Shall I ignore my BMI
Replies
-
My understanding is the BMI is a statistical tool more than anything. bMI Isn’t meant to be a standalone tool to evaluate an individuals health but a way to group test subjects to analyze and evaluate research. At overweight BMI you are more likely to see adverse health effects over time. If you are obese, even more so. For me, making the effort to go from obese to just overweight has been huge psychologically. I am still heavy by pop culture and aesthetic standards but I know that I have statistically improved my chances for avoiding diabetes, heart disease, certain cancers etc. I could still develop these of course but like I said there’s a huge psychological benefit to knowing I’m doing what I can to reduce the risk of incidence.
2 -
BMI is a worthless figure unless you are talking about large swaths of the population. It does not account for any amount of muscle mass and very fit people are overweight and obese by it's standards.7
-
CasperNaegle wrote: »BMI is a worthless figure unless you are talking about large swaths of the population. It does not account for any amount of muscle mass and very fit people are overweight and obese by it's standards.
If you look at OP's post, OP isn't in this boat. Like the vast majority of people, OP isn't asking from the POV of a very fit person, but from the POV of a person who has some weight to lose and is attempting to establish a goal weight.
For people who are starting at a point of obesity or being overweight, BMI can be a useful tool -- along with other markers -- to help determine a goal or understand how to minimize health risks associated with excess weight.
5 -
A better indicator for health than BMI is waist measurement, a waist measurement has been proven to be a better indicator of actual health, risk of heart disease and stroke so if your bmi was higher than the normal range but your waist measurement is less than 94cm for men and 80 cm for women your probably perfectly healthy
Waist measurement varies a lot based on the person's overall height, build, etc. an 80 cm waist on a 5'0" woman is going to be much different than on a 6'0" woman. Same with the men. Plus you cannot possibly say whether someone is "perfectly healthy" based on one number, regardless of what it is.3 -
BMI is not overrated, it is simply misunderstood by the general population and thus used an excuse by some overweight or underweight people.11
-
It's just one statistic. You can put as much worth into as you wish.1
-
BMI is not overrated, it is simply misunderstood by the general population and thus used an excuse by some overweight or underweight people.
I personally have seen way more obese/overweight people claim that BMI isn't accurate due to muscle mass etc than I have heard of very fit people being told to lose weight just because their BMI is too high.
Obviously I'm not privy to everyone's experiences, but I'm thinking that the former is more of a problem than the latter.15 -
Check your waist-hip ratio. If that's good, don't worry about your BMI so much. If you have a reasonably accurate measure of your body fat and it's acceptably low, worry about your BMI even less.0
-
To clarify: The waist measurement is supposed to be a ratio of waist to height or waist to hip.
One of my goals has been to hit the height to waist ratio at which health risks are lowered, which is 2:1. I’m 70 inches tall, so I’m aiming for a 35-inch waist (0.25” to go).
I’m also shooting for a normal BMI (14 lbs left). And a generally healthy body fat percentage (done, within an acceptable margin of error for me). And a clothing size out of the plus range (done). And just generally feeling good and athletic (still working on this one). No one metric is sufficient to tell me when I’m done.2 -
janejellyroll wrote: »BMI is not overrated, it is simply misunderstood by the general population and thus used an excuse by some overweight or underweight people.
I personally have seen way more obese/overweight people claim that BMI isn't accurate due to muscle mass etc than I have heard of very fit people being told to lose weight just because their BMI is too high.
Obviously I'm not privy to everyone's experiences, but I'm thinking that the former is more of a problem than the latter.
Yep. I was once one of those. I figured BMI didn't apply to me because I'm an extreme outlier at 6'6", and they say that BMI skews most strangely at extremes in height. When I got down to about 14-15% bodyfat, hey, whaddya know? My BMI currently sits at 23.1 - in the high end of the "healthy/normal" range, but within it. I don't carry the muscle mass of a bodybuilder, but I'm not a stick figure either.
Not saying there aren't outliers, but too many people use it as an excuse when it's not the case. A simple walk through your nearest large throng of people will clearly show that the vast majority of the populace aren't well-muscled specimens walking around at 10% bodyfat.9 -
stevencloser wrote: »BMI can't differentiate between fat and muscle since it only takes into account height and weight. If you have a decent amount of muscle it will be inaccurate; according to my BMI I'm overweight (26.62), but I'm objectively not.
Bf% is a better indicator to go by.
People for whom BMI is inaccurate because of muscle mass tend to know that. You don't get to a 27 BMI at 10% bf on accident from one day to another.
I suspect there are some who "know it" who are wrong, though - about the muscle mass, not necessarily BMI.
May be more likely to happen with women than men, though - not because we're more self-delusional, but because of some combination of generally higher BF% being healthy in the first place, a tendency to more whole-body/subcutaneous-layer fat distribution vs. more localized distribution for a lot of men, agonizingly slow muscle mass increase for natural women, and wanting to credit personal athletic effort over genetic luck (pelvis width, breast size) for looking/feeling best at higher BMI.
I've known quite a few elite(ish) female athletes - div I collegiate, high-achieving masters, a few national team members, all rowers. Impressive strength is standard, impressive muscular development common, but normal BMI isn't that unusual, and those at technically "overweight" BMI (but not carrying much fat) generally aren't all that far past the "overweight" BMI line. Makes me skeptical about some women who claim muscularity as a main reason for high BMI based on 3-5 days/week circuit-style weight training and some cardio, or the like. Frame size is a whole different matter.5 -
GlorianasTears wrote: »
you probably have a large body frame . I have a large frame as well and if i see rib cages in my opinion thats a red flag that you need more fat.smnovosad1 wrote: »I had trouble when looking at my BMI. For me (5’5” female) my normal range is 111-149 lbs (huge, eh?). I look fat in the 140s so I set a goal of 115 — I figured that is safely in normal weight and far from where I look fat. Well, I dieted and got down to 121 lbs. I was way skinny. I’m muscular, and you could see every muscle but my chest looked weird — you could prominently see all the ribs. And I stopped menstruating. I saw my GP and he said I didn’t have enough fat to support a menstrual cycle — and I was 10 lbs above underweight! I think I look best at 125-130 lbs.
Red flag is also when your period stops...2 -
I believe that BMI is an insurance tool whereby they calculate a person's odds of getting ill. If you are within a "normal" BMI, your chances of illness are minimized. So in that sense it is useful. I think it's a helpful measure if not used in a hard and fast way.1
-
-
Experts are still up in the air about whether BMI is accurate or not. Personally, I look at my weight + measurements + body fat percentage. If my weight is a little high, but my measurements are good and I’m in normal range for my BF% then I’m not going to stress.0
-
I started at 20 stone, the bmi calculator said my max was 10 stone to be healthy. This number may not be 100 % right but I'm going to be a lot closer to a healthy weight than when I started so for me yes it is a good tool BUT ... When I get within that magic healthy range i aim to stay there, I may not be ideal fitness or bf% or even weight but I'm going to be at a good starting point. For most people that are losing large amounts of weight it is fine to aim for , not everyone wants to be perfect and bmi ranges are an easy way to set a goal if like me your not comftable being assessed properly. It can always be taken further if you want.2
-
bendyourkneekatie wrote: »
Yes, that's why I mentioned more than once metric.0 -
i think bmi is a pretty good idea for most people to make their goal. it was my first goal. i am now normal weight and i am still very fat lol.1
-
ashliedelgado wrote: »You're pretty close to where your original goal was. Are you happy here? Once you hit 80, what are your plans? Are you going to go back to old ways or have you made enough of a lifestyle that you can maintain at 80?
I used the high end of normal BMI for my initial target weight. Since puberty, I have been either overweight or obese, and have no idea what a "normal" bmi will look or feel like, for me. Once I hit that 145lbs I will start recomposition, so it won't really be over.
I think that if you are still doing some sort of activity you love, and eating a nutritionally sound and varied diet, the difference of 11ish pounds is not the end of the world.
I have hit my target (well 80.2kg), I probably still need to lose a little bit but not too much, i don't want to look too skinny. It has been easier than I thought, saying that i was ill for about 3 weeks with a very nasty cold/chest infection, so no gym for almost 1 month, so my appetite was pretty dire. Just started going back this week to the gym and I have changed my training plan, switching to a PPL routine. I am going to give it a couple of months and see what happens. I may set a new goal to 78/79kg too. Using the MFP app has been a real eye opener, i was just eating too much (and thinking that i was eating healthy...), but I guess a whole tub of hummous with an entire packet of thin crackers is not healthy (that was just for snack), etc....
Re BMI, i personally think it's a bit ridiculous, just checked my BMI and at 80kg for 175cm, it still showing as overweight, but according to the table, my ideal weight should be 56.7kg to 76.3kg. At 76kg I would be more than happy, but at 56.7kg that's just unthinkable in my opinion
J3 -
BMI is a fine measurement for most people. It's mainly only inaccurate for body builders and people who lost lot of muscle mass due to extreme and unhealthy dieting.i think bmi is a pretty good idea for most people to make their goal. it was my first goal. i am now normal weight and i am still very fat lol.
Yeah that was the case with me too, when I hit normal BMI I was still very chubby. Most people need to be around the middle of "normal" BMI for good results.
0 -
I think BMI IS a good indicator for most people, in conjunction with clinical picture.
Fairly obvious if someone has a high BMI because elite body builder and BMI of 40 - or even fit muscly young man healthy with BMI around 27.
me personally, as a middle aged woman with a BMI of 28 - I knew darn well that was not because I was a fit and muscly outlier but because I was plain old fat overweight.
am happy and healthy now at 23.5 -
bendyourkneekatie wrote: »
I hate that calculation. At a BMI of 20.9 I am just inside the "healthy" range. If I put on any weight at all I become "at risk."
1 -
Mouse potato (what a cute user name!) - am not following you - 20.9 is not just inside healthy BMI - it is pretty well right in the middle.
Healthy BMI is from about 18 up to 25.
Sporty muscular young men upper and bit above limit - ie around 27 like I said in previous post.
if you put on any weight at all you wont be at risk - you would have to put on a reasonable amount to get from 20.9 to over 25
or do you mean if you get above hip/waist ratio - again that is a guide, in conjunction with rest of clinical picture.3 -
I am talking about the hip to waist ratio. I'm at .8, which I understand is the upper limit for that particular measurement. I know it means nothing, but it annoys me. Especially in a thread about how inaccurate BMI is.
Thanks for the compliment on my user name. It's not as accurate as it was five years ago, but I still like it.
1 -
In this thread: a bunch of guys who think they have a lot more muscle mass than they do calling BMI worthless.
It's a good rule of thumb for the vast majority of the population. People are much fatter today than they were 50 years ago. What we THINK is not fat today would have been considered fat fifty years ago. Yes, for elite athletes or people with extremely low BF, BMI is not a good indicator. That's probably less than 1% of the population. A rule that applies to more than 99% of the population is anything but worthless.12 -
DevilsFan1 wrote: »In this thread: a bunch of guys who think they have a lot more muscle mass than they do calling BMI worthless.
Since I just got dunked this morning I know exactly what my lean mass is, and my BMI is pretty much spot on. Guys should just admit they're a bit on the heavy side and deal with it.5 -
GlorianasTears wrote: »Yes it is overrated especially since people have different frame sizes you should go online and figure out your frame size. That determines A LOT as well
I have a larger frame based on measurements and lift heavy 3 days a week. I still am a healthy BMI. While I look at feel better towards the top end of the BMI range I still think the range is a good tool for most people. It’s a range for a reason.
For reference: The weight range my doctor gave me was 145-165 based on frame, muscle mass, and activity. At 159 I hit the healthy BMI range for my height. Currently at 156 with 25% bf and aiming for 150 and closer to 20-23%2
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions