Is BMI really a joke?

My BMI is obese and will be until I loose 5 more lbs. That doesnt make me feel better about myself at all. So I'm not sure what you are saying.

If you've done all you can to gain weight I would say relax. I can't stand the BMI. I'm not where I want to be weight wise but I dont consider myself obese...

I think BMI can be a decent guideline, but nothing more than that. The only things it takes into consideration are your height, your weight, and your age. Thus, you can have a very muscular person will low body fat that is in perfect shape with a distorted BMI because muscle is more dense than fat. It also doesn't take into consideration bone density or any sort of water weight...which continuously fluctuates.

BMI is merely a guideline. I do not find it to be truly accurate at all. The BMI charts list Lance Armstrong as being overweight. Can anyone truly say that he is overweight?

The reason a lot of people don't like BMI is because it ONLY takes into account height and weight.

For example, take two men, both 5' 10", and both with a BMI of 32 - so around 220 pounds.

That is in the "obesity" range of BMI. One though, could have a 22% body fat, while the other has 45% body fat. Which one do you think is healthier?

Or, using myself as an example. Right now, I am at a BMI of 25. But my body fat is still at 38%. I don't really need to lose more weight, but gain muscle. The BMI part doesn't tell me that at all.

BMI is a useful and simple way of suggesting a range of weights that might be considered healthy / overweight / obese for people of a particular height.

People are very fond of pointing out that a bodybuilder with a huge muscle mass and very low body fat %, comes out as obese. Far as I'm concerned that's a straw man argument. Very few people can get to build that much muscle, and cut that much fat off their bodies without learning FAR more than they'd need to know, to understand that BMI doens't apply to them.

What it cannot accurately do is give one weight that one person of one height should be. What it's great at doing is showing clearly that the typical "person X" who is seeking initial information, is severely over or under weight.

Remember, BMI is based on HEALTHY weights, not what you or anyone else might think looks good. At 90lb, I'm a healthy weight, but to my eyes, I look awful!

So, let me get this right, you are saying that it doesn't matter what shape you are natually, the BMI scale in your opionion is a valid scale. That is a joke! I am 5' 10", and currently 14 stone and 10 pounds, thats about 93 kilos, having lost three stone (18 kilos) yet according to BMI I am still obese!! I have played sport all my life, and am generally considered fit, I don't smoke or drink. You are saying that someone, with a much quicker metobolic rate, who smokes and drinks and is a small frame, but has what you would consider a much heathier BMI is healthier than me?

The problem with BMI is it doesn't take into account your body fat %. You can have two people, same height, same weight, same BMI, but one person is 35% body fat and the other person is 10% body fat - you'd better believe that the 1st person has a lot of work left to do, while the latter is very healthy. Someone posted a picture on another thread of this body-builder who is clearly in top physicial condition but is considered "obese" by BMI standards - clearly illustrating its flaws.

For the average person it can be a slightly useful tool but in general, you're much better off getting your body fat tested (using a reliable method) on a periodic basis and using that as a measure of your progress.

Edited to add - since some people have a problem with the body-builder example, another example is a woman who is technically a healthy weight, healthy BMI, but who has a high body fat percentage - the "skinny-fat" person. Technically a healthy weight, but really not all that healthy.

If you're including weight lifting and doing well-rounded exercise in addition to healthy diet to lose weight, you're probably fine going off BMI as a general indicator. It's the people at the far ends of the spectrum - bodybuilders and people who don't work on retaining muscle at all for whom BMI is a very poor measurement of health.

BMI is quite simply a joke. Any metric that alleges to give a useful portrait of your health situation with only these two pieces of information is completely useless. A formula that compares height and weight and can supposedly tell whether or not you are healthy? Give me a break. It doesn't take into account bone structure, muscle mass, or any other variable beyond those two pieces of information. According to BMI, my ideal weight is in a range that would have me waste away to look like a death camp refugee to achieve. Don't pay any attention to it EVER.

It's a guidline. And already lots of people have said it doesn't take into account build, muscle mass etc. I used to say that too - "I'm big boned..." And seriously, how many people are built like Lance Armstrong? Maybe other professional athletes...and I would agree that it is a useless measurement for them. But for us mere mortals....

For now, I am still technically "obese," and both of my parents are type 2 diabetics. My doctor would like me to be in the "healthy" range due to family history. I have absolutely no health issues and have a healthy lifestyle, so he doesn't give me a hard time about it. But from my doctor's perspective and experience: people that were beyond the "healthy" ranges tended to have more health problems overall, PERIOD!! I WANT to lose more, and my ultimate target weight, for various reasons is well within that range.

And of course, there are exceptions to every rule...

BMI doesn't take into account muscle mass and bone structure. My scale does fat percentage for me. at 0% body fat I would weight 152 lbs. The "normal" range for me according to the BMI charts on the Center for Disease control website is 119 - 157 lbs. So accourding to that chart, at 3.2% body fat I would just barely be in the normal range...

And that's provided I don't gain any more muscle...

To me, you don't look unhealthy or skinny, but you do look quite thin and very muscular. I'm not a medical professional by any means, but I'd be concerned that having such a low body fat percentage might be unhealthy for you as a woman. If you thought you needed to lose weight, I'd definitely be worried about you, but you look strong and healthy. I think it'd be best to discuss it with your doctor, and not go by generic charts.

GOVERNMENT PROPAGANDA , just to put another label on us........Most medical professionals laugh when the topic of BMI is brought up

Its an out date source of data that the Government used years ago , its a joke...........Im in the best health, run and exercise up to 3 hours, and it tells me " Im prone to bad health" Yeah right

I have a tendency to listen to the medical community on this one.........its a joke..........Lloyd

body fat percentage done by a professional is a much better way to assess your body mass/fat/weight health as opposed to bmi. like people said, bmi doesn't appreciate the difference between a pound of healthy muscle and a pound of unhealthy fat.

I got mine done on a machine at the chemist. Or you could try the gym. Your body fat should be 17% or above for your body to function as it should. Less than that and you could get fertility problems. Models can go down to 12%, but that is very unhealthy. Being underweight also puts you in danger of osteoporosis.