BMI?
Options
7rainbow
Posts: 161 Member
Alrighty, the world's debate. Is BMI an accurate way to measure if your weight is healthy? I want to make sure I stay a healthy weight, however I know some people use BMI and others claim it is "outdated, horrible, yaddy yaddy yada". So... What should one weigh? I'm a 5'6 female and am trying to figure out! 😅 The BMI scale I saw said 115-150 lbs. Is this good or totally off?
1
Replies
-
The statistical relationship between BMI categories (normal, overweight, obese, etc) and weight-related diseases such as diabetes and heart disease is utterly definite and indisputable. Diabetes, heart disease, and many other ailments increase in direct proportion to BMI categories. There is more diabetes per 100 people in the Overweight category than in Normal, and even more in Obese Class 1, and then more still in Obese Class 2, and so on. The data is so conclusive and proven, over and over and over, that it blows my mind people are still on the anti-BMI warpath.
BMI does not tell you, as an individual, whether you will get sick. It shows statistical probabilities across whole populations. Whether any one individual will, get, say diabetes from having a BMI of 38 is not knowable. But whether "more" people with BMI of 38 will get diabetes than people with a BMI of 27 is beyond dispute. Any individual could be one of the lucky ones, but BMI is about probabilities. It is best to be in a Normal BMI range for your health. Without a doubt, if one has an Obese BMI, it is time to make dietary and lifestyle changes. Aside from the handful of Arnold Schwarzeneggers out there with exceptional muscle mass, how can this possible be controversial?30 -
Do you not think that you can find your personal healthy weight within that wide range?
If not - why not?
Have you previously been somewhere in that range in your adult life? How did it feel to you?11 -
Hit 150 and reevaluate from there.13
-
The "healthy" range of the BMI scale is a wide range, as you point out.
For the vast majority of the population, it's a good guide.
The people who argue that it's "useless" typically point out the cases of athletes and body builders with high muscle mass, who fall outside of the range. It's not universally accurate for everyone, but MOST people are not in that outlier category.
What's your concern with the range for your height?12 -
I don't use BMI for many of my clients. I find out their fit goals then help them decide on body fat % and then we'll figure out a target weight for them.
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
7 -
The range is most likely correct, unless you're also a competitive athlete with an exceptional amount of muscle, an amputee or have some implant/organ removals going on. Where your healthy weight falls within that range depends on a wide range of factors like frame size, breast and hip size, amount of muscle. Some small deviations on the edges of that range might also happen due to the aforementioned things but also due to things like simply preferring a few extra pounds to increase performance on some sport or the slight increase in calorie allowance giving you more general enjoyment and energy for your fitness pursuits.
Example: I'm not an athlete, have all the "regular" body parts still attached and don't have any implants. I'm currently obese and there's no question in my mind that I'm obese. However, I have a quite large frame and huge breasts (not just fat, plenty of breast tissue too), and more muscle than average. Multiple health tests and body composition tests agree that my "ideal" weight would be slightly in the overweight category, since they count the ideal weight based on lean mass and adding a healthy fat percentage on top of that. I have a very petite friend who has a tiny frame, a fairly flat chest and doesn't really do any exercise that increases muscle mass, her "ideal weight" is in the lower end of her BMI spectrum.7 -
BMI is a good way to know if your weight is associated with a higher risk of health complications from being overweight or underweight. Many people, including myself, also find that they feel good and enjoy the way the look somewhere within the "healthy" range for their height, but since it's such a wide range most of us also have goals that go beyond just being within that range (I personally prefer to be at the lower end of the range for my height, for example, while others feel underweight at the lower range and like to be higher).
Anecdotally, it seems like many people who talk about BMI being "outdated" or "inaccurate" are either talking about clear outliers (bodybuilders) or are attempting to challenge the clear evidence that obesity is associated with harmful health outcomes.
My personal take: if you're currently overweight, shooting to get within the healthy range for your height is a good goal and you can always adjust if you feel like you want to continue losing or gain some weight.8 -
The problem isn't BMI...the problem is that people incorrectly use or interpret BMI. BMI isn't and never was intended to be a measure of an individuals overall health...it is a population statistic used to determine the potential risk of certain medical conditions that have a high rate of correlation to being overweight/obese. It is in no way a measure of individual health.
The BMI range is rather broad, and is that way in order to account for different skeletal build, muscle mass, etc. The vast majority of people who aren't either within a healthy range, or very close to it...maybe a few pounds over, are for the most part in denial unless they are true outliers...and those people know who they are. There are very few people who are obese as per the BMI scale who aren't in fact very fat...if one is obese because of muscle mass, they will very much know that because they will be hugely muscular and ripped.
It is not unusual for more sporty/athletic individuals, particularly men to maintain a healthy weight/BF% that is at the high end or just over the high end of BMI...but again the numbers are usually pretty close. My usual maintenance weight is around 180 Lbs which is about 5 Lbs over the high end of BMI for my height. At that weight, I'm fairly lean with a flat stomach and no love handles, but not underwear model lean with a popping six pack or anything. I lift and I'm pretty active and athletic/sporty and while not hugely muscular by any means, I do carry some decent muscle mass, particularly in my legs and my rear...mostly from years of lifting and cycling.
BMI is a perfectly acceptable guide for the vast majority of people, but should also be used in conjunction with other measurables like BF%, etc.16 -
Do you not think that you can find your personal healthy weight within that wide range?
If not - why not?
Have you previously been somewhere in that range in your adult life? How did it feel to you?
This. It's a wide range, most women are at a healthy weight somewhere within it, but if you don't think it works for you there are other ways to determine a healthy weight.
I didn't use it, as I knew I liked how I looked at 120-125 and that happened to be within the range for me (5'3).3 -
Probably you (OP) know this, but in case some reading don't: The goal weight you put in your MFP profile has no, nada, zero impact on the calorie goal it gives you. Put in a weight 10 pounds/kg below your current weight, or 75 pounds/kg below your current weight, and it will generate the same calorie goal. What it's looking at is the weight loss rate you request, and whether you can lose that fast (at your current size/age/activity level) while still getting the number of calories MFP considers minimally necessary (1200 for women, 1500 for men).
Therefore, you can put in a provisional goal now, and update it later. It's pretty much always easier to evaluate a goal weight when you get closer to it.
MFP uses the goal weight for some progress-type or motivating messaging. It doesn't affect calorie goal.
FWIW, the exercise entries in one's profile don't affect calorie goal, either: Just used for exercise tracking (plan vs. actual, on the exercise diary page on the web, for example) and supposedly motivating messaging.
No need to worry about final goal weight at the start, unless it's deeply important to you. If it is, maybe talk with your doctor about what would be healthy? (S/he may just say "in the normal BMI range"!)5 -
I am 20lbs over the the top end of the range for BMI. I will never be in the range and am not striving for it. I am built pretty thick (thighs, calves, arms) and carry a decent amount of muscle so in general for me it is not a measurement I am concerned about.5
-
Doc told me that it doesn't matter whether it's fat or muscle pertaining to BMI. He said it puts more work on your heart with either one. He tells me I'm morbidly obese in the winter and just right the rest of the year,lol.6
-
It's a broad range intentionally. I am currently aiming for the upper end of it and will reassess once I am there. For most people it is a decent guide of where to at least shoot for. Where within that range is down to personal healthy and, yeah, preferences and satisfaction.
But while I may not look as good at 150 as 120, certainly above 150 is overweight for me and below 115 is certainly underweight. So staying within the range SOMEWHERE is pretty freaking safe for 99% of people.8 -
I try to look at BMI the way I do the scale. It's a piece of the picture, but it is very limited in what it can tell you.
I've also never been at a healthy weight, so for me I have my goal set to the middle of the healthy range for my height and I'll reevaluate as I get closer.
Nobody can say for sure what your ideal weight ought to be, since we're all a bit different as far as body composition goes. It might be a good idea to take a similar stance as me: set a rough goal and see how you feel as you approach it. You can always change it later to either lose more weight, regain some, maybe try lifting weights, etc.3 -
When I was class III obese my goal was to no longer be morbidly obese.
By the time I was verging to become overweight, I was confident enough in the process that I decided to shoot for the normal weight range.
But the numbers had zero meaning for me as they would take me back to junior high.
So I decided to shoot for the middle of the normal weight range not even realizing at the time what BMI was saying (see above for what it does say).
it was just a "goal" number to fill. My real goal was size of deficit over time such as to lose the most I could (over time) with the least side effects and problems and most sustainable path I could come up with
By the time I was ready to worry about where in the normal BMI range I would settle I was more concerned with long term retention of my losses and making sure I had the easiest time to maintain.
Profile pick is in the just below BMI 24, within the range where I've remained since ~spring/summer 2016 (mid BMI 23s to mid BMI 24s).
There definitely exists room for me to be leaner. But the big health gains are already in the bag and I'm more interested in making maintenance easier as compared to worrying about perfection...
Eta previous profile pic with coffee mug...7 -
Alrighty, the world's debate. Is BMI an accurate way to measure if your weight is healthy? I want to make sure I stay a healthy weight, however I know some people use BMI and others claim it is "outdated, horrible, yaddy yaddy yada". So... What should one weigh? I'm a 5'6 female and am trying to figure out! 😅 The BMI scale I saw said 115-150 lbs. Is this good or totally off?
for the vast majority of people, yes, BMI is a pretty accurate guide to whether you are a healthy weight.
Sure, there are some obvious outliers - but is usually obvious if you are one of them.
It doesn't tell you exactly what you should weigh but it does give you a range and it is highly unlikely you will be at a healthy weight if you are not within the range or at most slightly out of it..
As was pointed out upthread and as I have said in such threads before, sporty young men ( not elite bodybuilders, just regular active youngish men) can be slightly beyond the range and still be at a healthy weight.
Slightly ie with a BMI of say 27 or 28.
It is worth taking such factors into account when deciding where in the range is likely to apply to you best.
Me as a middle aged, not that sporty woman, who had a BMI of 28 - wasn't out of the range because young and muscular, was out of the range because plain old overweight.
Conversely I am not a teenage girl and I am not trying to get to a BMI of 20, which might of been healthy for me 30 years ago
I think for me settling at a BMI of 23 is ideal.4 -
BMI is a range and I look at it as I look at the weight scale ranges , it's not the end all and be all to determine how healthy someone is or not. I think you have to take many other factors in your life into consideration along with your BMI to conclude your overall health and fitness. I think that's why it is in a range, because someone 20 years old and someone 50 years old although the same weight wouldn't necessarily have the same BMI. I am currently in the middle of my range and am very comfortable with it. If I was at the lower end of the range I would be rail thin and look sickly and unhealthy. This is just my opinion and I am sure you will get many on the subject and I am sure some will disagree with me, but again it's my opinion and it works for me.1
-
I suspect that people’s issue with BMI is that there are better metrics? Like BF%, waist size or waist to hip ratio.
It’s a nicely statistically correlated risk factor for weight related health issues. But there is plenty that it doesn’t capture, as others have said, such as frame size or muscle.2 -
I think that's why it is in a range, because someone 20 years old and someone 50 years old although the same weight wouldn't necessarily have the same BMI.
If they are the same height - yes they neccesarily would.
If people of different heights have the same weight of course their BMI would not be the same - regardless of age.
That's all BMI is - a weight to height ratio
Or did you mean they wouldn't neccesarily have the same ideal weight even though their BMI is same? - well, yes, true.
True for any 2 individuals of same height for that matter
That's why it is a range, not a single number.9 -
I suspect that people’s issue with BMI is that there are better metrics? Like BF%, waist size or waist to hip ratio.
It’s a nicely statistically correlated risk factor for weight related health issues. But there is plenty that it doesn’t capture, as others have said, such as frame size or muscle.
I suspect that some people's issue with it is it doesn't tell them what they want to hear.
16 -
BMI is useful but shouldn't be the only tool used2
-
Wonder if the OP is reading these responses and getting something out of them?
3 -
Can you even build substantial muscle mass with manual labor?
I've worked pretty tough jobs, none of the people I worked with were particularly buff. Unless they did some type of training on the side.0 -
just get within the healthy range of bmi first, then decide if it is healthy for you or not. most people say it suits them fine.0
-
Can you even build substantial muscle mass with manual labor?
I've worked pretty tough jobs, none of the people I worked with were particularly buff. Unless they did some type of training on the side.
You can build muscle with any type of repetitive progressive lifting. People had muscles before weights were invented, so it obviously can be done. That doesn't mean that most manual laborers are going to look buff, but you can also build muscle without looking really buff.3 -
I suspect that people’s issue with BMI is that there are better metrics? Like BF%, waist size or waist to hip ratio.
It’s a nicely statistically correlated risk factor for weight related health issues. But there is plenty that it doesn’t capture, as others have said, such as frame size or muscle.
It does though...that's why it's a rather large range of weight. And once again, an outlier...someone who is "obese" because of muscle mass is going to know and so is everyone else around them. It's also exceedingly rare outside of competitive bodybuilding. As I stated above, it is not particularly unusual for sporty/athletic individuals, particularly men to be at the high end or just a bit over the high end of BMI and still be pretty lean...but again, this is also fairly obvious that the individual isn't overly fat, and in most cases if over the high end, it's only by a handful of Lbs...
Odds are pretty good that if BMI is indicating "obese"...that the individual is in fact overly fat and obese and not a muscle bound beast.8 -
Can you even build substantial muscle mass with manual labor?
I've worked pretty tough jobs, none of the people I worked with were particularly buff. Unless they did some type of training on the side.
"Buff" in terms of adding on slabs of muscle like a bodybuilder...no. But yes, you can put on muscle mass with labor intensive jobs. I did landscape construction for a couple of years in college and I had a pretty good physique to show for it. Not huge in size or anything, but good musculature and pretty lean. I was also well proportioned because I was using all of the muscles in my body for just about everything I did. For "buff", I think of lots of various isolation movements to overwork specific muscles or groups of muscles to make them "unnaturally" large...ie that wouldn't really happen to that degree outside of a gym, thus the quotes.2 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »I suspect that people’s issue with BMI is that there are better metrics? Like BF%, waist size or waist to hip ratio.
It’s a nicely statistically correlated risk factor for weight related health issues. But there is plenty that it doesn’t capture, as others have said, such as frame size or muscle.
It does though...that's why it's a rather large range of weight. And once again, an outlier...someone who is "obese" because of muscle mass is going to know and so is everyone else around them. It's also exceedingly rare outside of competitive bodybuilding. As I stated above, it is not particularly unusual for sporty/athletic individuals, particularly men to be at the high end or just a bit over the high end of BMI and still be pretty lean...but again, this is also fairly obvious that the individual isn't overly fat, and in most cases if over the high end, it's only by a handful of Lbs...
Odds are pretty good that if BMI is indicating "obese"...that the individual is in fact overly fat and obese and not a muscle bound beast.
Exactly this. The healthy BMI range for my height is FORTY POUNDS. The BMI range for my husband is just shy of 50. Trust me, that is taking muscle and frame size into account. To get outside it via muscle -- it's going to show and be obvious and no 'am I fat/not fat'. To get outside it for frame size would be... quite the unusual situation.
In truth I have a super small frame. I wear a size 4 ring. At the upper end of that BMI chart, yeah, I'm still fat. My husband has a very large frame. At the lower end of the BMI chart he'd be underweight. Meaning that the whole range is not necessarily the ideal for us, but our healthy weights still fall *within* that range.6 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »
It does though...that's why it's a rather large range of weight. And once again, an outlier...someone who is "obese" because of muscle mass is going to know and so is everyone else around them. It's also exceedingly rare outside of competitive bodybuilding. As I stated above, it is not particularly unusual for sporty/athletic individuals, particularly men to be at the high end or just a bit over the high end of BMI and still be pretty lean...but again, this is also fairly obvious that the individual isn't overly fat, and in most cases if over the high end, it's only by a handful of Lbs...
Odds are pretty good that if BMI is indicating "obese"...that the individual is in fact overly fat and obese and not a muscle bound beast.
You shifted the goal posts there by talking about the obese class. There’s another whole class between that and the normal, healthy range.
I just did a Google search and it seems well know that BMI isn’t consistent across a range of heights. For example, I’m 6’4, BF 16%, waist 35”, unexceptional muscle, and just in the overweight class. This would surprise people to look at me (now that I’ve lost the beer belly at least). And I’m not particularly sporty or athletic.
I don’t think we really disagree though. I suppose being simultaneously skinny and overweight does bias my view of the metric though.
0 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »
It does though...that's why it's a rather large range of weight. And once again, an outlier...someone who is "obese" because of muscle mass is going to know and so is everyone else around them. It's also exceedingly rare outside of competitive bodybuilding. As I stated above, it is not particularly unusual for sporty/athletic individuals, particularly men to be at the high end or just a bit over the high end of BMI and still be pretty lean...but again, this is also fairly obvious that the individual isn't overly fat, and in most cases if over the high end, it's only by a handful of Lbs...
Odds are pretty good that if BMI is indicating "obese"...that the individual is in fact overly fat and obese and not a muscle bound beast.
You shifted the goal posts there by talking about the obese class. There’s another whole class between that and the normal, healthy range.
I just did a Google search and it seems well know that BMI isn’t consistent across a range of heights. For example, I’m 6’4, BF 16%, waist 35”, unexceptional muscle, and just in the overweight class. This would surprise people to look at me (now that I’ve lost the beer belly at least). And I’m not particularly sporty or athletic.
I don’t think we really disagree though. I suppose being simultaneously skinny and overweight does bias my view of the metric though.
You're not simultaneously skinny and overweight though. BMI isn't making a judgment about any individual body or telling you anything about how you APPEAR. It's simply a chart showing where risks associated with weight are. It's population level information, not a individual body appearance tool.4
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 396.6K Introduce Yourself
- 44.2K Getting Started
- 260.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.3K Food and Nutrition
- 47.6K Recipes
- 232.8K Fitness and Exercise
- 449 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.7K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.3K Motivation and Support
- 8.3K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.5K Chit-Chat
- 2.6K Fun and Games
- 4.5K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 18 MyFitnessPal Academy
- 1.4K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions