We are pleased to announce that as of March 4, 2025, an updated Rich Text Editor has been introduced in the MyFitnessPal Community. To learn more about the changes, please click here. We look forward to sharing this new feature with you!
Do BMI's seem unrealistic to anyone else?
Replies
-
doncha think waist to height would be a better indicator for you since you hold all your weight in your midsection, and as such your waist to hip may be misleading? (and that's what I thought you were referring to initially since many feel it's more accurate than BMI)0 -
doncha think waist to height would be a better indicator for you since you hold all your weight in your midsection, and as such your waist to hip may be misleading? (and that's what I thought you were referring to initially since many feel it's more accurate than BMI)
Alas, I was confused!
I thought we were talking about waist to hip being more accurate than BMI.
Thanks so much, pork chop.0 -
Thank you for saying this. There is so much negativity going on in this board, it sucks.
But thank you to the BMI advocate that just brought up Waist to Height Ratio. This is quickly replacing BMI as the standard for health with lots of research to back it up.
Mine is 0.46 which is right in the healthy zone, which supports that my BMI of 28 isn't telling the whole story
@holothuroidea, this was the post prior to yours that mentioned any ratio with the acronym WHR
you can see where I got confused.
but hey, if you think you're done, then more power to you. what are you still doing here?
(said 90% in jest, because I don't really NEED to be here myself, but it helps me stay on top of things) 0 -
@holothuroidea, this was the post prior to yours that mentioned any ratio with the acronym WHR
you can see where I got confused.
but hey, if you think you're done, then more power to you. what are you still doing here? (said 90% in jest, because I don't really NEED to be here myself, but it helps me stay on top of things)
Yeah. I get it now.
I am not done! I can't even do a single push up yet. Hell no, I'm not done!
I don't think any of these numbers really give a complete picture of health. I still have some BF to loose, and a lot of hard work to be able to do the things I want to do.
Anyway, it was just a random thought that popped in my head. Nothing serious. Carry on, then, schnookums. :P0 -
It really comes down to perception. My daughter in law and I are almost exactly the same size bone structure and height. I'm 115 lbs, she's 240, we're both 5"2" to 3" tall. She keeps telling me that it's not realistic for her to be my weight because she'd be just skin and bones. I ask if I looked like skin and bones, no, she thinks I look good. So why would she be skin and bones and I look fine? Because she's been 240 for so long her head can't get around that she could lose over 100 lbs and not be sickly.
Everyone should weigh or look they way they want but if you have weight to lose don't dismiss what a healthy weight would be based on your perception now. You don't have to accept that you've always weighed more and would therefore look awful at a lower end of the BMI.
Love this! I think it is totally true. When i first reached a BMI of 21 (my profile pic) everyone was really worrid...but thats what i should be and i think i look alot better at that weight. Everyone just gets used to what they see evryday , doesnt mean its right or healthy...I think BMI is a good indicator unless you are very muscular.0 -
Hmm, well I have a 23 inch waist and my pants size is 24, but this calculator only goes as low as 28, so it does not seem to account for people with a very small frame (as usual).
I am going to try this website and 24inch???? I would dieeee to have a waist that small..0 -
Yeah. I get it now.
I am not done! I can't even do a single push up yet. Hell no, I'm not done! I don't think any of these numbers really give a complete picture of health. I still have some BF to loose, and a lot of hard work to be able to do the things I want to do.
Anyway, it was just a random thought that popped in my head. Nothing serious. Carry on, then, schnookums. :P
:flowerforyou: :happy:0 -
I have done my BMI on MFP, NHS BMI TOOL and WEB MB and they ALL say the same...so i dont understand why some of you say there are discrepancies ...are you using notable websites?
I was hoping one would come up with the message 'youre not fat' but alas, it was 26.1 which i already knew
0 -
I have done my BMI on MFP, NHS BMI TOOL and WEB MB and they ALL say the same...so i dont understand why some of you say there are discrepancies ...are you using notable websites?
I was hoping one would come up with the message 'youre not fat' but alas, it was 26.1 which i already knew
BMI is an international standard, so it will always be the same no matter what website you calculate it at.
You may be thinking about BMR which is an approximation based on statistical averages and can vary significantly between different websites.0 -
I look at myself and think "dang according to charts, I need to lose another 70lbs to be the correct weight and BMI" serisously? is seems off0
-
BMI is an international standard, so it will always be the same no matter what website you calculate it at.
You may be thinking about BMR which is an approximation based on statistical averages and can vary significantly between different websites.
Nope, someone on one of the earlier pages said their BMI classed them as overweight on one website, but they re-did it on web MD and it said they were in healthy range.0 -
It IS realistic for most people.0
-
I have a healthy BMI, my waist is 34". I wear a size 4/6 and will never have a <31 inch waist. I am just not built that way. The space between my rib cage and hip is about 1/2". You cannot cookie cutter BMI or waist measurements for everyone. There are always exceptions.
If it's not too TMI, what's your height? I'm guessing you must be a lot taller than my 5'4". When I was a size 4, my waist wasn't over 26 inches at the waistband. I'm guessing the taller you are, the sizes measure differently?0 -
Nope, someone on one of the earlier pages said their BMI classed them as overweight on one website, but they re-did it on web MD and it said they were in healthy range.
That was me! The web MD calculator asks for more than just height and weight. So when I plugged in the other factors, I came in as upper edge of healthy, instead of lower end of overweight. I think i have slightly more muscle than the average woman of my weight because I do competitive cheerleading, which is for the change once it asked what size I am. (At my current weight, not my goal weight.)0 -
That was me! The web MD calculator asks for more than just height and weight. So when I plugged in the other factors, I came in as upper edge of healthy, instead of lower end of overweight. I think i have slightly more muscle than the average woman of my weight because I do competitive cheerleading, which is for the change once it asked what size I am. (At my current weight, not my goal weight.)
I knew i hadnt imagined it but when i went back to look for the post i couldnt find it!! lol Thought i was going crackers. Ive always wanted to do cheerleading...but its not really a Uk thing. Ive never seen any schools or colleges or clubs that do it in my town/city.0 -
I made that distinction in my first post but you probably missed it, it was a while ago.
So, WHR has nothing to do with how you're shaped? Hmm... lol.
My midsection isn't too big, it's just that the fat percentage of my midsection is proportionally large compared to my limbs. There's nothing wrong with that except that it puts me in higher risk categories for cardiovascular disease, etc. I think I am healthy, and my weight is fine. I'm just challenging the usefulness of these numbers based on how they apply to me. I understand that, statistically, they apply to most people.
It was just a random thought I had.
Waist to hip, sugar pumpkin.
38-31-41, with chicken legs. My thighs are very thin.
Ah, we are talking about 2 different things. It is waist to height (not hip) that determines health risk.
Waist to hip would be part of determining hourglass vs apple, but wait to height would not.0 -
many teenage girls SHOULD be 110-115 or below... my girlfriend is 5'2, 27 years old, and still around 110. and that's healthy for her
*facepalm* Oh yaaaaaaay... a man who knows what teenage and full grown women SHOULD weigh based on nothing but a couple of stats. :noway:0 -
I knew i hadnt imagined it but when i went back to look for the post i couldnt find it!! lol Thought i was going crackers. Ive always wanted to do cheerleading...but its not really a Uk thing. Ive never seen any schools or colleges or clubs that do it in my town/city.
Yes.. i live in Texas.. I can think of like 5 gyms at least within 30 minutes of me that are all dedicated to competitive cheerleading.. and thats not including all the schools! Its big down here. Its a good work out though! This will be my 7th year, and although I sadly never got into tumbling and gymnastics, I have developed some big strong thigh muscles from the lifting and throwing my flyer in the air all the time! When I started my weight loss journey in January, my thighs measured in at 26 in EACH, which is just 3 inches smaller than my waist is! haha!0 -
*facepalm* Oh yaaaaaaay... a person who knows what teenage and full grown people SHOULD weigh based on nothing but a couple of stats. :noway:
Fixed it.
But he called me "hun," so I say have at him anyway.0 -
yeah that's fair. i have no idea why i did that. i've never called someone hun in my life... nor would i in the demeaning way I did earlier...
oh the internet... makes us be stupid sometimes. sorry 'bout that.0 -
yeah that's fair. i have no idea why i did that. i've never called someone hun in my life... nor would i in the demeaning way I did earlier...
oh the internet... makes us be stupid sometimes. sorry 'bout that.
'sokay. I got you back like 5 times by now.0 -
Every one of these posts is identical. Its pretty indicative of our culture... the self-delusion is incredible.
I did not say that the BMI was unrealistic for everyone, just for myself. For some (maybe for even most) this is a nice target to shoot at. I do remember my stats when I was at this weight, and my LBM was well down into the healthy ranges. But, when I say dense muscle and large bone structure, I mean just that. Most times, to even get CLOSE to an accurate reading on BMI (according to at least 2 other doctors who have checked) my measurements have to be compared to the MALE BMI table. I was not trying to fan the flames, just stating that the BMI charts are not always the best choice for everyone.
Right now, I know that I am so far into the obese cagegory on BMI, there IS no reading for it, except "DANGER". But, that's why I'm working on pulling down the over wall weight, and not focusing on BMI. I actually find it personally funny to get a BMI reading, because of where I know my lower limits are. (Granted, if I've lost some of the muscle density due to being a lard butt, instead of an active farmer's child, it may be more accurate. So I'm also NOT ruling it out. I'll be able to tell better when I get closer to goal.)0 -
I was in the same boat as you many years ago. 168lbs would take me in the normal range I actually got down to 144lbs which was in the mid range for my height but I looked awful and scrawny, since then I haven't been that reliant on bmi, I just aim to be just in the normal range now.0
-
Well this is a very long thread, so I honestly didn't take the time to read all the posts, but skimming through them there's one thing that I didn't see mentioned: BMI is a statistical tool used for measuring populations and was NEVER intended to be used for judging individuals. The fact that it's commonly used as such is an incorrect use of the tool. You can argue all day about whether it's correct for you or not, but comparing individuals to this standard and making clinical judgements about them based on this number is not only wrong, it's irresponsible.0
-
95% of the time, smack dab in the middle of the BMI range is a good place to be for an individual.
I'm small boned, and have a BMI of 18.5, which is slightly underweight. However, I eat over 2000 calories a day, and the doc says I'm healthy as an ox.0 -
Every one of these posts is identical. Its pretty indicative of our culture... the self-delusion is incredible.
I so gotta agree with this. Sure, there might be some very few special snowflakes out there that indeed are big boned. However, chances are, you are not one of them. I even saw a couple of posts in another thread where a woman stated she would feel underweight if she were under 200 lbs.
Sorry, but no.0 -
Just for the sake of not leaving any loose threads (aheheh), I calculated my waist to HEIGHT ratio, and it is also in the healthy range.
Good for me! I am a statistically healthy individual. :P0 -
I think they are really inaccurate I just made a thread about that as well0
-
Just for the sake of not leaving any loose threads (aheheh), I calculated my waist to HEIGHT ratio, and it is also in the healthy range.
Good for me! I am a statistically healthy individual. :P
haha awesome!0 -
I have a 63% BMI.
I'd like to not believe in it........0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394.7K Introduce Yourself
- 44K Getting Started
- 260.5K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.1K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.7K Fitness and Exercise
- 444 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.2K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 4.1K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 1.3K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.8K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions