BMI vs. Body Fat
digestibleplastic
Posts: 27 Member
I have some interesting statistics for those of whom are wondering what their 'ideal' weight is.
My friend and I, both the same age, same height (5'4")
One of us was "overweight" 153 lbs - BMI 26.3 and the other was "healthy weight" 119 lbs - BMI 20.4
Both have been mostly sedentary for the last 15 years of our lives besides some cardio - NO weight lifting.
We both did Bod Pods (body fat test)
The one who was 153 lbs was 28% body fat.
The one who was 119 lbs was 33% body fat.
Normal and healthy body fat for women our age is around 19(athlete)-29%.
I do suggest if you're someone who is close to a "normal" BMI and frustrated with a weight loss stall, get an accurate reading of your body fat.
You could be a normal body fat and need to change up your fitness routine to see different results!
My friend and I, both the same age, same height (5'4")
One of us was "overweight" 153 lbs - BMI 26.3 and the other was "healthy weight" 119 lbs - BMI 20.4
Both have been mostly sedentary for the last 15 years of our lives besides some cardio - NO weight lifting.
We both did Bod Pods (body fat test)
The one who was 153 lbs was 28% body fat.
The one who was 119 lbs was 33% body fat.
Normal and healthy body fat for women our age is around 19(athlete)-29%.
I do suggest if you're someone who is close to a "normal" BMI and frustrated with a weight loss stall, get an accurate reading of your body fat.
You could be a normal body fat and need to change up your fitness routine to see different results!
1
Replies
-
Sometimes body fat testing can be incorrect. Don’t get too hooked into the numbers you get, they can be misleading. If you can, down the road, do the test again.8
-
L1zardQueen wrote: »Sometimes body fat testing can be incorrect. Don’t get too hooked into the numbers you get, they can be misleading. If you can, down the road, do the test again.
We both did it twice and it was accurate.2 -
That’s good then. Read this. It is a good explanation, at least interesting, about testing.
https://weightology.net/the-pitfalls-of-body-fat-measurement-part-1/
4 -
L1zardQueen wrote: »That’s good then. Read this. It is a good explanation, at least interesting, about testing.
https://weightology.net/the-pitfalls-of-body-fat-measurement-part-1/
I think you might have missed my point. The point is, just because you are in an overweight BMI doesn't mean you have more weight to lose, and just because you're normal BMI doesn't mean the weight you are carrying is a healthy fat to lean mass ratio.
BMI is basically the worst way to measure any one person's health. It has been studied, and debunked, as pseudoscience.1 -
digestibleplastic wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »That’s good then. Read this. It is a good explanation, at least interesting, about testing.
https://weightology.net/the-pitfalls-of-body-fat-measurement-part-1/
I think you might have missed my point. The point is, just because you are in an overweight BMI doesn't mean you have more weight to lose, and just because you're normal BMI doesn't mean the weight you are carrying is a healthy fat to lean mass ratio.BMI is basically the worst way to measure any one person's health. It has been studied, and debunked, as pseudoscience.
No. It's not "debunked as pseudoscience".
It's not meant to be a way to "measure any one person's health". It's meant to be used to be used to look at populations in terms of health risk, or as a first approximation to help identify individuals who are statistically most likely to to need more personalized, detailed assessment of health risks. The best statistics I've seen suggest that around 80% of the population would be at a healthy weight somewhere in the normal BMI range. That makes it useful as a screener.
Yes, it is being misused by some insurance companies and such, which is wrong. Yes, it has false positives and false negatives. Anyone who thinks a single number is gospel is wrong, of course.
Even the mainstream sources recognize it as an approximation, and suggest how to use it sensibly in context of other screening metrics, to decide whether action is required.
https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/educational/lose_wt/risk.htm#limitations
Experientially, among people I know personally, I think there more people (by far) who deny BMI's usefulness who are actually at health risk due to excess bodyweight, than people who are true outliers (there are a few I know). Your experience may differ.9 -
As your data indicated, while there is an association, no direct correlation between BMI and BF%
BMI was developed as a simple way to determine if someone MAY be "at risk" for certain health problems associated w/being overweight (regardless of their BF%), like diabetes and cardiovascular disease
While BMI can offer a "suggestion" of what weight range would be considered "healthy" based on one's height, it well documented that BMI is far from a perfect indicator of such risks and that it is a poor indicator for body builders and people of Asian ancestry.
What is an "ideal" wt for a specific individual will vary widely based on genetics and other factors and, in order to determine what your BF% is you need to measure it. Best to ket your scale, mirror and how you "look/feel" at aspecific wt to determine if it is "ideal" for you
While no method of BF% measurement is perfect, DEXA and Hydrostatic weighing are considered better than the BodPod in that they are more accurate (give a more precise reading) and more reliable (give consistent readings overcmutiple tests) but at least you have an idea from the BodPod what you BF% may be and you can determine your progress by taking further measurements over time.2 -
All statistics that are used to drive a decision about something (think political surveys to predict election results) have a margin of error. BMI vs BF is something I consider BMI having a higher margin of error, but an easier method to measure.3
-
digestibleplastic wrote: »L1zardQueen wrote: »Sometimes body fat testing can be incorrect. Don’t get too hooked into the numbers you get, they can be misleading. If you can, down the road, do the test again.
We both did it twice and it was accurate.
It measured the same number. Just says it was repeatable, nothing about the accuracy.8 -
Well I learned that the Bod Pod is relatively accurate compared to a DEXA scan, but it's not perfect according to https://examine.com/nutrition/an-accuracy-thing-measuring-body-fat-percentage but I disagree with the choice of "ideal" weight. I don't believe that there is a universal ideal weight/body fat percentage, and also an ideal weight can change, people can choose to gain or lose for various reasons. Anyway OP I hope you enjoyed your Bod Pod experience.1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions