Need a good hard slap in the face? Find out where you are on the global fat scale.
Options
Replies
-
skullshank wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »BMI of 28, pushin on that obesity level!
You have a higher BMI than 57% of males aged 15-29 in your country
You have a higher BMI than 93% of males aged 15-29 in the world
mirin', fatass.
You punch me right in the feels
0 -
I don't understand this at all! I get BMI but it says I am heavier than 98% of the women in Canada from 19-26 but I know for a fact there's a lot of women out there still bigger than me, and there's also a lot a bigger women in the US too. I cannot be heavier than 98% of the population in Canada . . . there's something off about this.
For the record, I'm 5'9, 250lbs with 34% BF0 -
I'm lower than 95% of women in my country in my age, and lower than 82% in the the world. I used to be lower than 58% in my country and higher than 74% globally - wow that's a big difference.
0 -
LolBroScience wrote: »skullshank wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »BMI of 28, pushin on that obesity level!
You have a higher BMI than 57% of males aged 15-29 in your country
You have a higher BMI than 93% of males aged 15-29 in the world
mirin', fatass.
You punch me right in the feels
10/10 would tongue-punch, right in the feels.0 -
tigersword wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »This is very reflective of how overweight Americans are now. I have a lower BMI than 65% in the U.S. for my height/age, but higher than 71% worldwide!!
actually it is not, because BMI does not account for muscle mass…
Not saying Americans are not obese, I am just disputing that BMI is an "effective stat"….
It actually IS reflective. People with a larger muscle mass than average are the exception, not the rule. BMI may not be very accurate for individuals, but it is for large groups.
That's the entire point. BMI is a population metric. It's completely useless as a statistic for an individual, was never intended to be used for individuals, and even the man who came up with the formula went on record stating that BMI of any single individual is meaningless.
Also, there are millions of athletes competing in organized sports (pro, semi-pro, amateur) in the United States alone. To say that people with above average muscle mass are rare exceptions is disingenuous.
Completely agree that BMI is not an individual tool and I've said that for years, it isn't as useful for individuals who can do a BF% aproximation. Also, it is true what you say about the number of athletes but even the majority of atheletes are not going to have a very high BMI with low BF%. Very few athletes would have an obese BMI with low body fat but overweight would be more likely for those in strength oriented sports like power lifting, Olympic lifting, rugby, body building and football. Those who are in endurance, speed, and other less strength dominant sports would likely have both low BMI and low BF%.
In my experience, those who are very musclular with low BF aren't normally the ones you see complaining about BMI being skewed by muscle most of the time, but rather those who are a little higher than average in muscle but have much higher BMIs.
ETA the last statement is not directed at anyone but just a general observation I've made over the years.0 -
At first it said I was 100% fatter than people in my country, but then I realized I didn't switch to pounds and now I'm 86% less fat than the average, haha I was concerned there for a minute.0
-
So I have a lower BMI than 53% of women my age in the US, but higher than 86% of women my age globally. This is definitely motivation!0
-
Very interesting! I apparently (as a short, slim woman) have a lower BMI than 70% of females ages 19-35 in the world, and am most like someone from Sri Lanka. And it says: "If everyone in the world had the same BMI as you, it would remove 50,614,965 tonnes from the total weight of the world's population"!0
-
brntwaffles27 wrote: »At first it said I was 100% fatter than people in my country, but then I realized I didn't switch to pounds and now I'm 86% less fat than the average, haha I was concerned there for a minute.
LOL, I would definitely hate so see what country you were from if you were 100%.
0 -
acorsaut89 wrote: »I don't understand this at all! I get BMI but it says I am heavier than 98% of the women in Canada from 19-26 but I know for a fact there's a lot of women out there still bigger than me, and there's also a lot a bigger women in the US too. I cannot be heavier than 98% of the population in Canada . . . there's something off about this.
For the record, I'm 5'9, 250lbs with 34% BF
It's not talking about all Canadians, or even all women in Canada. Only women in that specific age bracket...which is not a very big bracket So a woman who is 27 or 28 wouldn't be included for your results.0 -
Thank you for this, it really was an eye-opener. It says I'm most like someone from Somalia, and have a lower BMI than 90% of US females in my age bracket. That put things in perspective for me as I tend to be extremely critical of myself and every imperfection I find. This was really cool, and works both ways.
0 -
tigersword wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »This is very reflective of how overweight Americans are now. I have a lower BMI than 65% in the U.S. for my height/age, but higher than 71% worldwide!!
actually it is not, because BMI does not account for muscle mass…
Not saying Americans are not obese, I am just disputing that BMI is an "effective stat"….
It actually IS reflective. People with a larger muscle mass than average are the exception, not the rule. BMI may not be very accurate for individuals, but it is for large groups.
That's the entire point. BMI is a population metric. It's completely useless as a statistic for an individual, was never intended to be used for individuals, and even the man who came up with the formula went on record stating that BMI of any single individual is meaningless.
Also, there are millions of athletes competing in organized sports (pro, semi-pro, amateur) in the United States alone. To say that people with above average muscle mass are rare exceptions is disingenuous.
http://www.webmd.com/diet/features/how-accurate-body-mass-index-bmi
I think the reason we see it used so much on individuals is because it's generally considered useful for individuals. Ancel Keys didn't come up with the formula but he did popularize it centuries later, and suggest it be used on populations only. The WHO considers it useful for sedentary individuals of average body composition.
http://whqlibdoc.who.int/trs/WHO_TRS_854.pdf
I liked the tool in the OP. I found my results terrific.
Those of you getting nonsense BMI results, check your inputs. The fields have settings for meters vs. feet, etc.
0 -
OK-now I'm going to brag. At 72 I have a bmi of 19-below average for 95% of women 70-79. Let it be known that I am NOT one of those little-old skinny people who have trouble eating enough. I use MFP to manage my weight and macros. Great to know it is working! I agree that bmi is only one statistic and better ones are around-it is nevertheless a good one to use as a comparison over time.0
-
So basically I'm fatter than almost all the women in my age group in the world. Ouch!!0
-
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »
My BMI is 21 (5'7", 137 lbs) and I got Cambodia! I'm still looking to lose a few pounds so I wouldn't worry lol.0 -
Very interesting link, thanks for sharing! Helpful in confirming some of my goals. I think the BMI discussion is interesting. In general, I think it is a helpful tool but of course for some people with high LBM it is not realistic. However, I think it is often used as an excuse for many people.0
-
Well I'm 98% and I'm from Canada0
-
I have a lower BMI than 51% of females my age/height in my country but higher BMI than 83% of females my age in the world. I am most like someone from South Africa.
Interesting.0 -
ElizabethNJ wrote: »acorsaut89 wrote: »I don't understand this at all! I get BMI but it says I am heavier than 98% of the women in Canada from 19-26 but I know for a fact there's a lot of women out there still bigger than me, and there's also a lot a bigger women in the US too. I cannot be heavier than 98% of the population in Canada . . . there's something off about this.
For the record, I'm 5'9, 250lbs with 34% BF
It's not talking about all Canadians, or even all women in Canada. Only women in that specific age bracket...which is not a very big bracket So a woman who is 27 or 28 wouldn't be included for your results.
Right--I will improve my position somewhat just by turning 45.0 -
ElizabethNJ wrote: »acorsaut89 wrote: »I don't understand this at all! I get BMI but it says I am heavier than 98% of the women in Canada from 19-26 but I know for a fact there's a lot of women out there still bigger than me, and there's also a lot a bigger women in the US too. I cannot be heavier than 98% of the population in Canada . . . there's something off about this.
For the record, I'm 5'9, 250lbs with 34% BF
It's not talking about all Canadians, or even all women in Canada. Only women in that specific age bracket...which is not a very big bracket So a woman who is 27 or 28 wouldn't be included for your results.
They give you a national and a global measurement though . . . so the national one would be Canada and my age bracket is really what I'm concerned about since it's my age lol0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 389 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 918 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions