Skip to comments.Body Mass Index - How Reliable?
Posted on 07/15/2013 9:39:52 AM PDT by fwdude
In my efforts to be prepared for the civil unrest that is undoubtedly coming, I'm on a mission to get into better shape in my early fifties, and have revisited the health measure called Body Mass Index (BMI.) Just needing the input from some of you who agree or disagree with this seemingly arbitrary calculation.
It seems to be absolutely ridiculous to me in one sense. In my healthiest lean days I was still considered "overweight" according to the BMI calculation. Now, I'm considered "obese," when anyone looking at me would never describe me as such. If I got down just to the high end of the acceptable weight range, I would look like a famine-ravished Ethiopian.
The calculation for BMI:
BMI = mass(lbs)/height²(in.) x 703
The interpretation charts follows:
BMI below 18.5 is underweight, from 18.5-24.9 is normal, 25-29.9 is overweight, and 30 and over is "obese."
Are there other qualifying factors I should consider when looking at my raw BMI rating? These raw numbers seem bogus to me.
Thanks, health FReepers.
As always, follow the money. And lately, the lust for power.
It’s built off the same bullstalin that gave us “somatotyping” which said that there were ideal body shapes/proportions and that non-ideal types might indicate certain behavioral flaws as well (withdrawn, etc.).
Should men and women weigh the same? No accounting for muscle vs. fat?
It’s an “easy” calculation but as bogus as the grain heavy food pyramid we saw under Herr Clinton.
For that reason alone, BMI is not very accurate.
Short people can be quite pudgy and have a satisfactory BMI.
Tall people can be beanpoles and have an unsatisfactory BMI.
If you are interested, have a professional measure your body fat (calipers are fine), which is what BMI is estimating. However, I’m not sure which direction is better in times of unrest. In extended times of unrest, a little extra body fat can carry you through lean times on limited food. A little extra body fat can also slow you down in case of violence. Look at how you plan to live in case of unrest and choose accordingly, but don’t assume there is a single right answer.
Well except maybe the guy on the left and the guy squatting, they according to the BMI index are just borderline obese.
The best way to determine if you need to lose weight is to look in the mirror. BMI doesn’t take into account bone or muscle density and thus can give false impressions.
BMI is useless. Eat healthy, exercise, sleep plenty, don’t drink or do drugs, and look good naked.
As I said, at my most athletic (6 minute mile), I was borderline “overweight.” I’ve always suspected that this metric is bogus, but just wanted helpful input here. Thanks.
It doesn’t factor in body structure. Most athletes have high BMI’s.
Take the BMI chart with a grain of salt, as a basic reference. Focus your attention on your waist size at the level of your belly button and see how much you can reduce that number.
I've been doing the same. Results come a lot slower now than they did in my testosterone fueled youth.
BMI is so blatantly stupid it’s hard to believe any medical professionals accept it.
First clue is a man and a woman of the same height are supposed to have the same weight. Duh! That exposes it immediately.
And anyone in very good shape with a lot of muscle is obese or way obese!
I was at 6-6, 213 and my BMI was 24.6, right on the edge of overweight. That was insane, I could exercise for five hours straight and had a 10-inch drop from my chest to my waist.
Agree. Not taking sex and build into account invalidates it for me completely.
The ‘B’ in BMI should stand for Bull$&it! Im 63 and 270lbs. I bench press 495, ride a couple hundred miles per week on my bike and eat no carbs or wheat products. Yet, Im morbidly obese according to the BMI charts. My body fat percentage would make a lot of people blush!
For the average person, its a fairly good guide. For people with a lot of muscle mass, not so much.