Obese and proud of it!
McCloud33
Posts: 959 Member
So according to the BMI chart, at 5'-8" and 197lbs...I am Obese. Below video was a few weeks ago now, but that's about 320 lbs and I just did 340x5 this morning. Do I look obese to you? If this is what the medical community wants to say is obese, then yep, I'm obese and damn proud of it! F the BMI chart!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkinGweiAeM0
Replies
-
It's not perfect, that's for sure. It definitely doesn't apply to you I would think! Everything in perspective.0
-
The BMI chart isn't a good tool for everyone. webmd.com/diet/bmi-drawbacks-and-other-measurements?page=10
-
BMI does not distinguish muscle from extra fat
It is a poor measure considering the technology available.
Amazing health care uses that now. They use elaborate programs to figure out how to bill you but have a dumb chart for that.
0 -
I don't think BMI is the best indicator. I am definitely overweight at 5'2 and 175lbs, but no one would call me obese. However, the BMI says I am obese.
The only time you have to worry about the BMI, is what do they use as a measure for obese when getting health insurance.0 -
fannyfrost wrote: »I don't think BMI is the best indicator. I am definitely overweight at 5'2 and 175lbs, but no one would call me obese. However, the BMI says I am obese.
The only time you have to worry about the BMI, is what do they use as a measure for obese when getting health insurance.
I KNOW bmi isn't the best indicator LOL. I think that it is absolutely ridiculous that insurance uses that - and only that sometimes - to determine your rate. My heart rate is in the 40s, I can lift more weight than 90% of the population, I can run a 6 min mile, I can also run a half marathon...but because I have more muscle that is more dense than fat, I'm suddenly in the "at risk" weight threshold.
I know it gets used because it is the easiest, quickest thing they can do. Literally all they have to do is weigh you and measure your height, and they can train monkeys to do that. But they don't have monkeys...its usually nurses...educated nurses. You don't think they could be trained how to properly use a set of calipers to do body fat? or how about come up with a formula using chest/waist/hip/whatever else measurements...oh wait, you mean they already have formula's like that?!?! And we're still using this BS chart?
I actually had a nurse at a work screening do my BMI, measure me again because she couldn't believe that I was where it said I was, and then hesitantly try and tell me that I should try and lose some weight, because that's what's drilled into their skulls. If BMI says they're too fat, than no matter what my eyes tell me, and no matter how good the rest of the numbers are, you must need to lose weight.
Don't get me wrong, I can lose some fat. I was actually 25 lbs lighter earlier this year before I started bulking. I was 170 and was close to a 6 pack...and was still "overweight"!
0 -
uh oh, better start cutting calories, giving up weights and doing nothing but cardio so you can be at a "health BMI" <--joking of course.
Stay strong!0 -
The chart is just averages that applies to the average person. Most people don't "bulk" outside the fitness community.
For the majority of people these charts are fairly accurate.0 -
The chart is just averages that applies to the average person. Most people don't "bulk" outside the fitness community.
For the majority of people these charts are fairly accurate.
I disagree. First, there is no such thing as an average person. Second, based on the growing waistlines of the American people, I would say they *most* of us are on a continuous bulk. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/obesity-overweight.htm and third, the fact that the majority of people find the charts "accurate" is a joke and irrelevant. I think it's just as detrimental, if not more so, to tell someone who is a "healthy" BMI but carries around more fat than they should that they're doing just fine from a health standpoint when they can barely make it up a set of stairs without being out of breath.
It would take very minimal effort to take additional measurements and plug them into one of the many established formulas, or even work on coming up with one that's even better. That's my point...the medical/insurance community are just being lazy when it comes to this. And it'd be one thing if it had no bearing, but when they use it to establish insurance rates and what people pay...now it's just irresponsible.0 -
BMI is a SCREEN. Like a cancer screen. It quickly eliminates people you don't need to look at so you can concentrate on those who might. The point of a screen is to guarantee that you catch all the bad things, and a few good things vs letting some bad things slip through.
IF you are underweight, or normal on the BMI chart, you are pretty much guaranteed NOT to be fat/overweight. So you can go home. Doctor doesn't need to look at you. That eliminates a whole lot of people right off the bat with no work involved.
IF you are overweight, or higher on the chart, have a 2nd look at additional metrics. Oh you lift weights? Great, not fat/overweight - go home.
IF you are 30+ on the BMI chart, you have a weight issue no matter how much you lift bro.
That's all it's for (and comparing populations).
0 -
I think its a joke too. My husband is the perfect weight for his height (used to be underweight). However, he is totally out of shape, very little muscle, drinks Vitamin water or sugary drinks, eats like no veggies (great with fruit though). He has high cholesterol and stomach issues. Also has trouble sleeping.
Me I am considered "obese" based on BMI. I generally eat healthy (not perfect), lots of veggies, no sugary drinks, less fatty meats and workout 5 times a week. My cholesterol is perfect, blood pressure and sugar is perfect.
I had to lose some weight for my Insurance policy (I was 10 lbs heavier and it was bad), but everything else was perfect. I got the policy for less and got a refund check. My husband on the other hand stayed where he was expected to be.
BMI is way off as an indicator of health. I don't think it was ever developed to be what it has morphed in to. I also think it is very deceptive because you can be overweight and healthy or skinny and unhealthy.
0 -
The chart is just averages that applies to the average person. Most people don't "bulk" outside the fitness community.
For the majority of people these charts are fairly accurate.
I disagree. First, there is no such thing as an average person. Second, based on the growing waistlines of the American people, I would say they *most* of us are on a continuous bulk. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/obesity-overweight.htm and third, the fact that the majority of people find the charts "accurate" is a joke and irrelevant. I think it's just as detrimental, if not more so, to tell someone who is a "healthy" BMI but carries around more fat than they should that they're doing just fine from a health standpoint when they can barely make it up a set of stairs without being out of breath.
It would take very minimal effort to take additional measurements and plug them into one of the many established formulas, or even work on coming up with one that's even better. That's my point...the medical/insurance community are just being lazy when it comes to this. And it'd be one thing if it had no bearing, but when they use it to establish insurance rates and what people pay...now it's just irresponsible.
Your profile indicates you have been seriously into sports for years, and you clearly have more muscle than the average person. It is beyond any doubt that BMI is not a reliable measure of healthy weight for very athletic people.
On the other hand, it is usually true for anyone with a sedentary to moderately active lifestyle and not too much muscle. There are a lot of posts like yours, but yours is the exception. 9 times out of 10, it is an overweight person in denial posting.0 -
Your profile indicates you have been seriously into sports for years, and you clearly have more muscle than the average person. It is beyond any doubt that BMI is not a reliable measure of healthy weight for very athletic people.
On the other hand, it is usually true for anyone with a sedentary to moderately active lifestyle and not too much muscle. There are a lot of posts like yours, but yours is the exception. 9 times out of 10, it is an overweight person in denial posting.
Yup. BMI works for most people. Not gonna work for athletes.0 -
BMI is a SCREEN. Like a cancer screen. It quickly eliminates people you don't need to look at so you can concentrate on those who might. The point of a screen is to guarantee that you catch all the bad things, and a few good things vs letting some bad things slip through.
IF you are underweight, or normal on the BMI chart, you are pretty much guaranteed NOT to be fat/overweight. So you can go home. Doctor doesn't need to look at you. That eliminates a whole lot of people right off the bat with no work involved.
IF you are overweight, or higher on the chart, have a 2nd look at additional metrics. Oh you lift weights? Great, not fat/overweight - go home.
IF you are 30+ on the BMI chart, you have a weight issue no matter how much you lift bro.
That's all it's for (and comparing populations).
@gdyment I get what you're saying and if it was actually used that way it would be one thing. I'm telling you from personal experience and other's stories it's not though. I've heard of people being dropped into lower insurance rates making them pay more...I think I said earlier that I had a nurse tell me (when I weighed 180ish) that I needed to lose 15-20 lbs so that I could be "healthy". At that point I was at about 16-17% BF, so about 150 lbs of LBM. At The top end of the BMI chart for my height is 164. "Healthy" at that point would put me at about 8-9% body fat. I'm currently at about 158lbs of LBM, so if I were healthy, I'd be at 4% body fat!
as far as 30+ meaning you automatically have a weight issue...I just disagree. At 197 and 19-20% body fat, I'm right at that 30 BMI, but my body fat % is still within the "acceptable" category. Ultimately I do want to settle out at that 10-15% body fat level, but even there I'm still going to be "overweight"0 -
there is a percentage point that is used when a person has a lot of muscle mass...its not common knowledge.0
-
I think we all agree that BMI is not the most accurate gauge, however it is a good baseline for people wanting a general idea of where they should be.
Common sense dictates it's not really applicable to an athletic individual. For a truly obese individual wanting to figure out a goal weight, the BMI scale is the most accessible tool.0 -
The chart is just averages that applies to the average person. Most people don't "bulk" outside the fitness community.
For the majority of people these charts are fairly accurate.
I disagree. First, there is no such thing as an average person. Second, based on the growing waistlines of the American people, I would say they *most* of us are on a continuous bulk. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/obesity-overweight.htm and third, the fact that the majority of people find the charts "accurate" is a joke and irrelevant. I think it's just as detrimental, if not more so, to tell someone who is a "healthy" BMI but carries around more fat than they should that they're doing just fine from a health standpoint when they can barely make it up a set of stairs without being out of breath.
It would take very minimal effort to take additional measurements and plug them into one of the many established formulas, or even work on coming up with one that's even better. That's my point...the medical/insurance community are just being lazy when it comes to this. And it'd be one thing if it had no bearing, but when they use it to establish insurance rates and what people pay...now it's just irresponsible.
Your profile indicates you have been seriously into sports for years, and you clearly have more muscle than the average person. It is beyond any doubt that BMI is not a reliable measure of healthy weight for very athletic people.
On the other hand, it is usually true for anyone with a sedentary to moderately active lifestyle and not too much muscle. There are a lot of posts like yours, but yours is the exception. 9 times out of 10, it is an overweight person in denial posting.
I have been "into" sports for years, but had about a 12 year hiatus where I really let myself go. The last time I was "in shape" was high school when I was 5'-8" and 145lbs and rail thin. I had hardly any muscle mass at all. I would say I'm in much better shape now than I was then. And if there are really that many overweight ppl in denial, all the more reason to go with a measuring too that's much less abstract like body fat %.0 -
there is a percentage point that is used when a person has a lot of muscle mass...its not common knowledge.
@urloved33 percentage point for what? Are you talking about insurance rates?0 -
no lol. you use a percentage to reduce the bmi based on muscle mass. go to a gym and have a trainer do you. its generally free.0
-
SarcasmIsMyLoveLanguage wrote: »I think we all agree that BMI is not the most accurate gauge, however it is a good baseline for people wanting a general idea of where they should be.
Common sense dictates it's not really applicable to an athletic individual. For a truly obese individual wanting to figure out a goal weight, the BMI scale is the most accessible tool.
@SarcasmIsMyLoveLanguage first off let me just say I love your screen name LOL I do understand that it gives overweight/obese people a baseline of what to shoot for. I do, I get it. I was there less than two years ago. I was 235-240 lbs and BMI said shoot for 164. The more I researched and the closer I got, the more I realized how unrealistic that number was for me. That's my whole point. THERE ARE BETTER WAYS TO GIVE THAT BASELINE!!!!0 -
Where are you getting your body fat numbers that you're so confident in them? I'm 5'7" and even under 150 I wouldn't say I was much under 10%.
146-150 at 5'7 or 5'8 is pretty lean. 180 should be looking like Arnold.
0 -
@gdyment I'm not saying that it's 100% accurate, but it's kind of a running average of a lot of different methods. I use several of the tape measure formulas, skin caliper, BIA scale, mirror. The picture I posted above was just before I started bulking and I had myself at ~170 lbs and right around 13% BF which seems about right with the picture. I agree that If I was 180 @ 3-4% bodyfat, I would look Arnold-esque.
If I didn't lose any LBM and could cut down to 180 right now, I'd only be at 12%. Based on the muscular potential calculator here: http://www.weightrainer.net/bodypred.html , at 19-20% body fat, my muscular potential would be 230lbs+. So I still have quite a bit of muscle that I could put on. My upper body is way under developed compared to my lower.
Ultimately I would like to go get the DEXA or BodPod to get a more accurate reading.
Here's where I was Jan '15 compared to May '15.
0 -
Great work! Yes, I'd agree that the BMI is a little off for you
Obese, you are not.0 -
It's a guideline. Guidelines are for the typical cases, not outliers. The vast majority of 5'8" males that weight 200 pounds are, in fact, obese.
If you are an outlier, be happy you aren't one of them. :drinker:
EDIT: There is something that feels off about your numbers. According them, you put on 10 pounds of LBM in four months - that's an extremely...aggressive...rate of addition.0 -
It's a guideline. Guidelines are for the typical cases, not outliers. The vast majority of 5'8" males that weight 200 pounds are, in fact, obese.
If you are an outlier, be happy you aren't one of them. :drinker:
At the point that it's used to dictate health goals fore EVERYONE (ie. insurance rates) it's no longer a guideline, it's a mandate.0 -
Amazing results. Well done mate. I wouldn't worry about BMI if you lift heavy. Body fat percentage/weight on the scale/mirrors are probably more accurate indicators. I think even Arnold Schwarzenegger's BMI would have been considered morbidly obese at his peak. Don't give it a second thought.0
-
It's a guideline. Guidelines are for the typical cases, not outliers. The vast majority of 5'8" males that weight 200 pounds are, in fact, obese.
If you are an outlier, be happy you aren't one of them. :drinker:
At the point that it's used to dictate health goals fore EVERYONE (ie. insurance rates) it's no longer a guideline, it's a mandate.
Sure, they could do customized testing on everyone, which would cost a bunch more money, and raise rates anyway.
Obladi oblada...0 -
I missed that part. Your insurance uses BMI to determine rates? Weird. 'MuricaIt's a guideline. Guidelines are for the typical cases, not outliers. The vast majority of 5'8" males that weight 200 pounds are, in fact, obese.
If you are an outlier, be happy you aren't one of them. :drinker:
At the point that it's used to dictate health goals fore EVERYONE (ie. insurance rates) it's no longer a guideline, it's a mandate.
I can understand why you're annoyed in that case.
0 -
SarcasmIsMyLoveLanguage wrote: »
I missed that part. Your insurance uses BMI to determine rates? Weird. 'MuricaIt's a guideline. Guidelines are for the typical cases, not outliers. The vast majority of 5'8" males that weight 200 pounds are, in fact, obese.
If you are an outlier, be happy you aren't one of them. :drinker:
At the point that it's used to dictate health goals fore EVERYONE (ie. insurance rates) it's no longer a guideline, it's a mandate.
I can understand why you're annoyed in that case.
It doesn't for regular health insurance, but life insurance does and is fairly commonly done.0 -
It's a guideline. Guidelines are for the typical cases, not outliers. The vast majority of 5'8" males that weight 200 pounds are, in fact, obese.
If you are an outlier, be happy you aren't one of them. :drinker:
At the point that it's used to dictate health goals fore EVERYONE (ie. insurance rates) it's no longer a guideline, it's a mandate.
Sure, they could do customized testing on everyone, which would cost a bunch more money, and raise rates anyway.
Obladi oblada...
@Mr_Knight it wouldn't require "customized testing"! The navy uses a tape measure method, there's also a YMCA formula based on tape measure. Those are still guesstimates, but much better than BMI. And there are several caliper based ones as well, with as few as 3 measuring spots. You really think that a tape measure or caliper is "customized". I'm not calling for BodPod, hydrostatic or DEXA for the masses, but there's just no reason to continue using blood letting to get the "bad blood" out. I just think we can do better with our level of intellect and technology.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions