Am I unhealthy? BMI says I'm obese..

PAV8888

The disagree is not because they might or might not be obese. Even assuming they are obese, though, I don't see how that disqualifies them from providing you with medical advice--or where else other than from a medical professional you would get such.

AnnPT77

squiffiegirl wrote: »

Interesting that most here advise talking to your doctor. The doctors, nurses, techs, and receptionists at the clinic I go to are all, and I do mean ALL...obese. Morbidly obese.

Knowledge, insight and expertise can be independent of personal performance ability in humans.

Yes, many medical professionals are fat. And many professional baseball managers were mediocre players, and can't play at all now.

It would be nice if medical professionals were excellent models/exemplars. Just because they aren't, doesn't mean their advice is necessarily inaccurate.

Also, I have a whole boatload of doctors, PAs, and related medical professional (general practictioner, three surgeons, an orthopedist, one current and several former oncologists, an osteopath, a dermatologist, a gastroenterologist, a couple of pulmonologists, two retinologists, and probably some I'm forgetting). None of them are/were morbidly obese; one oncologist is a little pudgy, overweight to just obese probably; the rest appear to be a normal weight or just slightly overweight, and several are actively athletic (both surgeons, osteopath for sure, perhaps others in that they look fairly fit for their ages). Does that make their professional advice more accurate? I doubt it.

Lillymoo01

squiffiegirl wrote: »

Interesting that most here advise talking to your doctor. The doctors, nurses, techs, and receptionists at the clinic I go to are all, and I do mean ALL...obese. Morbidly obese.

I know many within the medical profession that also smoke. Does that mean they have no idea that smoking is bad for them? Hell no! They know what they should be doing for optimum health and what they are doing are two entirely different things. The fact that they smoke does not subtract from their vast knowledge of how the human body works.

SCoil123

paperpudding wrote: »

That said there is an entire overweight range on the BMI chart between normal and obese. It’s much more likely someone can be healthy and at low health risk in the overweight category than the obese one.

yes of course.

Thats what I meant by a matter of degree.

Obviously the risk for anyone of having a BMI of, say. 28, is different to the risk of one of 45.

My comment was directed at the OP only and take on the thread. So sorry if that was unclear.

SCoil123

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK278973/

magnusthenerd

There's a common misconception about BMI that people make with composition: a lot of people think that you can have a BMI above 30 and not be obese or a BMI above 25 and not be overweight because you have less body fat. That is not how it works. If you are over 25 BMI, you are overweight, period. Over 30 BMI, obese, period. That is the actual medical definition of those conditions.
I am ~10% body fat, and I am overweight on a doctor's scale, before anyone wants to get on me about bodybuilders and ignoring the point.

Yes, being leaner changes the risk profiles. The number of people that BMI inaccurately predicts adiposity for, however, is not that large, particularly in terms of overpredicting. BMI has far more of a problem in under predicting people that are normal weight, metabolic obese (colloquially skinny fat). It also does not change the risk profiles for all diseases - sleep apnea risk is, if anything, greater for people who are overweight or obese with low body fat. Risk of knee issues is also unchanged.

There's also a misconception that muscle tissue is a free lunch, and that is purely excess fat that change mortality. Sorry, having a bit of muscle mass, sure, reduces risks for mortality in the elderly by insuring mobility. It still is metabolically taxing, and carry large amounts of it probably does reduce life span, even if not anything near as much as carrying the same extra mass as adipose. Again, I'm carrying extra muscle mass, I'm aware if I carry it for the rest of my life as I hope to, it will be trading off possibly a few years for a quality of life I'd rather have.

paperpudding

magnusthenerd wrote: »

There's a common misconception about BMI that people make with composition: a lot of people think that you can have a BMI above 30 and not be obese or a BMI above 25 and not be overweight because you have less body fat. That is not how it works. If you are over 25 BMI, you are overweight, period. Over 30 BMI, obese, period. That is the actual medical definition of those conditions.
I am ~10% body fat, and I am overweight on a doctor's scale, before anyone wants to get on me about bodybuilders and ignoring the point.

Yes, being leaner changes the risk profiles. The number of people that BMI inaccurately predicts adiposity for, however, is not that large, particularly in terms of overpredicting. BMI has far more of a problem in under predicting people that are normal weight, metabolic obese (colloquially skinny fat). It also does not change the risk profiles for all diseases - sleep apnea risk is, if anything, greater for people who are overweight or obese with low body fat. Risk of knee issues is also unchanged.

There's also a misconception that muscle tissue is a free lunch, and that is purely excess fat that change mortality. Sorry, having a bit of muscle mass, sure, reduces risks for mortality in the elderly by insuring mobility. It still is metabolically taxing, and carry large amounts of it probably does reduce life span, even if not anything near as much as carrying the same extra mass as adipose. Again, I'm carrying extra muscle mass, I'm aware if I carry it for the rest of my life as I hope to, it will be trading off possibly a few years for a quality of life I'd rather have.

I disagree.

If your BMI is slightly over 25 and you are in the category of people for whom this is ok, then it is ok.

This idea that there are arbitary cut off points that apply exactly the same to everyone is as incorrect as the idea that there are lots of people who are healthy outliers.

middlehaitch

@paperpudding the BMI chart is only lower for the Asian populations at the upper end because of (I think =read but didn’t keep the research) a greater chance of diabetes T2, high cholesterol. Oops - heart disease not cholesterol.

The lower end applies to all people. Meaning anyone could be an outlier, not just Asian.

(It was thought Asian were smaller boned, comparative research shows it is negligible)

Cheers, h.

HDBKLM

The following is not meant to confirm or contradict what anybody is saying here but it might be interesting to note given the last few comments on this thread that in China the cut-off for 'healthy/normal' BMI (going toward overweight; I don't know what it is at the other end) is a point lower than in the US. Just to say the goal posts can be moved and governments determine this based on their assessment of the medical and population data.

middlehaitch

HDBKLM wrote: »

The following is not meant to confirm or contradict what anybody is saying here but it might be interesting to note given the last few comments on this thread that in China the cut-off for 'healthy/normal' BMI (going toward overweight; I don't know what it is at the other end) is a point lower than in the US. Just to say the goal posts can be moved and governments determine this based on their assessment of the medical and population data.

Earlier posting to paperpudding I pointed out that it was only at the upper end of the BMI there was a change in Asian countries. Singapore and Hong Kong (as well as China?). have a lower upper level of normal BMI, 23.

All have the same lower BMI cut off as Can/Uk/Aus/USA/EUR/NZ etc. 18.5

I don’t know about the Indian subcontinent or others countries classified as Asian.

Cheers, h.

ETA just added this to put the numbers in, not disagree etc.