BMI whats your opinion??

NatWillBeSkinny

hey im 4ft9 and 165lb according to my bmi im obesse?? what do other people think if they are classed at obesse, im pretty healthy with no health problems and size 14 clothes been disheartening really

oh_em_gee

I think it's a good tool but not the ultimate measure of health. People with a lot of muscle can be classified as obese in accurately too.

dym123

its useless. I'm 198lbs, my body fat % is well within the acceptable range, but my BMI indicates I'm obese. The BMI does not take into account muscle mass which is why there is such a discrepancy.

millipedey

It's not particularly accurate; a body fat analysis is much better because it only measures fat, not muscle or bones, which is what BMI also measures.

kristen6022

I'm 5'11 and 147 and I'm in the low end of the healthy range. I think unless you are naturally muscular and have a low % of body fat, BMI is accurate for health standards. At 165 I feel fat and I'm 14 inches taller than you and 34 years old. That wasn't to be mean, that was a slight wake-up call. Do me a favor and go to your doctor and get some blood tests done (you can't quote that you are healthy until you really know). When I was 42 pounds heavier my blood work was bad. Now, my blood work is better than the average 21 year old.

brevislux

Get your body fat percentage checked.

poodlepaws

My BMI reading here is way off..... I get tested at the gym every week.
I'm 5' 1.5", weigh 169, have an active job, wear size 12/14, and AM obese by both readings. I myself wouldn't think of being obese after losing the weight I have but by health standards???? I do know it confuses me.

Bakkasan

This is sucky, but unless you are very muscular, and at a 14 I doubt it, you are probably obese. But BF% is the true measure.

mayamagallanes

Presonally I dont like it... I was 155lbs in high school and in a 3/5 jean... it said I was overweight. I was TINY, and I played sports year round.

chaplostit

THE BMI just makes you feel bad! I am 6'2" and weigh 246 pounds with a body fat percentage of 15.84. Now, my BMI is currently 31.58. I do not have any faith in the BMI and you should not either.

86_Ohms

I don't agree with the scale, but it does give you a good indication where you are in general. There are formulas you can check on wikipedia that give a small bump to accuracy when checking BMI.


As stated, body fat% is what you should go by. It's expensive ($100 or more) to get a super-accurate test done (DEXA scanning), but I particularly like this article on Nerd Fitness that gives an idea through pictures that you can relate to:


http://www.nerdfitness.com/blog/2012/07/02/body-fat-percentage/


You can also get body fat calipers from Amazon or possibly a local health store that give a measurement but have a hefty tolerance to where you truley are with percentage.

skydiveD30571

Most experts agree that unless you do no regular exercise and are within a couple inches of the average person's height, it is not useful. Any decent amount of muscle mass (not even close to bodybuilder amount) or being taller or shorter than average will skew the results. Mine says I'm obese and that's not true at all.

Bug207

BMI isn't the most perfect indicator of your body, health, and fitness, but I do think it has a lot of merit. Unless you're an intense athlete, I think it gives a reasonable estimate of where you're at. It's hard to look at the word obese and say, "Hey, that's me!" mostly because we always imagine obesity to be this problem that doesn't concern us... it's what happens when I gain another 50, 100, 200 pounds. You think to yourself, "I shop at regular stores like the Gap, you can't possibly be obese right?" "Obese" is such a nasty word filled with emotional baggage and denial, but unfortunately a lot of us are closer to it than we realize.

ItsCasey

I wouldn't say it's useless, but it definitely should not be viewed as an indicator of health or lack thereof. Truly the only things it takes into account are your height and weight.

I'd say at your height, weight, and pants size, you may very well meet the clinical definition of obese right now. But my BMI is very near the "obese" category for my height and weight, and I'm not even close to being obese.

kirstyfairhead

I got up to 168 at 4' 11" and never thought of myself as obese. I thought obese people were those people who could hardly get out of their chairs!! I didn't have health issues and I was a 14 like you. I wasn't a happy 14 though and no health issues now doesn't mean none on the way!

168 is 45LBS heavier than a 'normal' BMI so i though it was a pretty good indication that i needed to lose some!

Don't tie yourself in a knot over the word obese, it's just a word, but think about where you want to be, what would make you happy and how you can be healthier. I've dropped 25lbs and can jog for 5miles without a break now, never thought i'd be able to do that, and it feels fantastic. Still got more to do but my self esteem is way up and i look and feel so much better already.

For now my target is 130, which is still technically overweight and when I get there I'LL decide if i want to lose some more or not, not a BMI indicator!!

NatWillBeSkinny

yeah i understand im tryin to get to 8 stone anyway just dont think the doctors should be using the bmi to diagnose obessety this puts false images into people heads in my opinion

TK266

The BMI is generally used as a means of correlation between groups related by general mass and can serve as a vague means of estimating adiposity. The duality of the BMI is that, whilst easy-to-use as a general calculation, it is limited in how accurate and pertinent the data obtained from it can be. Generally, the index is suitable for recognizing trends within sedentary or overweight individuals because there is a smaller margin for errors.

The BMI is a generalized tool, based upon a population as a whole, to give a gauge roughly where one should be. Think of it like hearing what the average American Family makes in a year. you may be above that or below that and depending what part of the county you live it that average may be a livable wage (Mississippi for example) or count as being close to poverty (Connecticut for example). That average US income looks different to different place, just as BMI look different on different people.

As for the BMI using the terms overweight or obese, these are the medical definitions. BMI overweight means the point at which the average person will start to see the minor medical effects of weight and BMI overweight means the point at which the average person will start have more major medical issues. Again this is a statistical thing and does not mean that if you are Medically Obese that you are going to start having health problem, just you are more likely. but if you exercise and are eating well even if not at a "perfect" average BMI one can prevent the medical problem.

The problem most folks have with BMI is the same problem they have with most statistical numbers, when the statistics don't match them they assume they must be wrong. Statistical, due to where i live, I should be a 25 years old Hispanic male republican. I am not, but I understand what that statistic means for the area in where i live.

Mathguy1

We in the actuarial field (I'm on the P&C side, but I've spoken with those on the health side) understand that weight and BMI numbers are very misleading. That's why they are going to be switching to a new measure of health which is your Waist to Height ratio. The reason is that a BMI number may become irrelevant is when dealing with those that lift weights and carry a decent amount of muscle on their frame.

Simply put, take a tape measure and measure your circumference (at your belly button to one inch above your belly button), dont suck in your stomach, but dont push it out either. Just stand as you normally do (hold your breath mid breath) and have someone measure you. Then divide that number by your total height.

You should get a fraction.

For Men,

.50 is ideal.
.48-.53 seems to have very little, almost immeasurable years of life lost.
.54-.56, one starts to lose years off their life.

For a 30 yr old non smoking male, here's how many years off their life they lose at varying Waist to Height ratios:

.60 - about 3 years lost
.70 - about 7 years lost
.74 - about 11 years lost
.78 - about 16 years lost
>.80 about 21 years lost

Keep in mind, an average 30 year old, non smoking male, on average, lives 47 more years.

There is a correlation to being too skinny and the number of years of life lost. Here are the additional years of life lost at lower waist to height ratios (again, for a 30 year old male non smoker).

<.36 - about 2 years
.38 - about 1 year
.40 to .48 - less than 1 year.

While it seems that being too skinny is a very slight health risk, it's nothing compared to having extremely high waist to height ratios. You'll see that more and more health insurance companies will move away from the BMI standard of measuring health to the waist to height ratio. It's more accurate and doesn't get skewed by those that exercise.

Also, keep in mind, I've only discussed the mortality aspect of varying waist to height ratios. In regards to units of health care consumed, having higher waist to height ratios (meaning you are carrying a lot of excess fat on your organs) increases the frequency and severity of your health related issues.

For women, the ideal is .46.
.40 - .54 is less than 1 year lost.
.56 is about 1 year lost
.70 is about 5 years lost
.76 is about 8 years lost
>.80 is about 11 years lost.

Keep in mind, a non smoking 30 yr old female is going to live, on average, another 51 yrs. I'm guessing the difference is that men and women store fat differently.

BamBam125

I think it's a good tool, but not perfect. When I felt and looked my best, I was 135 lbs and a size 6 petite. I had visible ab muscles, strong arms and not much jiggle anywhere. I could lift like many of the guys at the gym on my college campus. I'm 5foot tall. According to BMI, at what I think was my best, I was actually "overweight." I suspect my muscle mass made my BMI a bit off. I didn't look like a "scary" body builder though.

Of course right now it says I'm obese and sadly it's probably right. I have a lot of work to do to get back to my ideal.

Megamus55

My job right now is actually researching BMI and its flaws. there are many limitations to BMI and on an individual basis it serves no purpose and really tells you nothing about your health. I would even go as far to say that doctors need to stop perscribing treatment (specifically for weight) based solely on BMI. Your BMI does not tell you how healthy you are, it does not tell you how well you are doing with your lifestyle and it doesn't tell you how you feel, all of which are far more important. DO not use weight or BMI as an indicator of your success.

BMI has its uses in large groups or populations for example I can look at BMI differences between north americans and europeans and have a decent idea about the health risks associated with each population.

oh and just so you know for thoes who are obsessed with BMI categories and fitting into them, new studies show that the overweight category has the longest life expectancy and there is no difference in outcomes between normal and obese leve 1 categories.

TK266

I am a non-smoking male, 47 with .47 on your waist to height chart.

And there is something seriously wrong with me. I was just a little to excited to see someone with actuarial skills join the discussion. :laugh:

ItsCasey

At some point, even the waist-to-height ratio becomes a more of a genetic issue than a health marker, especially in people who are several inches shorter or taller than average. And the belly button level is not everyone's natural waist. I think we should all just acknowledge the fact that health is personal, and using these cookie-cutter methods to determine who is healthy and who isn't causes more harm than good.

I work in the P&C area of insurance myself, so I understand the actuarial concepts, but if my doctor says I'm healthy, then I don't see any reason why my insurance company's actuaries should be able to arbitrarily suggest that I am not.

waldo56

Pretty much every fit male but running fanatics are overweight by BMI.

ctperdant

We in the actuarial field (I'm on the P&C side, but I've spoken with those on the health side) understand that weight and BMI numbers are very misleading. That's why they are going to be switching to a new measure of health which is your Waist to Height ratio. The reason is that a BMI number may become irrelevant is when dealing with those that lift weights and carry a decent amount of muscle on their frame.
...

This looks very useful

From wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waist-to-height_ratio), Barbie has a WHR of 0.25. But I don't think that's ideal!

BarackMeLikeAHurricane

It's useful for population studies but not as a measure for health for everyone. My BMI is only 16.6 but I'm definitely healthy, I just have a small frame. Now take Andreas Münzer who had a BMI of 37.3 but was only about 2% body fat. Would you consider this man to be "obese"?

Mathguy1

At some point, even the waist-to-height ratio becomes a more of a genetic issue than a health marker, especially in people who are several inches shorter or taller than average. And the belly button level is not everyone's natural waist. I think we should all just acknowledge the fact that health is personal, and using these cookie-cutter methods to determine who is healthy and who isn't causes more harm than good.

I work in the P&C area of insurance myself, so I understand the actuarial concepts, but if my doctor says I'm healthy, then I don't see any reason why my insurance company's actuaries should be able to arbitrarily suggest that I am not.

JQ, I agree with you. BMI, or other metrics such as Waist to Height ratios are not the end all be all to determining health. I was just pointing out, that as a starting point, the BMI measurement that is currently used is not reliable and that the waist to height ratio is a better STARTING tool to measuring health. You made an excellent point. I certainly did not want to imply that the waist to height ratio should be the only measurement of health. The OP's question was whether the BMI measurement is a good starting point for measuring health. You and I agree that it isn't.

jessfresh78

I don't think its too accurate, I'm a size 12 and my BMI is healthy but my body fat % is actually really high, so I go by that rather than the BMI - not getting that down is what's going to impact my health the most