BMI is a joke

Quasita

I think we all know that this is true in the sense that not every type of measurement can be universal for every one.

Instead, I saw a orthopaedic doctor that specializes in spinal conditions, and asked him what my goal weight needs to be. He said 285. Now, I'll still have room to go if I want but that's where he suggested I shoot. FYI, I'm 6'1.5", and broad framed. I've never looked 485 pounds... The lightest I ever was at this height was about 215, which is still 20 pounds over the "highest" weight for my height on the standard BMI scale.

What I hate even more is when you go to have measurements done and they use calipers, then find the biggest roll on your body. I had a trainer try to tell me I was like 68% fat once, because he just got my belly roll and barely pinched it.

At the same time, you just have to find what works for you. Just because it doesn't make sense to use it for you doesn't mean that the average person can't use the information to their benefit.

BeardieDad

I don't believe in BMI calculations and the body fat assessment on my scale is all over the map. I'm measuring my progress based on weight, waist circumfrence, how I feel and what the lab results say about my blood glucose, cholesterol, etc. Unfortunately the insurance industry does believe in BMI and its one of the reasons I had to give up on my small business and get a "regular" job. I was getting killed in insurance premiums because I was labeled "obese" by the BMI standard.

fuzz_pawz

Many critics of the BMI have complained that the formula used is too simple and ignores a large number of variables that can influence both your BMI score and your overall health. For example, the BMI does not distinguish between lean and fatty mass. As a result, many heavily-muscled individuals, particularly athletes, may be characterized as obese because of their weight. There is also no consideration for how body fat is distributed, which greatly influences health risks. Because the BMI is so accessible and easy to calculate, it can be misinterpreted by individuals who may incorrectly classify themselves as overweight or obese based on their score.


Our continuing reliance on BMI is especially grating given there's a very reasonable alternative. It turns out that the circumference around a person's waist provides a muchmore accurate reading of his or her abdominal fat and risk for disease than BMI. And wrapping a tape measure around your gut is no more expensive than hopping on a scale and standing in front of a ruler. That's why the American Society for Nutrition, the American Diabetes Association, and other prominent medical groups have lately promoted waist circumference measurements as a supplement to, or replacement for, the body mass index.

Yet few doctors have made the switch. The waist measurements require slightly more time and training than it takes to record a BMI reading, and they don't come with any official cutoffs that can be used to make easy assessments. The sensitivity of doctors to these slight inconveniences signals just how difficult it will be to unseat Quetelet's equation. The body mass index is cheap and easy, and it has the incumbent advantage. In short, BMI is here to stay—despite, but also because of, its flaws.

---

I'd have to lose a further 14 pounds in order to get just to the top of the "normal" BMI range for my height. My lean body mass is around 184. I will certainly not go to either below 3 % body fat or lose muscle mass just to fit into BMI. No thank you. ;-)

Thanks for the confirmation...I thought I was the only one that thought it was bogus!

vweavers

A decent analogy: BMI is to measuring fat as a QB rating is to measuring how good a quarterback is. They are just numbers based on averages. Both sets of numbers can be easily skewed if the numbers it is based on are at either the high or low end of the scale. For example- A quarterback who only throws 2 passes, but one happens to go for a 40 yard touchdown is going to have a higher quarterback rating than the guy who throws 32/40 for 3 TD's and 350 yards. We all know which was actually the better effort.
BMI is the same way. The more average you are- height, weight, muscle mass, etc. the more likely the BMI index works for you. The more any of those factors vary from average, the less likely the BMI will give you an accurate rating. It is truly a flawed system for anyone who is away from average.

elg1982

I got an Omron body fat monitor and have been using it once a week after I weigh in. My body fat percentage has been going down, and my first goal is to get it to 30%.

A lot of people on this thread have said that if you diet you will lose lean mass no matter what. Could you explain more about that? I make sure to eat enough protein and I life weights 2 or 3 times a week. I thought that if you did that you would at least maintain your muscle mass.

heybales

I got an Omron body fat monitor and have been using it once a week after I weigh in. My body fat percentage has been going down, and my first goal is to get it to 30%.

A lot of people on this thread have said that if you diet you will lose lean mass no matter what. Could you explain more about that? I make sure to eat enough protein and I life weights 2 or 3 times a week. I thought that if you did that you would at least maintain your muscle mass.

You're right. They were referring to just doing long cardio.