Do you care about your BMI?
Replies
-
This content has been removed.
-
crzycatlady1 wrote: »Nope. I don't care, really. My Bull$#!t Mass Index is 17.9, which would be considered 'underweight', but I don't see myself that way at all. I'm fine with maintaining this weight.
Your profile says you've struggled with an ED though. How you perceive yourself may not be the healthiest indicator to go by. What does your doctor say about your underweight bmi?
I like how if you're overweight on these forums (even considerably so), and you mention that you're ignoring the BMI table, you get cheers and comments of "rock on," but if you're marginally considered underweight by said table (17.9 vs. 18.5), you get called out on your profile for your eating history (which is a disgustingly tactless act on a public forum).
And who are you to ask what her doctor thinks?5 -
Personally, I don't care what some BS chart says. I care how I look and feel and that I am healthy. According to BMI charts, I used to be obese with a 32" waist.1
-
ShammersPink wrote: »animatorswearbras wrote: »I worry more about my belly measurement as that comes with more health problems, I'm technically (just) in a healthy bmi of 25 atm but the measurement around my belly (taken where your bellybutton is not the slimmest part/dress waist) is over the healthy range of 32" for a women (according to the british heart foundation). If you don't store all your weight around your middrift like me and are a pear or hourglass figure you're probably fine. I however as an apple don't feel like I'm at a healthy weight even though my BMI says I technically am
Yes, that's a good point. But I think the 32" waist figure is an example of the over-simplification of health guidelines. It'd be relatively stout on a 5' woman, but not unreasonable on a 5' 10" woman. Waist:Height ratio is probably a better measure, along with Waist:Hip ratio.
If those are both okay, then you probably aren't carrying most of your weight as visceral fat.
Thanks for those the waist hip ratio has me at normal because it asks for the dress waist measurement, the waist height one has me at either normal or overweight depending where I measure, (dress waist or belly). I'm suprised the BHF measurement I use doesn't take into consideration height if it makes a big difference? I'm just shy of the obese range on that, and I'm fairly averege height at 5'5
It doesnt make sense though a health measurement that would ask for the slimmest part of your waist and skip the belly? I can understand it from an aesthetic point of view but if you want to measure the fat surely thats the measurement to take? 0 -
Neither my doctor nor I care about BMI - she is of the belief that the BMI index really doesnt reflect the physiological reality of women particularly, especially after the age of 40 yrs and after children. I love her for that! In fact, at my last appointment with her, she said I could probably stop losing weight, that I was at a good point. I whined a bit and said that I wanted to lose 5lbs more, as then I would cross from being obese to just overweight. She then shared her perspective on the BMI issue and as someone said earlier, noted that 5lbs was not going to be a make or break real live weight issue with me - maybe a psychological one, but really not physically necessary. When you think about it, it really is sort of goofy to say that if you way x amount, you are "normal" but if you weigh x + 8 ounces, you are overweight. I understand that even ranges have to have identifiable parameters, but in this case, I'm ok with not paying it a lot of attention.0
-
My doctor said to stop losing weight because I'm in the healthy range of BMI, and I stopped caring about my BMI once I was within the healthy range.
However, I told my doctor that I had vanity and aesthetic goals that shedding a few more pounds were factoring into. She was cool with that. I care more about body fat and aesthetics at this point. I want to be light for running. I naturally have a stockier build, but I can lean out a bit.2 -
I use the standard BMI range as a good way of setting a realistic goal - I'm not tall and not that short and definitely not an athlete (professional rugby players get classed as obese so it doesn't work for them). I'm also of European descent so am reasonably sure I fit the average profile it was designed for. I know that the ranges are slightly different for other ethnicities - Asian is lower while Maori/Pacifc Islander ranges are about 2 points higher than European0
-
animatorswearbras wrote: »I'm suprised the BHF measurement I use doesn't take into consideration height if it makes a big difference? I'm just shy of the obese range on that, and I'm fairly averege height at 5'5 It doesnt make sense though a health measurement that would ask for the slimmest part of your waist and skip the belly? I can understand it from an aesthetic point of view but if you want to measure the fat surely thats the measurement to take?
I can't help on precisely the right place to measure - I think I'd need to look into it more. There are a number of different calculators around.
But as for the BHF recommendation, health recommendations are frequently ridiculously simplified to give an easy number to remember - 2000 calories for a woman, 2500 for a man, protein amounts similarly standardised. Now there are lots of women who will gain steadily on 2000 calories, and plenty of others who will lose.
The waist measurement given by BHF equates to a Waist:Height ratio of 50% on a standard height 5' 4" white British woman. It's a maximum, and if your height is close to 5' 4", not a bad approximation, but the further you are from "average", the worse it gets as a predictor, like many of these recommendations.
0 -
ShammersPink wrote: »animatorswearbras wrote: »I worry more about my belly measurement as that comes with more health problems, I'm technically (just) in a healthy bmi of 25 atm but the measurement around my belly (taken where your bellybutton is not the slimmest part/dress waist) is over the healthy range of 32" for a women (according to the british heart foundation). If you don't store all your weight around your middrift like me and are a pear or hourglass figure you're probably fine. I however as an apple don't feel like I'm at a healthy weight even though my BMI says I technically am
Yes, that's a good point. But I think the 32" waist figure is an example of the over-simplification of health guidelines. It'd be relatively stout on a 5' woman, but not unreasonable on a 5' 10" woman. Waist:Height ratio is probably a better measure, along with Waist:Hip ratio.
If those are both okay, then you probably aren't carrying most of your weight as visceral fat.
I hate the Waist:Hip ratio. It shows me as "at risk" no matter how small I get because my hips shrink along with the rest of me.
1 -
crzycatlady1 wrote: »Nope. I don't care, really. My Bull$#!t Mass Index is 17.9, which would be considered 'underweight', but I don't see myself that way at all. I'm fine with maintaining this weight.
Your profile says you've struggled with an ED though. How you perceive yourself may not be the healthiest indicator to go by. What does your doctor say about your underweight bmi?
they aren't too concerned since I've been maintaining for ~3 months. As long as my bloodwork is okay and my blood pressure and electrolyte levels check out, it's not a huge deal so long as I continue to see a therapist and work on reducing ED behaviors.
Good to hear that things are going well with your treatment, thanks for responding
0 -
I do use it as my upper weight goal, which I'm still 20 pounds over. From there, I'm sure I can go down as it's the top of like a 25 or 30-pound range. I think it is a general rule, and since I'm probably "average" in many senses (I'm not super muscles or anything), seems like a good place to start.0
-
I thought I didn't but I just edged into the top end of normal and I found it pleased me.2
-
I think it's UTTER RUBBISH! Don't even waste a second thinking about it.0
-
Personally I don't care about BMI anymore but I used to. When I was massively overweight, a healthy BMI gave me an initial goal to aim for.
I'm now a "healthy weight" according to the BMI scale but I still have a considerable amount of weight to lose as there's a lot of fat around my stomach/thighs/legs/bottom/back/arms and a bit on my face that needs to go.
So I ignore BMI now and just go by how I look and feel but I'm nowhere near there yet 3 -
LiminalAscendance wrote: »crzycatlady1 wrote: »Nope. I don't care, really. My Bull$#!t Mass Index is 17.9, which would be considered 'underweight', but I don't see myself that way at all. I'm fine with maintaining this weight.
Your profile says you've struggled with an ED though. How you perceive yourself may not be the healthiest indicator to go by. What does your doctor say about your underweight bmi?
I like how if you're overweight on these forums (even considerably so), and you mention that you're ignoring the BMI table, you get cheers and comments of "rock on," but if you're marginally considered underweight by said table (17.9 vs. 18.5), you get called out on your profile for your eating history (which is a disgustingly tactless act on a public forum).
And who are you to ask what her doctor thinks?
I've never cheered anyone on for being at an overweight bmi. And if someone puts information in their public profile then it's out there for others to see/comment on. When the pp shared that she's underweight, has a history with an ED and then also states that she's ok with her weight-that raises red flags. I asked for more info out of concern for her. She seems to have taken my post in the way that it was intended and it sounds like she's making progress with her recovery. Really surprised that someone would read what the pp posted and not be concerned, and would instead question the poster who was trying to figure out if the pp was ok.
16 -
Even the BMI charts admit that they are a one size fit all. And I have seen several of them actual include a disclosure that the chart may not be accurate for athletic individuals. Meaning muscle mass throws could throw you over the spectrum. For instance at 6'1, my BMI says I should be between 165 and 174. I weight 212 currently with a 23% BF. Could I stand to lose 15 to 20 lbs? Yes. 38 lbs? Heck no. I graduated High School weighting 170 and I was skin and bones, a walking skeleton.
My doctor does not even mention BMI around me. He has much more important indicators he cares about. And honestly I could careless too. I have my ideal and I will work towards that.0 -
If I go by Asian BMI classifications, I'm overweight. 1
-
-
Soccermavrick wrote: »Even the BMI charts admit that they are a one size fit all. And I have seen several of them actual include a disclosure that the chart may not be accurate for athletic individuals. Meaning muscle mass throws could throw you over the spectrum. For instance at 6'1, my BMI says I should be between 165 and 174. I weight 212 currently with a 23% BF. Could I stand to lose 15 to 20 lbs? Yes. 38 lbs? Heck no. I graduated High School weighting 170 and I was skin and bones, a walking skeleton.
My doctor does not even mention BMI around me. He has much more important indicators he cares about. And honestly I could careless too. I have my ideal and I will work towards that.
This is my husband. 6'1. Used to throw competitively (so think shot putter type build). He's currently at his lowest weight in decades: 225. That just barely dropped him from "obese" into "overweight". To hit "normal" BMI, he'd have to drop to athlete levels (or less) body fat.0 -
Mouse_Potato wrote: »
I hate the Waist:Hip ratio. It shows me as "at risk" no matter how small I get because my hips shrink along with the rest of me.
Sadly, this ratio is largely genetically determined. It is a good descriptor for apple vs pear fat deposition, which does affect your risk, as it indicates visceral fat, but beyond a certain point, you may not be able to alter it. If you tend to have a high waist:hip ratio, it may be more important to make sure the other measures, such as BMI, are okay.
I'm pretty sure that if I went up into the obese range, I'd start putting enough on my belly for the waist:hip ratio to go the wrong way, but I'm hour-glassy by genetic disposition, and I could be overweight by BMI, borderline by waist:height ratio, and almost certainly overfat by BF%, and my waist:hip ratio would remain healthy.
So I think it's a ratio to use in conjunction with other measures, not by itself.3 -
Bmi is more of a guidline then anything else. It is most helpful for people for people losing or gaining weight to see what a healthy weight is. Also five pounds isnt the end of the world.3
-
hellobaconplease wrote: »I don't overly care - I mean, I don't want to be in any of the obese categories. I want to get down to "overweight" and I'll be pleased.
My husband is 5'6"/168cm tall, weight varies between 161-174lbs/73-79kg which is overweight for his height, but he does olympic weightlifting almost every day and has a fairly decent amount of muscle. He's got fat too, sure, but I wouldn't say a huge amount. There is a small bit he can pinch on his tummy and hips, that's about it. I look at this picture of him and don't think "oh god, he's so overweight!" BMI 26.6 in this picture.
I would love to be "overweight" but from being more muscular than most women tend to be. I'd be more than happy with that. I know how hard that it is to build muscle as a woman though.
Please post some shirtless pictures of your husband. For science
12 -
No because if I did, I'd be in the category of obese. According to BMI I should be between 118lbs and 159lbs. and obviously I look obese.
Even with my clients, I focus more on body fat % than BMI.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
1 -
@gabbyo23 What’s your frame size? http://www.myfooddiary.com/Resources/frame_size_calculator.asp
I have a large frame and the only time I've had a BMI as low as 24 was after 6 weeks of undereating and overexercising during boot camp. I have wide shoulders, big hands, big feet, and a big head and had to get my boots and hat from the men's side of the uniform room.
My goal is to get back into my skinny jeans from when I was a full time yoga teacher, which will have me at a Low Overweight BMI, and I'm ok with that.2 -
No I don't care about bmi. Its about comfort, agility and flexibility. I like being at a lowish weight but skinniness isn't my goal.
If I don't eat right my body lets me know so I tend to go for good nutrition but I don't deprive myself of foods I enjoy and I cook and shop for getting enjoyable meals on the table.
I admit I don't know my exact bmi atm but I'm definitly on the slimmer side of normal weight for my height and age.
I sure do like feeling more in control of my size and it makes me happy to read how others enjoy getting themselves in shape.
edited 4 spelling0 -
I look at it this way. ..
My hip to waist ratio is healthy 0.76
Body fat percentage around 25%, healthy for female, low average
BMI 25.8 overweight
And Im in the upper end of the healthy weight range my doctor assigned me. (Literally in the 20lb range by 1lb)
Alone any of of these data points is useless to me. The body fat % could allow me to justify not pursuing my additional goals, especially when combined with a good hip to waist ratio. On the other side if I looked only at BMI I could be motivated to pursue unrealistic goals and jeapordize my muscle gains to lose more than I really should. But when I look at all the data side by side I see a more complete picture. I'm almost where I want to be but not quite yet.1 -
My goal weight will take me to a BMI of 26. To even be of a bmi of 22 would make me the same weight I was at 15....and very skinny! Im 41 and 5'11, iv no desire to b the weight I was at aged 15.2
-
-
kshama2001 wrote: »@gabbyo23 What’s your frame size? http://www.myfooddiary.com/Resources/frame_size_calculator.asp
I have a large frame and the only time I've had a BMI as low as 24 was after 6 weeks of undereating and overexercising during boot camp. I have wide shoulders, big hands, big feet, and a big head and had to get my boots and hat from the men's side of the uniform room.
My goal is to get back into my skinny jeans from when I was a full time yoga teacher, which will have me at a Low Overweight BMI, and I'm ok with that.
That calculator drives me batty, because I have differing elbow breadth and wrist findings. If you look at me, it's all a puzzle. My hips are narrow (34"), but my shoulders are broad. I have no earthly idea what my frame size is. I have small hands and feet, and a narrow rib cage (I wear a 30" bra band). I'm going to go with small-ish frame size. I think.0
I'm good lol. 
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions