BMI Chart as Gospel or do Your own thing?

[wannabelf]

I've closed in on the last 10 pounds for the BMI chart to say I'm high "normal". My original goal before I studied it was 5 lbs over....I thought I'd be overjoyed and happy to "maintain" from there. I'm doing very well still losing and I know I can get to "normal"....but What do/did You do?

Some people carry a Few extra pounds just fine and carried them in their youthful most active years. I'm 62 and just wondering if crossing off that Last square on a BMI chart Really will make me "healthier"? I feel so much better I honestly don't know if I Need to be at that weight....especially since I'm 5'5" and it's the Same BMI for 5' 4". I kinda wondered Why it's the same....

Any comments appreciated!   I'm not "stressing" I expect I'll keep right on going to the BMI goal but I'm Curious as to how others feel about it.  Thank You! 

It's just beyond astonishing to me how much fitbit has helped my education and finess. I'm already Very happy!

[USAF-Larry]

---

@tamado wrote:

I think as we are on this journey we become more and more aware of what our bodies are doing.  If we listen, and want to hear, we will know what they are asking for.  It has been such a journey of introspection and self discovery.  Things I did not know mattered to me matter now.  I have watched my resting heart rate drop into a very healthy range, something I would have been dismissive and in denial about before.  Be well, body mind and soul and enjoy your new health.

---

Well Said! 

[wannabelf]

Technical question!  

Well, I'm trying to figure out how my fitbit dashboard chart judges BMI now. Have I been reading the standard chart wrong?  Where the chart says "150" I Thought that the box on the chart was the 145-150 range colored still as "overweight". So to be " normal " I thought I had to hit 145 or less to cross off that last box.... . Well,I've hit 148.8 and my fitbit chart reads Green now. The only difference that I guessed might apply is that on standard charts 5'5" AND 5'4" are the Same and I'm 5'5".  Does fitbit differ from standard charts?  

[Dominique]

If you are 148.8 and 5’5, your BMI is 24.8, which is right below the upper limit of the normal range (25). Overweight is 25 to 30, obese is > 30, underweight is < 18.5

[wannabelf]

@Dominique Thank You for responding!

I knew my fitbit chart went green but I thought it was too soon. ha.I'm sure glad I enjoy laughing at myself because being a "dummy" was a nice little boon to me today. For 5 months I've been reading the BMI chart wrong. ROFL.Well,the whole world of "weight loss" was something I never even peeked at,my entire life, until 5 months ago,so I guess that's why the "detail" of Correctly reading the chart escaped me (rolling eyes at self)  I thought I had 5 more lbs to go to get into BMI Normal .  I thought the numbers at the top of the chart were the High end of the box....so I thought the 145 box was 140-145, NOT 145-150. Sheesh! This is the first time I think my 62 yr old "senility" worked in my favor.

[shipo]

From my perspective, BMI is one of the dumbest metrics ever when it comes to a relative assessment of health.  In my case, I'm a 59 year old male measuring in at 5' 8", weigh just over 200 pounds (yielding a BMI of just over 30), and a such, I am officially obese.  That said, I recently ran a half marathon on a hot 85°F day and finished in 1:42, not exactly something typical for a truely obese individual.

Am I a little plump?  Yup; I could easily stand to loose 20 or so pounds.  Do I see myself ever getting down into the "normal" BMI range?  Yup, when I'm dead, cold, and rotting in my grave.

I read an argument a year or so ago suggesting BMI should be scrapped in favor of a very simple metric, waist size compared to height; if an individual is at least twice as tall as their waist size, they're "normal" (up to a point of course), if not, then they're merging into the overweight category.  Sounds pretty logical to me.

[Mukluk4]

BMI doesn't account for two pretty critical items:

1. What can you do physically  (endurance, strength, etc.)

2. How you got to be in a good BMI range (starving yourself, shoving your hand down your throat, etc.)

[wannabelf]

Gee @Mukluk4

Getting into My range JUST by walking for 4 months,and a little elliptical, made me stronger.I needed it.I did not have near the endurance I have now. Also I ate everything I always did,I just burned off the calories First every day. Zero deprivation for This old gal!   Drank wine and ate chocolate sometimes too, and still made my home made apple pie! He/he

I understand what you are saying since BMI doesn't work for SOME body types or atheletes. But for some of us,that just plain let themselves get old,chubby and lax it Is a reasonable goal.

I don't foresee any problems maintaining either. I had to learn to eat Serving sizes and I Have. Some of us really have to read charts and use tool to "get a grip" for inspiration. It does help Some of us.

[Mukluk4]

The point is that BMI is a point in time reference that tries to build correlation between two pieces of data to extrapolate to a larger assumed whole.  Therefore, it can't be used as a sole identifier to what healthy is and creates inaccurate assumptions.

Her BMI is healthy, therefore she eats appropriately....

His BMI is healthy, therefore he exercises adequately...

His BMI is healthy, therefore he doesn't do crack cocaine...

Her BMI is healthy, so she's not at risk for a heart attack...

His BMI is high, therefore he eats junk all day...

Her BMI is high, so she's lazy...

[wannabelf]

Ah OK...wasn't sure what your post meant! 

[shipo]

---

@Mukluk4 wrote:

The point is that BMI is a point in time reference that tries to build correlation between two pieces of data to extrapolate to a larger assumed whole.  Therefore, it can't be used as a sole identifier to what healthy is and creates inaccurate assumptions.

Her BMI is healthy, therefore she eats appropriately....

His BMI is healthy, therefore he exercises adequately...

His BMI is healthy, therefore he doesn't do crack cocaine...

Her BMI is healthy, so she's not at risk for a heart attack...

His BMI is high, therefore he eats junk all day...

Her BMI is high, so she's lazy...

---

The problem here is much of the medical community takes BMI as gospel (or very nearly so).  Case in point, I run, a lot, like 2,000+ miles per year, that and I moonlight on a horse farm taking care of eleven willful horses (I kind of use this as my means of cross training).  That said, my BMI is over 30 and so I am classified by my company as "obese" and as such, I'm not automatically eligible for a health care cost reduction.  In order for me to get my reduction, I need to apply for an exception, and I need to do that every year.  Very annoying.

[Wingmender]

BMI is used as a predictor for blood pressure, blood glucose, and cholesterol. The healthy bmi range should protect you from diabetes, hypertension, and coronary artery disease. But it’s only a loose approximation. It can’t tell the difference between healthy muscle and high risk abdominal fat. The best way to know how you’re really doing is to monitor your actual blood pressure and labs with your doctor. 

[SunsetRunner]

I just tried the following BMI calculator at this link:

https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/educational/lose_wt/BMI/bmicalc.htm

I am 6' 8" tall and currently weigh 236 lbs.  According to their calculations, this is overweight.  If I drop to 225 lbs (my goal weight) I am barely considered "normal" weight.  If I drop to 210 lbs I would still barely be considered a normal weight, despite the fact that I would start looking like I need to eat a couple of sandwiches.

IMHO, the BMI chart is an outdated too based on junk science and shouldn't be taken seriously.  There are far better ways to measure obesity than a 'one size fits all' number.  YMMV.

[Dominique]

Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson was recently mentioned in another topic. He’s shorter (6’4) and heavier (260lbs) than you, sporting a BMI of 31.5. Typical example of the tiny minority of very athletic/muscular individuals to whom BMI doesn’t apply. If you have a similar (athletic/muscular) build, then BMI doesn’t apply to you either.  Just because BMI doesn’t apply to a tiny minority of the population doesn’t mean it should be discarded as "junk" for the vast majority for whom it is perfectly valid.

[GershonSurge]

@SunsetRunner,

Don't be so quick to discard something as junk science without knowing the science. 

BMI is intended to be used as an indicator for large groups. It is only a first cut for individuals. The next step for a person who is in the obese category is to measure the stomach circumference at the largest point. If it exceeds 40 inches at any height, then it's on to the next step, which is measuring body fat. If a male has less than 15% body fat, then they are considered at a normal weight. At 15%, the love handles are completely gone and there is little or no stomach bulge while standing.

[SunsetRunner]

---

@GershonSurge wrote:

@SunsetRunner,

Don't be so quick to discard something as junk science without knowing the science. 

The BMI has been considered an outdated method of determining obesity for some time now.  Measuring actual body fat with a caliper (or as you suggested, a tape measure) gives a much more realistic picture of overall health than a "one-size-fits-all" chart of meaningless numbers.  Even the Fitbit scale uses some kind of electronic pulse method to determine your overall fat to muscle ratio rather than resorting to the archaic (and largely inaccurate) BMI system for good reason. 

FWIW, it isn't the rare person who's weight seems to be out of sync with BMI charts.  I have known guys who lift regularly and girls who are very lean that are considered obese because a BMI chart takes nothing into account other than height and weight. IMO, when you take into consideration the overall diversity of human body types  is not very scientific in the least. 

Top 10 Reasons Why the BMI is Bogus:

https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106268439

It's Time to Ditch BMI as a Measure of Obesity:

http://fortune.com/2017/05/01/bmi-bvi-obesity/

Why BMI Isn’t The Best Measure for Weight (or Health)

http://healthland.time.com/2013/08/26/why-bmi-isnt-the-best-measure-for-weight-or-health/

[Dominique]

On the one hand, you’re dismissing BMI as useless, but on the other hand, you reported in another topic the Atkins diet took you from 257 lbs (BMI: 28.2), which you described as "unhealthy", to 211 lbs (BMI: 23.2), at which weight you said you were in the "best shape of your life". So maybe there’s some validity in BMI after all.

[GershonSurge]

@SunsetRunner, @Dominique

I think it pays to look dispassionately at the "archaic" to see what it is you are rejecting.

The Met Life weight tables were used for a long time to determine life expectancy. They recommended far lower weights than most people would consider reasonable, but that doesn't make them wrong. Let's start with that and then look at BMI.

The middle three blocks of the BMI give the weight for the Met Life Tables. They include 5 pounds of clothes and add an inch for heels. A medium framed male who is six feet tall and wearing clothes and shoes should weigh between 150 and 165 or a naked weight of 145 to 160. They will look like they need a few sandwiches, but those are the facts based on mortality rate. 

@SunsetRunner, you say you know many people classified as obese who don't have any fat. A 6-foot tall male doesn't become obese until 217 pounds. There are very few people who have 60 or 70 pounds of extra lean weight. Until a person can look down and see a flat stomach (or their toes), they can't claim they are being somehow screwed by the BMI tables. Suppose there is someone. They are still screwed by the basic premise that the weight ranges are a good predictor of mortality. If they weren't, the insurance companies wouldn't use them.

The problem arises when people use unhealthy methods to get to their target BMI. Usually, they don't make it. They either yo-yo or they fall short unable to lose the last 20 pounds. There is more inconvenient science here, but I don't want to go off topic.