Your take on BMI

Options
2456

Replies

  • SanDiegoCasey
    SanDiegoCasey Posts: 130 Member
    Options
    BMI lists me as forever near Obese. LOL I love it. hate it for insurance rates though!
  • chrishgt4
    chrishgt4 Posts: 1,222 Member
    Options
    BMI lists me as forever near Obese. LOL I love it. hate it for insurance rates though!

    Haha, I'm currently overweight - aiming for obese though...
  • dave4d
    dave4d Posts: 1,155 Member
    Options
    Is that savings $50 a year? Or a month?

    I believe it is a one time savings for a year.
  • goldfinger88
    goldfinger88 Posts: 686 Member
    Options
    BMI is totally worthless. Forget it. Arnold Schwartznegger would have been obese in his prime if you go by BMI. Better to go by other formulas --- especially body fat and visceral fat. Forget BMI.
  • GemskiB
    GemskiB Posts: 95 Member
    Options
    BMI is a good guide to start with if you are average, and that is what I have set my goal for; the top weight for healthy BMI. But because I have been doing strength training the nurse at my work says I should use BF% and I tend to agree. I am nowhere near goal yet but I will be re-assessing as I go. No point getting down to 153 and looking like skeletor and having to lose lean muscle mass to do it. I'll stop when I'm happy. Too much is put on this and that. The main reasons we all want to lose weight are that we are not happy in ourselves and the implications, ie being untit etc.
  • Duck_Puddle
    Duck_Puddle Posts: 3,237 Member
    Options
    Health insurance premiums at my company are about $400/yr lower for healthy BMI. I'm not wealthy, so having a healthy BMI is an important goal for me. While BMI may be a "crap" measurement or being used "incorrectly" or what have you, for me, BMI is spot on as a measurement. It told me I was morbidly obese when I started (I was), told me I was still obese when I hit my first major milestone (I was), and it tells me I'm overweight now (which I am). My personal opinion is BMI is fairly valid for the vast majority of people-not for everyone.
  • DonnaLeeCattes
    DonnaLeeCattes Posts: 492 Member
    Options
    I agree with most of the replies you've had so far, I used it to gauge my progress and to set targets when I was just losing weight with a little exercise and "for me" I found it very useful. My first target was to hit 24.9 to be in healthy and once I got there I did feel much better even though it felt too light when I first saw it! I'm now 23.3 but have now changed to strength, so my focus is BF% and I no longer care about my BMI.

    I'd say it's a useful gauge but far from perfect

    I agree with this...Last month i got to a healthy weight, finally! I took off 60 lbs to get there, my BMI started out at 34.7 now it's 23.7, and for me I just wanted to prove to myself that I could reach the number it said I needed to reach.
  • Nataliaho
    Nataliaho Posts: 878 Member
    Options
    BMI = TBS (total bull *kitten*)

    Not really BS - it's a simple tool to measure height/weight ratio. That it get mis-used by being applied to individuals instead of populations isn't really the fault of the tool.
    It's like using a hammer to drive in a screw instead of using a screwdriver. A tool being used for something it wasn't designed for.

    Insurance companies use it (mis-use it) so they can charge more money. So it works for them!!

    I totally agree, but given that its misuse is so institutionalised now I maintain my stance. If the only thing a hammer was ever used for was driving in a screw, then I'd say it was a useless tool....

    One of my biggest pet peeves about the BMI has been illustrated by a few people in this thread. There is an underlying acceptance that the BMI is always an indicator of underlying health issues, IT ISN"T. There is also an assumption, despite all credible, logical and historical evidence to the contrary, that people who don't like the BMI are just fatties making excuses. It is not just 'Arnies' who are incorrectly classified by the BMI. The more worrying issue is that it notoriously misclassifies small people with little msucle as being 'normal' or 'healthy' who actually have an unhealthy amount of fat.
  • sm1zzle
    sm1zzle Posts: 920 Member
    Options
    BMI = TBS (total bull *kitten*)

    Not really BS - it's a simple tool to measure height/weight ratio. That it get mis-used by being applied to individuals instead of populations isn't really the fault of the tool.
    It's like using a hammer to drive in a screw instead of using a screwdriver. A tool being used for something it wasn't designed for.

    Insurance companies use it (mis-use it) so they can charge more money. So it works for them!!

    I totally agree, but given that its misuse is so institutionalised now I maintain my stance. If the only thing a hammer was ever used for was driving in a screw, then I'd say it was a useless tool....

    One of my biggest pet peeves about the BMI has been illustrated by a few people in this thread. There is an underlying acceptance that the BMI is always an indicator of underlying health issues, IT ISN"T. There is also an assumption, despite all credible, logical and historical evidence to the contrary, that people who don't like the BMI are just fatties making excuses. It is not just 'Arnies' who are incorrectly classified by the BMI. The more worrying issue is that it notoriously misclassifies small people with little msucle as being 'normal' or 'healthy' who actually have an unhealthy amount of fat.

    .... what ?
  • missxlaur
    missxlaur Posts: 286
    Options
    I HATE BMI. Does not take into consideration activity level or health or muscle content or anything.

    My doctor told me based on my BMI I was super unhealthy and "on the verge" of a plethora of health issues. I workout 4 days a week, I've been lifting for years, and I just ran a half marathon. ABSURD.

    And when my BF was trying to play in the NFL, he had 6% body fat and was considered "morbidly obese" based on BMI. SO DUMB.
  • RoadsterGirlie
    RoadsterGirlie Posts: 1,195 Member
    Options
    Don't hate me, but I think a lot of people sell themselves short when it comes to achieving the normal BMI range if they are over weight.

    If you would have asked me what kind of frame I had at 215, I definitely would have said large. I wouldn't have thought it was possible to get to the weight I am now, at all. I just took it one day at a time, tracking my food and eating more fruits and veggies, and less processed carbs.

    So ask me now at 125, and I would tell I have a small frame.

    When it comes to goal weight, I just took mine one day at a time. Had I plateau'd at 150, I would have been okay with it, knowing where i had come from - that would have put me smack dab in the middle of mine.

    I maintain on 2000 calories a day on average, and am 5'9". This is just where my body wants to be.
  • BarackMeLikeAHurricane
    BarackMeLikeAHurricane Posts: 3,400 Member
    Options
    I think BF% is a much better tool. BMI doesn't account for your frame either. I have a small frame and a BMI of 17.2 but I don't think I'm underweight.
  • Nataliaho
    Nataliaho Posts: 878 Member
    Options
    BMI = TBS (total bull *kitten*)

    Not really BS - it's a simple tool to measure height/weight ratio. That it get mis-used by being applied to individuals instead of populations isn't really the fault of the tool.
    It's like using a hammer to drive in a screw instead of using a screwdriver. A tool being used for something it wasn't designed for.

    Insurance companies use it (mis-use it) so they can charge more money. So it works for them!!

    I totally agree, but given that its misuse is so institutionalised now I maintain my stance. If the only thing a hammer was ever used for was driving in a screw, then I'd say it was a useless tool....

    One of my biggest pet peeves about the BMI has been illustrated by a few people in this thread. There is an underlying acceptance that the BMI is always an indicator of underlying health issues, IT ISN"T. There is also an assumption, despite all credible, logical and historical evidence to the contrary, that people who don't like the BMI are just fatties making excuses. It is not just 'Arnies' who are incorrectly classified by the BMI. The more worrying issue is that it notoriously misclassifies small people with little msucle as being 'normal' or 'healthy' who actually have an unhealthy amount of fat.

    .... what ?

    What to which part?
  • RobynLB
    RobynLB Posts: 617 Member
    Options
    How is everyone who is touting body fat percentage as the best measurement measuring their body fat accurately? I've tried the army body fat calculator, calipers, and a body fat scale, and I'm STILL not sure what my exact body fat measurement is. I've gotten measurements everywhere from 12% to 19%, with the average around 17%... How is that useful?
  • markpmc
    markpmc Posts: 240 Member
    Options
    BMI is only useful for population studies. It's not a measure of heath.
  • n0ob
    n0ob Posts: 2,390 Member
    Options
    I'm overweight by my lean body mass alone. It doesn't apply to me...
  • MicheleNaame
    MicheleNaame Posts: 13 Member
    Options
    BMI is a total crock! There is a gentleman where I work who just had his biometric screenings completed for our health insurance. This individual is 6'7" tall and thin as a rail. He was told his BMI put him in the morbidly obese category when nothing could be further from the truth. Most times, we all want to feed him double cheeseburgers so he'll have enough weight on him to keep him warm in the winter months. So yes...in my opinion BMI is bull!
  • ObtainingBalance
    ObtainingBalance Posts: 1,446 Member
    Options
    It doesn't take muscle into consideration, just height and weight.....so it's crap...

    bmi-comparison.gif

    Exactly!
  • keenesmom
    keenesmom Posts: 115 Member
    Options
    How is everyone who is touting body fat percentage as the best measurement measuring their body fat accurately? I've tried the army body fat calculator, calipers, and a body fat scale, and I'm STILL not sure what my exact body fat measurement is. I've gotten measurements everywhere from 12% to 19%, with the average around 17%... How is that useful?

    I'd like to see a reply to this as well. I used 2 calulations and one said 26% and the other said 30% (and the one that said 26% said that 30% and over was obese but the other said 30% was average for my age - 46 and weight 143 height just shy of 5'7" - also i wear a size 6 so i'm not overweight).
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    Options
    How is everyone who is touting body fat percentage as the best measurement measuring their body fat accurately? I've tried the army body fat calculator, calipers, and a body fat scale, and I'm STILL not sure what my exact body fat measurement is. I've gotten measurements everywhere from 12% to 19%, with the average around 17%... How is that useful?

    I have hydrostatic tests usually, plus the odd DEXA, plus eyeballing. It does not matter what your exact BF% tbh is as long as it is a good approximation as none will be totally accurate.

Categories