Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

Is every single body in the world intended to be within the so-called healthy BMI range?

1…1112141617…22

Replies

  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    None of the tests work for everyone. My waist/hip ratio is weird too, I think it's because I'm really short-waisted and have slim hips. At one point I was a 2 in jeans and barely okay with the waist-hip. One of the reasons I had a DEXA (when I was around BMI 26 and then a follow up when I was around goal) was that I was curious if I actually had a problem with visceral fat, since I seem to gain in the middle and my waist-hip ratio was never as I would like it (I thought that was probably structural, but wanted to check). It was fine, no issue with visceral fat.
  • kimny72
    kimny72 Posts: 16,013 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    None of the tests work for everyone. My waist/hip ratio is weird too, I think it's because I'm really short-waisted and have slim hips. At one point I was a 2 in jeans and barely okay with the waist-hip. One of the reasons I had a DEXA (when I was around BMI 26 and then a follow up when I was around goal) was that I was curious if I actually had a problem with visceral fat, since I seem to gain in the middle and my waist-hip ratio was never as I would like it (I thought that was probably structural, but wanted to check). It was fine, no issue with visceral fat.

    So a DEXA will show visceral fat? That is something I worry about too, people are always surprised that I weigh as much as I do since my arms and legs really leaned out but my midsection is still where I am obviously carrying some excess!
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    kimny72 wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    None of the tests work for everyone. My waist/hip ratio is weird too, I think it's because I'm really short-waisted and have slim hips. At one point I was a 2 in jeans and barely okay with the waist-hip. One of the reasons I had a DEXA (when I was around BMI 26 and then a follow up when I was around goal) was that I was curious if I actually had a problem with visceral fat, since I seem to gain in the middle and my waist-hip ratio was never as I would like it (I thought that was probably structural, but wanted to check). It was fine, no issue with visceral fat.

    So a DEXA will show visceral fat? That is something I worry about too, people are always surprised that I weigh as much as I do since my arms and legs really leaned out but my midsection is still where I am obviously carrying some excess!

    Yeah, it shows how much fat you have in various parts of your body; really interesting.
  • Packerjohn
    Packerjohn Posts: 4,855 Member
    edited November 2017
    JasonMcS wrote: »
    Depending on exacts and according to Wikipedia, Arnold Schwarzenegger was 6'2" and weighed 235 at his last Mr. Olympia contest (260 before the cut). That puts his competition weight BMI at ;


    "Height: 6 feet, 2 inches
    Weight: 235 pounds
    Your BMI is 30.2, indicating your weight is in the Obese category for adults of your height."


    The calculator is not very accurate. You can WOO this if you want but to say that Mr. Olympia 5 times was Obese?Come on? You know if you are healthy. You just have to tell yourself the truth. I have a long way to go but I am not trying to get to a BMI goal. I am trying to get to a healthy me goal.

    So he is one of the 10-20% of the outliers. So would Michael Jordan in his playing day and any active NFL running back. What % of the people at the beach looked like them on your last visit?
  • JasonMcS
    JasonMcS Posts: 96 Member
    @Packerjohn , LOL. I was just making a point. You are correct. I am simply saying what the world thinks is super perfect is on this scale, we allow insurance to measure us by, obese. Not over weight. Not border line Obese. Higher premiums and all...This BMI to Health comparison is not good enough to broadly classify humans of different shapes and sizes. I am not hiding my size. I am better than I was but am not where I want to be and BMI is not my goal. I don't think it works in enough people that it should be the standard. That is my experiential opinion. but who am I?
  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,268 Member
    JasonMcS wrote: »
    @Packerjohn , LOL. I was just making a point. You are correct. I am simply saying what the world thinks is super perfect is on this scale, we allow insurance to measure us by, obese. Not over weight. Not border line Obese. Higher premiums and all...This BMI to Health comparison is not good enough to broadly classify humans of different shapes and sizes. I am not hiding my size. I am better than I was but am not where I want to be and BMI is not my goal. I don't think it works in enough people that it should be the standard. That is my experiential opinion. but who am I?

    I have yet ot see anyone say BMI is perfect...

    I think however that if you are classed as obese and even overweight you probably are...there are outliers yes...but those are not the norm.

    If people feel that they are an outlier then by all means do more testing...but even Waist to Hip Ratio is shown to not apply to all...BF% testing has large variances even Dexa.

    BMI is a weight measure and that is use to figure out what you probably will get if you are obese not what you will get...and sorry but I don't have an issue with people classed as obese having to pay more for insurance...when I was a smoker i had to pay more...thems the breaks for not taking care of oneself.

    https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/educational/lose_wt/BMI/bmicalc.htm

    read this site...all of it...it includes it's limitations etc....

  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    JasonMcS wrote: »
    You say you would rather unjustly punish the 10% (not my number) than figure out a person by person system to figure out the exact risk.

    No one has said this. You are the only one talking about insurance. Stef is in Canada, for heaven's sake, and most of us even in the US don't have insurance costs vary by BMI. (For the record, mine do not, but my employer-based BCBS has a wellness program (does not affect costs) that uses BMI + other tests (including waist to height). Most wellness programs that affect costs allow you to pay less if you hit certain criteria that are way broader than BMI too (just getting an assessment sometimes, lowering blood pressure or cholesterol, losing weight, step count, etc.). I am aware some focus on BMI alone, and even though I firmly believe BMI is a generally reasonable standard that applies to most, I would not approve of such a thing and certainly would allow an out for someone who can show BF% that was healthy (I also would use additional measures like waist/height like my insurance co).
    If you have a car that is the same model that someone else has wrecked or if you could be in an accident then you should pay a higher auto insurance premium.

    ?? Car insurance (which unlike health insurance acts as actual insurance) DOES vary by statistics only, such that being a young male or the model of the car makes a difference. Where my house is located affects my homeowners insurance, too.
  • JasonMcS
    JasonMcS Posts: 96 Member
    @lemurcat12 I was failing to make the point that just because the auto and other insurance "DOES" discriminate does not make it right. I have drove a Jeep Wrangler for 10 years (3 different Jeeps) and pay a higher premium because of it. I have never had an accident in one of them. NEVER! Is my higher premium justified? No. But statistics say...
  • usernameformyfitnesspal1
    usernameformyfitnesspal1 Posts: 12 Member
    John Cena 6 1 251 lbs BMI 32.3 OBESE...

  • stanmann571
    stanmann571 Posts: 5,727 Member
    edited November 2017
    rheddmobile wrote: »
    JasonMcS wrote: »
    @stevencloser So with or without...does he fit? I can go to my gym and pull you 5 men (I am in a small gym) that I can think of off the top of my head that are body builders in the 6 foot tall range and in the 200 pound plus range. Start asking some that you know their weight. Put you absolute knowledge to work. Start putting body builders in to the BMI scale. Not cut weight now. Do it for homework. then be honest about what you find. Do you really think a skinny fat person that sits at a desk and eats snickers is in better statistical shape than these body builders who make a diet of protein shakes, fruits and vegetables, and lean meat? But the BMI will tell you they are. It is wrong. Do the home work. I used Arnold as an example because of his Mr. Olympian titles and because everyone knows him.
    Again, we are talking about opinion. It is one thing we all get to have.

    There's some evidence (if I recall correctly, based on a study of football players)that very high BMI increases mortality risk even if it's muscle. Your cardiovascular system has to work harder if there is more of you, period. Excessive fat has additional negative effects, but being bigger and more muscular than a human can get without spending hours doing nothing but trying to get muscular isn't necessarily super healthy.

    This is very important. Take someone like Vince Wilfork who retired from football last year. He was a relatively healthy 325 lb man when he retired.

    If he's Wise, he's not 325 lbs today. He may not be 195 lbs which is what his height/BMI suggest are desirable because to get that low he'd need to be comatose. OTOH, If he took advantage of the discipline/fitness habits he gained over almost 20 years of playing football and his relative youth(36/37), he could have easily cut down to 260 or 240 within a very short time by maintaining activity and cutting calories. He would still be obese, but he would be healthy and obese.
  • JasonMcS
    JasonMcS Posts: 96 Member
    NorthCascades wrote: »
    JasonMcS wrote: »
    I can go to my gym and pull you 5 men (I am in a small gym) that I can think of off the top of my head that are body builders in the 6 foot tall range and in the 200 pound plus range.

    Nobody thinks there aren't outliers. Your trying to prove a point that everybody already agrees with. The part you seem to be missing though is you can also find 500 people on the sidewalk, at the mall, in the grocery store, or anywhere else, who are 5 feet tall and 200 pounds.

    If their are 20% "outliers" is that enough to call this bad science? What about 30%? I agree it is a good estimation. I don't agree that it is definitive or that it has validity in the medical or Insurance industry in generalizations about another human's health. with 10% outliers it is not accurate enough to stereotype humans.

    We disagree. I am cool with that!

Categories