"Actually the BMI is a pretty good indicator of your general health. "
No, it's not.
Body fat percentage is a "pretty good indicator". The BMI approximates that number, but obviously it's a poor indicator. It is a crude method that supposedly replaces much more precise (but more costly) methods, such as the dunk tank method, or even the skin pinch test. The BMI is akin to saying that we know the condition of an automobile by looking at the tires.
Athletes blow the scale out of the water due to muscle mass, especially those who have massive leg muscles (bicyclist, including Lance and Dubya and me).
In addition, different ethnicities experience health effects at different BMIs as their body responds differently to fat mass and body build. Oriental people, for instance, run into health problems at a lower BMI than causasians.
Thank you....I'm a woman....who has always been strong and active, with good sized (and well developed) thigh muscles....and while I'm not over the BMI amount, I always seemed more close than I thought I should be.....but, I have more muscles than the average woman.....guess it's the German stock in me. I see skinny women, who seem fatter than me on the other hand (they have rolls where I don't.)
I have to agree with you 100%. I have found the BMI is suited for very thin wristed French men.
I am not think by an measure but I am not fat either. According to BMI, I am obese. I have big shoulders and big legs. I lift weights and play hockey 3 days a week. I find that if I was at my BMI weight I would be a lizard.
Although you're both coming at this from different angles, you're both dicounting the fact that the Clinton administration lowered the BMI to instantly make 30/40 million more people "obese".