Am I unhealthy? BMI says I'm obese..
Options
Replies
-
john_not_typical wrote: »I think you need to ask your doctor what they think. I was obese at one time on the BMI scale and my doctor told me not to lose more weight. He told me don’t become one of those cyclists with eating disorders to lose more weight. It really depends on the person.
Are you more obese now, or less obese now than when your doctor saw you and said the above? Are you a cyclist? Do you have an eating disorder? If you did lose more weight did it hurt you in any way?
What you relay above sounds as if it's either missing part of the conversation or else your doctor's comment, as relayed, sounds like an off the cuff comment as opposed to a medical opinion. If a doctor said the above to me I would be very tempted to ask them if this was their professional opinion and ask for their reasoning for rendering such an opinion...15 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »Lillymoo01 wrote: »paperpudding wrote: »I am an RN and I do like the BMI tool - used in conjunction with clinical picture, ie seeing the actual patient.
Is usually blatantly obvious whether somebody has a very high BMI because they are have an unusual muscle mass, ie elite body builders - or they are plain old fat.
Yes I've seen people who are fit and healthy and BMI says overweight too - usually young active men who have a BMI of 27 or so.
They are the demographic often just above upper limits and still healthy.
Young women with BMI over 30,( ie OP) much less likely to be healthy weight.
Highly unlikely her BMI does not reflect true obesity, or at least significant overweight. As I said before.
The fact that BMI was first invented in 1830's doesn't change its validity. Maths hasn't changed and human body structure hasn't changed in that time.
I think it is really hard for a person to accept that they are obese and they cling onto anything they can to try and justify being an unhealthy weight. I am included in this they. I tried to kid myself for years that I simply had a large frame which meant I could still be healthy carrying around that extra weight. Once I got down to a healthy BMI I finally came to the realisation that my frame is anything but large. I was simply overweight.
It probably has to do with obesity being portrayed as a character flaw, not just a health risk. From a different perspective, as someone who has no self-esteem issues related to weight, I knew I was fat all along I just didn't care. Now, I know I'm still fat, and I prefer it. I don't feel the need to justify wanting to be an overweight BMI by saying I'm big boned (I actually am, but I'm also fat) because I don't feel it's something I need to be ashamed of.
This is why, personal opinion only, I don't like the BMI tool, because I did feel ashamed. Even as a nurse, telling people who look over weight, yeah fat, that they are morbidly obese feels terrible. Before I started here two years ago my BMI was morbidly obese. I also have g cup breasts Which are pretty damn heavy and hard on my back (Only lost one cup size after losing 17kg mind you), it was embarrassing because to look at me yes I was over weight, fat, I held my weight Differently as everyone does, obese, yeah OK, but Being told I was morbidly obese, when all we see is the stereotype of morbid obesity, can't move off the couch, chronically ill Etc it really did a number on my self esteem. I guess Everyone's entitled to disagree with our opinion, doesn't mean It's wrong for us. I have 10kg to go, I'm doing it for me and my health not because some scale says so.4 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »I wonder what exactly people are disagreeing with, that feeling bad about something can skew our perception or my belief that being fat is not shameful?
Who knows?
I shared my actual experience of how it doesnt work for me, and people disagreed with that.
Does that mean they all think Im lying? Who knows! MFP has a strange relationship with BMI.
Youve got a disagree to go with your question - what does that even infer?1 -
samhennings wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »I wonder what exactly people are disagreeing with, that feeling bad about something can skew our perception or my belief that being fat is not shameful?
Who knows?
I shared my actual experience of how it doesnt work for me, and people disagreed with that.
Does that mean they all think Im lying? Who knows! MFP has a strange relationship with BMI.
Youve got a disagree to go with your question - what does that even infer?
Yeah, my opinions regarding BMI seem polarizing. It's just that it would be interesting to see the other perspective.2 -
Indeed it would.
I think, and speaking generally here, weight loss can be a bit of a religious experience.
Certain things become sacrosanct to people, and so there is a reaction to anything that challenges it.
Ive had similar response when explaining that I dont weigh/measure everything and still lose the weight I want on schedule.
BMI seems to be another.
I think, logically, if something like BMI is designed to be used on populations, then the outliers above/below the line cancel each other off and its a pretty reliable formula.
But the fact it has that interaction, by definition, suggests its not ideal as a blanket thing for all individuals.
There are a lot of outliers, and as my case shows, you dont need to be an 18st of hulking muscle Rugby player to fit that profile. I am very simply short and stocky, and BMI falls over completely for me.
2 -
"Obese" does not necessarily mean "unhealthy".2
-
amusedmonkey wrote: »I wonder what exactly people are disagreeing with, that feeling bad about something can skew our perception or my belief that being fat is not shameful?
16 people disagreed with my opinion and only one person explained their thought which was really insightful. Not sure about the disagree yet lol there's always something2 -
Regardless of anything else, I can't imagine there are many 5'3" women, weighing 170 pounds, who aren't carrying quite a lot of fat. Particularly ones who have only recently started training, and don't eat very well.33
-
amusedmonkey wrote: »I wonder what exactly people are disagreeing with, that feeling bad about something can skew our perception or my belief that being fat is not shameful?
16 people disagreed with my opinion and only one person explained their thought which was really insightful. Not sure about the disagree yet lol there's always something
What tends to happen with the ex-woo now disagree button is that as people read along they will see a reply that they disagree with, think of a reply, then see that a reply has been made saying what they were going to say in disagreement, more or less. They will then go back, hit disagree then follow with a like.
Where paperpudding did a fuller explanation of the use of BMI and being a nurse, she got the likes to counter the disagrees you got.
You followed her post agreeing with her, saying it was more in line with what you were trying to convey.
Using the disagree and like buttons in this way saves a lot of people piling up on you saying the same thing over and over x16 again. Never mind the 20+ then saying why they liked paperpudding’s reply.
I have been neutral in this and haven’t liked or disagreed with you.
Cheers, h.14 -
middlehaitch wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »I wonder what exactly people are disagreeing with, that feeling bad about something can skew our perception or my belief that being fat is not shameful?
16 people disagreed with my opinion and only one person explained their thought which was really insightful. Not sure about the disagree yet lol there's always something
What tends to happen with the ex-woo now disagree button is that as people read along they will see a reply that they disagree with, think of a reply, then see that a reply has been made saying what they were going to say in disagreement, more or less. They will then go back, hit disagree then follow with a like.
Where paperpudding did a fuller explanation of the use of BMI and being a nurse, she got the likes to counter the disagrees you got.
You followed her post agreeing with her, saying it was more in line with what you were trying to convey.
Using the disagree and like buttons in this way saves a lot of people piling up on you saying the same thing over and over x16 again. Never mind the 20+ then saying why they liked paperpudding’s reply.
I have been neutral in this and haven’t liked or disagreed with you.
Cheers, h.
Thanks for replying, you make great points. I wasn't being defensive or having a sook, the post below mine was great. I have read lots of reply's that people have disagreed with, on other topics too, and I find people's perspectives interesting and sometimes confusing depending on the context.2 -
neugebauer52 wrote: »"Obese" does not necessarily mean "unhealthy".19
-
john_not_typical wrote: »I think you need to ask your doctor what they think. I was obese at one time on the BMI scale and my doctor told me not to lose more weight. He told me don’t become one of those cyclists with eating disorders to lose more weight. It really depends on the person.
Are you more obese now, or less obese now than when your doctor saw you and said the above? Are you a cyclist? Do you have an eating disorder? If you did lose more weight did it hurt you in any way?
What you relay above sounds as if it's either missing part of the conversation or else your doctor's comment, as relayed, sounds like an off the cuff comment as opposed to a medical opinion. If a doctor said the above to me I would be very tempted to ask them if this was their professional opinion and ask for their reasoning for rendering such an opinion...
My doctor said based on my frame size and blood work I should not lose more weight. He told me he would write a letter to my insurance company saying I was at a healthy weight if I needed one. As a biomedical engineer that used to work clinically with doctors all the time, I found his explanation to make sense. Yes, I bike either inside or outside just about every single day, if for no other reason than arthritis relief.
He was not the first doctor to tell me this so I believe it. I also recently had surgery that didn't end up the way we had planned because according to one of the doctors "there's just no room in there."
I did lose a little more weight (not really trying to at the time) and I don't think it had any real effect on my health, but I got very sick after that in a way completely unrelated to weight loss or gain so I suppose I'll never know.
He told me my bones and muscles were very large and my body fat percentage was appropriate for my age.
I have never had an eating disorder.
2 -
john_not_typical wrote: »john_not_typical wrote: »I think you need to ask your doctor what they think. I was obese at one time on the BMI scale and my doctor told me not to lose more weight. He told me don’t become one of those cyclists with eating disorders to lose more weight. It really depends on the person.
Are you more obese now, or less obese now than when your doctor saw you and said the above? Are you a cyclist? Do you have an eating disorder? If you did lose more weight did it hurt you in any way?
What you relay above sounds as if it's either missing part of the conversation or else your doctor's comment, as relayed, sounds like an off the cuff comment as opposed to a medical opinion. If a doctor said the above to me I would be very tempted to ask them if this was their professional opinion and ask for their reasoning for rendering such an opinion...
My doctor said based on my frame size and blood work I should not lose more weight. He told me he would write a letter to my insurance company saying I was at a healthy weight if I needed one. As a biomedical engineer that used to work clinically with doctors all the time, I found his explanation to make sense. Yes, I bike either inside or outside just about every single day, if for no other reason than arthritis relief.
He was not the first doctor to tell me this so I believe it. I also recently had surgery that didn't end up the way we had planned because according to one of the doctors "there's just no room in there."
I did lose a little more weight (not really trying to at the time) and I don't think it had any real effect on my health, but I got very sick after that in a way completely unrelated to weight loss or gain so I suppose I'll never know.
He told me my bones and muscles were very large and my body fat percentage was appropriate for my age.
I have never had an eating disorder.
I feel the need to say that I haven't hit the disagree button on your post that I quote
There exist corroborating measurements that can be used to determine increased health risk: waist circumference, waist to high, waist to hip, and BMI.
I am not a doctor, nor a biomedical engineer, but if all these measures were indicating increased risk I would reconsider my belief that my BMI was of no concern. if most of them indicated lack of concern then I would be more confident... makes sense?
Now if I was convinced I was OK but the numbers said I wasn't and I wanted to corroborate it, I am not sure what I would do... maybe post "guess my body fat" pictures on the exercise board asking if I should cut, bulk, or recomp? I supposed that might be an idea to see how other people perceived me, people who look at me without the filter of my own perceptions!
Luckily I was just an average kitten. When I was morbidly obese all measures showed me as having increased risk. When I became normal weight my waist ratio showed a tiny bit of increased risk. When I fell to a BMI of around 24 the rest of my measurements fell in line. Lucky for me, I guess. The nature of most statistical estimates is that they will be correct for most--not all!
<I note that BMI is using height squared. One of the criticisms of BMI is that it sometimes falsely signals lack of risk for people who are BELOW average height and over-fat. While I would have less concern ignoring BMI that indicated slightly increased risks if I was a 6ft 6" individual, I would be much more conservative ignoring an indication of risk as a 5ft 3" individual>12 -
There is a different BMI type calculation which uses height to the power of 2.5. Back in the day when BMI was invented powers of non-integers were hard to calculate, square is much easier.
The equivalent calculation is 1.3 * weight / height ^ 2.5, this gives a number about 0.8 lower than the normal calculation for my body, I'm 183 cm tall.
People can read about the new calculation here:
https://people.maths.ox.ac.uk/trefethen/bmi.html
There are a number of other indexes I've come across over the years, probably the most sophisticated which uses the height difference between shoulders and hips, and other measurements.3 -
There is a different BMI type calculation which uses height to the power of 2.5. Back in the day when BMI was invented powers of non-integers were hard to calculate, square is much easier.
The equivalent calculation is 1.3 * weight / height ^ 2.5, this gives a number about 0.8 lower than the normal calculation for my body, I'm 183 cm tall.
People can read about the new calculation here:
https://people.maths.ox.ac.uk/trefethen/bmi.html
There are a number of other indexes I've come across over the years, probably the most sophisticated which uses the height difference between shoulders and hips, and other measurements.
Interesting. I must be in some goldilocks zone because both numbers are exactly the same for me.3 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »There is a different BMI type calculation which uses height to the power of 2.5. Back in the day when BMI was invented powers of non-integers were hard to calculate, square is much easier.
The equivalent calculation is 1.3 * weight / height ^ 2.5, this gives a number about 0.8 lower than the normal calculation for my body, I'm 183 cm tall.
People can read about the new calculation here:
https://people.maths.ox.ac.uk/trefethen/bmi.html
There are a number of other indexes I've come across over the years, probably the most sophisticated which uses the height difference between shoulders and hips, and other measurements.
Interesting. I must be in some goldilocks zone because both numbers are exactly the same for me.
The difference is there but it isn't massive. About 4kg (~10lbs) or thereabouts for my height at 183cm (6 foot).
On the new scale 'Overweight' starts at 104kg (229lbs) and ends at 88kg (194lbs) with 87kg (192lbs) being 'Healthy' whereas the old scale Overweight starts 100kg (220lbs) and goes to 84kg (185lbs) with 83kg (182lbs) being top of 'Healthy'1 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »Lillymoo01 wrote: »paperpudding wrote: »I am an RN and I do like the BMI tool - used in conjunction with clinical picture, ie seeing the actual patient.
Is usually blatantly obvious whether somebody has a very high BMI because they are have an unusual muscle mass, ie elite body builders - or they are plain old fat.
Yes I've seen people who are fit and healthy and BMI says overweight too - usually young active men who have a BMI of 27 or so.
They are the demographic often just above upper limits and still healthy.
Young women with BMI over 30,( ie OP) much less likely to be healthy weight.
Highly unlikely her BMI does not reflect true obesity, or at least significant overweight. As I said before.
The fact that BMI was first invented in 1830's doesn't change its validity. Maths hasn't changed and human body structure hasn't changed in that time.
I think it is really hard for a person to accept that they are obese and they cling onto anything they can to try and justify being an unhealthy weight. I am included in this they. I tried to kid myself for years that I simply had a large frame which meant I could still be healthy carrying around that extra weight. Once I got down to a healthy BMI I finally came to the realisation that my frame is anything but large. I was simply overweight.
It probably has to do with obesity being portrayed as a character flaw, not just a health risk. From a different perspective, as someone who has no self-esteem issues related to weight, I knew I was fat all along I just didn't care. Now, I know I'm still fat, and I prefer it. I don't feel the need to justify wanting to be an overweight BMI by saying I'm big boned (I actually am, but I'm also fat) because I don't feel it's something I need to be ashamed of.
This is why, personal opinion only, I don't like the BMI tool, because I did feel ashamed. Even as a nurse, telling people who look over weight, yeah fat, that they are morbidly obese feels terrible. Before I started here two years ago my BMI was morbidly obese. I also have g cup breasts Which are pretty damn heavy and hard on my back (Only lost one cup size after losing 17kg mind you), it was embarrassing because to look at me yes I was over weight, fat, I held my weight Differently as everyone does, obese, yeah OK, but Being told I was morbidly obese, when all we see is the stereotype of morbid obesity, can't move off the couch, chronically ill Etc it really did a number on my self esteem. I guess Everyone's entitled to disagree with our opinion, doesn't mean It's wrong for us. I have 10kg to go, I'm doing it for me and my health not because some scale says so.
Was it though the BMI or the label the issue? If you were being essentially labelled "fat" by whatever other tool, would it have changed anything?4 -
Several years ago, my father was a dr, in a large training hospital, head of a big clinic, with a PhD, and several peer reviewed publications. So, definitely not stupid and not ignorant. Yet, my father was also a chain smoker, since his teens, and never really managed to cut back.
What did he do? He developed a theory that it was not just smoking that caused cancer, but lung cancer was affected by several other parameters. He based this theory on outliers: he knew of someone who was a chain smoker and never had a health problem even though he was in his 80s. He had a friend who died from lung cancer in his 40s, despite never smoking. And so on.
Obviously he never dared publish this theory and had every single one of his colleagues roll his eyes at him, but still, he had convinced himself. To deal with the obvious problem of "smokers are far more likely to get lung cancer" , his theory was extended to claim that correlation does not mean causation and that perhaps the same genetic traits who make you more likely to get to lung cancer make you also more stressed, thus more likely to seek nicotine as means to deal with the stress! All this from a medical dr, who was just desperate to find an excuse to continue smoking.
The mind is a very powerful thing, and it is amazing what we will lie to ourselves about to not admit to bad, or at least less than great, choices.23 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »There is a different BMI type calculation which uses height to the power of 2.5. Back in the day when BMI was invented powers of non-integers were hard to calculate, square is much easier.
The equivalent calculation is 1.3 * weight / height ^ 2.5, this gives a number about 0.8 lower than the normal calculation for my body, I'm 183 cm tall.
People can read about the new calculation here:
https://people.maths.ox.ac.uk/trefethen/bmi.html
There are a number of other indexes I've come across over the years, probably the most sophisticated which uses the height difference between shoulders and hips, and other measurements.
Interesting. I must be in some goldilocks zone because both numbers are exactly the same for me.
The difference is there but it isn't massive. About 4kg (~10lbs) or thereabouts for my height at 183cm (6 foot).
On the new scale 'Overweight' starts at 104kg (229lbs) and ends at 88kg (194lbs) with 87kg (192lbs) being 'Healthy' whereas the old scale Overweight starts 100kg (220lbs) and goes to 84kg (185lbs) with 83kg (182lbs) being top of 'Healthy'
Even ranges are spot on for me 18.5-25 are exactly the weights regular BMI calculators give me
2 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »amusedmonkey wrote: »There is a different BMI type calculation which uses height to the power of 2.5. Back in the day when BMI was invented powers of non-integers were hard to calculate, square is much easier.
The equivalent calculation is 1.3 * weight / height ^ 2.5, this gives a number about 0.8 lower than the normal calculation for my body, I'm 183 cm tall.
People can read about the new calculation here:
https://people.maths.ox.ac.uk/trefethen/bmi.html
There are a number of other indexes I've come across over the years, probably the most sophisticated which uses the height difference between shoulders and hips, and other measurements.
Interesting. I must be in some goldilocks zone because both numbers are exactly the same for me.
The difference is there but it isn't massive. About 4kg (~10lbs) or thereabouts for my height at 183cm (6 foot).
On the new scale 'Overweight' starts at 104kg (229lbs) and ends at 88kg (194lbs) with 87kg (192lbs) being 'Healthy' whereas the old scale Overweight starts 100kg (220lbs) and goes to 84kg (185lbs) with 83kg (182lbs) being top of 'Healthy'
Even ranges are spot on for me 18.5-25 are exactly the weights regular BMI calculators give me
Is it a twilight zone coincidence, he asks with tremor in his voice?
But, no, his google foo whispers, it's all as it were meant to be! The numbers 1.3 and 5734 are designed make the BMI reading unchanged for an adult of average height, which I take to be about 66.5 inches, i.e., 1.69 meters. (The square root of 1.69 is 1.3.) To find your "New BMI", try the New BMI Calculator written by Nick Hale. https://people.maths.ox.ac.uk/trefethen/bmi.html
5
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.5K 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
- 392 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
- 926 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions