Why BMI is bullshit

In 1960, the average 6 foot tall American male in the 45 to 54 year old category weighed 187 pounds. This is a BMI of 25.4 which is officially classified as overweight. The 75th percentile was 208 pounds which is a BMI of 28.2, officially overweight towards obese.

It is complete nonsense to claim that more than 50% of American males who were 6 foot tall in 1960 were overweight. BMI is bullshit because it claims you're overweight if you're of above average height.

Data: https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/50284

  1. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Americans have always been fat,and they will always be fat

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      The Canadian weights were similar but the British were skinny as fuck in 1943.

      That's what WW2 starvation diets do to you.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        It doesn't even go past 6.2 Feet. Dang.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          i see asian women over 6ft tall all the time now, volleyball playing queens. People everywhere are getting bigger and better, they have been for decades.
          30 years ago an asian woman over 6ft would be a freak

  2. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >BMI is bullshit
    *snifff sniff* hmmm hohh that concentrated copium fuck yeah smells like murican freedom innit?

  3. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    BMI doesn't account for bodyfat percentage.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      BMI doesn't give a sensible weight for your height if you are tall even ignoring body fat percentage.

  4. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    It is bullshit for other factors.

    I started lifting last february at 68kg 180cm. That's 'healthy weight', although skinny. I'm now at 84kg, being squarely 'overweight'. My bodyfat is around 14-15% according to navy method which is well within expectations considering I never, ever cut. BMI tells me I'm 'unhealthy' and should drop the weight. I can probably hit at least 90kg natty, getting ever closer to being considered 'obese'.

    Does that sound like a good system for you?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      lol you got fat

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Nice bulk

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        youre full of shit

        [...]
        stfu fatty

        Post abs

        You are not 84kg and 14-15% bodyfat, simple as.

        Here. My bodyfat estimation is taken doing the navy method at home, I do not own nor am interested in doing bioimpedance shit or more expensive methods. I have a visible six pack even at my heaviest, and am completely satisfied with it considering I do not ever cut. My arms are 39.5cm large.

        If I look unhealthily overweight to you, because that's what BMI implies, maybe you should try lifting some weights

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >visibile 6 pack
          >pic related
          Stop kidding yourself. You're fat

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            I can see it both in the picture and irl.

            You still give BMI any credit?

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              Yes, it was meant to be a shot of my glutes for comparison. Some fellow told me my ass was disproportionately big and I was just checking, it happens to be the most recent picture I have

              I have pictures from the front and can see it just as well. What's your point? I'm not arguing I couldn't be leaner, I'm arguing BMI is shit for suggesting my current weight is unhealthy.

              You can't see a 6 pack in the picture you posted

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >I have a visible six pack
          Do you have any particular reason for taking that picture from the side sir

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Yes, it was meant to be a shot of my glutes for comparison. Some fellow told me my ass was disproportionately big and I was just checking, it happens to be the most recent picture I have

            I have pictures from the front and can see it just as well. What's your point? I'm not arguing I couldn't be leaner, I'm arguing BMI is shit for suggesting my current weight is unhealthy.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >I have pictures from the front and can see it just as well.
              So post them you idiot

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                [...]
                You can't see a 6 pack in the picture you posted

                I do have it. I've been leaner and had it more apparent, sure, as a former skelly I do not bother with cutting at all, at least not for now. I'm permabulking until I hit my natural limit and only then I'll think about cutting.

                I do not see how any of this argues against BMI being a shitty metric that takes neither body fat or lean mass into consideration

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                OH NO NO NO NO NO NO

                lmao that's a 6 pack??? Bruh.... not like this. Not like this....

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Yeah, I can see the entirety of the abs. I gave you my numbers above, you can figure out whether that's fat or not. Keep in mind I gained nearly 20kg of mass in one year of lifting and there's plenty more to go

                >b-but you're not lean!!!!!!
                sure. Unhealthily fat? lol

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                no offense m8 but I wouldn't call that a 6 pack. looks like you need more ab hypertrophy

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I don't disagree with you. Picrel was around 76-77kg (I'm 84 now), I know it's not just fat because I measure my arms and they're very low in fat. Right now I'm just mindlessly bulking to get as heavy as I can before I do a single cut into maintenance.

                The glorious system of BMI would throw me, in this picture, in a 'borderline overweight' status. Does that look borderline overweight to anyone?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Read into how humans store fat mate, not much will ever go to your arms as a man

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Correct, which means that if my arms went from 33cm to 39.5cm, it is in great majority lean mass. I have not gained 'only fat'. That's my point.

                What I'm trying to convey is that BMI is shit. That's it. Not saying I'm lean, or the leanest I could be, or that I mog people. I said I have a six pack in all pictures I uploaded, and I can see a six pack looking down right now. It's fine if people don't, I still think BMI is inadequate and worthless for lifters.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I didn't realise it's possible to have body dysmorphia in the opposite direction.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Bro you don't even have a six pack here even though you've clearly tried to use gypsy lighting to highlight any shred of gains. You say you gained 20kg of mass in one year - I agree, but mass doesn't refer only to muscle anon.
                Do a cut for fucks sake.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                You are at least 20% bf, I've done over 400 DEXAs for people trust me

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                you arent "fat" but you arent anywhere near lean either, you need to drop at least 20lbs bro

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                He would probably lose 30lbs before he's at a legit 10% bodyfat. I remember being about as delusional as him on my first bulk though so there's that

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Lol you're fat dude. Strongfat, but still fat.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          nice butt! Are you a bottom?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            https://i.imgur.com/UOerlhZ.gif

            Kek you are like 25% bodyfat and all your fat goes into your gigantic bubble butt that only an 8 inch dick could penetrate u thick as shit white boy

            nice grindr pic, bet you're getting tons of attention there

            I'm straight

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              so probably butt virgin, all the better
              wya bb

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Kek you are like 25% bodyfat and all your fat goes into your gigantic bubble butt that only an 8 inch dick could penetrate u thick as shit white boy

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          nice grindr pic, bet you're getting tons of attention there

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          LONDON
          O
          N
          D
          O
          N

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      youre full of shit

      https://i.imgur.com/ok95rgp.png

      In 1960, the average 6 foot tall American male in the 45 to 54 year old category weighed 187 pounds. This is a BMI of 25.4 which is officially classified as overweight. The 75th percentile was 208 pounds which is a BMI of 28.2, officially overweight towards obese.

      It is complete nonsense to claim that more than 50% of American males who were 6 foot tall in 1960 were overweight. BMI is bullshit because it claims you're overweight if you're of above average height.

      Data: https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/50284

      stfu fatty

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Are you telling me that the average middle aged, 6 foot tall American male in 1960 was clinically overweight?

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >over 45
          yes I absolutely believe that

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >my made up formula says it, so it must be true
            do BMItards really believe this

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >I say it isn't, so it must be true
              Post abdomen fatty

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >made up formula
              It’s literally just a ratio that correlates with optimal bodily function. Cope fatty

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >It’s literally just a ratio that correlates with optimal bodily function. Cope fatty
                [citation needed]
                BMI was invented centuries ago. It's a convenient measure but not based on any kind of modern research.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      You are not 84kg and 14-15% bodyfat, simple as.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Post abs

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      You are likely 20% bf+. People suck at guessing their bf, I have a visible six pack, SUPER veiny, and I'm 14% based on DEXA

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        15% is the number I got from navy test done at home. It's actually from 13 to 14, every time. One time I got 14.9% and that's the upper limit I'm basing my posts off of.

        My pictures are above, you can check and guess. BMI is still shit.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I literally have the same height and went from the same weight as you bulking to 87kg and my body fat% went up from about 12% to at least 20%. What you're implying is that you only gained muscle while gaining no fat which is highly unlikely. If most people were like you steroids would be unnecessary for body building. So I'm personally doubtful.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        That's not how it works. I was real skinny before starting to workout. Say, 10%bf. Even if I stood at 10% and gained 20kg, it wouldn't be 20kg of 'pure muscle'. Bodyfat is a %. 10% of 80 is more than 10% of 60. But it didn't, it increased to around 13-15%. I gained quite a bit of fat, as is normal for powerbulks.

        >BUT YOU HAVE AT LEAST 20%!!!!!! YOU'RE FAT!!!!

        Not only does navy method points to my bodyfat being 14%, most charts also do the same. Call it reverse dysmorphia or whatever if you will, but I do not see myself anywhere even near the 20% picture. I can clearly see my abs, despite there being quite a lot of fat I could lose to make them more defined.

        My ONLY point is that BMI indicates I am unhealthily overweight, when that's not the case. Muscle is much more dense than fat, and someone who didn't lift at my height and weight would start having issues with visceral fat around the organs and shit, because their bodyfat% would necessarily be way higher - they don't lift, there's no way they have 40cm lean arms.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      https://www.mdapp.co/ponderal-index-calculator-430/
      > 84kg 180 cm
      Ponderal Index = 14.4
      Interpretation: Normal
      > 118 lbs 66 inches
      Ponderal Index = 11.36
      Interpretation: Normal
      I'm 19 bmi too which is normal so

  5. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Max pull ups is a better indicator of whether or not you're a healthy weight than BMI. I've never once seen a fat person who could do a decent number of pull ups.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >decent number
      which is?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        12+

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          fair
          I can do maybe 10 at my fatass weight

  6. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Has the average muscle mass declined though?
    Also, imagine the data was saying they weighed far less than the healthy BMI Range. Would you come here claiming that having a BMI of 16 is the healthy ideal? If not, why would the reverse apply?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Presumably there wasn't an obesity crisis all the way back in 1960 when ultraprocessed food was unknown. It doesn't make sense to say that most adults back then had an unhealthy weight.

      > Also, imagine the data was saying they weighed far less than the healthy BMI Range. Would you come here claiming that having a BMI of 16 is the healthy ideal
      If that was what the data said then I guess I would agree with that. Whatever people weighed before the obesity crisis should be around what we consider to be a healthy weight.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Fair enough. I would add though that, as far as I know, average height has increased steadily, meaning that people who were tall decades ago may have had better access to nutrition overall, so a higher percentage of that population may have been overfat. Would be interesting to see if there are any large datasets of caliper measurements.
        And there's still the question of whether this would mean that BMI is bullshit, or whether the recommendations would simply need to be adjusted. I still think amount of mass per (estimate of) body size seems like a pretty decent measure for practical purposes (e.g. for the doctor to tell you you're at risk of something without having to do a whole dexa scan or some shit).

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        1960 was the beginning of the obesity crisis it wasnt nearly as bad as it is now. It started because after WW2 peoples lives became increasingly sedentary as more people started moving to suburbs, driving everywhere instead of walking and working white collar jobs. Ultraprocessed food just exploded it into orbit.

        Thats why the food pyramid looks how it does, because back then there wasnt an abundance of ultraprocessed carbs so if someone was overweight its probably because they were eating steak and ground beef all the time.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          This makes the food pyramid actually make sense for the first time, since products with bread were probably also more plain and less sugary (think sandwiches and doubletriplebaconcheesesugarsauceburger), no hyperpalatable MSG instant noodles etc.

  7. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Nah bmi is accurate, stop eating so much you fucking disgusting pig.

    source: I'm a disgusting pig

  8. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >the average american
    >not overweight
    Ok anon

  9. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    And yet I'm willing to bet the average 6ft American age 45+ WAS overweight, or should I say, overfat
    "Overfat" is defined as "having enough fat mass to be detrimental to health"
    It's a better metric than referring to weight which as you say can be confounded by variables like height and bone density/structure
    Fat levels are also easily and reliably measured using tape
    Overfat directly refers and relates to health outcomes, where weight and BMI don't necessarily
    Stop using overweight and start thinking overfat, anons

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >should I say, overfat
      >"Overfat" is defined as "having enough fat mass to be detrimental to health"
      >It's a better metric than referring to weight which as you say can be confounded by variables like height and bone density/structure
      I like this, much like "MSM" it cuts through the bullshit to focus on the important stuff

  10. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I am 74 inches tall and 178 pounds and I think I am out of shape and slightly fat but everyone I know thinks I am slim and in shape...

    Basically the average American is so fat that all you have to do to look in shape is not eat a container of cookies, party size bag of chips, large pizza or drink a two liter of soda while sitting on your ass all day.

    I don't work out and still eat like shit but because I don't stuff myself full of sugar and I actually get off my ass I am somehow in better shape and size than the average American.

    I always get a laugh when people say getting ahead in life is hard in America. If you just look at the average American you will see that all it takes is a tiny bit of effort to be successful.

    The victimhood culture going around have made people not even want to try in the first place.

  11. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Why are you so concerned with BMI?
    And to your point about height, the picture you posted shows an equation for BMI that takes height into account. Dividing by height means that larger height equals smaller overall BMI so the idea that you’re specifically targeted by the BMI garden gnomes for being above average height is not the case.
    You need to put any more stock into BMI because of this, but just stop eating so much if you look in the mirror and appear to be fat.

  12. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    BMI is a quick measure to see general health. Doctors measure your height, weight, blood pressure, temperature, and a couple other things to get a general idea of good health vs bad health. For like 90% of people it’s going to be generally right. If you’re right above the border of healthy and over weight and your other test are fine and you are visibly fit unless the doctor graduated bottom of their class they aren’t gonna say you are overweight and need to lose weight. If your BMI says you are obese and aren’t built like an NFL linebacker then you are fat.

  13. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    6ft
    220
    32bmi
    Allegedly, I look like the guy on the far right.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Now stand normally bitch tits

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Sorry I can bench 3pl8? Whats does that have to do with me looking like OPs pic of an obese?

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          you can still look like a lardass and bench 3pl8 dimwit

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            But i dont.

            >is fat
            >bmi calls him fat
            So where is the discrepancy

            And i have no gut.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >is fat
      >bmi calls him fat
      So where is the discrepancy

  14. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >tfw was skinnyfat with "perfect" bmi
    healthy bmi doesn't say much
    unhealthy bmi usually is right

  15. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    retard

  16. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    BMI is a simple heuristic to assess general health in combination with a bunch of other heuristics/tests and not to be taken too seriously. If you're overweight and your bloodwork is shit and your resting HR is shit and your blood pressure is shit, your weight is probably an issue. If you're a BMI of 26 but you're otherwise in peak health, it's clearly not a problem.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      The bmi is meant to be used on a population for a general indication of its fatness. Op is pointing out correctly that bmi doesn’t work for taller than average individuals getting worse the taller you get. It’s a valid criticism and probably one of the reasons the population is getting more overweight as it gets taller.

  17. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    The average dad back then was a skinny fat mess though. Watch literally any old media and all the dads look like complete shit, skinny twig arms and beer bellies, not even a respectable built fat dad bod. These are the losers that beat their wives and kids after drinking every day

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Forgot pic

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        they look like champions

  18. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >no penises
    Hey! I've seen this episode!
    https://www.xvideos.com/video679184/howard_stern_-_smallest_penis_contest

  19. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    People are retarded and dont understand BMI is an estimate to be used by medical practitioners and isnt for aesthetics

    Even if you are low bodyfat high muscle high BMI, your cardiovascular system doesnt care if you have fat or muscle, just weight.

  20. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    they changed the cutoff in the 90s from 27 to 25. probably coincident with rising bodyfat percentages

  21. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >BMI is bullshit because it claims you're overweight if you're of above average height.

  22. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >tfw I have a condition that makes my bones unusually dense so BMI actually doesn't calculate correctly for me

    I'm moderately skinny but my BMI calculates to 30. I sink like a rock in water.

  23. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    BMI was originally created to tell whether or not someone was underweight. Which is why you start getting some fucky ratings the larger you go.

  24. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Broadly, it's not bullshit. For the most part it's accurate assuming you're interpreting "overweight" and "obese" as measurements of overall health, which you should.

    The problem arises when you're high BMI but also high muscle. If you're 6'2 230 you're in the "overweight" category. If you're built like an NFL linebacker and low BF%, high in muscle (assuming you're natty) are you really "unhealthy" or overweight/obese? Most likely not. At the same time you could be 6'2, 170 lbs and in the normal weight range but you're a skinny-fat dyel with absolutely ZERO muscle on his body and a layer of pudge covering everything with a shit diet and being generally unhealthy.

    Still, it's accurate and correct in probably 95% of cases. Most people who pretend they shouldn't be categorized as overweight are indeed overweight. They might be fairly athletic, they might be fairly muscular, they're almost certainly fat enough to be unhealthy. Railing against BMI is a massive cope for fat fucks who want to pretend that they should be considered healthy before actually becoming healthy. How about you cut, remove all that fat, and then we'll talk? If your BMI is still overweight and you're low BF then you won't even CARE what some BMI number says about you because it'll be so obvious and self-evident that you're still healthy that you don't seek validation in some kind of bs number.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >trust the science guys!

  25. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    At the very least, BMI is a good rule of thumb for general health, in particular regards to how much strain/pressure your body weight is putting on your joints and organs.
    That is still absolutely relevant when lifting.

  26. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    This thread is just a fat homosexual raging about being overweight and posting pics of his ass to other men.

  27. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    The dod bod from the 1960s was a six foot man with a beer belly and weighed 187 pounds. Beer belly = fat. Stop coping and have a little discipline with your diet if you don't want to be considered fat.

  28. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >that 20 bf% guy itt coping and thinking he's close to 15%
    Oh no no, rippetoe kickstarted another dreamer bulk.

  29. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I must be 20-25% bf at 5'6 59kg. Can barely see my abs and still have the skinnyfat belly.

  30. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Hey fellows, I just arrived from work and gym. The numbers I gave you are what I always got through navy method. It's what I have available to consistently measure at home. As far as I know it's considered relatively accurate - if anything, at least it's very reliable because I always get either 13 or 14%.

    I don't care whether or not I'm at that level, the point of the thread and all my posts is showing you that BMI is a shitty scale that does not means shit. This thread isn't about myself. I'm permabulking and I'll cut once I can't get any bigger. If I'm 14% or 20% or 30% means little, I'm more concerned with the consistency of the test. It is very consistent.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      what if you hold alot of fat at your waist but barely anywhere else

  31. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >“BMI is bullshit because it claims you're overweight if you're of above average height”
    >the picture that you posted literally shows that BMI is is inversely proportional to the square of height

    You are retarded and you understand math at less than a 6th grade level.

    >95% of men overweight according to BMI are also overweight according to BF%
    >same for 99% of women
    >only requires height and weight. So advanced machinery or measurement device. No special training or variables like with calibers/displacement weighing/ DEXA.

    BMI is an excellent metric and unless you’re absolutely jacked, it’s an accurate assessment of your general fitness

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >You are retarded and you understand math at less than a 6th grade level.

      you are an actual fucking retard. BMI is a formula that someone made up. it does not necessarily give sensible answers for the relationship between a healthy weight and height. historical data shows that even way back before obesity was a crisis, most tall men were classified as "overweight" by BMI. therefore it seems likely that BMI is not a sensible measurement formula for healthy weight at all heights.

  32. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Massive cope
    I am 6’1, 175 lbs and lean but not thin and my BMI is smack in the middle of the healthy range. There is no excuse to not have a BMI between 21-24 unless you choose to use gear and put on extra muscle

  33. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    It's not good for athletes but it's pretty good for general populations. A man standing 6feet at 190pounds who doesn't work out (as most don't) is just barely overwheight under the standard BMI measure.

    And if you were to look at him, you would probably agree: most men of that height and weight *who don't work out, as most people don't* will have love handles and little to no definition anywhere. He wouldn't be obese, in fact he'd be less overweight than the average American, but most of his cohort will look unremarkable and a little heavier than he needs to be.

  34. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    BMI is bullshit but because the statistics its based on are no longer true.
    The average man when BMI was formulated had MORE muscle on average than now. Alot of people that are at a healthy weight BMI are still fat.
    Its why skinny fat even exists, you can be at a healthy weight but have auschwitz levels of muscle mass.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      this lol, fatties have it backwards.
      Pic related is a graph from 2013, so it's safe to assume that the current situation is even worse

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        btw maybe putting the line at 20% bf is a bit harsh, but even at 25% the point still stands.
        Also I'd like to see the guy in pic related

  35. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    People with enough muscle to skew their BMI towards overweight/obese even when relatively low bodyfat% are the exception, not the rule.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/ok95rgp.png

      In 1960, the average 6 foot tall American male in the 45 to 54 year old category weighed 187 pounds. This is a BMI of 25.4 which is officially classified as overweight. The 75th percentile was 208 pounds which is a BMI of 28.2, officially overweight towards obese.

      It is complete nonsense to claim that more than 50% of American males who were 6 foot tall in 1960 were overweight. BMI is bullshit because it claims you're overweight if you're of above average height.

      Data: https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/50284

      This guy is sadly right. I was in denial at 6’3 220. I looked good with clothes on but bf was probably close to 20. Dropped down to 199 which is like the top of normal weight and looked much better. Got on roids and am about 15% at 225 so now I know what the copers should look like at 28 bmi (much less higher). I look pretty fucking juiced. Anyone natty with a 28+ bmi is in denial if they think they aren’t fat

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        You're literally proving my point. Being 6 foot 3, if you were in the middle of the supposedly "healthy" 18-25 range with BMI 21.5, you'd weigh 172 pounds. That is very lean. At any time in history when obesity was not a problem, a healthy tall man would be BMI>25. Probably tall men should take any BMI less than 27 as healthy.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Reminder that average height has also increased over the last almost 80 years.
          The further you tread from the average the more wrong bmi is.
          It doesn't mean its not a useful tool for the average person.
          And If your not the average person, why would you be using bmi over calipers anyways?

          You people are like those people who say physics is fake because newton is wrong.
          The vast majority of the time newton is right and thats all that matters for most people.

  36. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    It accounts for height, fatfuck.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Can you fucking read? It doesn't account correctly for height unless you think the majority of tall men in 1960 were clinically overweight.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >unless you think the majority of tall men in 1960 were clinically overweight.
        Yeah, they probably were. Overweight is not obese.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          by what clinical definition of overweight?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            See the chart here

            https://i.imgur.com/Qc1FuvL.png

            btw maybe putting the line at 20% bf is a bit harsh, but even at 25% the point still stands.
            Also I'd like to see the guy in pic related

            The people who are high BMI but relatively low bodyfat % are the exception. 99/100 people with a BMI over 25 have a bodyfat % above 20.
            It's different for women, but if you're a man with bodyfat% above 20, you are overweight.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              That doesn't provide any clinical definition of overweight. That plot doesn't even look at the range of standard weights for a given height and its relationship with BF%. The assumption is that BMI standardizes the weight-height relationship whereas in reality it fails increasingly badly for tall people.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >That doesn't provide any clinical definition of overweight.
                The clinical definition is based on BMI, but you knew that, and were hoping to catch me in a tautology. BMI works in 99% of cases. Are their edge cases where a 6'8 guy might be below 20% bodyfat and still classed as overweight? Sure. It still works in 99% of cases so it's a useful metric when looking at groups as a whole.
                Look at the chart again. Look at the crosses, representing men. The vast majority of them are above 20% bodyfat.
                Are you implying that taller people can be at a higher bodyfat% than shorter people whilst remaining healthy? How do you think percentages work?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                nta but a bf% over 25 for men and over 35 for women is considered obese, I'm not sure what the cutoff is for overweight tho

  37. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >BMI is bullshit
    Oh boy, another coping fatty.
    kys.

  38. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    > 2+ weeks pregnant.
    > 4+ months pregnant.
    > 8+ months pregnant.

  39. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    BMI only factors in weight.
    its a good metric if you use it on the people it was designed for.
    the untrained

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Yep this, it doesn't count for trained individuals. Obese powershitters are still coping though.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >be me
      >178cm 83kg
      >internet says i'm overweight
      >mention it to GP during twice yearly check up
      >get told muscle weighs more than fat and i should cut the shit and stop being a hypochondriac like all sporty people are
      >only come to IST to see young men worry about decimal points and fad diets like a bunch of neurotic housewives

  40. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    found another graph that has a much smaller difference between the skinnyfat and the fatfit.
    These were all 18-20yo males at a military recruitment centre (in 2008) tho, so it makes sense for them to be much more fit on average than the general population

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >The limitation of the BMI to classify subjects has been largely described in literature.
      >A higher proportion of muscle mass overestimates BMI. Subjects who are rela-tively disproportionate between upper and lower body parts usually have their BMI underestimated. In our sample, the sensitivity of the BMI was 91.9%, which means that 90% of the normal weight people were classified as normal. The specificity was only 48.4%, which means that 50% of the overweight individuals were classified as overweight.
      >There are two possibilities to limit FN: using an additional method to evaluate BF% or using a higher cutoff for the BMI. In our sample, 29 candidates were classified as FN. It is important to note that 23 individuals (80%) of the 29 classified as FN had a BMI between 25.0 kg/m2 and 27.0 kg/m2.
      >Adding an impedance measurement for the BMI category at 25.0 kg/m2 to 27.0 kg/m2 would classify these candidates correctly. A second approach would be using a higher BMI cutoff: with a cutoff of 27.0 kg/m2, FN would decrease to 6.
      >However, the number of FP would increase compared with a BMI cutoff of 25.0 kg/m2, from 47 to 68. A problem with this second approach is that using a higher cutoff of 27.0 kg/m2 would select a different sample, probably with the same problems as FN.
      >From this study, we can conclude that the BMI method, combined with impedance, classified 83% of the volunteers correctly: 372 of the 448 were correctly classified with both methods as normal or overweight. This criterion is also technically easy to use. Because of the high number of candidates each year for a military career, using a systematic bioelectrical impedance measurement is too time-consuming. However, a BMI between 25.0 kg/m 2 and 27.0 kg/m 2 does not indicate that an individual is over-fat.
      >Additional impedance testing for this category should therefore be performed to determine whether the excess weight in such individuals really is due to an excess of fat accumulation.

  41. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    It doesn't matter if your BMI is high due to fat or muscles. You are putting more stress in your joints and your heart either way.

  42. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    try corpulence index

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      https://www.mdapp.co/ponderal-index-calculator-430/
      > 84kg 180 cm
      Ponderal Index = 14.4
      Interpretation: Normal
      > 118 lbs 66 inches
      Ponderal Index = 11.36
      Interpretation: Normal
      I'm 19 bmi too which is normal so

      interesting. Next time that a retarded butterball says that BMI doesn't make sense because the body is a volume and not a surface I'll whip out this

  43. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >makes fats seethe
    yeah BMI is epic

  44. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I agree. Body fat % and weight are a better measurement.

  45. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >It is complete nonsense to claim that more than 50% of American males who were 6 foot tall in 1960 were overweight
    He thinks its nonsense to claim most Americans are overweight

    Anon, go touch some grass and you'll see.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >in 1960
      what year are you claiming most people were healthy in?
      or if you can't answer, what does "being healthy" even mean?

  46. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Do we need a bmi thread every day? Bmi works for most of the population. But its not perfect for every situation. Especially if you have a ton of muscle. But usually, if you are really mad at the bmi chart, you have a large amount of fat in your mid section that you are coping about.

    t. 6'2 210 pounds....he could lose some weight

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *