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?

1111214161722

Replies

  • bmeadows380
    bmeadows380 Posts: 2,982 Member
    tomteboda wrote: »
    The only reason any of this matters in reality is that governments and health insurance agencies are setting premiums and services based on BMI. I think this is appalling because the statistics just don't back up the use of the population metric on individuals or even on all sub-populations. People's judginess is an irritation aside from that "you are a pound overweight by bmi, you can't be healthy!" The statistics are pretty clear that the miscategorization is most pertinent for setting overweight, and to a lesser degree obese; there is no real disagreement on morbid obesity.

    I also think people are setting up a logical fallacy when they try to shift the argument and say "obese people are delusional and think they're healthy." they are arguing 2 full categories apart, not the division which represents where real growing risk exists.

    I strongly prefer the definition of obesity used by the Mayo Clinic, which is a functional one. It is when your body fat is high enough that you are at risk of weight - related conditions. At risk. Some will, some won't have them. More will develop them than if they had less fat. And morbid obesity? Functional again - the body fat at which you are guaranteed to have medical problems caused and exacerbated by your weight.


    The bolded is exactly what irks me so much about BMI. And you are right - it is an irritation when folks seem to insist that you absolutely MUST fit within the BMI or a certain clothing size, or you can't possibly be healthy, no matter what your other metrics are or what your doctor says......

    And I agree with you completely on your last paragragh - I do like the Mayo Clinic's definitions.
  • ilfaith
    ilfaith Posts: 16,769 Member
    I have always felt that BMI gives a fairly wide range of "healthy" weight. I have a relatively small frame, and I typically maintain my weight at the lower end of the scale (19ish...give or take a point). It's where I look and feel my best. But I could actually gain 30+ pounds and still be within the "healthy" range. Of course my body would be quite different depending whether I gained 30 pounds of fat or 30 pounds of muscle. The former being less "healthy" than the latter. Obviously, body fat percentage or body composition is a superior measure of overall fitness...but I still feel that barring the previously described "outliers" most people have the potential to be able to fit into the broad range of healthy BMI.
  • janeyeadon1
    janeyeadon1 Posts: 2 Member
    By mass/height, my BMI is 28. Yes I am overweight but healthy in general (walk a lot and lift heavy boxes 2 days a week). On calorie reduction diet and have lost 5kg so far. Using waist/hip the ratio is 0.9. Sounds worse right? But it goes UP as I get skinnier! When I weighed 53kg and was weight-training, my BMI was 18 (but that was thin enough to stop my periods!) and my waist hip ratio was 0.93! So no, it doesn't work for everyone.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    None of the tests work for everyone. My waist/hip ratio is weird too, I think it's because I'm really short-waisted and have slim hips. At one point I was a 2 in jeans and barely okay with the waist-hip. One of the reasons I had a DEXA (when I was around BMI 26 and then a follow up when I was around goal) was that I was curious if I actually had a problem with visceral fat, since I seem to gain in the middle and my waist-hip ratio was never as I would like it (I thought that was probably structural, but wanted to check). It was fine, no issue with visceral fat.
  • kimny72
    kimny72 Posts: 16,023 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    None of the tests work for everyone. My waist/hip ratio is weird too, I think it's because I'm really short-waisted and have slim hips. At one point I was a 2 in jeans and barely okay with the waist-hip. One of the reasons I had a DEXA (when I was around BMI 26 and then a follow up when I was around goal) was that I was curious if I actually had a problem with visceral fat, since I seem to gain in the middle and my waist-hip ratio was never as I would like it (I thought that was probably structural, but wanted to check). It was fine, no issue with visceral fat.

    So a DEXA will show visceral fat? That is something I worry about too, people are always surprised that I weigh as much as I do since my arms and legs really leaned out but my midsection is still where I am obviously carrying some excess!
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    kimny72 wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    None of the tests work for everyone. My waist/hip ratio is weird too, I think it's because I'm really short-waisted and have slim hips. At one point I was a 2 in jeans and barely okay with the waist-hip. One of the reasons I had a DEXA (when I was around BMI 26 and then a follow up when I was around goal) was that I was curious if I actually had a problem with visceral fat, since I seem to gain in the middle and my waist-hip ratio was never as I would like it (I thought that was probably structural, but wanted to check). It was fine, no issue with visceral fat.

    So a DEXA will show visceral fat? That is something I worry about too, people are always surprised that I weigh as much as I do since my arms and legs really leaned out but my midsection is still where I am obviously carrying some excess!

    Yeah, it shows how much fat you have in various parts of your body; really interesting.
  • Packerjohn
    Packerjohn Posts: 4,855 Member
    edited November 2017
    JasonMcS wrote: »
    Depending on exacts and according to Wikipedia, Arnold Schwarzenegger was 6'2" and weighed 235 at his last Mr. Olympia contest (260 before the cut). That puts his competition weight BMI at ;


    "Height: 6 feet, 2 inches
    Weight: 235 pounds
    Your BMI is 30.2, indicating your weight is in the Obese category for adults of your height."


    The calculator is not very accurate. You can WOO this if you want but to say that Mr. Olympia 5 times was Obese?Come on? You know if you are healthy. You just have to tell yourself the truth. I have a long way to go but I am not trying to get to a BMI goal. I am trying to get to a healthy me goal.

    So he is one of the 10-20% of the outliers. So would Michael Jordan in his playing day and any active NFL running back. What % of the people at the beach looked like them on your last visit?
  • JasonMcS
    JasonMcS Posts: 96 Member
    @Packerjohn , LOL. I was just making a point. You are correct. I am simply saying what the world thinks is super perfect is on this scale, we allow insurance to measure us by, obese. Not over weight. Not border line Obese. Higher premiums and all...This BMI to Health comparison is not good enough to broadly classify humans of different shapes and sizes. I am not hiding my size. I am better than I was but am not where I want to be and BMI is not my goal. I don't think it works in enough people that it should be the standard. That is my experiential opinion. but who am I?
  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,268 Member
    JasonMcS wrote: »
    @Packerjohn , LOL. I was just making a point. You are correct. I am simply saying what the world thinks is super perfect is on this scale, we allow insurance to measure us by, obese. Not over weight. Not border line Obese. Higher premiums and all...This BMI to Health comparison is not good enough to broadly classify humans of different shapes and sizes. I am not hiding my size. I am better than I was but am not where I want to be and BMI is not my goal. I don't think it works in enough people that it should be the standard. That is my experiential opinion. but who am I?

    I have yet ot see anyone say BMI is perfect...

    I think however that if you are classed as obese and even overweight you probably are...there are outliers yes...but those are not the norm.

    If people feel that they are an outlier then by all means do more testing...but even Waist to Hip Ratio is shown to not apply to all...BF% testing has large variances even Dexa.

    BMI is a weight measure and that is use to figure out what you probably will get if you are obese not what you will get...and sorry but I don't have an issue with people classed as obese having to pay more for insurance...when I was a smoker i had to pay more...thems the breaks for not taking care of oneself.

    https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/educational/lose_wt/BMI/bmicalc.htm

    read this site...all of it...it includes it's limitations etc....

  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    JasonMcS wrote: »
    You say you would rather unjustly punish the 10% (not my number) than figure out a person by person system to figure out the exact risk.

    No one has said this. You are the only one talking about insurance. Stef is in Canada, for heaven's sake, and most of us even in the US don't have insurance costs vary by BMI. (For the record, mine do not, but my employer-based BCBS has a wellness program (does not affect costs) that uses BMI + other tests (including waist to height). Most wellness programs that affect costs allow you to pay less if you hit certain criteria that are way broader than BMI too (just getting an assessment sometimes, lowering blood pressure or cholesterol, losing weight, step count, etc.). I am aware some focus on BMI alone, and even though I firmly believe BMI is a generally reasonable standard that applies to most, I would not approve of such a thing and certainly would allow an out for someone who can show BF% that was healthy (I also would use additional measures like waist/height like my insurance co).
    If you have a car that is the same model that someone else has wrecked or if you could be in an accident then you should pay a higher auto insurance premium.

    ?? Car insurance (which unlike health insurance acts as actual insurance) DOES vary by statistics only, such that being a young male or the model of the car makes a difference. Where my house is located affects my homeowners insurance, too.
  • JasonMcS
    JasonMcS Posts: 96 Member
    @lemurcat12 I was failing to make the point that just because the auto and other insurance "DOES" discriminate does not make it right. I have drove a Jeep Wrangler for 10 years (3 different Jeeps) and pay a higher premium because of it. I have never had an accident in one of them. NEVER! Is my higher premium justified? No. But statistics say...
  • John Cena 6 1 251 lbs BMI 32.3 OBESE...