Anybody using Smart Body Mass Index instead of BMI?

janalo55
janalo55 Posts: 50 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
I just happened to find this during a surf session and found it very interesting. I have laughed at BMI several times... touted as being better than Height/Weight Charts when it really is just converting those same Height/Weight charts to different numbers. True BMI can't be calculated that way... I was once measured with calipers by a College PE Instructor who was a body builder and the difference was amazing. My husband is elderly and weighs 155 at 5'6" and the charts say he's overweight... he's VERY thin, if he weren't so strong (not really muscular, just strong) he might even look frail. People are always commenting about there being "nothing to him" and the BMI charts say he's OVERWEIGHT? His doctor cautions him not to lose any weight. Anyway, the SBMI takes sex and age into account. I found it very interesting and wondered about others' thoughts.
«1

Replies

  • 1houndgal
    1houndgal Posts: 558 Member
    I would go with the Dr's opinion and warning to not lose any weight.
  • RuNaRoUnDaFiEld
    RuNaRoUnDaFiEld Posts: 5,864 Member
    I still swear by the old pinch an inch method.
  • Maxxitt
    Maxxitt Posts: 1,281 Member
    At my age and weight/height, SBMI puts me at "optimal" and suggests focusing on fitness. Works for me.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    I'm slightly overweight by either of these measures, but I'm not fat...
  • Lounmoun
    Lounmoun Posts: 8,423 Member
    I think any chart is a guide and real world experience and health is more important than being a specific number.
    Based on my past experience the regular BMI is pretty accurate for me.
  • svel713
    svel713 Posts: 141 Member
    I pay attention to body fat percentage rather than BMI. Many more people are overweight and obese in BF% even when at a normal weight. But for whatever reason doctors don't check for it, even though many "wellness screening" companies do.

    And I'm aware that its hard to get a perfect reading with body fat analyzers and measurements, but its better than nothing. I check every year in my city for DEXA scans and this city still doesn't have a place for them.

    BF% scales are usually $60+ and measuring tape is no more than a few dollars if anyone wants to try to track theirs. I use the WeightGurus scale, it can link to Fitbit, which links the BF% to MFP.
  • Kst76
    Kst76 Posts: 935 Member
    edited April 2018
    I am 5'5" and weigh as of today 154.5

    I used to dismiss BMI but now when I am close to being less than a 25, which is the high normal, I look at myself in the mirror and think..yeah...that's about right. I am not skinny or thin. I am not fat either but I can affford to lose some more weight. Another 15 pounds would probably be good and easy enough for me to maintain.

    People that are used to old me at 185 pounds thinks im "skinny"...but that's just becauce they are so used to me being bigger.
  • paperpudding
    paperpudding Posts: 9,304 Member
    BMI is one measure and should be taken in conrtext of clinical picture - ie seeing the patient.

    Is obvious to any Dr, or indeed casual observer, that an elite body builder with a BMI of, say, 35, is not actually obese.
    Also was obvious that I, a middle aged woman, did not have a BMI of 28 because I was very muscular.

    And we all know different demographics have slightly different healthy ranges - Asian people for instance are usually healthier at lower number.
    And young men can be healthy at around 27 or so - because they carry more muscle mass than general population.

    So it seems smart BMI just factors these things into the reading. Nothing new there really.

    Me personally - have BMI of 23 in standard measure. Given I am not an outlier to whom different to standard range would apply - no, I won't recalculate with smart BMI. What would be the point?
  • Kst76
    Kst76 Posts: 935 Member
    This chart tells me im at a good weight for my age/sex and that might be true. But it also tells me losing another 15 pounds wont benefit me anything.....hmmm...i dont know about that one.
  • amusedmonkey
    amusedmonkey Posts: 10,330 Member
    Funny, but I actually used it to choose my goal weight just to have a number to aim for. I want to maintain overweight, and then someone mentioned SBMI. I played with the calculator and decided to set my goal weight to the highest "ideal" SBMI (39/70). It puts me at exactly 26.6 BMI which is overweight and sounds good to me. But no, I don't use it. I think regular BMI is good enough among other measurements and common sense.
  • rheddmobile
    rheddmobile Posts: 6,840 Member
    BMI is not meant to be used in place of good judgment in individual cases, it's a statistical tool for quickly identifying people who may be at risk so a second look can be taken.

    In my case, BMI is very accurate - my health profile and ability to function change almost exactly at the dividing lines between categories. When I was morbidly obese I was too sick to function and couldn't easily walk any distance. Just regular obese, I could walk easily but not run. Overweight, I could run but not fast. Normal weight, I was much better at doing everything. And now that I am nearing the middle of normal weight I can see it's a good weight for me. When I was in college I was underweight, got sick easily, and was anemic.

    But I am a white woman of slightly more than medium height and average bone structure - the charts were designed with people like me in mind. They don't work so well for everyone. My husband, according to his chart, was "overweight" when he was a skinny teenager in the Airborne. If he got down to "normal" weight he would be scrawny.
  • andreascjonsson
    andreascjonsson Posts: 433 Member
    I have often laughed about BMI to, all additional information helps of course and BMI only taking 2 variables into account is creating a very rough estimate. So by adding a little more you should get a slightly less rough estimate.
    I got 22,3 BMI and 34/70 SBMI so both put me at slightly under the middle of the healthy range so i guess it does no diffrence what i use atleast.
  • workinonit1956
    workinonit1956 Posts: 1,043 Member
    I put my numbers in, I’m currently 150 with a goal of 135. On BMI I’m 10 pounds overweight, on the smart version they tell me I’m at a good weight and losing further won’t benefit my health. I like the second answer better, but I can clearly see I need to plug along to my goal.
  • janalo55
    janalo55 Posts: 50 Member
    I wonder if those of you who say it made very little difference are in the mid-range age that BMI targets. At 63, there is a substantial difference in what it says I should weigh. Yes, I understand it is just a guideline and requires common sense to interpret. I have just always found it odd that BMI charts don't take sex into consideration, when commonly men have a higher muscle mass. I hadn't thought about the age change, although I knew if you still aimed for your goal weight when young, you would appear haggard at older ages.
  • xfc1
    xfc1 Posts: 69 Member
    It doesn't ask a fundamental question: how muscular are you? Compare myself to my brother. Almost the same height, but goal weights are 10 kilograms different. My brother is more muscular than the general male population (by say 5kg) and I am less muscular by about 5 kg.

    Why don't indexes ask how muscular a person is?
  • xfc1
    xfc1 Posts: 69 Member
    janalo55 wrote: »
    I have just always found it odd that BMI charts don't take sex into consideration, when commonly men have a higher muscle mass.

    I was always under the impression that the additional male muscle weight roughly equalled what breasts weigh.
  • tbright1965
    tbright1965 Posts: 852 Member
    I found the name misleading.

    I guess I was expecting a BMI type calculation that took into consideration age, as it does, but also some additional measurements.

    I.E. if you are 225#, 5'11" tall, have a 50" chest and a 35" waist, you probably don't have the body that typically corresponds to a BMI of 31.

    I guess I was expecting it to add more than just one variable to the calculation. Doesn't really seem so smart to me. But what do I know?
  • xfc1
    xfc1 Posts: 69 Member
    The more variables the better. I've seen distance from shoulder to hips used in one index. Some necks are longer than others but don't really contribute to fatness / thinness.
  • ExistingFish
    ExistingFish Posts: 1,259 Member
    Well, according to traditional BMI, I'm overweight. According to SBMI, I'm in the optimal range, so I guess it made a difference. I still have fat to lose, but I would say now that when I look in the mirror, I do think I'm at a pretty healthy weight for my age and height. I doubt my current weight, despite being "overweight" by traditional BMI standards, puts me at greater risk for disease.

    I don't know my BF%, but I have a solid estimate that I'm at the upper end of normal/average. I'm 5' even and 131lbs.
  • verneycarino
    verneycarino Posts: 1 Member
    edited February 2022
    After reading your story, I wondered how to calculate the mass index correctly. I don't usually watch my weight, but now I've decided that I should. Unfortunately, I will not be able to make any professional measurements since I have only a bathroom scale, and it seems it's doesn't show enough data to draw any conclusions. However, I can just make an appointment with a nutritionist or a doctor and "see what condition my condition is in" (c) because this is important, and my health depends on it. Your example spurred me to action. Thank you, and good luck to you!
  • Corina1143
    Corina1143 Posts: 3,844 Member
    My current goal is to lose 7-8 pounds for bmi = 24.99. Not that I think there's any magic in bmi, just an arbitrary goal when I was at least 60 pounds overweight.
    Smart bmi says it won't do me any good to lose that 7-8 pounds cause I'm already as healthy as weight is gonna make me. Good to know. But I'm barely getting into a size 10, bubbling over on both ends, so I think I'll keep losing for a while. Better to shrink into a 10 than gain into a 12.
  • HoneyBadger302
    HoneyBadger302 Posts: 2,085 Member
    All of the generalized BMI type charts (smart or not) say I'm at a healthy weight. I am NOT. Each individual really is vastly different.
    As an apple-shaped female, where the vast majority of my fat stores center around my mid section and spread out from there (the most unhealthy way to carry excess fat), for optimal health, I actually have to be pretty trim. The last fat stores to go are around my mid section, especially the "saddle bags" as I call them.
    Healthy for me would be at least 20 pounds lighter than I am, maybe more like 25-30 based on historical weight. Weight lifting/muscle mass may have raised that a bit, but I was plenty strong before, just wasn't doing focused lifting like I have (on and off) the past 5 or so years. Regardless, I am a very long ways from a "picture of optimal health" LOL.
  • spiriteagle99
    spiriteagle99 Posts: 3,749 Member
    I have the same BMI with both calculators: 20/healthy. With the Smart BMI I am on the low end and at my age I shouldn't lose any more. I knew that already. When you get to a certain age, the risk of illness that causes serious weight loss is greater and your ability to recover is less. I still have large thighs and a bit of a belly, but that's at least partly due to genetics. My upper body is all bones, so I have no desire to lose more.
  • yirara
    yirara Posts: 9,986 Member
    In the country I live currently bmi tends to have a correction for age. Meaning a higher bmi is still considered normal when you're older. It's a bit odd, but ho hum. Just thought I mention it.

Categories