What do you think of the BMI?
Options
Replies
-
While I was in and I retired in 2008, they used the average circumference as the authoritative measurement system. Waist minus neck for men, and neck, waist, hip, for women. Dumb!! That is as accurate a measurement as BMI.
Yep, they just go from one dumb standard to another, the only one that would make sense to me is to go with body fat %.0 -
I was responding to someone who has over 100 pounds to lose. You are speaking from your own experience being in the military and presumably very active with physical training that most people do not do. Those are two very different situations, and I think it is well known and acknowledged in this thread that BMI will not accurately account for those who have exceptional muscle mass. I don't believe that applies to most people, or even most of the people disregarding BMI in this thread.
Yes I was aware of that...but BMI is not a measure for individuals...period. It is a measure of groups of sedentary groups of the population per the definition.
I believe that BMI for most individuals should be ignore period. It is an antiquated calculation that is skewed for even "normal" people and if they aim for those weights (being uneducated) they aim for the low range not taking into account their muscle mass, their frame size etc.
And a lot of people I know on this site are the "exception" as well along with a lot I am not familiar with.
Even if they need to lose 100lbs...
As for my personal exp BMI puts me at 140 high end...Yup I could do that and not have any muscle to speak of..no thanks and that applies to any woman like me and trust me I am not the exception to the rule.0 -
Yes I was aware of that...but BMI is not a measure for individuals...period. It is a measure of groups of sedentary groups of the population per the definition.
I believe that BMI for most individuals should be ignore period. It is an antiquated calculation that is skewed for even "normal" people and if they aim for those weights (being uneducated) they aim for the low range not taking into account their muscle mass, their frame size etc.
And a lot of people I know on this site are the "exception" as well along with a lot I am not familiar with.
Even if they need to lose 100lbs...
As for my personal exp BMI puts me at 140 high end...Yup I could do that and not have any muscle to speak of..no thanks and that applies to any woman like me and trust me I am not the exception to the rule.
At 5'7, 140 would give you a 21.9 BMI. You can be 159 and still register as "normal" BMI at 5'7. At your most muscular in the military, you say you were 158. That's still "normal".
This is using MFP, CDC, and NIH calculators for BMI. Not sure what BMI calculator you're looking at that provides such a low target weight.0 -
this.
I actually had to lose the weight first before my special-snowflake image of myself crumbled.
Agreed.0 -
Yes I was aware of that...but BMI is not a measure for individuals...period. It is a measure of groups of sedentary groups of the population per the definition.
I believe that BMI for most individuals should be ignore period. It is an antiquated calculation that is skewed for even "normal" people and if they aim for those weights (being uneducated) they aim for the low range not taking into account their muscle mass, their frame size etc.
And a lot of people I know on this site are the "exception" as well along with a lot I am not familiar with.
Even if they need to lose 100lbs...
As for my personal exp BMI puts me at 140 high end...Yup I could do that and not have any muscle to speak of..no thanks and that applies to any woman like me and trust me I am not the exception to the rule.
Declaring something as true automatically makes it so... period.
As others have said, we aren't all special snowflakes. Some of us are much more overweight than we realize, or are comfortable with admitting. BMI is a helpful general tool to give us an objective picture of whether we are overweight and roughly how far into that category we are. Measuring body fat percentage is probably more effective, but harder to do. A lot of the posters here are simply in denial, especially the ones who are as yet nowhere near a healthy weight. How do you know?0 -
What are you even basing that on? By your own reporting you have over 100 pounds to lose. I've lost over 100 pounds and I can tell you it's hard to predict what your body will actually be like after that weight loss.
Also, several people, (myself included) have pointed out that a range is provided for BMI precisely to account for differences in body types and other individual variances.
It sounds to me like you just don't like what your BMI # tells you.
Agreed. I can only speak from my experience but BMI has always been a pretty accurate reflection of how I see myself. I've never been morbidly obese, but I have had a few pounds to lose and at those times my BMI reflected that.
I think for the most part unless you are a professional athlete, BMI is pretty accurate. And the people who get so upset with it seem to be the ones who dont like what that BMI is telling them.0 -
this is a trick question if I ever saw one...complete horse****.
according to BMI I am "morbidly obese".
do I look morbidly obese to you??
I would agree that I am overweight. but no way that I am in the category that BMI puts me in!
in addition, BMI says that I am supposed to be between 95-110lbs. At my smallest (120) I had 10% body fat -- which is very underweight! but according to BMI, I was still overweight.
I prefer to use BFP -- with BFP I am 5% over a healthy, normal weight.0 -
I think for the most part unless you are a professional athlete, BMI is pretty accurate. And the people who get so upset with it seem to be the ones who dont like what that BMI is telling them.
There's a difference with guys. Sure there are plenty of guys who don't have a 6-pack who object to being in the "overweight" category, but guys don't have to be pro athletes to be both lean and 26+.
A few women have posted BMI expectations that appear to be aiming at 22 BMI, rather than the standard 25. That may be a cause for big time confusion with this issue.0 -
There's a difference with guys. Sure there are plenty of guys who don't have a 6-pack who object to being in the "overweight" category, but guys don't have to be pro athletes to be both lean and 26+.
A few women have posted BMI expectations that appear to be aiming at 22 BMI, rather than the standard 25. That may be a cause for big time confusion with this issue.
Perhaps. My BMI is 22.4 which is right in the middle of the "healthy" range. I wouldn't say I'm underweight by a long shot. I still have pounds to lose. The BMI spectrum is pretty broad from what I see and I dont think confusion is the issue as much as denial.0 -
Declaring something as true automatically makes it so... period.
As others have said, we aren't all special snowflakes. Some of us are much more overweight than we realize, or are comfortable with admitting. BMI is a helpful general tool to give us an objective picture of whether we are overweight and roughly how far into that category we are. Measuring body fat percentage is probably more effective, but harder to do. A lot of the posters here are simply in denial, especially the ones who are as yet nowhere near a healthy weight. How do you know?
Exactly! When I was overweight, I would have sworn up and down I was big boned.
Now that I can actually see my frame, I know that I am fine boned, which is why I ended up at the bottom of my BMI range. I'm sure there are truly big boned people out there, but they are rarer than this thread suggests.0 -
I have a BMI of 26.5 after starting at 58.4. Apart from a little excess skin around the stomach, I already get told I look too thin and can fit in a small sized T Shirt. I am aiming to be a little under BMI 26 but after 9 months still haven't got there.
The BMI formula is 200 years old and was used for population not individuals.0 -
I have a BMI of 26.5 after starting at 58.4. Apart from a little excess skin around the stomach, I already get told I look too thin and can fit in a small sized T Shirt. I am aiming to be a little under BMI 26 but after 9 months still haven't got there.
The BMI formula is 200 years old and was used for population not individuals.
I've gotten told I look too thin several times, all by people who are overweight. I've refrained from telling them I'm not too thin, it's that they're too heavy
I don't know why people think it's acceptable to knock someone down for being a healthy weight (as per my doctor), but I'd get flame broiled if I pointed out that they're overweight :huh: 0 -
I've gotten told I look too thin several times, all by people who are overweight. I've refrained from telling them I'm not too thin, it's that they're too heavy I don't know why people think it's acceptable to knock someone down for being a healthy weight (as per my doctor), but I'd get flame broiled if I pointed out that they're overweight :huh:
My arms and feet are thinner than I like. It is just my stomach that I don't like. After losing over 200 pounds, it is just a little annoying to still look fatter than I like to be.0 -
My arms and feet are thinner than I like. It is just my stomach that I don't like. After losing over 200 pounds, it is just a little annoying to still look fatter than I like to be.
Never heard anyone mention feet being thinner than desired before. Those are just your feet. They're not supposed to have fat on em. May take some time to get used to your new body (gratz on the big weight loss).0 -
I do not think I am "big boned" nor am I a "chunky monkey" as one person said of us claiming the BMI scale does not apply to everyone. My BMI is 24 which is nearing the "overweight" category. I have been building muscle intentionally in order to compete next spring....so maybe that makes me a special snowflake...I don't know. All I know is some of those commenting that BMI is accurate for them cannot seem to grasp the fact that everyone is not the same. We are NOT all in denial if we claim it doesn't reflect our body.
This is me...I don't think I am "nearly overweight"...but then again everyone is entitled to their own opinion on that as well and I am not everyone's cup of tea.
ETA:pic didn't seem to work...so see profile.0 -
Personally, I feel that it is a fair guideline for the average person.0
-
I'm above average height, above average bone density, above average muscle mass etc. etc. etc., stopped paying attention to BMI a long time ago.0
-
It was designed to be a very rough estimate of the AVERAGE person's body fat % at certain weight/heights. HOWEVER, the more muscular you become, the less accurate it'll be. For example almost any NFL player, body builder, or pro athlete would be considered in an unhealthy range, even though their weight is mostly muscle & their body fat percentage low. That's why a body fat percentage scale would be a better judge of fitness the better shape you're in.0
-
I do not think I am "big boned" nor am I a "chunky monkey" as one person said of us claiming the BMI scale does not apply to everyone. My BMI is 24 which is nearing the "overweight" category. I have been building muscle intentionally in order to compete next spring....so maybe that makes me a special snowflake...I don't know. All I know is some of those commenting that BMI is accurate for them cannot seem to grasp the fact that everyone is not the same. We are NOT all in denial if we claim it doesn't reflect our body.
This is me...I don't think I am "nearly overweight"...but then again everyone is entitled to their own opinion on that as well and I am not everyone's cup of tea.
You're building muscle intentionally and you're "normal" BMI. You're in fine shape and BMI indicates you're not at risk of being overweight. Seems like this is an example of "working as intended", not an exception.0 -
I know it is a guideline but it is very frustrating because insurance companies use it to help determine premiums. My husband is tall and thin. He wears a 34" waist, 38" length in jeans. His BMI is borderline obese. CRAZY!! The insurance company rated him up and gave him a higher premium because of it.0
-
I don't like that it makes no allowance for the relative proportions of bone, muscle and fat in the body. But bone is denser than muscle and twice as dense as fat, so a person with strong bones, good muscle tone and low fat will have a high BMI. Thus, athletes, fit, and health-conscious folk who work out a lot tend to find themselves classified as overweight or even obese.0
-
Me, 10 years ago. 5'8", 178lbs. BMI 27.1, dead center of the overweight range.
Less than 20 lbs up from that now and barely out of the obese range...0 -
I know it is a guideline but it is very frustrating because insurance companies use it to help determine premiums. My husband is tall and thin. He wears a 34" waist, 38" length in jeans. His BMI is borderline obese. CRAZY!! The insurance company rated him up and gave him a higher premium because of it.
You can request that the insurance company do a tape measure or pinch test for body fat percentage. For example, in the military, if you're above a certain BMI, then you can be written up. But w/all the muscular types, they know once they reach that point, to just ask for the tape or pinch tests. Otherwise they enroll them in fitness programs that they don't need. But just being tall & thin shouldn't make you "overweight" on the BMI, it's usually only if people are muscular.0 -
This is a nice look at athlete BMI:
Male gold medal winners: http://www.runnersworld.com/elite-runners/bmis-champions
Female gold medal winners: http://www.runnersworld.com/womens-running/bmis-of-champions-womens-edition
Most male olympic gold medal winners are "normal", and nearly all female olympic gold medal winners are "normal" BMI. Throwers and heavy lifters can be "obese" for both males and females.
As a side note, the most popular sports in the USA (basketball and football) are predominantly "overweight"+ BMI athletes at the pro level. Big, heavily-muscled guys.
Being an athlete, especially a female athlete, is not a surefire "high BMI" scenario by any means.0 -
Declaring something as true automatically makes it so... period.
As others have said, we aren't all special snowflakes. Some of us are much more overweight than we realize, or are comfortable with admitting. BMI is a helpful general tool to give us an objective picture of whether we are overweight and roughly how far into that category we are. Measuring body fat percentage is probably more effective, but harder to do. A lot of the posters here are simply in denial, especially the ones who are as yet nowhere near a healthy weight. How do you know?
I edited to ensure my main point was not lost
I personally don't agree with you...We do however agree BF% is good and effective tool, and yes harder to do.
I recently read an article on this and what stood out to me the most was the fact this was not developed by a doctor...he was a mathematician...to help the government disperse aid.
I am not saying we are all special snowflakes I just do not feel it is an appropriate measurment for individuals really based on why it was developed and how it is used and calculated now...en mass0 -
for the general population accurate
It's used extensively in research and medicine0 -
I know it is a guideline but it is very frustrating because insurance companies use it to help determine premiums. My husband is tall and thin. He wears a 34" waist, 38" length in jeans. His BMI is borderline obese. CRAZY!! The insurance company rated him up and gave him a higher premium because of it.
I'm at 36" jeans presently myself and I am about 10-15 pounds into the obese category. It doesn't sound so crazy to me.0 -
QUOTE:
I know it is a guideline but it is very frustrating because insurance companies use it to help determine premiums. My husband is tall and thin. He wears a 34" waist, 38" length in jeans. His BMI is borderline obese. CRAZY!! The insurance company rated him up and gave him a higher premium because of it.
I'm at 36" jeans presently myself and I am about 10-15 pounds into the obese category. It doesn't sound so crazy to me.
36" waist or length?0 -
It is meant to measure groups; not individuals. If you want something accurate get body fat test. I was told my whole life I was "obese" even when I was an athlete and almost all muscle.0
-
You can request that the insurance company do a tape measure or pinch test for body fat percentage. For example, in the military, if you're above a certain BMI, then you can be written up. But w/all the muscular types, they know once they reach that point, to just ask for the tape or pinch tests. Otherwise they enroll them in fitness programs that they don't need. But just being tall & thin shouldn't make you "overweight" on the BMI, it's usually only if people are muscular.
This is good advice. There's some missing info if a guy is tall, "thin", and nearly obese by BMI. Especially a guy nearing retirement. If he's actually pretty jacked, which is possible, it's worth pursuing another measurement for fitness and taking that up with the insurance. If he has a 34" waist, but his belly hangs over his belt, then he probably just needs to lose some weight.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394.3K Introduce Yourself
- 44K Getting Started
- 260.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.1K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.7K Fitness and Exercise
- 442 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.3K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 4.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 18 MyFitnessPal Academy
- 1.4K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.7K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions