kind of weight related, that's why it's important to them that you're at a certain weight.)0
-
I wouldn't worry about accidentally gaining so much muscle that it skews your BMI.I don't like BMI simply because according to the doctor people in charge where I live, I need to be at 25% for a surgery. That means losing about 20kg -- and while I do know that I need to drop that weight anyway, I'm worried that I will get to a healthy weight and be fit etc, but still not be at the right % simply because I've gained "too much" muscle. Hopefully, even if I'm a few % over, if they see that what I've got is not an excess of fat any more, I will still be able to get the surgery. (It's kind of weight related, that's why it's important to them that you're at a certain weight.)
0 -
DeguelloTex wrote: »
Oh, I'm not offering to switch, that's for sure.DeguelloTex wrote: »
At 24% BF, BMI had me at substantially overweight. Again, because it's poo for someone three standard deviations from the mean in height. Which, admittedly, isn't very many people, but that doesn't help me when the insurance company starts complaining.
Depends on sex.DeguelloTex wrote: »
What's the cutoff for a healthy body fat percentage?
Guessing he means in comparison to going by body weight percentage.DeguelloTex wrote: »
BMI skews towards underestimating body fat percentage.
Usually below 25% is considered acceptable for a man, 32% for a woman. Though as it is harder to get an accurate number for, I think there is no where near the medical correlations and research done it.
Wikipedia has this table for body fat:
Description Women Men
Essential fat 10–13% 2–5%
Athletes 14–20% 6–13%
Fitness 21–24% 14–17%
Average 25–31% 18–24%
Obese 32%+ 25%+
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_fat_percentage
I guess at 5'7.5" I'd offer to switch heights with you if you have a way to do it.
There are all kinds of holes in that make it poor for an absolute personal standard, but the deviations cancel out when you need a quick measure for research studies and epidemiological data collection. Not to mention, you can measure it as accurately as a scale and tape measure allow, but honestly, body fat can be measured with absolute accuracy only one time.
I think BMI is a reasonable first pass at the problem for the overwhelming majority of people. I just wish there were a way to get my insurance company to accept reasonable alternative criteria. The "tall BMI" or body fat percentage would be two candidates, imo.
If you get a worse insurance rate for your BMI while you're at a good body fat percentage, that is pretty crappy. It would be nice if they'd let you turn in something like a hydrostatic, bod pod, or DEXA scan body fat percentage and use that for determining if you're overweight that way as an alternative.
I've heard that there are new untested waters in life insurance where they're giving discounts to people based on their fitness tracker information and things like that. I think they're giving discounts more to get the data so they can use it in the future, more than out of any actual predictions that data makes currently.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 983 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions