Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

Is every single body in the world intended to be within the so-called healthy BMI range?

1679111222

Replies

  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Additionally, not everyone who wants to lose weight is overweight to begin with. I lost what made me overweight 2 years ago.

    I'm playing with vanity weight, pure and simple.

    This is true. As I said above, I look better toward the lower end of the BMI scale. I'd also agree that people who are overweight know it if they are honest with themselves. But that doesn't change the fact that not everyone is built like me and I've known some who are same height/heavier weights who are leaner. My former trainer was my height and had about 10 lbs on me, and she was not remotely fat.
  • Orphia
    Orphia Posts: 7,097 Member
    tomteboda wrote: »
    There is much math. I don't wish to bore you with it, but the relationship works for random individuals with similar body fat percentages at the top and bottom of the healthy range. Moreover, the approximation that height directly correlates to volume and therefore mass is destroyed by variable skeletal width, skeletal structure, and length of various body parts. Someone who has a wide biiliac crest distance has considerably more volume, and therefore unavoidable lean mass, than someone who has a narrow biiliac crest distance. Simliarly, torso length and limb length affect BMI considerably, and these things are widely variant in human populations, both now and into paleohistory.

    Thus while I used myself as a convenient example, it is an example born by millions upon millions of individuals.

    Surely the height metric in BMI takes most of that into account. Your situation notwithstanding.

    Do you actually have a BMI formula for people with scoliosis? Or is the maths creative like a forum post?
  • GottaBurnEmAll
    GottaBurnEmAll Posts: 7,722 Member
    kimny72 wrote: »
    It seems to me that BMI is useful as one of several indicators used in tandem to determine health and fitness. Looking at your BMI, BF%, waist circumference, waist to hip ratio, and perhaps a couple other indicators I'm forgetting, you can determine whether your weight should change or not. None of these measurements tell the whole story for every person. But several together can be enlightening.

    I'm honestly confused by the passionate arguments about BMI, but to each their own :smile: I think for most people it's a good place to start, and then if real world results cause you to question whether it's a good indicator for you, look to the other tests to see if they agree. <shrug>

    This.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    kimny72 wrote: »
    It seems to me that BMI is useful as one of several indicators used in tandem to determine health and fitness. Looking at your BMI, BF%, waist circumference, waist to hip ratio, and perhaps a couple other indicators I'm forgetting, you can determine whether your weight should change or not. None of these measurements tell the whole story for every person. But several together can be enlightening.

    I'm honestly confused by the passionate arguments about BMI, but to each their own :smile: I think for most people it's a good place to start, and then if real world results cause you to question whether it's a good indicator for you, look to the other tests to see if they agree. <shrug>

    This.

    Yep, I think kimny is right on.
  • deannalfisher
    deannalfisher Posts: 5,601 Member
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    I like the way the military uses BMI. As a gross population study and a guideline.

    At least once a year each candidate is checked for height/weight. If it falls within BMI - that's a PASS. If this first line fails, then the measuring tape comes out. If that fails, then calipers. If that fails the candidate has an option to defer to body fat analysis which is conducted through water displacement.

    If you fail to pass this standard you are put into a weight management program. Unfortunately this is nothing more than a low calorie diet and a regimen of physical activity. There is no CICO element to this, although I have petitioned for this change.

    The military does calipers? Hmmm never seen that in the navy - it's pass the taping (currently single waist and if you fail that then a neck/waist ratio) or you fail
  • stanmann571
    stanmann571 Posts: 5,736 Member
    edited November 2017
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    I like the way the military uses BMI. As a gross population study and a guideline.

    At least once a year each candidate is checked for height/weight. If it falls within BMI - that's a PASS. If this first line fails, then the measuring tape comes out. If that fails, then calipers. If that fails the candidate has an option to defer to body fat analysis which is conducted through water displacement.

    If you fail to pass this standard you are put into a weight management program. Unfortunately this is nothing more than a low calorie diet and a regimen of physical activity. There is no CICO element to this, although I have petitioned for this change.

    The military does calipers? Hmmm never seen that in the navy - it's pass the taping (currently single waist and if you fail that then a neck/waist ratio) or you fail

    If you've got a caliper certified person available, it can be an option... It's fairly rare, but it is in the Regulation, at the very least as a CO option to determine COA
  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,270 Member
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    I like the way the military uses BMI. As a gross population study and a guideline.

    At least once a year each candidate is checked for height/weight. If it falls within BMI - that's a PASS. If this first line fails, then the measuring tape comes out. If that fails, then calipers. If that fails the candidate has an option to defer to body fat analysis which is conducted through water displacement.

    If you fail to pass this standard you are put into a weight management program. Unfortunately this is nothing more than a low calorie diet and a regimen of physical activity. There is no CICO element to this, although I have petitioned for this change.

    The military does calipers? Hmmm never seen that in the navy - it's pass the taping (currently single waist and if you fail that then a neck/waist ratio) or you fail

    If you've got a caliper certified person available, it can be an option... It's fairly rare, but it is in the Regulation, at the very least as a CO option to determine COA

    we never did that sort of testing when I was in the Canadian military except to get in.

    After you were in we did what was called a BFT (battle fitness test)...if you could walk 16km with rifle and webbing then the next day do a 10k with full ruck and webbing and rifle and carry a mate 100 meters you passed...regardless of weight.

  • stanmann571
    stanmann571 Posts: 5,736 Member
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    I like the way the military uses BMI. As a gross population study and a guideline.

    At least once a year each candidate is checked for height/weight. If it falls within BMI - that's a PASS. If this first line fails, then the measuring tape comes out. If that fails, then calipers. If that fails the candidate has an option to defer to body fat analysis which is conducted through water displacement.

    If you fail to pass this standard you are put into a weight management program. Unfortunately this is nothing more than a low calorie diet and a regimen of physical activity. There is no CICO element to this, although I have petitioned for this change.

    The military does calipers? Hmmm never seen that in the navy - it's pass the taping (currently single waist and if you fail that then a neck/waist ratio) or you fail

    If you've got a caliper certified person available, it can be an option... It's fairly rare, but it is in the Regulation, at the very least as a CO option to determine COA

    we never did that sort of testing when I was in the Canadian military except to get in.

    After you were in we did what was called a BFT (battle fitness test)...if you could walk 16km with rifle and webbing then the next day do a 10k with full ruck and webbing and rifle and carry a mate 100 meters you passed...regardless of weight.

    Clearly I picked the wrong countries service. At my worst level of conditioning I could do that.
  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,270 Member
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    I like the way the military uses BMI. As a gross population study and a guideline.

    At least once a year each candidate is checked for height/weight. If it falls within BMI - that's a PASS. If this first line fails, then the measuring tape comes out. If that fails, then calipers. If that fails the candidate has an option to defer to body fat analysis which is conducted through water displacement.

    If you fail to pass this standard you are put into a weight management program. Unfortunately this is nothing more than a low calorie diet and a regimen of physical activity. There is no CICO element to this, although I have petitioned for this change.

    The military does calipers? Hmmm never seen that in the navy - it's pass the taping (currently single waist and if you fail that then a neck/waist ratio) or you fail

    If you've got a caliper certified person available, it can be an option... It's fairly rare, but it is in the Regulation, at the very least as a CO option to determine COA

    we never did that sort of testing when I was in the Canadian military except to get in.

    After you were in we did what was called a BFT (battle fitness test)...if you could walk 16km with rifle and webbing then the next day do a 10k with full ruck and webbing and rifle and carry a mate 100 meters you passed...regardless of weight.

    Clearly I picked the wrong countries service. At my worst level of conditioning I could do that.

    I never agreed with it...I always thought weight should be a factor too.

    and that was for combat arms...aka infantry, artillery and engineers and anyone attached to the regiment. I was artillery.
  • CSARdiver
    CSARdiver Posts: 6,257 Member
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    CSARdiver wrote: »
    I like the way the military uses BMI. As a gross population study and a guideline.

    At least once a year each candidate is checked for height/weight. If it falls within BMI - that's a PASS. If this first line fails, then the measuring tape comes out. If that fails, then calipers. If that fails the candidate has an option to defer to body fat analysis which is conducted through water displacement.

    If you fail to pass this standard you are put into a weight management program. Unfortunately this is nothing more than a low calorie diet and a regimen of physical activity. There is no CICO element to this, although I have petitioned for this change.

    The military does calipers? Hmmm never seen that in the navy - it's pass the taping (currently single waist and if you fail that then a neck/waist ratio) or you fail

    If you've got a caliper certified person available, it can be an option... It's fairly rare, but it is in the Regulation, at the very least as a CO option to determine COA

    we never did that sort of testing when I was in the Canadian military except to get in.

    After you were in we did what was called a BFT (battle fitness test)...if you could walk 16km with rifle and webbing then the next day do a 10k with full ruck and webbing and rifle and carry a mate 100 meters you passed...regardless of weight.

    Clearly I picked the wrong countries service. At my worst level of conditioning I could do that.

    I never agreed with it...I always thought weight should be a factor too.

    and that was for combat arms...aka infantry, artillery and engineers and anyone attached to the regiment. I was artillery.

    Note that the weight test is also held in conjunction with the respective service's Physical Readiness Testing (PRT) - pushups, situps, run, swim results based on gender/age.
  • Orphia
    Orphia Posts: 7,097 Member
    Orphia wrote: »
    tomteboda wrote: »
    There is much math. I don't wish to bore you with it, but the relationship works for random individuals with similar body fat percentages at the top and bottom of the healthy range. Moreover, the approximation that height directly correlates to volume and therefore mass is destroyed by variable skeletal width, skeletal structure, and length of various body parts. Someone who has a wide biiliac crest distance has considerably more volume, and therefore unavoidable lean mass, than someone who has a narrow biiliac crest distance. Simliarly, torso length and limb length affect BMI considerably, and these things are widely variant in human populations, both now and into paleohistory.

    Thus while I used myself as a convenient example, it is an example born by millions upon millions of individuals.

    Surely the height metric in BMI takes most of that into account. Your situation notwithstanding.

    Do you actually have a BMI formula for people with scoliosis? Or is the maths creative like a forum post?

    What's your point, Orphia?

    I think all Tomteboda is arguing is that BMI isn't useful as a stand in for how lean someone is on an individual level given variances in human structural differences. Given that the person who invented the BMI scale said that it was useful for populations and not individuals, I don't see what the problem is.

    I know that the common person who thinks BMI is trash is usually some beer-bellied ex-footballer who's sure he's still got tons of muscle from his glory days out on the field, but that's no reason to discount the main point that the numbers don't work for quite as many people as some seem to think it does.

    And note that this number skewing works both ways. People with normal BMIs are still overfat just as some people with BMI's running into the 26 range can be lean.

    @GottaBurnEmAll I was just hoping there was a handy formula.

    As kimny said, and what I meant by "creative" maths, is that you need to look at various metrics, and there is no Grand Unified Theory.
  • GottaBurnEmAll
    GottaBurnEmAll Posts: 7,722 Member
    Orphia wrote: »
    Orphia wrote: »
    tomteboda wrote: »
    There is much math. I don't wish to bore you with it, but the relationship works for random individuals with similar body fat percentages at the top and bottom of the healthy range. Moreover, the approximation that height directly correlates to volume and therefore mass is destroyed by variable skeletal width, skeletal structure, and length of various body parts. Someone who has a wide biiliac crest distance has considerably more volume, and therefore unavoidable lean mass, than someone who has a narrow biiliac crest distance. Simliarly, torso length and limb length affect BMI considerably, and these things are widely variant in human populations, both now and into paleohistory.

    Thus while I used myself as a convenient example, it is an example born by millions upon millions of individuals.

    Surely the height metric in BMI takes most of that into account. Your situation notwithstanding.

    Do you actually have a BMI formula for people with scoliosis? Or is the maths creative like a forum post?

    What's your point, Orphia?

    I think all Tomteboda is arguing is that BMI isn't useful as a stand in for how lean someone is on an individual level given variances in human structural differences. Given that the person who invented the BMI scale said that it was useful for populations and not individuals, I don't see what the problem is.

    I know that the common person who thinks BMI is trash is usually some beer-bellied ex-footballer who's sure he's still got tons of muscle from his glory days out on the field, but that's no reason to discount the main point that the numbers don't work for quite as many people as some seem to think it does.

    And note that this number skewing works both ways. People with normal BMIs are still overfat just as some people with BMI's running into the 26 range can be lean.

    @GottaBurnEmAll I was just hoping there was a handy formula.

    As kimny said, and what I meant by "creative" maths, is that you need to look at various metrics, and there is no Grand Unified Theory.

    Ah. For me? I know how tall I used to be and for fun I calculate my BMI both based on my height at 5'3" and at 5'1". They're both in normal range, but they are different. It is odd though that my weight could get to a point where I could be overweight for 5'1" but normal for my height when I was younger.

    I developed scoliosis thanks to disc degeneration.
  • Lisa8823168
    Lisa8823168 Posts: 139 Member
    I have a brother who is in the middle of his BMI...always bragged about being the sibling who is never "fat". He smokes, eats like crap and has never had to diet in his life. His estimated body fat is 16%. He has terrible blood work, cholesterol, shortness of breath and couldn't do a push up or pull up to save his life. He is rated at 46% chance of developing heart disease in the next ten years.

    I do not have an obese BMI but not at all in "my" BMI range and have never been. I have had to manage diet all my life (hypothyroid). I have exceptional blood work, walk 5+ miles x5 days week, some strength training and even with a bad shoulder, do farm work every day. My estimated body fat is 24%. Clearly higher than my brother...but I can do pull ups and push ups to save my life. My blood work is outstanding and I am rated at having less than a .05% chance of having heart disease in the next 10 years.

    I need look no further than the examples of my family. BMI is no indicator of health...it can only apply if ALL things in every persons body and DNA are the same...and I don't think human cloning is yet a popular thing.
  • timtam163
    timtam163 Posts: 509 Member
    Too much to catch up on on this long thread but no I believe in being more body inclusive and less fat-phobic. There are too many variables to say "yes everyone should live life in this specific way and look this specific way". People carry their weight differently and have different "tolerances" to the physiological effects of adipose tissue.

    Someone who is morbidly obese can become obese and have dramatically improved their health to get there. Also some medications cause weight gain but is a person less healthy for having taken it? Without knowing someone's trajectory and mental health and lifestyle we can't know about their health, and fixating on weight to tell us how healthy someone is as a way of judging them and shaming them for not being at a normal BMI is counterproductive bullying.

    That being said, BMI can be a useful guideline for many people, in conjunction with other markers of health. I know that for me being labeled as overweight woke me up from my denial.