Opinions On BMI
Options
Replies
-
HoneyBadger- Very insightful post! Thanks for sharing!7
-
Feeling good is WAY more important than any sill tool or chart.7
-
I think it is relatively uncommon for an adult to be a true outlier to the BMI range. I think a lot of people lie to themselves and think they have far more muscle than they actually do and use that to justify maintaining an overweight size. And, the ones who are outliers often look like they weight far less than they actually do.
Bodies are built differently though and your genetic structure will help to determine which end of the range you are more comfortable in. At 5 foot 9, I can easily maintain 130lbs which is about 8lbs less than my profile pic. I have a friend who is 5 foot 6, and she can also maintain about 130lbs easily. We have different body types and she is about 10 years older than me. I have another friend who is 5 foot 8 and she easily maintains closer to 150lbs.10 -
I don't like it but it's what doctors go by to determine if you're "healthy". When I can get to a "normal" BMI, I sit around 130-133# which is close to overweight for a female at 5'2", but I'm lazy and don't want to put in more effort to lose another 20# to get in the middle.1
-
DaisyHamilton wrote: »I absolutely never recommend anyone to go by BMI. It's interesting to read about, but not useful to go by.
The more usual problem is that the fat bloke on the right does a few bicep curls and thinks he is an outlier and uses the example of an elite athlete on the left to "prove" why BMI doesn't apply to him.28 -
I don't like it but it's what doctors go by to determine if you're "healthy". When I can get to a "normal" BMI, I sit around 130-133# which is close to overweight for a female at 5'2", but I'm lazy and don't want to put in more effort to lose another 20# to get in the middle.
From the NHS website....
BMI takes into account natural variations in body shape, giving a healthy weight range for a particular height.
As well as measuring your BMI, healthcare professionals may take other factors into account when assessing if you're a healthy weight.
It's not intended or expected everyone should be in the middle of the range.
It's just one tool, not the only tool.11 -
DaisyHamilton wrote: »I absolutely never recommend anyone to go by BMI. It's interesting to read about, but not useful to go by.
The more usual problem is that the fat bloke on the right does a few bicep curls and thinks he is an outlier and uses the example of an elite athlete on the left to "prove" why BMI doesn't apply to him.
One of my favorite ones is the "large frame" excuse. It's amazing how many large frames melt away with the fat when people lose weight. The root problem is the same as what you are discussing - because there is a small chance BMI doesn't apply, a lot of people think they are exceptions, or at least they says so. In many cases it is willful deceit, which is another issue; there are outliers, and there are out and out liars. Speaking of outliers, I think once you get past a BMI of 27 or 28, there will be incredibly few truly healthy people who exceed BMI. It is not just uncommon but exceedingly rare for anyone in the obese range to actually be healthy.16 -
I don't like it but it's what doctors go by to determine if you're "healthy". When I can get to a "normal" BMI, I sit around 130-133# which is close to overweight for a female at 5'2", but I'm lazy and don't want to put in more effort to lose another 20# to get in the middle.
From the NHS website....
BMI takes into account natural variations in body shape, giving a healthy weight range for a particular height.
As well as measuring your BMI, healthcare professionals may take other factors into account when assessing if you're a healthy weight.
It's not intended or expected everyone should be in the middle of the range.
It's just one tool, not the only tool.
You know, that's really awesome! Now please tell every doctor I have that! No doctor I've seen has ever taken my blood work/lab results into account of what they consider to be "healthy" for me.
I'm pear shape with a smallish medium frame (almost 6" wrist circumference, and 2 1/4" elbow measurement). I can stand to lose 20# and still be considered "unhealthy" by looks alone because I would have a hanging, flabby belly.2 -
I guess I am one of those outliers. The BMI has never worked for me or described me. I am 5'0", pear shape, super muscular from the waist down, with large calves and thigh for my size. Even before I worked out a lot and gained muscle, even when I was very young, I have always been at least 10 lbs. above the range and into "overweight", where the BMI currently shows me to be, although I have been in maintenance for 4 years and am a size 4 to 6 Petite. I agree with those who say look at many other factors, including waist circumference, lab work, etc. , all of which show me to be healthy. My internist does not agree that the BMI range covers everyone accurately and had me look at the Smart BMI calculator which shows me to be at a good weight for my height, weight, and age.14
-
I also look unhealthy & feel sick when I’m on the low end of the BMI chart. I agree with nowine4me. Feeling better is far more important. I guess it’s ultimately up to the person to decide what’s best for them.2
-
I don't like it but it's what doctors go by to determine if you're "healthy". When I can get to a "normal" BMI, I sit around 130-133# which is close to overweight for a female at 5'2", but I'm lazy and don't want to put in more effort to lose another 20# to get in the middle.
From the NHS website....
BMI takes into account natural variations in body shape, giving a healthy weight range for a particular height.
As well as measuring your BMI, healthcare professionals may take other factors into account when assessing if you're a healthy weight.
It's not intended or expected everyone should be in the middle of the range.
It's just one tool, not the only tool.
You know, that's really awesome! Now please tell every doctor I have that! No doctor I've seen has ever taken my blood work/lab results into account of what they consider to be "healthy" for me.
I'm pear shape with a smallish medium frame (almost 6" wrist circumference, and 2 1/4" elbow measurement). I can stand to lose 20# and still be considered "unhealthy" by looks alone because I would have a hanging, flabby belly.
Honestly, with the amount of weight you've lost, every doctor should take into consideration that you're carrying quite a few pounds of excess skin that factors into your BMI calculations. While it's likely true that there's fat clinging to that skin, that sort of fat often proves quite difficult to shift after a very large weight loss unless you lose weight to a very low body fat level.8 -
Outliers are the exception rather than the rule, unless you happen to work and live your life in a gym full of bodybuilders.DaisyHamilton wrote: »I absolutely never recommend anyone to go by BMI. It's interesting to read about, but not useful to go by.
If you take a look around at society in general, our problem isn't that the vast majority of our population are ultra-lean and carrying too much muscle mass. Pair that with the fact that a lot of people who consider themselves BMI "outliers" are fatter than they think they are.
BMI is a reasonable ballpark figure for most people - with the understanding that it's not being utilized for what it was originally designed for, and that outliers, although rare, do exist.
I totally agree. BMI is a great tool for 98% of the population. Yes there are outliers, but the ones quoted are pretty much always the star athletes at and over the top end of the BMI range. I always keep in mind the All Blacks (NZ Ruby) often according to BMI overnight or even obese, but highly skilled trained and muscular types. A lot of people think well they are outliers so the system is broken. No they are the exception to the rule, but it does not mean that the rule is invalid because some super top athletes do not comply. But these athletes also do not have a social life as the general population have.
Plus what always strikes me as odd is that they never focus on the outliers at the bottom end of the BMI range, who also exist
I disagree it is a useful tool - provided as with all tools it is used correctly. Outliers that do not fit into the toolbox exist. They are rare and they special and they are not the special snowflakes that claim thatBMI does not work for them because they {fill in reason of choice}DaisyHamilton wrote: »I absolutely never recommend anyone to go by BMI. It's interesting to read about, but not useful to go by.1 -
I think it's a good tool. The BMI range certainly applies to me personally. The folks I know in real life that argue that it "doesn"t apply" are ALWAYS overweight (from fat not muscle). In my personal experience every single person that has ranted to me about BMI has been overweight and lying to themselves about their own weight.
Granted it's a small sample size - meaning the people I'm referring to - but I think it probably scales across the population in general. Yes, there are outliers but they are a very small percentage of the population.11 -
garystrickland357 wrote: »I think it's a good tool. The BMI range certainly applies to me personally. The folks I know in real life that argue that it "doesn"t apply" are ALWAYS overweight (from fat not muscle). In my personal experience every single person that has ranted to me about BMI has been overweight and lying to themselves about their own weight.
Granted it's a small sample size - meaning the people I'm referring to - but I think it probably scales across the population in general. Yes, there are outliers but they are a very small percentage of the population.
My anecdata matches your. I got wooed above for my "large frame" comments above but my experience with people I know personally is that any differences in frame did not account for their size. A large frame is what makes the high end of the scale more likely to be accurate.12 -
garystrickland357 wrote: »I think it's a good tool. The BMI range certainly applies to me personally. The folks I know in real life that argue that it "doesn"t apply" are ALWAYS overweight (from fat not muscle). In my personal experience every single person that has ranted to me about BMI has been overweight and lying to themselves about their own weight.
Granted it's a small sample size - meaning the people I'm referring to - but I think it probably scales across the population in general. Yes, there are outliers but they are a very small percentage of the population.
That’s been my experience also. Several people I know (and I will include myself, *previously-not anymore*) who are/were overweight or obese didn’t agree with BMI for various reasons. My personal reason was because I thought I had a “large frame” (I do not). A friend (a young man) especially raved against the doctor who told him his BMI was in the obese category, but it’s clear he is over fat. He says it’s because he “works out”.
7 -
BMI is what kicked me into gear about getting serious and losing weight. Realized that I had creeped into the "overweight" range and was not okay with that. I'm 5'7" and started off at 168, which was a 26 BMI. I'm down to ~140 now which puts me 22. That's right in the middle of my healthy range and I'm quite happy with how I look. At my height, I could get down to 120 and would have a healthy BMI but I don't think it'd be something I'd be able to sustain and quite frankly I don't think it'd look good either.10
-
3
-
Several things are factors in deciding which 'sub range' applies to individuals. Tall people are more likely to be healthy at upper end, Asian people more likely at lower end, for example.
Muscular young men ( not elite athletes, just generally sporty types) can be healthy slightly above range ie at around 27.
But for almost everybody, you are unlikely to be healthy anywhere much outside standard range - and is usually obvious to both your doctor and yourself whether that really applies to you.
In my case I knew darn well my BMI of 28 wasn't because I was unusually muscular for a middle aged woman. I was plain old overweight and I knew it.
Am quite happy now at bmi of 23. Could possibly lose another 5 lb of vanity weight, not planning to though as from health point of view am good where I am.8 -
My previous doubts about the accuracy of BMI were based on relative improvements. A few years ago, I was 230 pounds and lost down to 170, but was back up around 180 pretty quickly. I kept it there a couple of months. For me, 170 was a BMI of 25.8 and 180 was 27.4. I was in much better shape and didn't think it would be healthy to lose much more. I actually thought it was good/healthy to have gained back to 180. This time, I lost from ~225 to just below 155, but have stayed mostly in the upper 150s which is a little over a BMI of 24. I have done this for several months. Without this perspective, I honestly believed I was in great shape over 20 pounds heavier. I thought I would look emaciated at my current weight. I think a lot pf people who haven't recently had the perspective of being at a healthy weight believe the same thing.12
-
BMI is crap. When I was at a BMI of 19-20, everyone said I looked too skinny. I was at 16% body fat. Now I have naturally settled at a BMI of 22-23 (20% body fat) and I have more energy and I’m happier.23
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 389 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 919 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions