Coming to grips with BMI
Replies
-
Nt0
-
NorthCascades wrote: »YellowD0gs wrote: »KeithBarrows wrote: »Thanks everyone for your input. As I am seeing a heart doc (a very recent development) and going in for my 60,000 mile checkup, err, 60 year physical, BMI was something that was asked on the intake forms for the new Doc. .
Ah HAH! Clarity is approaching. For what it's worth, I had my heart attacks 2 years ago and that obviously got me started with a Cardiologist and was the first time I saw "BMI" mentioned. Long story short, I had been bristling with them over the BMI reports, my on-going weight loss, etc etc, and finally took them to task to explain why they were taking such a vague metric so seriously. Their explanation at the time is that it doesn't really matter between fat and/or muscle, its all extra tissue that your heart has to pump blood through, and the more tissue, the more your heart has to work. Which is a thing for heart attack survivors. But as a "statement of health", yeah, generally meaningless.
It sounds like you've had multiple heart attacks, and your BMI is in the risk factor category, from what you're telling us?
Not any more, it isn't.2 -
Somewhere in recent years after the reintroduction of the BMI into medical society, the use of BMI has been skewed by general society. Probably when the internet became widely available.
The combination of the vague info needed and ability to quickly formulate a BMI made it once again a simple screening tool and nothing else.
As more current evidence became available recently doctors are implementing the waist measurement coupled with BMI as more efficient way of determining if any future screening is needed.
In other words, we as society put wayyyyy more importance of the BMI from lack of education.
Here is me at age 52 with a obese BMI...
In the past my doctor would look on paper before viewing me at my BMI and say I fit into the obese category. Then while screening me in person, they would notice I carry more than average muscle mass for a man my age, size, and weight.
Currently my doctor would look at my BMI and my waist measurement and know there is a very good chance I carry more than average muscle mass sight unseen.
Again, BMI isn't a tell all and is misunderstood.7 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »Theoldguy1 wrote: »I'm not really sure what you are looking for.
BMI assumes average muscle, so yes, if you have above average muscle, then it will be off for you.
BMI is a populational metric, so it's only a very rough metric for individuals.
So again, I'm not entirely sure what you are looking for?
BMI is weight and height, body composition (bodyfat % or muscle) assumed or otherwise doesn't come into the equation.
Yes, I'm aware that the number doesn't assume anything, but the categorizations of "underweight," "healthy weight," "overweight," and "obese" do have assumptions of averages in terms of body composition built into them since they are based on populational averages.
Which makes the categories less applicable for individuals who deviate heavily from average in terms of body composition for their BMI.
True, but by definition, "individuals who deviate heavily from average" are not common.
Yep. I've noticed that most people that most people that hate BMI seem to think they are exceptional. Like no, BMI isn't a perfect measure, especially if you aren't a white male. It being a bad measure for an Olympic athlete doesn't mean that an average person looking is actually "healthy" if the chart says they are obese. But, everyone likes to think they are one of the outliers.
Now, what that measure means for people is individual of what you intend to do with that information and your actual health. But, far fewer people are outliers than like to think they are outliers.7 -
I don't think it's that uncommon for men to be outliers in that they can be not overfat but in the BMI overweight zone. It's less common for women or if you are getting obese numbers. There was a good discussion about it on Sigma Nutrition, with Spencer Nadolsky as the guest. It's usually pretty obvious from other measurements/your exercise history if there's an issue.2
-
My BMI is 15.5 and they say it's underweight. My health is great and I don't look underweight ☺2
-
I don't think it's that uncommon for men to be outliers in that they can be not overfat but in the BMI overweight zone. It's less common for women or if you are getting obese numbers. There was a good discussion about it on Sigma Nutrition, with Spencer Nadolsky as the guest. It's usually pretty obvious from other measurements/your exercise history if there's an issue.
You listen to good podcasts
While I agree it is less common for females to be outliers in that regard, it does happen. I'm currently categorized as overweight and before I started this kinda-sorta-cutting-but-nothing-formal, I was within 2 or 3 pounds of being obese.
10 -
I suspect the level of mass someone can safely carry is very individual to that person. I used to be overweight, but not obese. My BMI was 28, but I was on the verge of diabetes. So I went on a diet and started to exercise a lot.
I cut to a BMI of 21 (142 pounds), and have stayed there for the last 3 years. My blood glucose is now normal, and other health markers improved as well. I have no idea what the maximum BMI I can get away with, but it's less than 28 and more than 21.4 -
I don't think it's that uncommon for men to be outliers in that they can be not overfat but in the BMI overweight zone. It's less common for women or if you are getting obese numbers. There was a good discussion about it on Sigma Nutrition, with Spencer Nadolsky as the guest. It's usually pretty obvious from other measurements/your exercise history if there's an issue.
You listen to good podcasts While I agree it is less common for females to be outliers in that regard, it does happen. I'm currently categorized as overweight and before I started this kinda-sorta-cutting-but-nothing-formal, I was within 2 or 3 pounds of being obese.
Oh, I agree. Definitely possible (and impressive!) but of course you fit into the "pretty obvious from other measurements/your exercise history"!5 -
MercuryForce wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »Theoldguy1 wrote: »I'm not really sure what you are looking for.
BMI assumes average muscle, so yes, if you have above average muscle, then it will be off for you.
BMI is a populational metric, so it's only a very rough metric for individuals.
So again, I'm not entirely sure what you are looking for?
BMI is weight and height, body composition (bodyfat % or muscle) assumed or otherwise doesn't come into the equation.
Yes, I'm aware that the number doesn't assume anything, but the categorizations of "underweight," "healthy weight," "overweight," and "obese" do have assumptions of averages in terms of body composition built into them since they are based on populational averages.
Which makes the categories less applicable for individuals who deviate heavily from average in terms of body composition for their BMI.
True, but by definition, "individuals who deviate heavily from average" are not common.
Yep. I've noticed that most people that most people that hate BMI seem to think they are exceptional. Like no, BMI isn't a perfect measure, especially if you aren't a white male. It being a bad measure for an Olympic athlete doesn't mean that an average person looking is actually "healthy" if the chart says they are obese. But, everyone likes to think they are one of the outliers.
Now, what that measure means for people is individual of what you intend to do with that information and your actual health. But, far fewer people are outliers than like to think they are outliers.
Okay sure, but that comment was in response to my previous comment, and I only said it because OP posted a photo of themselves where they appeared to have more than the average amount of muscle.
So if OP is still as muscular, then it seems very reasonable to assume that they might not be very well represented by the average.
Which seems to have been OP's point the entire time, that because of his muscle mass, that he doesn't feel that the BMI labels are appropriate for his build.
He's only posted old photos though, so it's impossible to comment on the present. People can lose a lot of muscle in 5 years. So who knows.
But my original reply to him was basically along the lines of "yeah, if you have above average muscle mass, then the BMI categorizations may not be accurate for you".
0 -
Theoldguy1 wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »How tall do I have to be to be considered in the healthy range at 194? lol
At 5' 8", I'm in the overweight range when I crest 165 and obese at 197.
Ever get your bodyfat measured by a reliable method?
I was referring to the height disparity between myself and the OP (joking about the fact the healthy BMI range for my height is a good 30 pounds lower than for his).
I wasn't commenting on my actual weight status.
But to answer your question, no I've never wasted my money getting my body fat measured (I'm not a competitive bodybuilder so there's no real point in doing so).0 -
I don't think it's that uncommon for men to be outliers in that they can be not overfat but in the BMI overweight zone. It's less common for women or if you are getting obese numbers. There was a good discussion about it on Sigma Nutrition, with Spencer Nadolsky as the guest. It's usually pretty obvious from other measurements/your exercise history if there's an issue.
Agreed, I didn't mean that outliers are rare. Just extreme ones, like those who measure as obese but are lean.
Slightly overweight but pretty lean is more common, I think.1 -
Sporty young men being healthy at slightly out of BMI range - ie with BMI's of 27 or 28 - is quite common.
Not extreme outliers and not competitive body builders - just regular fit young men.
or what Carlos is saying " Slightly overweight but pretty lean is more common"2 -
A BMI of 28 vs. a BMI of 25 is a 20lbs difference, it is quite significant. I don't think "slightly" out of range is the right wording. Your doctor would let you know if you were 20lbs overweight.0
-
A BMI of 28 vs. a BMI of 25 is a 20lbs difference, it is quite significant. I don't think "slightly" out of range is the right wording. Your doctor would let you know if you were 20lbs overweight.
Lots of doctors don’t mention when their patients are overweight. There’s a whole big discussion here about that.2 -
Some service branches take a fresh look at body composition assessment methods, but weight still a focal point.
The U.S. Army and other branches of the military are taking a fresh look at how they measure body composition to determine if it is accurately associated with performance.
The U.S. Department of Defense instruction 1308.3 mandates that each service branch carry out physical fitness and body fat programs and procedures. In general, the military establishes minimum physical standards for recruitment and retention by measuring body fat based on height and weight tests or based on measurements at the neck and waist. Body composition is calculated using the body mass index (BMI).
The standards are not easy to meet. Right now, according to a Dec. 22, 2020, Congressional Research Service report, “19% of U.S. adults ages 18-24 would not meet standards for accession to the U.S. military due to obesity.”
However, some experts consider BMI-based body composition calculations to be a problematic way to measure body fat overall, gauge healthy weight ranges among and between racial and ethnic groups, or predict health outcomes in general. (See a rundown of the BMI issue at https://www.insider.com/is-bmi-accurate.)
Many of the military’s body composition programs haven’t been updated since the 1940s, when society looked very different, said Katrina Velasquez, a lobbyist with the nonprofit Eating Disorders Coalition. The average American — and service member — is taller with more muscle mass.
Velasquez: Weight-based body composition programs are harmful and stigmatizing
BMI testing is not only an inaccurate measure of health, “it’s actually pretty harmful,” Velasquez said, because it can trigger eating disorders in service members predisposed to develop one.
She said research shows that the service member population is developing eating disorders at a higher rate than the general population, which is roughly 9%. The military has few treatment options for this mental illness, she added.
Velasquez said she’s heard from numerous service members who’ve engaged in unhealthy behaviors to “make weight.” These include eating almost nothing ahead of weigh-ins, wearing plastic to sweat off pounds or taking laxatives. The body composition programs also often layer on stigmatizing and stressful elements such as announcing weights out loud in group settings or separating out or threatening to fire service members who don’t make weight, she said.
Certain service branches look at new assessment methods
The following studies or policy changes suggest that some service branches are open to considering changes to body composition programs:
Army: The U.S. Army on Oct. 18 launched the first evaluation in 30 years of its body composition test, examining its association with physical fitness to determine if changes are needed to regulatory guidance, training and instructional programs, or to the mechanics of the program. The U.S. Army Center for Initial Military Training and the U.S. Army Institute of Environmental Medicine are conducting the research.
Sgt. Major of the Army Michael Grinston kicked off the study at Fort Bragg by taking the test, which uses four techniques to assess body composition: 1) standard AR 600-9 tape test, 2) dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), 3) three-dimensional total body scanning and 4) bioelectrical impedance analysis. Researchers are looking at body size and composition and comparing them to soldiers’ most recent physical fitness score and to dates and types of injuries. For females, the study is reviewing the number and dates of pregnancies, delivery methods, and first postpartum physical fitness score and Army Body Composition Program record. Army officials said initial findings should be out in December, but that final data will be ready in six to nine months.
Marine Corps: The U.S. Marine Corps’ (USMC) Human Performance Office is collaborating with the Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine to study body composition using various methods to assess fat mass, lean mass and bone mineral density. The review aims to determine whether the USMC’s policies and standards balance “health, performance, fitness and appearance.” According to a USMC study webpage, the Quantico-based study, which began in June 2021 and extends through the second quarter of 2022, will inform the future of body composition standards in the Marine Corps.
Navy: The Navy’s body composition assessment protocols, dated April 2021, don’t appear to be under review. (See the guide at https://www.mynavyhr.navy.mil/Portals/55/Support/21stCenturySailor/Physical/Guide%204-Body%20Composition%20Assessment-BCA-APR%202021.pdf?ver=UXBxbuAy0713JcZBkRRy2g%3d%3d.)
Air Force: The U.S. Air Force recently removed waist measurement as a scored component of its soon-to-be-revamped physical fitness test, and distributed those points across three main fitness categories. However, Air Force officials said that waists may still be measured as part of a body composition assessment that was set to start again this fall, according to a May 26 news release. Officials said details would be released at a later date.
Velasquez contended that the military does not need to use weight at all in health assessments. Instead, service members’ fitness could be measured through calculations of metabolic rates, blood pressure or other vital signs.
“From our perspective at the Eating Disorders Coalition, actually having a focus on hitting a certain weight is still going to be triggering into an eating disorder,” Velasquez said.
Learn more
Review the Army’s news release on its study, dated Oct. 18, 2021: https://www.dvidshub.net/news/407457/us-army-evaluate-relationship-between-body-composition-and-physical-fitness.
Review the Army Body Composition Program guidelines, dated Aug. 16, 2019: https://www.armyresilience.army.mil/ard/images/pdf/Policy/AR%20600-9%20The%20Army%20Body%20Composition%20Program.pdf.
Review the USMC study webpage: https://www.fitness.marines.mil/Body-Composition-and-Resources/Body-Composition-Study/Marine-Corps-Base-Quantico-Body-Composition-Study.
Review the Air Force’s news release on its fitness assessment alternatives, dated July 2, 2021: https://www.afpc.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2681139/air-force-releases-cardio-and-strength-fitness-assessment-alternatives-new-onli.
Read the Congressional Research Service report, “Obesity in the United States and Effects on Military Recruiting,” dated Dec. 22, 2020: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/IF11708.pdf.2 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »I don't think it's that uncommon for men to be outliers in that they can be not overfat but in the BMI overweight zone. It's less common for women or if you are getting obese numbers. There was a good discussion about it on Sigma Nutrition, with Spencer Nadolsky as the guest. It's usually pretty obvious from other measurements/your exercise history if there's an issue.
Agreed, I didn't mean that outliers are rare. Just extreme ones, like those who measure as obese but are lean.
Slightly overweight but pretty lean is more common, I think.
I don't think OP is claiming that his BMI is obese, but he's lean. I believe he said that he's aware that he needs to lose weight, but I think his point was that he doesn't feel like he has *as much* fat as the BMI is suggesting.
I really think that's all he was trying to say.4 -
I am the OP.
When I was in the Corps, and for several years after, I weighed 196 +/- 2 pounds, and for my height that put me at 25.2 BMI - the low end of over weight (not obese). Later in age I weighed 210 +/- 2 pounds and placed in a body composition competition. That put my BMI at 27.0. Again, overweight. Today? my BMI is at 32.1 (obese). 6 months ago it was at 29.9 (borderline obese) when I went on a heart med. The weight gain has been atrocious and a 75% calorie intake plus working out was not bringing it down at all.
I do not expect to ever be in the so called Healthy range on the BMI. I was up until I went to boot camp. Since then - never again will I see that unless I get seriously sick - and I mean very, very, very sick.
I do not trust the BMI as a standard indicator. My heart doc has said NOTHING about weight. My stress test came back normal with a good recovery rate - before the BP was down in the normal range. And now, on the Keto diet these last 16 or so days, my BP is starting to get too low. I am almost out of the obese BMI range and am hoping to be back to 210 pounds within the next 4-8 months.
So - all I was trying to say at the beginning is when my BMI says I am over weight, I am at my fittest.2 -
A BMI of 28 vs. a BMI of 25 is a 20lbs difference, it is quite significant. I don't think "slightly" out of range is the right wording. Your doctor would let you know if you were 20lbs overweight.
As the poster who wrote that fit young men are often healthy slightly our of range ie BMI of up to 28 - yes I do think slightly was the wording I meant.
In other words such men could be up to 20lb higher than a BMI of 25 and that is healthy for them.
That is exactly what I meant.
4 -
paperpudding wrote: »A BMI of 28 vs. a BMI of 25 is a 20lbs difference, it is quite significant. I don't think "slightly" out of range is the right wording. Your doctor would let you know if you were 20lbs overweight.
As the poster who wrote that fit young men are often healthy slightly our of range ie BMI of up to 28 - yes I do think slightly was the wording I meant.
In other words such men could be up to 20lb higher than a BMI of 25 and that is healthy for them.
That is exactly what I meant.
This has been my exact situation.
A BMI of 28 (around 185 lbs at 5' 8"), is about 20 lbs overweight for me on the BMI scale. I've weighed about that much before I lifted weights and I've weighed that much (and more, frankly) after spending years in the gym building muscle.
Pre lifting, at over 180 I had a poochy belly. Years later when I'd lost the weight but then slowly bulked my way back up while lifting heavy, I could weigh even a few pounds more and sure, with my shirt off you could see my fat, but with a t-shirt on, I'd just look broad shouldered and thick chested, my belly not sticking out past my chest.
Did the goal become to shred back down into the 160s? Sure.
Do I think any doctor would bring up my weight as a concern? I can't imagine.4 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »I don't think it's that uncommon for men to be outliers in that they can be not overfat but in the BMI overweight zone. It's less common for women or if you are getting obese numbers. There was a good discussion about it on Sigma Nutrition, with Spencer Nadolsky as the guest. It's usually pretty obvious from other measurements/your exercise history if there's an issue.
Agreed, I didn't mean that outliers are rare. Just extreme ones, like those who measure as obese but are lean.
Slightly overweight but pretty lean is more common, I think.
I don't think OP is claiming that his BMI is obese, but he's lean. I believe he said that he's aware that he needs to lose weight, but I think his point was that he doesn't feel like he has *as much* fat as the BMI is suggesting.
I really think that's all he was trying to say.
I don't think the comments you quoted were aimed so much at OP as they were at the first response to OP, where the poster implied that BMI is useless because Arnold was obese when he won Mr. Olympia.0 -
BMI is a REALLY GOOD ball park ESTIMATE of someone's over all physical health based on weight and height.
The ONLY people BMI does not provide an estimate for are professional athletes (think the likes of mike tyson, or professional bodybuilders).
If your BMI says you are obese, then yes, you most likely are carrying around quite a bit of extra bodyfat.
If your BMI says you are just overweight, then yes, you probably have a little bit of fat on your body and are not ripped or lean
If your BMI Is "healthy" you most likely have a very small amount of extra body fat, and are most likely relatively lean.
BMI is an estimate, and an estimate only. But the people who say BMI is somehow "wrong" are delusional. BMI is wildly efficient at estimating someone's general body shape via height and weight alone. It doesn't have to be 100% accurate to still be very accurate.6 -
dontlikepeople wrote: »The ONLY people BMI does not provide an estimate for are professional athletes (think the likes of mike tyson, or professional bodybuilders).
What's the source for this? I mentioned above a podcast with Dr. Spencer Nadolsky, who discussed studies and so on, and it's not that uncommon for a fit young man to have sufficient muscle (without being a professional athlete or bodybuilder) to be healthy and not have excessive bodyfat but be in the overweight BMI.1 -
I'll add another wrinkle.
You CAN be overweight at the upper end of a 'normal' BMI.
Like medically at increased risk from weight issues.5 -
Yes, definitely.0
-
dontlikepeople wrote: »The ONLY people BMI does not provide an estimate for are professional athletes (think the likes of mike tyson, or professional bodybuilders).
What's the source for this? I mentioned above a podcast with Dr. Spencer Nadolsky, who discussed studies and so on, and it's not that uncommon for a fit young man to have sufficient muscle (without being a professional athlete or bodybuilder) to be healthy and not have excessive bodyfat but be in the overweight BMI.
A man can lift for three months and be at an overweight bmi while lean.
If an 18 year old start lifting weights somewhat seriously for a year with minimal fat gain then bmi is not going to apply to him.
Saying that it only applies to professional athletes is a hilarious statement. You don't have to be a professional athlete to gain muscle mass.3 -
Velasquez contended that the military does not need to use weight at all in health assessments. Instead, service members’ fitness could be measured through calculations of metabolic rates, blood pressure or other vital signs.
Perhaps not in "health" assessments, but it's still an important metric. When I was in the Marines, weight was only partially a "health" matter. For the most part, the guys I served with were just lean and healthy Marines who just looked fit and athletic, but weight still became a factor with some guys who became too muscular and too heavy, even though they were quite lean because if you go down in combat, someone has to pick you up and pull your *kitten* out of there. This wasn't really an issue with guys who were slightly overweight but lean per BMI (I typically fall into that category and I'm not a big guy), but we had some guys really get into bodybuilding and stuff like that where they would be pushing that line of obese or over it, and it mattered in those instances because normal Marines have to be able to extract you if you go down.4 -
You vastly over estimate how many people are fit enough to break the BMI chart. Vastly.
And yes, ONLY professional athletes break the BMI chart. If someone is BMI 26 and lean, that's not breaking the chart, it's still a reasonable estimate. But if you're BMI 26 and lean, you're in extremely good shape, significantly better shape than 90% of the western population.
Give me an example that proves me wrong, and that example will be an outlier. Unless you are professional athlete, the BMI estimate is very, very good.2 -
> A man can lift for three months and be at an overweight bmi while lean.
And you thought MY statement was hilarious? Okay.0 -
dontlikepeople wrote: »You vastly over estimate how many people are fit enough to break the BMI chart. Vastly.
And yes, ONLY professional athletes break the BMI chart. If someone is BMI 26 and lean, that's not breaking the chart, it's still a reasonable estimate. But if you're BMI 26 and lean, you're in extremely good shape, significantly better shape than 90% of the western population.
Give me an example that proves me wrong, and that example will be an outlier. Unless you are professional athlete, the BMI estimate is very, very good.
What is your idea of "breaking the chart"? As per the chart, a BMI of 26 is technically overweight. This however isn't particularly unusual with males who participate in sport (not necessarily professional) and engage in other fitness activities. I'm 5'10" and my typical maintenance weight is 180 which puts me at a BMI 25.8 which is technically overweight. I'm around 15% BF at that weight, so not six pack lean, but lean enough to have a flat midsection and certainly well within a healthy BF%...and yes, physically fit but nothing particularly unusual among my group of peers. And I see guys like me all the time in the gym, and definitely guys far more muscular than I am. I also certainly don't see myself in the top 10% of the entire population physical fitness wise.
If you're talking about being lean but at a medically obese weight as "breaking the chart", I would agree...that is far more rare...but also not necessarily a professional athlete. There are bodybuilders and power lifters in my gyms who are not professional athletes and fit the bill of being lean and highly muscular.
I would agree that BMI is a good starting point for the general population, but it's also not unusual for a trained, fit male to fall slightly outside of BMI parameters which would likely apply to the OP at a healthy BF%.
5
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
- 426 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