BMI = bull

kanonxbou47

So, I went to a dietician, talked to her about my goal weight.

I am 5'8", and my goal weight was 130 pounds. She said I absolutely should not reach that, it would be very unhealthy.

But the BMI scale says I could get down to 120 pounds and still be healthy. When I talked to the dietician about it, she said nope, no way, that would be emaciation for someone of my height.

So I don't listen to that **** anymore. Suffering from an ED, I wanted to get down to 120, the lowest end of "healthy" on that scale, but I'm around 150 now and multiple doctors have told me they'd be worried if I lost any more weight.

Watch this video for more about it...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlXxoG98urc&feature=BFa&list=UUJm5yR1KFcysl_0I3x-iReg

BMI doesn't account for muscle, for body structure, for metabolism, anything like that.

IMO, you guys would all be better off asking your doctor.

wackyfunster

BMI does suck. body composition (body fat% and skeletal muscle%/lean body-mass) is a much better predictor of all measures of health.

jayne_mel

120 is actually an underweight bmi for 5'8. 130 though is reasonable for someone your height. 19.65

Jflowwers

The bmi is such BS. According to the bmi, I would be at a healthy weight at 118, and my husband at 130. I havent been 118 since maybe 12. My husband at 5'11 would be alarmingly thin.

hillm12345

I'm also 5'8" and I got down to 135 once, and instead of compliments all I got were comments that I looked too skinny, that I looked sick, and that I should stop dieting.

Even at my lowest though, my hip bones would not allow me to fit into a size 8. if that describes my bone structure at all.

Stefanie7125

i'm 5'8, my goal weight is 155, but I'd be thrilled anywhere around 160ish

carld256

The bmi is such BS. According to the bmi, I would be at a healthy weight at 118, and my husband at 130. I havent been 118 since maybe 12. My husband at 5'11 would be alarmingly thin.

Those charts provide a range to accommodate different builds. 130 is below a normal healthy weight even for a 5' 11 man with a very slight build. If he's of average build, like most people, the BMI charts would put him more in the range of 150-155.

Elizabeth_C34

BMI is not the ONLY measure of what dictates a healthy size, but it's reasonable I think for most people of average build or size. The people who complain about it are usually totally misinformed about their appropriate weight range (see poster who claimed a healthy BMI would put her 5'11" husband at 130, nonsense). If you're a little over or a little under, I don't think it's a big deal, but it isn't a bad measure of how you measure up against the averages. Of course, bodybuilders and men or women with more than average muscle mass will not fit the range, but that's a completely different issue.

I wish doctors would look at body fat percentage, BMI, and waist circumference to get a more comprehensive picture of body size and health though. BMI alone isn't the whole story.

We, as a society, have lost touch with what is a "healthy" weight. We're used to seeing men at >25% body fat and women at >30% body fat.

wackyfunster

Not to defend BMI, because I think it's basically worthless, but a lot of the people who say "OMG X IS WAY TOO SKINNY" don't understand how much body fat they are carrying around. I would have figured that at 5'8" that ~130 would be way too skinny for me, but at 6% body fat, I could still deadlift >300 pounds, bench over 180, etc. and looked pretty big. It really amazed me how much more fat I had to lose than I thought I did (currently bulking to 145, then 155 after another cut, before any of the 'omg you are anorexic wharrgarbl' comments come in).

Just saying, at 'athletic' body fat numbers, the low end of the BMI scales is a lot more reasonable than it seems to people who are used to a society where normal is 20% body fat on guys and 30% on women.

determined136

I agree! I am 5'10" and supposed to be between 130 and 174 according to the BMI calculations. At one time I was on the verge of an eating disorder and over exercised until I was at 149 and a size 2/4. My husband complained that I was too boney and my mother thought that I was purging. There is NO WAY I will EVER be there again. I was skinny but unhealthy. I too asked my doctor and he instructed me that my healthy weight would be no less than 180. I was a size 8 at that weight. I would be happy at that weight. That is what my goal now is.

I would also recommend going to your doctor to find out where you should be. Don't shoot for unrealistic goals.

shellsrenee01

I've not been able to get private health insurance because of the BMI nonsense. *sigh* Frustrates the hell out of me.

Gestahl

Sadly, an awful lot of doctors seem to rely on the BMI... although these are generally not good doctors.

DB_1106

The only obesity epidemic is the one that is created by the BMI chart. Only about 2% of the population have a BMI over 40, which I would consider obese. That is 1 in 50, not 1 in 4 like the news would have us believe.

I know many many people who have BMIs over 25 and are in top shape and are considered obese. The scale is a joke and should not be taken seriously.

SabinaHoule

I am 4"11 and 160. It states I should lose 32 pounds. How do I know how much I should actually lose?

BeetleChe13

The bmi is such BS. According to the bmi, I would be at a healthy weight at 118, and my husband at 130. I havent been 118 since maybe 12. My husband at 5'11 would be alarmingly thin.

^This. My hubby is almost 5'10" and 135, and he looks skeletal. We've both been trying to find healthy ways to get him to gain weight. His BMI? 19.4, well within the "healthy" range, but it does not look nor seem healthy at all.

jessicataylor2

BMI calculators tell me that I'm underweight even though my doctor tells me that I'm healthy. I could still even stand to lose a few. But I also have a very small frame, I can overlap my pink and thumb around my wrist. Right now I'm 115 at 5'8" and I used to be at 110 naturally and my doctors told me that I was healthy then also. So I say just stick with what the doctors say.

airlily

I know EXACTLY what you're talking about. It says for 5'8" that 124 - 164 is ideal. I'd maybe aim for 150 at the lowest, but 124?! Wow. I have small, 5'4" students who are 120, and I can see pelvic bones on them. I don't know who came up with these generic, sweeping goals.

My doctor and I have many things to discuss this summer. >.<

bergsangel

Funny how we are all so different. I am 5'2 and 120 with a very medium range BMI. I don't leave normal range for about another 10-15 pounds. HOWEVER...my body fat is nearly 30% which tells me I have plenty to lose...so I </3 BMI but for the opposite reasons.

SmartAlec03211988

BMI is crap.

According to BMI my target weight range is 94.7 - 128.0 lbs. I'm 130 lbs right now and have a 30 inch waist... which to me is really thin already. In fact my doctor told me not to go below 135 lbs, so according to her I've gone off the deep end already. :P At one point I was 125 lbs and WAY thin. I could NEVER imagine being 94 lbs?!

kdeaux1959

I agree that BMI does not give the full picture. It is a good STARTING POINT for many. I for one have adjusted my weight goal to 225 since most body fat analyses show that I have near 200 lbs of lean mass (200 lbs is the top end of my IBW range (BMI=25)... BMI tells you ONE THING. What is your height to weight ratio. That is all. It says nothing about lean body mass.

The better guide is a body fat analysis. Keeping your body fat percentage within the recommended levels for your age and physical fitness goals is by far the better and healthier method.

BMI works for probably 70-80% of the population. It never works for athletic individuals because the muscle mass is so high.

DB_1106

In my opinion, this whole BMI crowd is in the same room as all the fat kills you crowd. Eat less meat, eat more grain BS.