Do BMI's seem unrealistic to anyone else?

geekyjock76 · April 2013

Go to your university kinesiology department and ask if someone can assess you either with calipers or a BIA device. Regardless of which you choose, it's simply an estimate that carries some error for various reasons.

CoachReddy · April 2013

honestly, those devices are just as accurate as this online calculator:

http://fitness.bizcalcs.com/Calculator.asp?Calc=Body-Fat-Navy

aimforhealthy · April 2013

I think it's meant as an average and you have to be honest with yourself about what average really is for you. I suppose this is a rather useless opinion since other people have said this better over the last 15 pages. I can only share my own experiences and why I think BMI is still a useful tool.

For me, being an average-framed 5'7" woman in her 30s, BMI is a good gauge of what healthy weight is. The top of the BMI range for someone my size is 159 lbs. Currently, I am 20 lbs away from that, and yet I KNOW, from having run the gamut of weight in my adult life from weighing 117 lbs at 22 to weighing 197 last Christmas, that I will still be a chunky little monkey at 159 lbs. Dress size is not a good indicator of health, I realize, but at 159 lbs I will be BARELY out of the plus sizes.

The low end of BMI for my height is 118 lbs. When I was dancing 8 hours a day and weighing under 120 lbs I looked straight-up sickly. People would often ask me if I was feeling under the weather and my health practitioners told me to eat more even though I ate whatever I wanted and ate a LOT. I was just working it off at a deficit because I was so active.

I'm medium-framed, so neither the low end nor the high end of the BMI range works for me. I looked and felt amazing at about 135 - which, hey, is smack dab in the middle of normal BMI for someone my gender, size and frame. It's hard to figure out what your goals should be when you've been fat most of your life. To me, BMI is a happy medium to shoot for.

holothuroidea · April 2013

Here are two calculators. You will need a tape measure. Their accuracy depends on where you carry your weight. I suggest taking an average of the two to get a general idea. Even if they aren't entirely accurate, the calculations will be consistent as you loose inches so it's a good way to track your progress.

http://www.fat2fitradio.com/tools/mbf

http://www.fat2fitradio.com/tools/cbbf

conorpatmanCHANGED · April 2013

unless you have a large amount of muscle then no

BluePHX · April 2013

I guess that depends on how tall you are? That's a hard question to answer without info.

jmadams111 · April 2013

Which BMI are you using? There are 4 -6 different ones that I have found so far and using them I vary =/- 6. Even my Dr,, who has always been on me to lose wt told me the "charts" are off for my frame. Like everything else you do in this questuse it as a guide; its not engraved in stone.

charliemarie923 · April 2013

REALLY REALLY wish i hadnt done that now...it is 36% which is classed as obese....my BMI is 26.1 which is slightly overweight. Now i feel like utter ****...But more to work towards i guess

bring7 · April 2013

[/quote]

honestly, those devices are just as accurate as this online calculator:

http://fitness.bizcalcs.com/Calculator.asp?Calc=Body-Fat-Navy
[/quote]

HAHA. By that, I'm obese right now with 30% body fat. And that's considering that a couple of pounds ago I slipped into the highest end of normal on BMI. I'd like to drop 10 pounds from where I am now...but I'm not seeing where I'm obese. I don't know if they are a gimmick, inaccurate or what, but one of those scanner things said I was 19% body fat. That's a lot of difference.

holothuroidea · April 2013

Please check out the other one that I linked to!

The navy/military calculator gives me 36%, too, which I know is inaccurate because it only takes waist and hip and neck measurements. It over estimates BF% for people who carry their weight in their midsection.

The covert-bailey one also takes thighs and forearms against the wrist. This one will overestimate if you tend to carry your weight in your thighs.

Also make sure you are measuring your true waist, not x inches above the navel or at the navel. Your true waist is the narrowest part of your torso and its placement varies from person to person.

charliemarie923 · April 2013

OK themilitary one you gave me the ,link to said 34.7% and the covert-bailey one said 24.1 % that is a HUGE difference.....what am i supposed to do now lol

bring7 · April 2013

That one says I should weigh 174, which just so happens to be 1 pound away from the goal I set when I started. I think it's a lot more accurate than the others in my case.

holothuroidea · April 2013

I take an average of the two. For you that would be 29.4%. I also did a google search for pictures and descriptions of people with known BF%'s and compared them to my build, and figured that the average was fairly accurate for me.

I've had one person reply to these links and say that the average of the two numbers was spot on to what they were measured at by a professional. That doesn't mean it's going to be that accurate for you, but it seems to work okay.

Like I said, it's a good benchmark to track your progress.

danasings · April 2013

Wow. You have rendered me speechless yet again. What a completely asinine thing to say.

CoachReddy · April 2013

interesting... the Navy Calc says 9% for me and the other you linked said 10% - although i guess the variation is going to be smaller at a certain point...

good point about accurate measurements

CoachReddy · April 2013

great call.

it's silly to just take the lower one because it makes you feel better, but you also shouldn't 100% buy into the higher number. measure your bf% with a bunch of calculators and average. that's gonna be just as accurate as any other method outside of water displacement or other more complicated tests.

yuckidah · April 2013

The BMI is certainly interesting.
I have *just* made my way in to the 'overweight' category (yay, lol!) and people are calling me 'skinny'.
I'm NOT skinny by any means, but I sure don't look like I'm only 1lb under 'obese' either.
Fairly certain I'll never get down to 'healthy' but I'd like to get to the lower end of overweight if I can

aimforhealthy · April 2013

Yeah, I'm very, very hourglassy - my waist is nearly 15" smaller than both my hips and boobs, think Christina Hendricks from Mad Men as she and I have nearly the same proportions - so body fat measurements are always very unhelpful for me. Even pushing 200 lbs at 5'7" with very little lean muscle, these indices were telling me my body fat was in the 25% range and that I was totally fit, which just isn't true. I just carry all my fat where the BF indices don't measure.

charliemarie923 · April 2013

I think im going to pretend i never saw any of my BF%....sorry for highjacking the thread!!

doneatfour · April 2013

For the military one, use the smallest part of your torso as your waist and your hips should NOT be the widest part from a front view, but a side view. The tape should pass across your buttocks. Per the military instruction. Should result in a dramatic decrease in percentage and bring it closer to Covert Bailey.

Do BMI's seem unrealistic to anyone else?

Replies

Categories