Do you follow BMI guidelines?

I checked BMI guidelines for setting my goal weight on MFP (at 10lbs below the top of the range for my height of 5'3"). So, I started at 254 lbs (BMI 45, aka Obesity Level III) and am—as of this morning—167.2 (BMI 29.6, aka overweight).

But this was an initial goal a la 'I have to fill in the blank with something'. And I'm well aware that I can be a little anxious and obsessive. I know me. The top of the weight range for my height is 140. If I'm 139.8, I'll be calm and relaxed. If I'm 140.2, I'll start panicking that the weight is coming back on and I'm about to fall into yoyo-ing. And the reality is that sodium, hormones, time between workout and weigh-in, how long it's been since you've used the bathroom, and a whole bunch of other things can make your weight fluctuate. I want to have a bit of a buffer for my peace of mind. Also, everyone says (correctly!) that the last 10 lbs are the hardest. And the reason is because you're close to goal, you don't have the same fat reserves you used to, and loose logging can be costly. Miss logging 150 calories/day when you've got 100 lbs to lose and it won't impact weight loss anywhere near as much as it will if you miss them when you've got 5 lbs to lose. If I get down to 135 and get frustrated with a month of so of no change or playing with the same 0.4 lbs and just say to myself, "Kitten it. This is good enough," well, it actually will be.

However, when I get down to 150, I'm going to ask my family doctor to refer me to an RD or other weight-loss specialist for a couple of sessions, just so I can be clear on where in the range (118-140) is the happiest spot for me.

I used to follow BMI until I started developing digestive issues (14+ pound intestinal blockage, abdomen swelling, etc). Now I go by DXA scans. They're more accurate. I'm also 5'6. My regular weight is 117-121 but can easily temporarily balloon up to 145 in less than two weeks if I'm not careful what I eat. I'll literally look 7 months preggo.

Remember that BMI is just your (weight in kg) divided by your (height in meters, squared). That's it!

That formula has only one thing going for it: simplicity. Because of this, it has been used in a wide range of health studies showing that, yes, if your BMI is high (particularly over 30) you have an increased risk of a range of health issues. That risk is a population risk, so applying it to an individual is tricky. There are many other factors that lower or raise your risk, such as BP, lipids, exercise, diet, genetics, etc.

Other simple metrics you can try are waist-to-hip ratio and skinfold thickness ("pinch test"). Pick the one that makes you feel the best about yourself!

(Actually, I doubt that the pinch test makes all that many people feel good about themselves. )

I use it as a rough estimation of how much I need to lose. I started at a BMI of 40 and those risk factors associated with that category were starting to slowly rear their ugly heads.

My doctor and I agree that I should try for a BMI of 25 and then we'll reevaluate according to other markers.

I think BMI is probably great for the vast majority of us. You are barely overweight - I plugged in your numbers and got 25.2; 24.9 would be normal. For you, that's 2 pounds. I'm 50 and have been morbidly obese for all but about 4 years of my adult life. I got down to 143 when I was in my mid-thirties, but never maintained it for very long - I was able to maintain 150-155 for a fair amount of time, which is overweight for me. I'm currently at 162, having lost 105 pounds. My doctor is fine with me being in the overweight range, as long as I can maintain it and continue to exercise.

You're at a place to lose a few pounds and be back in the healthy range. Whether or not you need to is between you and your doctor.

I take BMI into consideration, but I try not to focus on it. I freaked out a bit when I saw where I was on the BMI. Fortunately my doctor was less concerned, she pointed out I completed a half marathon in April and my job is all exercise so my weight should come back down in a couple months. I am in relatively good shape cardiovascular wise, so right now I am monitoring myself on the belt scale and resting pulse rate.

EllieElla2015 wrote: »

I haven't weighed myself in a while, but always assumed I floated between 130 and 145 pounds. My mom recently started trying to lose weight so we both weighed ourselves. I'm 5'6 and 156 pounds, which according to my BMI makes me overweight. My mom freaked out, asking me how I let myself get overweight. While I was shocked at first, I let it go since I'm pretty close to where I want to be physically but I still found it weird. Also, while I know BMI doesn't account for muscle, I have legitimately zero muscle lol so it can't be that- I've only ever done cardio.

So I'm just wondering if anyone here follows BMI guidelines and if so to what extent. Do the guidelines seem to apply to your body at different stages?

Thanks!

Your current weight is my goal weight and we are the same height

That makes you overweight by 1 pound. I know this because I too am 5'6"

So don't freak out, lose a pound or even a few more and you'll be fine. To answer your question, yes I do stick to BMI guidelines but if I were one pound into the overweight category, I would not freak out.

My initial response to this question: "Bwahahahahaha. no."
After reading answers, I do completely understand why other people would use BMI as a tracker of health, and I do understand how it could be helpful. For me, no. I will never have "normal" BMI, and will always be--at very least-- overweight because of my muscle mass. I use a tape measure and scale. Use what works for you.

I don't "follow" it in the sense of being guided by it in any major way. But I do know where I fall, and that my preferred weight (120 at 5'5") is toward the lower end of normal BMI (even though I'm not devoid of muscle, and do have broad shoulders, big hands/wrists, and most simple "frame size" estimates allege I have a large frame (I don't)).

I know where I feel best weight-wise, and look best.

Most people can find a healthy weight in their BMI range. A few can't. It was never designed to be definitive for individuals, but it can be a useful approximation for many.

amusedmonkey wrote: »

I do. My goal is not to be obese by BMI, and I'm aware by choosing my goal weight in the overweight category I have a slightly increased risk of certain diseases, but not as significant being in the obese category. A risk I'm aware of and willing to take, which is why I will always and periodically keep watching my parameters. As it stands, I'm not planning to go down to normal BMI unless I have to. If something comes up out of order and weight loss helps it, I will work on going lower, but I hope I will be able to happily maintain in the overweight category for as long as possible.

Some people could proudly claim that they're muscular enough not to need the guideline and they're right in that they aren't "overfat", but any extra weight as per statistics means increased risk, even if it's coming from muscle. Now the risk is not as high as if the extra weight was predominantly fat, but it's still there, and it's smart to acknowledge that. Wanting a much higher than normal muscle mass to the point where it makes you an outlier is a valid personal choice, but people need to be aware that it's not without cons.

If you're "statistically" at increased risk it just means that you're in the segment of the population that is considered to be at increased risk. You as an individual may or may not be. If the only reason that you're in that segment of the population is because of muscle mass then you're not actually at increased risk.

amusedmonkey wrote: »

counting_kilojoules wrote: »

amusedmonkey wrote: »

I do. My goal is not to be obese by BMI, and I'm aware by choosing my goal weight in the overweight category I have a slightly increased risk of certain diseases, but not as significant being in the obese category. A risk I'm aware of and willing to take, which is why I will always and periodically keep watching my parameters. As it stands, I'm not planning to go down to normal BMI unless I have to. If something comes up out of order and weight loss helps it, I will work on going lower, but I hope I will be able to happily maintain in the overweight category for as long as possible.

Some people could proudly claim that they're muscular enough not to need the guideline and they're right in that they aren't "overfat", but any extra weight as per statistics means increased risk, even if it's coming from muscle. Now the risk is not as high as if the extra weight was predominantly fat, but it's still there, and it's smart to acknowledge that. Wanting a much higher than normal muscle mass to the point where it makes you an outlier is a valid personal choice, but people need to be aware that it's not without cons.

If you're "statistically" at increased risk it just means that you're in the segment of the population that is considered to be at increased risk. You as an individual may or may not be. If the only reason that you're in that segment of the population is because of muscle mass then you're not actually at increased risk.

Let's put it this way: who is statistically at more risk? A woman with 20% bodyfat in the normal BMI category or the same woman with 20% bodyfat in the overweight category? That's what I meant by risk being statistically higher, a possibility of risk for the individual vs what might be the risk with the same circumstances at a lower weight. Having a higher weight, even from muscle, affects certain metabolic pathways. It may be at less risk than someone in the normal weight category with high body fat, but it's smart to watch for trends in blood work and not be stubborn about it if at some point weight loss is recommended.

The percentage of fat is all that matters and that's the same. The reason people say that BMI works for populations rather than individuals is precisely because of cases like these. Very few people actually have enough muscle mass to skew things but for those that do BMI isn't going to be accurate.