Do BMI's seem unrealistic to anyone else?
Options
Replies
-
I dunno, I would hope my doctor told me to lose weight if it was affecting my health.
When 67% of your patients are overweight, you probably stop remembering to mention it since it pretty much goes without saying these days... that, and im sure plenty of people give them **** about it based on the reactions in this thread.0 -
According to my BMI, I have ALWAYS been overweight... Even when I was unpleasantly thin from a stomach parasite. My body may have been a slender size 4, but I could not keep anything down for 3, almost 4 months. About a year after my stomach parasite, I had gained 10 pounds, and was a comfortable size 6, whose BMI was overweight. Currently, I am trying to get back to my size 6 weight because I KNOW that my body is at a comfortable and healthy size, even when my BMI says otherwise. Also, my CURRENT waist to hip ratio is .43... which is definitely considered "healthy." 20 pounds ago, my BMI was closer to the obese range, but my waist to hip ratio was .48.
For me personally, I do not find the BMI correct. I am not going to be a weight that is unpleasant for me to maintain in order for a formula to consider me "healthy."0 -
BMI measurement came out in the 1800s. I think science has come a way regarding human phisiology since then, it's amazing to me that BMI has somehow remained a standard.
We, however, have not evolved since then. It's remained standard because its a good metric to apply to overall populations.
What?! No.... has nothing to do with evolution.
It's remained a standard because not everybody can afford to have density tests performed on their bodies every week. So doctors give them something that is easily calculated. Simplicity means more people will do it. Rough BF% can be done pretty damn close just no one bothers to do it or does it wrong.
I doubt BF% much more indicative of health at population level than BMI is. You'd still have those for which it doesn't mesh such as anorexics, people with little body fat because they are sickly and dying, people with too much fat who register a good BF% because they have a lot of both fat and muscle, etc. No population based tool will be without ouliers. It's the nature of the beast.
Statistically I think waist to height measurement has the most correlation to health risk. Where you store fat is as important as how much you store.
Now you are just getting into body composition which is something else that BMI does not take in effect. Anorexia is diagnosed in a much different manner, not BMI. The sick and dying are not compared to BMI unless it's a glancing factor, they have other things to worry about.
And you can't say statically and I think. You either have them or not and I love to see those statistics.
The latest statistics I've seen, which was over a year ago (hense, the "I think"), say that waist to height is the best measurement for disease risk.
BMI is a population based tool and applies to all adults - male, female, athlete, dying, anorexic, etc. So would BF% if it were to replace BMI for use in general guidelines based on population data. In a population, no tool is going to work for everyone.0 -
I am definitely not obese. No doctor has ever told me i had too lose weight either, but bmi says im obese. The skinniest i have been as well was when I was 20 lbs less and i didnt eat and did waaayyyy toooooo much partying. I was sickly! I dunno though... Maybe i am morbidly obese...
Just because no doctor told you to lose weight doesn't mean anything. My husband is obese, has high blood pressure, sleep apnea and acid reflux issues. No doctor has ever told him to lose weight. They give him meds, a CPAP machine and told him to sleep on a wedge. 75 lbs would probably cure most of it but no one ever says that to him so he thinks he must be just fine.
I bet they have told him to lose weight. He is telling you they haven't
Nope, sat with him through appointments, even ask two different doctors while we were there if they thought he should lose some weight. They bumbled around the subject and never said yes, that would be a great idea.0 -
I'd say it's a good guideline for people that aren't athletes or body builders. There will always be exceptions.0
-
I am definitely not obese. No doctor has ever told me i had too lose weight either, but bmi says im obese. The skinniest i have been as well was when I was 20 lbs less and i didnt eat and did waaayyyy toooooo much partying. I was sickly! I dunno though... Maybe i am morbidly obese...
Just because no doctor told you to lose weight doesn't mean anything. My husband is obese, has high blood pressure, sleep apnea and acid reflux issues. No doctor has ever told him to lose weight. They give him meds, a CPAP machine and told him to sleep on a wedge. 75 lbs would probably cure most of it but no one ever says that to him so he thinks he must be just fine.
I bet they have told him to lose weight. He is telling you they haven't
Nope, sat with him through appointments, even ask two different doctors while we were there if they thought he should lose some weight. They bumbled around the subject and never said yes, that would be a great idea.
They are probably afraid. So many people are in the lawsuit business now adays. doesn't pay to give suggestions.0 -
How accurate is the WHR, though?
I have a typical hourglass figure, and my WHR is 0.76.
That's not the full picture, though. My BF% is 27-28. If you looked at just my arms and legs, you'd estimate my BF% at 20 at the most. That's how much of my weight I carry in my midsection, literally almost all of it. So am I at risk because I carry all my weight in my midsection, or am I safe because of the way it's distributed there?0 -
Exactly. Which goes to show the issue this country has in terms of perception of what is and isn't a healthy weight.I am definitely not obese. No doctor has ever told me i had too lose weight either, but bmi says im obese. The skinniest i have been as well was when I was 20 lbs less and i didnt eat and did waaayyyy toooooo much partying. I was sickly! I dunno though... Maybe i am morbidly obese...
Just because no doctor told you to lose weight doesn't mean anything. My husband is obese, has high blood pressure, sleep apnea and acid reflux issues. No doctor has ever told him to lose weight. They give him meds, a CPAP machine and told him to sleep on a wedge. 75 lbs would probably cure most of it but no one ever says that to him so he thinks he must be just fine.
I bet they have told him to lose weight. He is telling you they haven't
Nope, sat with him through appointments, even ask two different doctors while we were there if they thought he should lose some weight. They bumbled around the subject and never said yes, that would be a great idea.
They are probably afraid. So many people are in the lawsuit business now adays. doesn't pay to give suggestions.0 -
How accurate is the WHR, though?
I have a typical hourglass figure, and my WHR is 0.76.
That's not the full picture, though. My BF% is 27-28. If you looked at just my arms and legs, you'd estimate my BF% at 20 at the most. That's how much of my weight I carry in my midsection, literally almost all of it. So am I at risk because I carry all my weight in my midsection, or am I safe because of the way it's distributed there?
Hun if your BMR, WHR and body fat are all in "bad" ranges... at some point its probably not that all the metrics are off...0 -
BMI is usually only unrealistic for those who are extremely muscular or have a warped perception of what would be good for their body or willingness to put in the effort needed to achieve a normal BMI. The range is so wide of what is a normal BMI that there are very few people who don't fit into normal at a good weight.
I completely agree! I'm in the middle of my healthy BMI and I'm happy with how I look, so is my husband and my doctor says I've done a fantastic job. There are people who tell me I'm too skinny but their perception of what is normal is warped in my opinion and my doctor says I'm not to skinny.
God bless,
Karen0 -
How accurate is the WHR, though?
I have a typical hourglass figure, and my WHR is 0.76.
That's not the full picture, though. My BF% is 27-28. If you looked at just my arms and legs, you'd estimate my BF% at 20 at the most. That's how much of my weight I carry in my midsection, literally almost all of it. So am I at risk because I carry all my weight in my midsection, or am I safe because of the way it's distributed there?
An hourglass shape doesn't carry most weight in the waist. It's carried there the least. The definition of hourglass is bigger on top and bottom with a narrow middle (like an hourglass)
You sound more like an apple shape, and as unfair as it may seem, carrying more weight in your waist raises your risk of disease. Mother Nature isn't very fair.0 -
40 pounds is a lot of weight to lose. For anyone. I am overweight yes. 20 pounds would have me looking really good. I know that. 40 would be too much. I want curves. but that doesn't mean I want to be fat either. Nor do I want to be skinny. I want to look fit. 20 pounds coupled with Insanity will do that for me. Once I am there (hopefully at the end of insanity in 5 weeks) and I can figure out how to post pics I will revisit this.
I'm sure you will be stunning, curvy and everything you've dreamed of. I really would be interested to see your after pictures to see what I'd look like 40 lbs heavier because I already know how many rolls of fat I had at 20 lbs heavier.0 -
How accurate is the WHR, though?
I have a typical hourglass figure, and my WHR is 0.76.
That's not the full picture, though. My BF% is 27-28. If you looked at just my arms and legs, you'd estimate my BF% at 20 at the most. That's how much of my weight I carry in my midsection, literally almost all of it. So am I at risk because I carry all my weight in my midsection, or am I safe because of the way it's distributed there?
Hun if your BMR, WHR and body fat are all in "bad" ranges... at some point its probably not that all the metrics are off...
My BMI is in the "healthy" range, so is my WHR and so is my BF%.
So what are you talking about, sweetie pie?0 -
I haven't really read all these comments yet. I personally think it depends on a lot of factors, including frame size, as well as body composition. So, I don't think it is a good universal guideline, but it can still serve as one aspect of information for understanding averages and what falls within the healthy range. For example, it can help people to realize how low is too low and not to lose weight past the healthy point. At the low end of the scale it can become useful. But, it is based on averages, so that would inform you that a person is healthy along a wide range and even beyond that (I think it is at least a 35 pound range). But, it is useless for people that have a large frame or are body builders (for example). But, a person can be healthy and fit, all along the spectrum. Just because someone is at the low end of the range does not mean they are unhealthy or unfit, it just means they have a small frame. A person can still have a healthy amount of lean body mass for their size and have a low, but not too low bf% and be at a low weight. It just sometimes seems like people don't know that. The point is that we are all different (all you have to do is look around at people to see that).0
-
How accurate is the WHR, though?
I have a typical hourglass figure, and my WHR is 0.76.
That's not the full picture, though. My BF% is 27-28. If you looked at just my arms and legs, you'd estimate my BF% at 20 at the most. That's how much of my weight I carry in my midsection, literally almost all of it. So am I at risk because I carry all my weight in my midsection, or am I safe because of the way it's distributed there?
An hourglass shape doesn't carry most weight in the waist. It's carried there the least. The definition of hourglass is bigger on top and bottom with a narrow middle (like an hourglass)
You sound more like an apple shape, and as unfair as it may seem, carrying more weight in your waist raises your risk of disease. Mother Nature isn't very fair.
The definition of an hourglass shape is pretty loose. I've seen it defined as a 10 inch difference between waist and hips, or a WHR between 6.5 and 7.5. I'm definitely not an apple. I'm an hourglass with stick figure arms and legs! But, that's not really the point.
I know carrying more weight in the midsection increases disease risk, that was my point. My WHR says I'm not at risk when I probably am.
I don't think ANY of these numbers give a complete picture.0 -
How accurate is the WHR, though?
I have a typical hourglass figure, and my WHR is 0.76.
That's not the full picture, though. My BF% is 27-28. If you looked at just my arms and legs, you'd estimate my BF% at 20 at the most. That's how much of my weight I carry in my midsection, literally almost all of it. So am I at risk because I carry all my weight in my midsection, or am I safe because of the way it's distributed there?
As for how accurate WHR is, it depends on what you mean. There is no single number or measurement that indicates "healthy". You can have BMI, WHR, BF, lipids, BP, etc. all in the healthy range and still contract disease. Or you could have many of those in the unhealthy range and be disease free.
These are all just things that put you at an increased risk. There are no guarantees.0 -
The definition of an hourglass shape is pretty loose. I've seen it defined as a 10 inch difference between waist and hips, or a WHR between 6.5 and 7.5. I'm definitely not an apple. I'm an hourglass with stick figure arms and legs! But, that's not really the point.
I know carrying more weight in the midsection increases disease risk, that was my point. My WHR says I'm not at risk when I probably am.
WHR has nothing to with hourglass vs pear vs apple shape. But it does have to do with disease risk. Why do you think your midsection is too big if you are an hourglass shape with a healthy WHR?0 -
I feel like you know your body. If you feel your goal weight makes you feel good and your stats look good at that weight then your fine. I'm 5'2" my Dr. said I should be about 119, I asked by who's standards? Although i'm short my goal weight is 135-150 pounds. I don't want to be skinny, I like meat on my bones. Reach your goals and feel good about it. :flowerforyou:0
-
How accurate is the WHR, though?
I have a typical hourglass figure, and my WHR is 0.76.
That's not the full picture, though. My BF% is 27-28. If you looked at just my arms and legs, you'd estimate my BF% at 20 at the most. That's how much of my weight I carry in my midsection, literally almost all of it. So am I at risk because I carry all my weight in my midsection, or am I safe because of the way it's distributed there?
Hun if your BMR, WHR and body fat are all in "bad" ranges... at some point its probably not that all the metrics are off...
My BMI is in the "healthy" range, so is my WHR and so is my BF%.
So what are you talking about, sweetie pie?
Wait waist to hip or waist to height?0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.8K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 396 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 969 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions