Do BMI's seem unrealistic to anyone else?
Options
Replies
-
YESSSSSS my first roll!0
-
0 -
BMI wasn't even meant to determine a person's ideal weight anyway. It was created to be used to study a large group of people and find the average standard proportion. Then insurance companies adopted it and now it's used for something it's creator never intended.
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2009/07/beyond_bmi.html
It's much better to go by your body fat percentage to determine your actual lean body mass and use that to calculate an appropriate weight.0 -
BMI is an OK guide, but it has some serious drawbacks. I prefer Waist to Height ratio.
- BMI is a way more complicated formula than Waist/Height.
- BMI is not as good of a predictor for health outcomes as Waist/Height.
- Different ethnicities have different health risks at the same BMI
- "Skinny" people can have a good BMI, but have too much fat - usually the waist is out of balance though.
- Muscly people can have a bad BMI, but be healthy - usually the waist is OK though.
My goals have shifted over time to focus on gettting to a point where my waist circumference is less than half my height, instead of a poundage number.
More info: http://www.webmd.com/diet/features/bmi-drawbacks-and-other-measurements
Maybe it's just my body shape, but I really wonder how true this is.
At my highest weight, obese by both body fat and BMI and a month post-partum, my waist-height ratio would still have told me I was "healthy."
It does have its share of problems. I currently have a BMI of 19.3 and my waist-height ratio borders on unhealthy for an adult female. I have a relatively short back for my height and a shorter than average gap between my ribs and hip bones, so there isn't room for much for a well defined waist. Still, I think the waist-height ratio is a better health guide for me than BMI when I'm heavy. Any excess fat goes mostly to my midsection, where it's at its most dangerous, and the waist-height ratio raises a red flag long before BMI does. At my highest weight I had a 38.5" waist, sleep apnea and assorted other problems associated with obesity, and didn't qualify as obese by the BMI standard.0 -
study at Michigan State University looked at BMI as a predictor of percentage fat in college athletes and nonathletes and found that two-thirds of male athletes and one-third of female athletes fell into the category for overweight. They concluded that "BMI should be used cautiously when classifying fatness in college athletes and nonathletes."
Another study looked at gold medal winners from the 2004 Olympics in Athens, and determined that based on published height and weight at least 15 athletes would be classified as overweight or even obese.
Others looked at professional athletes. LeBron James, 2009 NBA MVP, would be considered overweight based on the BMI scale. Peyton Manning, ten times selected to the Pro Bowl and MVP of Superbowl XLI would also be considered overweight. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) states that "highly trained athletes may have a high BMI because of increased muscularity rather than increased body fatness0 -
study at Michigan State University looked at BMI as a predictor of percentage fat in college athletes and nonathletes and found that two-thirds of male athletes and one-third of female athletes fell into the category for overweight. They concluded that "BMI should be used cautiously when classifying fatness in college athletes and nonathletes."
Another study looked at gold medal winners from the 2004 Olympics in Athens, and determined that based on published height and weight at least 15 athletes would be classified as overweight or even obese.
Others looked at professional athletes. LeBron James, 2009 NBA MVP, would be considered overweight based on the BMI scale. Peyton Manning, ten times selected to the Pro Bowl and MVP of Superbowl XLI would also be considered overweight. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) states that "highly trained athletes may have a high BMI because of increased muscularity rather than increased body fatness
/facepalm0 -
BMI alone cannot determine risk for anything. The only thing a high BMI can determine is that a person has a high BMI.
Do insurance companies use BMI in calculating risk? Yes, but NOT alone, ever. They use many factors in addition to BMI such as complete measurements of height, weight, waist/chest/hip circumference, lifestyle, exercise, education, medical history and more.
They KNOW from all research that BMI alone cannot determine risk, and insurance companies do their best to be very competitive. If they relied solely on BMI for risk determination they'd quickly go bankrupt because nobody would buy their policies.
As an example, I'm a 47 year old diagnosed diabetic with a family history of heart disease and a BMI (today) of 29.4 which is the very high-end of obese. Last week I was classified obese by BMI. Yet at 6'3" tall and basically 'obese' by BMI standards I have a waist of 36", and it will go down to 34-35" when I finish this diet phase.
If BMI and my diabetes diagnosis alone determined my risk, my life insurance policy would be damned expensive. Yet I have a fairly substantial policy (I'm the major breadwinner in a family of 5 with a 5 bedroom home, need a decent policy) that's dirt-cheap BECAUSE of my actual risk.
My risk is exceptionally low (and thus a major policy 'dirt-cheap' because my BMI, diabetes diagnosis and family history means practically nothing when risk is calculated based on my waist circumference, true bodyfat %, fitness level, blood work (my glucose is not only controlled, but better than many people NOT diagnosed with diabetes and my cholesterol ratio and HDL:Trig ratio is superior to 95% of the population), and other lifestyle factors.
From a cardiology standpoint - not insurance, we KNOW that both BMI and waist-circumference combined are a better indicator of risk than BMI alone and the recommendations published in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology reflect this. In fact, the recommendations are based on research that tells us using BMI alone misses a massive subset of at-risk patients - those with normal BMI who are still (in bodyfat percentages) obese.
"If all we do is the BMI measurement, we may be missing a subset of patients who have a low BMI but are centrally obese, and we'd be neglecting the opportunity to identify and counsel and treat these patients who would be at increased risk of dying,"
Regardless of in medical/health-care fields or the insurance business, BMI is simply NOT used as a determination of health or risk, period. Any belief it would be is based in ignorance.0 -
Wow, what an extremely scientific, highly-researched and logically presented rebuttal./facepalm0 -
Wow, what an extremely scientific, highly-researched and logically presented rebuttal./facepalm
i'm getting a little tired of you0 -
Why, because I post well-researched, accurate statements? Perhaps you should learn to admit when you're wrong, and accept it.i'm getting a little tired of you
If, however, I'm misinterpreting what you say - then I do apologize.
If you're saying, however, that BMI alone is an indicator of being medically overweight - I stand firm in the fact that it is not.0 -
I get that BMI's are inaccurate for many people, but as a general guideline, it definitely opened my eyes when I was struggling with an eating disorder. I was 88lbs at 5'4", which seemed like a fine weight to me. But when my doctor told me how far my weight was out of a normal BMI range, it was shocking.0
-
... Meanwhile... someplace in Africa/China/Russia, people look at BMI as unrealistic goal to reach.
It's all about perception. Just because we live in America where the majority of people are overweight doesn't mean that the "rules" have changed. You may like the way you look better in the "overweight" category... but that doesn't change the fact that you are overweight.0 -
Regardless of in medical/health-care fields or the insurance business, BMI is simply NOT used as a determination of health or risk, period. Any belief it would be is based in ignorance.
My point was that, like auto insurance, it can help predict risk. Auto insurance also takes many other things into consideration, not just age/gender. I doubt her rate increase was based solely on her BMI, but she obviously thinks it was, so I was offering a possible reason for it.0 -
And with other variables (especially height/waist-circumference) it can help predict risk, I agree.My point was that, like auto insurance, it can help predict risk. Auto insurance also takes many other things into consideration, not just age/gender. I doubt her rate increase was based solely on her BMI, but she obviously thinks it was, so I was offering a possible reason for it.
But those who say BMI alone is a determination of any kind of risk are clearly incorrect. There are people at reduced risk for CVD and other health issues with high BMI's and there are those at increased risk for CVD/Health issues that have normal, even low-normal BMI's.0 -
I think maybe the problem here is people's understanding of the word "overweight".... Meanwhile... someplace in Africa/China/Russia, people look at BMI as unrealistic goal to reach.
It's all about perception. Just because we live in America where the majority of people are overweight doesn't mean that the "rules" have changed. You may like the way you look better in the "overweight" category... but that doesn't change the fact that you are overweight.
"Overweight" when used by the BMI is 'moderately correlated' with body fat percentage, but does not take into account many factors and cannot be relied upon as a measure of healthy weight in the entire population.
"Overweight" when used in medical terminology, is having a greater body fat percentage than is considered healthy.
The two meanings of overweight, though correlated in much of the population, are mutually exclusive. "Overweight" according to BMI is not necessarily medically overweight.
Similarly, someone medically 'overweight' may present with a very normal BMI.0 -
I do think BMI charts are accurate, unless you are an elite athlete, and c'mon, most of us here are not. Most people that complain about the charts are just looking for another excuse to remain overweight.0
-
I think maybe the problem here is people's understanding of the word "overweight".... Meanwhile... someplace in Africa/China/Russia, people look at BMI as unrealistic goal to reach.
It's all about perception. Just because we live in America where the majority of people are overweight doesn't mean that the "rules" have changed. You may like the way you look better in the "overweight" category... but that doesn't change the fact that you are overweight.
"Overweight" when used by the BMI is 'moderately correlated' with body fat percentage, but does not take into account many factors and cannot be relied upon as a measure of healthy weight in the entire population.
"Overweight" when used in medical terminology, is having a greater body fat percentage than is considered healthy.
The two meanings of overweight, though correlated in much of the population, are mutually exclusive. "Overweight" according to BMI is not necessarily medically overweight.
Similarly, someone medically 'overweight' may present with a very normal BMI.
ok.0 -
Not just elite athletes, but neither true mesomorphs or true ectomorphs, regardless of athletic conditioning will be represented properly on the BMI. (Most mesomorphs will register higher on the scale, while most ectomorphs will register lower than a true healthy representation, thus the "skinny-fat" condition of some ectomorphs).I do think BMI charts are accurate, unless you are an elite athlete, and c'mon, most of us here are not. Most people that complain about the charts are just looking for another excuse to remain overweight.
And for that matter, a healthy, pregnant woman will also be classified as obese...
When people reply to this thread with comments such as:
... or ...I am only looking to move from obese to overweight on the BMI chart and then I will be happy, my "ideal" weight will be way to low for me
^ what all obese people think.
Sorry but those statements are both inaccurate and in the case of the first, also quite rude.they are realistic unless and only unless you are a body builder with a lot of muscle.
And the people suggesting that some people claim BMI is a 'bad metric' so they can "justify" being overweight ... sure, there may be some people that fall into that group- but painting all of us with that brush is akin to saying that all people with a 'normal' BMI are carrying a healthy percentage of bodyfat - which simply isn't true.
... AND one important thing ... a quick apology to CoachReddy ... I did misinterpret some of what he was saying. Back on page 5 of the 1st part of this thread the following from him is hidden:
... and as I jumped into this in part two I did not see that and assumed he thought otherwise, mostly based on his "^ what all obese people think" comment I quoted above.But that doesn't mean its inherently bad, or a bad indicator of future health risks.
Again for clarity:
The terms 'overweight' and 'obese' are categories in the BMI. Although these categories moderately correlate to what is medically classified as 'obese' or 'overweight', they are still mutually exclusive.
The MEDICAL definitions of the terms "overweight" and "obese" are actually different than the BMI categories, and consider true body fat percentage, not the BMI's estimate of body fat percentage. The sad truth here though, is, that not even all doctors realize that.0 -
Not just elite athletes, but neither true mesomorphs or true ectomorphs, regardless of athletic conditioning will be represented properly on the BMI. (Most mesomorphs will register higher on the scale, while most ectomorphs will register lower than a true healthy representation, thus the "skinny-fat" condition of some ectomorphs).I do think BMI charts are accurate, unless you are an elite athlete, and c'mon, most of us here are not. Most people that complain about the charts are just looking for another excuse to remain overweight.
And for that matter, a healthy, pregnant woman will also be classified as obese...
When people reply to this thread with comments such as:
... or ...I am only looking to move from obese to overweight on the BMI chart and then I will be happy, my "ideal" weight will be way to low for me
^ what all obese people think.
Sorry but those statements are both inaccurate and in the case of the first, also quite rude.they are realistic unless and only unless you are a body builder with a lot of muscle.
And the people suggesting that some people claim BMI is a 'bad metric' so they can "justify" being overweight ... sure, there may be some people that fall into that group- but painting all of us with that brush is akin to saying that all people with a 'normal' BMI are carrying a healthy percentage of bodyfat - which simply isn't true.
... AND one important thing ... a quick apology to CoachReddy ... I did misinterpret some of what he was saying. Back on page 5 of the 1st part of this thread the following from him is hidden:
... and as I jumped into this in part two I did not see that and assumed he thought otherwise, mostly based on his "^ what all obese people think" comment I quoted above.But that doesn't mean its inherently bad, or a bad indicator of future health risks.
Again for clarity:
The terms 'overweight' and 'obese' are categories in the BMI. Although these categories moderately correlate to what is medically classified as 'obese' or 'overweight', they are still mutually exclusive.
The MEDICAL definitions of the terms "overweight" and "obese" are actually different than the BMI categories, and consider true body fat percentage, not the BMI's estimate of body fat percentage. The sad truth here though, is, that not even all doctors realize that.
No reasonable person would think to evaluate PREGNANT WOMEN according to bmi, that's perverse.
How likely is it that MOST people at the high end of the bmi scale have normal bf% and low waist to height ratios, or that they're athletes?
Yes bmi excludes the high-risk 'skinny fat', that's true.0 -
and while the relationship between chronic illnesses like CV diseases & Type 2 diabetes and obesity is correlational, all signs point to yes, it's safer to assume these are related in an important way than not. And it's ridiculous to hope for a solidly causational relationship with anything related to lifestyle.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 402 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 998 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions