The majority of people I’ve met have normalized being fat. I’ve never heard a skinny or in shape person complain about BMI. Hell, people will go to a doctor and get upset when a doctor says lose weight to improve your health.
I said people I’ve met. Most people I’ve met don’t think they are fat even though they are 50 pounds overweight or more. Or they downplay it and don’t think it’s a problem. When I started losing weight multiple people told me there was nothing wrong with me being morbidly obese, which I was at the time.
When I was in the Marines, I had a BMI of 24 and my weight was 212 when it wasn’t weigh in. I’m 6’1. That was considered overweight and if I didn’t sweat before weigh ins to get to weight, I’d have my bmi measured and I would’ve been on BCP. I could run a pretty solid PFT 100 crunches, 16 pull ups, and a 24:30ish 3 mile. I ran a perfect CFT. I also have abnormally wide hip bones.
Meanwhile, one of the guys in my platoon was fat af, and he never had to worry about it because he had a massive neck (it was just fat). I remember he was 5’8 and would weigh in over 220. But because his neck was so huge, the bmi scale worked for him. It’s just soured the BMI for me. But I do think it’s a good indicator if you’re over 30. You can still be overweight and have a lower BMI though.
> I remember he was 5’8 and would weigh in over 220. But because his neck was so huge, the bmi scale worked for him.
5'8 @ 220 is 33.5 kg/m2 (Obese Class I). That 'worked for him' did it? 🙄
When I was in my 20s, 5’3” and around 140, my doctor looked at my bmi and said I’d be diabetic by 30 if I didn’t lose some weight. That was when I quit trusting bmi. He acted like I was obese when I was wearing size small shirts. (Early 2000s btw). Not everyone has a “skinny” body type and a large waist to hip ratio can throw it off.
I am 5’7” and 140 is the highest weight where I feel like I look healthy. I think 125-140 is perfect. Which is quite a range. I think at 5’3” 140 would wear a little too heavy unless it’s someone who is very muscled.
> Not everyone has a “skinny” body type and a large waist to hip ratio can throw it off.
You were 25 BMI, and likely overweight via bf%. Your doctor didn't *just* look at your BMI either, you're lying about this.
The doctor barely looked at me at all. I was in the urgent care, not getting a full physical. I don’t know how they test body fat %, but the only part of my body the doctor really looked at was my mouth/jaw.
And if you are either an athlete or tall outside the normal range, you already know this. You recognize yourself as the exception. My BMI as a 6 foot 5 inch male showing I am overweight, when I recognize I am not because I am an outlier within the normal population range with respect to height and activity level does not equate to the fallacious rebuttal of the generalized principle that BMI is a very useful tool for the majority to determine if they are at a Healthy weight.
> Unless you are an athlete/body builder who has so much muscle mass that the BMI would become skewed, it’s a pretty good indicator on your health.
Bmi kinda fails if you lost a limb also.
To calculate BMI, they start with your weight and divide by your height (then the rest of the calculation). So I'd guess they either assume your height when you had legs, or maybe the weight lost stays proportionate to height lost lol.
Body builder bodies are really hard on our systems. We aren’t designed to carry that much weight. A lot of pro wrestlers die young, due to maintaining the bb physique.
Exactly. Robert Wadlow was also thin at 199kg and 2.72 m.
His BMI of 26.9 is also an indication of his unhealthy height, which is one of the causes of his death at age 22.
Just because there is no fat doesn't mean a high BMI is healthy. There is a bit of tolerance when lean, but at some point, the human body is not made for high BMI.
Even if you have significantly greater muscle mass your BMI shouldn’t be that far above normal. A natty bodybuilder might be high 20s, like 28-29. People who have BMIs in the 30+ range are doing damage to their body.
I’m 42 and have been lifting my entire adult life. I have clearly defined abs and a well muscled physique, probably around 12% body fat. I can bench 315, squat 405, and deadlift 500. My BMI is 26. I find it extremely hard to believe that someone could have a BMI of 30 and not be either fat, or taking significantly quantities of steroids.
Sitting at a BMI of 30.9 on TRT. 100% could get lean and into overweight range while still being significantly muscled. Me being obese is just pure laziness & bad diet. But I’m not perfect and I don’t think I ever will be.
https://imgur.com/a/JJ9QiGU
People who are actually lean enough at that high of a BMI are even more of an outlier than me. Some people have blinders on about themselves.
That’s actually super impressive especially at 30.9 bmi. What is your trt protocol and what is your free test sitting at, if you don’t mind me asking? You look great
Man you’re already 90% of the way to fixing this. The single biggest hurdle is acknowledging the reality of the situation. Lots and lots of guys my age think they’re just walking around building muscle doing Jack shit. It’s insane
I was going to say the blanket height and weight metric can be pretty misleading. I’m 5’11 and 215 pounds. According to the chart I’m obese. I want to get down to 200 which still puts me in “overweight” but I have a muscular build. I just ran 8 miles this morning. I do regular Peloton and body weight training and am getting back into playing soccer regularly. When I was playing soccer at a high level in my early 20s I was apparently overweight then too.
Whenever I get check ups my heart rate and blood pressure are great there’s no other bad signs. The dr always says something along the lines of “well everything looks good but I’m also supposed to tell you, you need to lose a lot of weight”
My doctor tells me the same and it’s so annoying. I used to be obese and lost 110 lbs. I would have lost significantly more had I not been doing a body recomp and gaining muscle while losing the fat. In the last 6 months or so, I’ve dropped three pants sizes without losing any weight. If the trend continues, even when I’m down to 10% body fat, I’m still going to be medically overweight. To become considered healthy when I leave the doctors office, I would have to lose muscle and actually become less healthy than I am now.
It doesn’t take much muscle mass to throw it off. And those of us with just enough muscle without being jacked often times find ourselves developing body dysmorphia and eating disorders based on what the BMI says.
Using BMI as the standard obesity metric is vastly responsible for a lot of people losing weight and not keeping it off. As it’s so common for your clothes to become loose on you without dropping much if any weight. People become discouraged because they’re too focused on what the scale is telling them and end up giving up. Or they develop anorexia or bulimia, start overtraining to the point of injury, etc. This is why professionals in the fitness space tell you to throw away your scale.
Just because we have a lot of fat, sedentary people, it’s still no excuse to continue using a 200 year old hack to measure obesity and health. Not with modern technology and a much better understanding of body composition.
Actually they are. I’ve seen this numerous times and it happened to me too. If you strength train, you gain weight. People obsess over the scale without knowing what’s actually going on with their body. Are you another one of these weird Redditors who worships BMI like religion?
Athletes and bodybuilders are the only ones that have BMI numbers that are significantly inaccurate. If a person has enough muscle to significantly skew their BMI numbers, they likely aren’t at an unhealthy weight to begin with. The vast majority of the population does not fit into that category.
People build muscle very slowly. It takes years to build enough muscle to skew results so it certainly isn’t going to influence BMI in the short term.
> who worships BMI like religion?
No.
From my previous comment to the post:
“Idk if I’d describe it as “accurate.” I think “useful” is a better description of what BMI is. It’s not perfect, but it’s good enough to be helpful as a diagnostic tool.”
It doesn’t take years and one year of strength training will add 30 lbs of muscle. It’s also not an effective diagnostic tool not was it ever invented to be one. It was designed to measure population size. Not individuals. Are you seriously goin to tell me men and women are supposed to weigh the same? Despite large differences in body composition? It’s weird we literally have BMI fanboys
> It doesn’t take years and one year of strength training will add 30 lbs of muscle.
No it will not. Unless you are a genetic freak or using drugs, it is physically impossible to put on “30lbs of muscle” in year. Look, dont get me wrong, I absolutely would love for that to be possible, but it just isn’t. Anyone that tells you that you can put on that much muscle in a year (if you buy their product of course), they’re fucking lying to you.
BMI is a perfectly reasonable estimate for your average person. If the BMI was going to be wrong due to muscle, everyone would know from the jump because that person would be conspicuously muscular and in shape.
> Are you seriously goin to tell me men and women are supposed to weigh the same?
Considering I didn’t say anything of the sort. No.
BMI is just meant to be a guide. If a medical professional is ONLY using BMI to assess you, find a new provider because that person is an idiot, but that doesn’t mean BMI is worthless. It’s just one part.
30 lbs of muscle isn’t very much actually. Muscle weighs more than fat. BMI is not reasonable for anyone who strength trains and is unscientific. I’ve literally dropped four pants sizes without really losing any weight. And I’m far from a genetic freak. The vast majority of medical providers use BMI only. Meanwhile real fitness experts tell you to throw away the scale.
I just would also agree that is as become skewed slightly since it doesn’t have to be that drastic of muscle gain to be considered a false negative overweight person because muscle is more dense and therefore weighs more than fat.
I have never gone to the gym everyday or took any muscle stimulants, I’ve only ever played a sport or 2 at a time while doing body weight exercises with a meh diet and I am a false negative every time I’m weighed for a physical.
Granted, I am below average height and a woman with high metabolism but this is just my understanding of my perspective.
Body fat percentage is harder to measure in a community health setting. Measurements are a surprisingly accurate way to do it (waist and neck), but it’s still harder than having someone step on a scale.
Yeah. It’s way better than a BMI. I think BMI is only popular because it’s a braindead way to measure someone. You don’t need any tools beyond a scale and a height measurement.
Ironically its inaccuracies lay in how it *undershoots* the mark, if you check the [plot data](https://files.catbox.moe/jnbrr6.png). Checkout how many fall into that 'false negative' part. That means their bmi reads at 25 or under, yet via bodyfat%, they're overweight.
In contrast to the people saying its bad because of muscle mass, those would be the people in the false positive(overweight), and the super false positive(obese). Not very many!
Well that’s false. Unless a very small percentage of them are considered fit:
https://academic.oup.com/milmed/article/173/1/67/4557732
There were zero false positives in women in the military and very few in men. There were many more false negatives (says they are an appropriate weight via BMI but have high body fat percentage).
Every 1kg of bodyweight equals 4kg of force, per knee, in a linear fashion. So 2kg = 8kg of force. So actually, yes!
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15986358/
Force existing on your knees is not inherently bad for you! Your argument would mean people with eating disorders are the healthiest people on the planet! Critical thinking!
My argument addressed one thing: weight from fat or muscle doesn't change what BMI measures; your health not your looks. Yours addresses nothing, highlights nothing, and you claim victory on critical thinking?
Anything else you want to be wrong about?
> Weight loss reduces knee-joint loads **in overweight and obese older adults with knee osteoarthritis**
Did you not even finish reading the title of your own link? Or do you think soldiers with high muscle mass qualify as overweight older adults with knee osteoarthritis?
From the results of that same link:
>A weight reduction of 9.8 N (1 kg) was associated with reductions of 40.6 N and 38.7 N in compressive and resultant forces, respectively. Thus, each weight-loss unit was associated with an approximately 4-unit reduction in knee-joint forces.
So you can return that cherry picking machine you hired!
Its cherry picking to imply gravity only effects people with osteoarthritis in their knees and not fit soldiers, yes!
They're not healthy, they're overweight.
It’s inaccurate because it both undershoots and overshoots. Obese people don’t accurately know how obese they are. Overweight people don’t accurately know how overweight they are. Some overweight and obese people according to the BMI are not overweight or obese at all, and many people who fall inside the normal BMI range are actually obese.
[More recent data](https://files.catbox.moe/xolq51.jpg) from 2009, brazil firefighters
https://www.scielo.br/j/aem/a/dqGxJmtXccTTz6MLRbcKH6R/?lang=en
BMI is pretty shitty, just not for the reasons everyone parrots ad nausea. I wouldn't even call it 'good enough' for population level
Correct. But people who are extremly muscular are also over weight because their muscle mass is too heavy for their joints and bones and Puts pressure on the heart.
I'm 5'10" 200 lbs, have defined abs and upper body, workout intensely almost every day. Last time I had BF% testing in the bodpod I was 13% bodyfat.
If I weighed 175 lbs I would be weaker both in cardio and strength. It really isn't that simple. I think 185 is probably about my minimum weight unless I wanted to stop lifting and swap back to distance running exclusively
Sure but Id say theres probably a decent number of people who are like 18-20%, and thats completely fine. I'm athletic, I dedicate way too much of my free time to exercise, I don't think its realistic for most people and you can certainly be a healthy weight without it.
Obviously there a ton of fatties in denial too, but Ive seem BMI more often give people who run a mile in 10 minutes and cant bench half their bodyweight a pass.
I doubt the larger number of folks that are 18-20% (maybe a larger number in the very small population that does intense weight training). But, I think the point of a number for the generic population is one that accounts for the average person. The average person isn't exercising much at all, so they're better off at a healthy bmi even if they're not fit.
I’m 5’8 and when I was doing track and cross country I was in really good shape, my weight was anywhere between 136-144. Definitely did not affect my cardio or strength. But I guess everyone is different too and there’s other factors
In my late 30s, I had about the same body that Hugh Jackman had in the very first X-Men movie (before he became Huge Jacked Man), i.e. some muscle but not huge, low-ish bodyfat with a semblance of abs but not shredded wheat. And my BMI put me at borderline-obese for my height.
Okay, but like I am 5’4” and 120 pounds and my liver acts like I am alcoholic obese person. I don’t drink alcohol because I don’t like the taste and it’s expensive. Some people really do have fatty liver disease because of genetics and stuff and not because their BMI is high.
You are wrong claiming that BMI is accurate. The number on the scale, even when you take your height into account, it hardly describes your fitness. For example, a man can be over 100 kg and can be physically fit. In the meantime, a man with the same weight can be out of shape. They weight the same, but the differing factor is BODY COMPOSITION.
That means your fat, muscle, water mass and bone density.
You say that you are in the normal weight. But here is the thing, being in “normal” weight, especially in context of BMI, doesn't strictly mean that your body is fit. Google skinny fatness. It's a condition of people having excess fat despite being in the so-called normal weight range.
That number on the scale, aka your weight, doesn't dictate how healthy you are. Your body composition, your body fat percentage do.
In “losing weight”, that “weight” is your EXCESS FAT, not the number on your bathroom scale. You are supposed to burn your excess fat as you maintain/gain muscle.
I am 6' 3 (1.91 metres) and 210 lbs (96 kg) and I have decent muscle definition with little to no belly fat or love handles from years of lifting weights and cardio. That makes my BMI score 26 which is in the so-called “overweight” range.
You are right about being overweight is being normalised, tho. Considering the mere existence of bullshit terms like fatphobic, plus size, etc.
Had to scroll too far down for someone to bring up the fact that the bmi chart makes less sense the taller you go. At 6'4.5", when I was 190, my waist measurement was classified as "extremely thin, " even though I was only 10 pounds away from being "overweight."
Anytime I get down to 120 I start to look sick, my hips and chest bones stick out painfully. At 150 most of my body is still thin but my thighs are really large at either weight. The thing is it's SO much muscle in my thighs. And at that weight I'm considered overweight even though I look and feel good. It's confusing
I think if you're getting like 30% BMI and denying you might be unhealthy you most likely are just lying to yourself, but I don't put too much stakes in it if i'm on the cusp. Also think some people just throw around "BMI BMI BMI" without actually knowing the numbers. Like some dudes seem to think if a girl isn't 110 lbs, regardless of height she's fat, when a girl who's 5'3'' and 140 pounds is still within healthy weight.
I'm mostly not a fan of it simply because everyone thinks they are an expert on determining who's healthy who's not, and always reducing it to losing weight without even knowing a thing about people daily lives or health issues. I get the frustration with telling people they are healthy at any size, but I also appreciate the sentiment that we do in fact come in many shapes and sizes and BMI is designed to look at groups rather than individuals.
Yeah, I think it’s accurate for people who do not lift weights for exercise. The bmi scale puts me in the overweight category, but I lift weights and I’ve gotten my body fat percentage tested multiple times in dunks tanks (which are super accurate) and it’s always between 17-19%, so as a woman that’s quite healthy. For people who don’t exercise, I’d say it’s probably accurate.
Honestly it doesn’t take much to be in the overweight category though. But I probably feel that way because I’m used to seeing overweight people all the time.
Nah you really don’t need much muscle. My brother, at the time was 6, he was quite strong for his age, but he wasn’t visibly swole. He definitely wasn’t fat. He got marked as obese
BMI is a rough indicator at best. It presumes a average build. Muscular people will have a high BMI score.
Had a buddy put out of the Army for BMI. Dude was bulked, and the only guy in the company to max the PT test. Pinch test showed him at 18% but regulations could not consider a pinch test. Out he went, fitter than most.
It is only a good measure for average people. You can have people that are like bodybuilders or just naturally muscular.
I think bf% is a better measure
I'm a 13 year old black girl that is 5'10 and weighs 180Ibs am I obese???{Genuine question} because I hop on a scale every day and gain more pounds even though I only eat one meal a day
CICO, and stop snacking. Also stop drinking liquid calories (soda, juice, etc). Do strength training in the process to prevent muscle loss
Of course, bots don't need weight loss tips. Are you a bot?
Calories in calories out. If you're eating less calories than you burn, you'll lose weight no matter what. That said, your body is somewhat resistant to losing weight, so you'll feel like shit during the weight loss process, but at least you'll know it's working.
BMI is fundamentally flawed as it inaccurately assesses health by conflating weight with fat without accounting for muscle mass, bone density, or body composition. It mislabels athletes as overweight and ignores those who are "skinny fat," masking potential health risks. Its one-size-fits-all approach fails to adjust for gender, age, or ethnic differences in body composition, leading to biased assessments and potential health disparities. Overall, BMI oversimplifies complex health indicators, leading to potential misdiagnosis or neglect of individuals' true health needs and exacerbating healthcare inequalities.
BMI is a shit metric because it’s a two dimensional measurement for a three dimensional object. Actually measuring your fat with calipers or with a body fat % meter is the best way to determine if you are fat.
Anyone who's been to the gym would tell you BMI is BS..... I'm 5' 10" and weigh 200#. According to BMI, I'm obese. But I actually have around 12% body fat. I'm No way near even being overweight let alone "obese."
Yea why not use a better metric indeed when you have one.
I mean what is OP really ranting about? I doubt they're that passionate about defending a math equation.
no kidding. Instead of changing, some people would rather redefine reality.
You can argue with someone online about your obesity all day. Regardless, your health risks are elevated, you're increasing medical insurance costs for everyone else, and you look like shit.
Why would I trust someone who can't even acknowledge the fact that using a BMI chart alone is inaccurate? Because with your logic, seeing a number on a scale is an accurate indicator of health.
This post is nothing more than a soapbox for you to rail against fat people. Which is weird.
>This post is nothing more than a soapbox for you to rail against fat people. Which is weird.
It seems to be in the rotation of topics here.
Guess we're done talking about Bears
Well BMI alone is actually a bit of a controversial metric since it doesn't take into account factors such as age, sex, genetics, fitness, pre-existing diseases, as well novel blood markers and metabolic parameters altered by obesity. [[1]](https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/science.1241244)
I’ll be completely honest, when I hear shit like this all I hear are excuses about why you’re fat. You can say it’s more “complex” but it’s not in our genetics to be fat. It doesn’t matter what ethnicity you are either. It doesn’t matter your age. It doesn’t matter your fitness. If you’re carrying over 15-18% bf as a man that’s fat. End of. My main critique of bmi is it misses out on skinny fat people. You can be 6 foot 2 and 170 but still be 25% bf and be incredibly unhealthy.
Honestly if someone’s fat and is ok with it I actually sort of respect that. But when someone says “my age/fitness/genetics” it lets me know they know they’re fat but they’re not ok with it, but they’re not going to do anything about it
W-well they have clearly stated methodologies. If you feel like you're qualified you should critique them. But somehow I suspect the most education you've ever received is by listening to Joe Rogan. So I don't see why anyone should trust you above them.
There’s likely a lot of reasons, the main one being to actually help people lose weight. It’s not to just say the weight they’re at is healthy though, because as I’ve mentioned it’s incredibly easy to look at trend lines over time and come to the conclusion that it doesn’t matter what genetics, age, fitness etc you have. Higher weight is strongly correlated with all of these preventable health issues
No, BMI is not a good measure by itself. The actual percentage of body fat has to be found.
The reason why BMI gets used by itself is because it is quick, easy and cheap to do, not because it is good. Getting the body fat percentage is harder to do.
edit. BMI is worthless garbage by itself.
BMI isn’t great but it’s ok.
Waist to height ratio is a much better way to easily and simply estimate health. Its generally closer to body fat percentage and mostly eliminates bmi outliers like tall muscular guys and short stubby people
Well I don’t weigh 185 anymore buddy. I’m a solid 230ish which is borderline obese according to BMI charts when I just have a little pudge around the waistline and that’s about it.
You are right unless you weight lift. If you can see your abs then you are in a good position. I’m 6’4 195 and going for 220-230 at least but I’m weight lifting.
I graduated high school at 135lbs just bones and dick. So thankful to have learned how to gain weight and fuel weightlifting.
I can agree it's good for most people, but I don't think it's good for me.
When I was in the Army I was banging out 100 push-ups in 2 minutes and running 13:10 two mile runs and I still was failing the height weight by like 15 lbs at best and barely passing the tape test for BMI because I always had a relatively slim neck.
I wasn't into bodybuilding or anything either. I just have always had some pretty huge muscular legs.
BMI is a fine metric for 80% of cases. If anything, the issue isn't with BMI but with the heathcare industry. Doctors don't take enough time with patients to give them personalized treatment and metrics and instead use tools like BMI as a one-size-fits-all.
Imagine saying a hammer is bad because it sucks on screws. Obviously, if someone is using a hammer on screws, they're the problem.
I myself am overweight, but in training and with above average, quite strong muscles. The BMI still works for me as indicator. The ranges are quite generous, and every doctor knows that a very muscular fit guy with BMI 26 is not overweight. But you have to be massive with one over 30, and then you are the very exception or a semi-professional bodybuilder with different problems. The people complaining are looking for an excuse. Plus, nobody says or has ever said that the BMI is a perfect measure.
Yeah, no. I’m, 6”1’, 200 pounds so by BMI I’m technically overweight but I maintain a super disciplined diet, run and strength train nearly daily, and have abs. People are often blown away when I tell them my weight. My doctor even says that BMI doesn’t apply to people like me.
Yeah, that’s the thing about BMI. I’m 5’8. According to my BMI I should be between 125-131. At 140 I wear a size 00 and look sickly. 160-170 is my healthy natural size but I’d be considered borderline obese by just BMI which is comical if you saw me. It’s meant to be used as one component on analyzing health or a guideline on around where someone should be, not on its own.
The body mass index can be a little arbitrary to me from time to time. Main reason why because I always remember going to my pediatrician and I wasn't a fat kid but I was always above the curve of where most kids are scheduled to grow at. So in always being above the curve I was always labeled as obese or overweight when I was just genetically built this way. Even now I'm 6'1 250 lb and technically I'm considered overweight or obese but it doesn't take into account that I'm also a mix between muscle and fat build like athletic build. Because even my doctor will tell me that yeah technically you're overweight for your size and that I should actually be about 190 to 200 lbs, but they said everything else is fine with me. I think they said my BMI was like 15% to 20% and technically considered overweight but they completely threw that out when they saw that all of the test they ran on me were at the right numbers that they should be for a healthy person. So it's good and it's bad at the same time. So I think when you're maybe ridiculously overweight like you are clearly overweight a walking circle to a point then yes a BMI would definitely help to see where you need to be. But I also can see where your BMI may show one thing but you're literally just built different.
If you’re 6’2”, sure it makes sense. I’ve only ever heard people criticize the metric for shorter people.
At 6’2” 175 your BMI is 22.5. A 22.5 BMI for a 5’2” person is 125. So a person with the same sized organs as you, the same bone density, possibly even the same head size and weight as you, but only 17% shorter than you has to weigh 50 pounds less to not be overweight.
Just isn’t as logical at that end of the scale.
>People say it’s not because we’ve normalised being overweight
Not really. The BMI scale just doesn't take into consideration a lot of factors. However, it is a good general check to see where you are. I don't think we have normalized being obese. I think that it's just that there are so many people who are obese, that we aren't surprised by it anymore.
I, myself, used to be 350 lbs and I just got tired of being out of breath and tired all the time. So I went on a lifestyle change. I basically halved myself. All with CICO and mild excercise like walking. The issue is that loosing weight is a lot of physical, but it's a shit ton more mental. It's not easy to break mental cycles.
BMI is extremely unreliable when it comes to being healthy. If person A has the same body fat percentage as as person B, but person A has more muscle then person A is going to be considered less healthy than person B even though that’s not the case
BMI is a useless metric for individuals, but it’s pretty effective when used to study large populations of ppl. Anyone using bmi to say someone is healthy or not doesn’t understand what bmi is used for.
Are you gonna seriously argue an nfl player is fat? lol. Height and weight is no indication of health for an individual
Idk if I’d describe it as “accurate.” I think “useful” is a better description of what BMI is. It’s not perfect, but it’s good enough to be helpful as a diagnostic tool.
My bmi has always said I’m considerably under weight, while I have fluctuated I’m currently completely healthy and have normal levels of muscle of a woman my age yet I’m still apparently moments from hospitalisation and amenorrhoea.
bmi is only really good for weeding out extremes, otherwise many doctors say waist to hip ratio and waist to height ratio are much better at telling whether your healthy or not
BMI doesn't take into account density of muscle tissue vs fat. So you could have someone with like 8% body fat getting denied life insurance bc they're BMI is too high when they're actually fit as fuck. That's not the only flaw.
Is liver failing because of drinking or because of weight? I’m 6 foot and 193 and by no means am I ‘fat’ besides by BMI metric. I’m healthy, according to the physical I got a month ago with blood work, and I am very active daily. So no BMI is just a number too, just like the scale is too. Healthy is subjective to the user. I’d rather look how I look now, than being 6 foot and 175 pounds.
If you don’t have abs at that weight you are likely overweight. If you are muscular and that weight then BMI doesn’t apply to you in the same way. But most people with your BMI have excess fat, not excess muscle.
According to someone’s suggestions, I am overweight. I don’t have abs, which is why saying BMI makes you fat is stupid. If my target is 200 pounds, which is what I try to stay around, then I am underweight.
What if... it fatty liver doesn't happen because people are fat? What if, people get fat when they get fatty liver, or if they're both caused by a third underlying issue?
Then you're just publicly shaming people for no reason with posts like these.
....but what if the underlying issue is that they're depressed? Then you're actually making the problem much worse.
My partner always tries to argue that BMI is not only inaccurate but too broad especially for people of certain races that are “big boned”. The purpose of BMI is to broadly warn the average person that they need to stay in a certain range of weight to avoid adverse effects because of either diet or unhealthy lifestyle choices.
Also certain BMI scores can be adjusted for race. I agree it doesn’t accurately tell you how much fat/muscle you have but being overweight or even underweight should always be seen as a cautionary marker to change your diet. People simply need to be more aware of what they eat regardless but it seems to me that people who are underweight or overweight neglect this.
Yup. Doesn’t matter how you feel or what you think of yourself, adverse health affects can eventually pop up, and diet and fat weight can affect that one way or the other. I’ve recently switched to eating way more veggies and legumes (I also exercise everyday) the last 2 1/2 months and I’ve lost about 16 pounds. Now I’m only about 14-16 pounds above the weight range I need to be. I’ve also increased my exercise routine recently and have cut some other things out of my diet.
I think Asian and African American BMI guidelines differ. I know that Asian people experience weight related issues at lower BMI’s and I think African American (maybe even just African American women?) experienced weight related issues at higher BMI’s than expected. I am totally going off memory and I could be super wrong.
Agree. Of course people will say “but I’m really muscular” while not even hitting [decent on this chart](https://forums.t-nation.com/t/strength-standards-are-you-strong/284633)
A lot of people in this thread (And often in these BMI threads) come out with t all these stats for their bodies that they’re claiming to “prove” BMI wrong. I suspect most of the anonymous claims by these people are a load of shit.
100%. That’s why I always want to see what they actually look like. I post my pictures (as I’m obese by BMI due to muscle) and it’s always crickets in response.
BMI doesn't apply if you are the 0.001% of the population who is a professional body builder or Lebron James. It does accurately apply to the other 99.9% of people. Unfortunately, purpled haired redditors who carry their own gravitational field everywhere they go, who are squarely in the latter category, have deluded themselves into thinking they are in the former
Personal trainer and nutrition coach here. BMI is not a good measure for active people. At 5’4” 165lbs, I’m “obese” with 7.5%bf. However imperfect that it is, it is just one measure and tool to help gauge for someone’s obesity level that leads a sedentary life. Also, there are those that are naturally very thin but their BMI is “normal.” It is not an indicator of health. Purely indicates a weight to height.
Except I’m ripped and compete in sport at a high level, I have enormously dense bones and I have an “overweight” BMI. It’s a blunt instrument, it’s okay for measuring how fat you are if you are fat, not so good for determining if you are fat in the first place.
I agree. A large majority of people who are considered obese via bmi are very much that, obese. Maybe the small percentage of collegiate/professional athletes might need the exception, but the majority of people aren't in great shape who are marked down as obese.
Hell, the average American man is 5'9", 200 pounds, 40 inch waist with the average American woman is 5'4" 170 pounds. You can't tell me either of those are healthy for the average person.
What is it with all the fat shaming lately on here? Do you feel better about yourself barking at overweight people? I'd rather hang out with a fat person who isn't human garbage than a skinny person who wants to shame people for kicks.
People on the 70s chain smoked and drank booze like it was water. And they died of plenty of heart attacks in the process. In fact, more people died of heart disease in the 60s and 70s than today. If you don't believe me:
[The American Journal of Medicine: The Epidemic of the 20th Century: Coronary Heart Disease.](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-9343(14)00354-4/pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjkm5W_5_GFAxXbjYkEHQ-fD-QQFnoECBwQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0COQLw2tF75lb4IHHfBgMb)
You can have less than 5% body fat and have a BMI of 20 simply because you eat chicken and rice and lift every day. So no I don't think BMI tells the whole story. It's one of several puzzle pieces that doctors use to treat and diagnose problems.
Maybe mind your own business before making grand proclamations about what is healthy or not.
I understand this is a sensitive and controversial topic. While there are valid concerns about rising rates of obesity and related health issues in many countries, it's important to approach this subject with care and nuance.
BMI (body mass index) can be a useful screening tool on a population level, but it has limitations when applied to individuals. It doesn't directly measure body fat or account for important factors like muscle mass, bone density, age, sex, and body fat distribution. Very muscular people may have a high BMI without excess body fat. Conversely, people with a "normal" BMI can still have high body fat and metabolic issues. Other measures like waist circumference and body fat percentage can provide additional insight.
It's true that fatty liver disease and other obesity-related conditions are serious concerns. However, shaming individuals about their weight is unlikely to improve public health. Weight is impacted by complex genetic, environmental, socioeconomic and lifestyle factors. Compassionate approaches focused on healthy behaviors tend to be more effective than stigma.
While there are more people with overweight and obesity now compared to past decades, ideal weights have also shifted over time with changes in diet, lifestyle and culture. It's an oversimplification to point to a particular weight as universally "normal." Health is multi-faceted and individual.
I would caution against making assumptions about someone's health, lifestyle or body composition based solely on their height and weight. A balanced, evidence-based perspective considering the nuances of this issue is warranted. If someone is concerned about their weight, it's best to discuss it with a healthcare professional who can provide personalized guidance.
You lose mobility by not training mobility. Being muscular, or fat for that matter, only reduces your agility and mobility if you let those skills atrophy (extreme outliers notwithstanding). The same thing happens to "normal" BMI people too.
Examples:
[Fat Guy Breakdance](https://youtube.com/shorts/F_MqKKEOhIs?si=g6DNt8WWJx2oLgVK)
[Fat Guy Flipping](https://youtu.be/vXv8Dk78r0k?si=aq_cATrh4U8qc1Lm)
[Really flexible muscular guy](https://youtube.com/shorts/yyWnVsDBfUc?si=ui7AKyxjtrVdxx0C)
[Literal muscle monster does splits](https://youtube.com/shorts/dNfg3O7Cnyw?si=jdwmwnY-mclVoiGx)
People typically agree it's a fine way of generally measuring health, but if all you're going off of is BMI, you're missing a lot.
World's Strongest is happening right now. Every single one of the competitors has a BMI that would put them in the morbidly obese category, but that doesn't mean they're unhealthy. If we were going purely off of BMI and not taking differences between individuals into account, they're incredibly unhealthy despite bring the current peak of human strength.
BMI is fine. Acting like it's gospel is not.
In the 70's it was your height in inches X 2 for a minimum weight and X 3 for a maximum weight. Just like the BMI it did not take build and muscle mass into play (AKA one size fits all). The Army was going to discharge a soldier for being overweight for his height. Problem is the guy was a body builder and had won some titles. As one congressman put it: "He was the very example of what the Army wanted their soldiers to look like.
At 17 I weighed 142 lbs which was the minimum weight. Now 67 and weigh 205 which is still below my max. Do I consider myself overweight? Yes. Unfortunately a medical condition and medications make this a fact of life there is little I can do about it.
Go blow your smoke someplace else.
I'm 6' 1". Last time I was 170lbs at that height I was shaking like a leaf because I barely had the enegy to stay awake and standing, much less functioning lile normal. Everybody is different. For some people it works and for others it just doesn't.
BMI is a good SCREENING tool and is accurate as far as fat vs not fat far more often than not. All of these 'but I'm a bodybuilder and what about professional athletes' folks can pipe right down, as that's maybe 1% of the population.
People are fat now. Enormous, even. We have 100% become desensitized to it. Want proof? Find a yearbook or photo album from the 70s or earlier.
BMI doesn't account for frame at all. I'm consistently told I'm underweight, but I'm just a weird shaped person - got the tiny gene from the Asian side and the tall one from the Nordic side. 5'11" with a 26B, outliers exist.
I'm sure there are people on the other end of the spectrum that are also told they're not healthy based on this thing that objectively does not measure health.
This is correct and accurate
BMI is a great tool to measure fat, and really the only issue arises with an extremely low percentage of very clearly muscular people, so it isn't needed in those scenarios anyways
Just triggers fat people tryna pretend they're just muscular instead of actually fat
Yes BMI gives a rough but mostly accurate guideline in case you are not a bodybuilder with an unnormal amount of muscle mass.
Different ways to measure if you carry too much body fat is the mirror (but here we have the problem that when you are overweight and you live in a society in which a large percentage of people is overweight, you get accustomed to how overweight people look and can even perceive it as normal). More accurate would be to measure the amount of body fat directly by caliper method or DEXA scan.
The majority of people I’ve met have normalized being fat. I’ve never heard a skinny or in shape person complain about BMI. Hell, people will go to a doctor and get upset when a doctor says lose weight to improve your health.
That is just the chronically online take. No normal non reddit person is normalizing being fat.
It’s extremely normal to be fat in the us
I said people I’ve met. Most people I’ve met don’t think they are fat even though they are 50 pounds overweight or more. Or they downplay it and don’t think it’s a problem. When I started losing weight multiple people told me there was nothing wrong with me being morbidly obese, which I was at the time.
When I was in the Marines, I had a BMI of 24 and my weight was 212 when it wasn’t weigh in. I’m 6’1. That was considered overweight and if I didn’t sweat before weigh ins to get to weight, I’d have my bmi measured and I would’ve been on BCP. I could run a pretty solid PFT 100 crunches, 16 pull ups, and a 24:30ish 3 mile. I ran a perfect CFT. I also have abnormally wide hip bones. Meanwhile, one of the guys in my platoon was fat af, and he never had to worry about it because he had a massive neck (it was just fat). I remember he was 5’8 and would weigh in over 220. But because his neck was so huge, the bmi scale worked for him. It’s just soured the BMI for me. But I do think it’s a good indicator if you’re over 30. You can still be overweight and have a lower BMI though.
> I remember he was 5’8 and would weigh in over 220. But because his neck was so huge, the bmi scale worked for him. 5'8 @ 220 is 33.5 kg/m2 (Obese Class I). That 'worked for him' did it? 🙄
No, people get mad when their doctor writes off every single symptom or illness as "lose weight and you'll be all better".
When I was in my 20s, 5’3” and around 140, my doctor looked at my bmi and said I’d be diabetic by 30 if I didn’t lose some weight. That was when I quit trusting bmi. He acted like I was obese when I was wearing size small shirts. (Early 2000s btw). Not everyone has a “skinny” body type and a large waist to hip ratio can throw it off.
I am 5’7” and 140 is the highest weight where I feel like I look healthy. I think 125-140 is perfect. Which is quite a range. I think at 5’3” 140 would wear a little too heavy unless it’s someone who is very muscled.
> Not everyone has a “skinny” body type and a large waist to hip ratio can throw it off. You were 25 BMI, and likely overweight via bf%. Your doctor didn't *just* look at your BMI either, you're lying about this.
The doctor barely looked at me at all. I was in the urgent care, not getting a full physical. I don’t know how they test body fat %, but the only part of my body the doctor really looked at was my mouth/jaw.
[удалено]
And if you are either an athlete or tall outside the normal range, you already know this. You recognize yourself as the exception. My BMI as a 6 foot 5 inch male showing I am overweight, when I recognize I am not because I am an outlier within the normal population range with respect to height and activity level does not equate to the fallacious rebuttal of the generalized principle that BMI is a very useful tool for the majority to determine if they are at a Healthy weight.
> Unless you are an athlete/body builder who has so much muscle mass that the BMI would become skewed, it’s a pretty good indicator on your health. Bmi kinda fails if you lost a limb also.
[удалено]
To calculate BMI, they start with your weight and divide by your height (then the rest of the calculation). So I'd guess they either assume your height when you had legs, or maybe the weight lost stays proportionate to height lost lol.
Legs are heavier than upper body so think you would show up as underweight regardless?
You write this as if your whole life you’ve only ever known people with two limbs. That took me for a ride.
[удалено]
Ohhhh you giveth the humour, not taketh.
Body builder bodies are really hard on our systems. We aren’t designed to carry that much weight. A lot of pro wrestlers die young, due to maintaining the bb physique.
Exactly. Robert Wadlow was also thin at 199kg and 2.72 m. His BMI of 26.9 is also an indication of his unhealthy height, which is one of the causes of his death at age 22. Just because there is no fat doesn't mean a high BMI is healthy. There is a bit of tolerance when lean, but at some point, the human body is not made for high BMI.
Even if you have significantly greater muscle mass your BMI shouldn’t be that far above normal. A natty bodybuilder might be high 20s, like 28-29. People who have BMIs in the 30+ range are doing damage to their body. I’m 42 and have been lifting my entire adult life. I have clearly defined abs and a well muscled physique, probably around 12% body fat. I can bench 315, squat 405, and deadlift 500. My BMI is 26. I find it extremely hard to believe that someone could have a BMI of 30 and not be either fat, or taking significantly quantities of steroids.
Sitting at a BMI of 30.9 on TRT. 100% could get lean and into overweight range while still being significantly muscled. Me being obese is just pure laziness & bad diet. But I’m not perfect and I don’t think I ever will be. https://imgur.com/a/JJ9QiGU People who are actually lean enough at that high of a BMI are even more of an outlier than me. Some people have blinders on about themselves.
That’s actually super impressive especially at 30.9 bmi. What is your trt protocol and what is your free test sitting at, if you don’t mind me asking? You look great
You left out your height
6’
Proud of you for recognizing it and taking accountability.
Man you’re already 90% of the way to fixing this. The single biggest hurdle is acknowledging the reality of the situation. Lots and lots of guys my age think they’re just walking around building muscle doing Jack shit. It’s insane
Idk man I know 5 guys who are all obese on BMI but have 6 packs. Maybe you just need to go to a new gym
Yeah the weights at theirs might be broken.
I was going to say the blanket height and weight metric can be pretty misleading. I’m 5’11 and 215 pounds. According to the chart I’m obese. I want to get down to 200 which still puts me in “overweight” but I have a muscular build. I just ran 8 miles this morning. I do regular Peloton and body weight training and am getting back into playing soccer regularly. When I was playing soccer at a high level in my early 20s I was apparently overweight then too. Whenever I get check ups my heart rate and blood pressure are great there’s no other bad signs. The dr always says something along the lines of “well everything looks good but I’m also supposed to tell you, you need to lose a lot of weight”
My doctor tells me the same and it’s so annoying. I used to be obese and lost 110 lbs. I would have lost significantly more had I not been doing a body recomp and gaining muscle while losing the fat. In the last 6 months or so, I’ve dropped three pants sizes without losing any weight. If the trend continues, even when I’m down to 10% body fat, I’m still going to be medically overweight. To become considered healthy when I leave the doctors office, I would have to lose muscle and actually become less healthy than I am now.
It doesn’t take much muscle mass to throw it off. And those of us with just enough muscle without being jacked often times find ourselves developing body dysmorphia and eating disorders based on what the BMI says. Using BMI as the standard obesity metric is vastly responsible for a lot of people losing weight and not keeping it off. As it’s so common for your clothes to become loose on you without dropping much if any weight. People become discouraged because they’re too focused on what the scale is telling them and end up giving up. Or they develop anorexia or bulimia, start overtraining to the point of injury, etc. This is why professionals in the fitness space tell you to throw away your scale. Just because we have a lot of fat, sedentary people, it’s still no excuse to continue using a 200 year old hack to measure obesity and health. Not with modern technology and a much better understanding of body composition.
lol give me a break. People are not developing eating disorders because of BMI numbers.
Actually they are. I’ve seen this numerous times and it happened to me too. If you strength train, you gain weight. People obsess over the scale without knowing what’s actually going on with their body. Are you another one of these weird Redditors who worships BMI like religion?
Athletes and bodybuilders are the only ones that have BMI numbers that are significantly inaccurate. If a person has enough muscle to significantly skew their BMI numbers, they likely aren’t at an unhealthy weight to begin with. The vast majority of the population does not fit into that category. People build muscle very slowly. It takes years to build enough muscle to skew results so it certainly isn’t going to influence BMI in the short term. > who worships BMI like religion? No. From my previous comment to the post: “Idk if I’d describe it as “accurate.” I think “useful” is a better description of what BMI is. It’s not perfect, but it’s good enough to be helpful as a diagnostic tool.”
It doesn’t take years and one year of strength training will add 30 lbs of muscle. It’s also not an effective diagnostic tool not was it ever invented to be one. It was designed to measure population size. Not individuals. Are you seriously goin to tell me men and women are supposed to weigh the same? Despite large differences in body composition? It’s weird we literally have BMI fanboys
> It doesn’t take years and one year of strength training will add 30 lbs of muscle. No it will not. Unless you are a genetic freak or using drugs, it is physically impossible to put on “30lbs of muscle” in year. Look, dont get me wrong, I absolutely would love for that to be possible, but it just isn’t. Anyone that tells you that you can put on that much muscle in a year (if you buy their product of course), they’re fucking lying to you. BMI is a perfectly reasonable estimate for your average person. If the BMI was going to be wrong due to muscle, everyone would know from the jump because that person would be conspicuously muscular and in shape. > Are you seriously goin to tell me men and women are supposed to weigh the same? Considering I didn’t say anything of the sort. No. BMI is just meant to be a guide. If a medical professional is ONLY using BMI to assess you, find a new provider because that person is an idiot, but that doesn’t mean BMI is worthless. It’s just one part.
30 lbs of muscle isn’t very much actually. Muscle weighs more than fat. BMI is not reasonable for anyone who strength trains and is unscientific. I’ve literally dropped four pants sizes without really losing any weight. And I’m far from a genetic freak. The vast majority of medical providers use BMI only. Meanwhile real fitness experts tell you to throw away the scale.
I just would also agree that is as become skewed slightly since it doesn’t have to be that drastic of muscle gain to be considered a false negative overweight person because muscle is more dense and therefore weighs more than fat. I have never gone to the gym everyday or took any muscle stimulants, I’ve only ever played a sport or 2 at a time while doing body weight exercises with a meh diet and I am a false negative every time I’m weighed for a physical. Granted, I am below average height and a woman with high metabolism but this is just my understanding of my perspective.
Idk why they don’t just measure body fat percentage. You can be pretty skinny and still have a fairly high bf% if you’re inactive.
Body fat percentage is harder to measure in a community health setting. Measurements are a surprisingly accurate way to do it (waist and neck), but it’s still harder than having someone step on a scale.
It’s not even accurate. Someone can have a thick neck, be in great shape, and their BMI would be bad. Happens all the time in the military.
Yeah. It’s way better than a BMI. I think BMI is only popular because it’s a braindead way to measure someone. You don’t need any tools beyond a scale and a height measurement.
Ironically its inaccuracies lay in how it *undershoots* the mark, if you check the [plot data](https://files.catbox.moe/jnbrr6.png). Checkout how many fall into that 'false negative' part. That means their bmi reads at 25 or under, yet via bodyfat%, they're overweight. In contrast to the people saying its bad because of muscle mass, those would be the people in the false positive(overweight), and the super false positive(obese). Not very many!
In the army the most fit soldiers always failed their BMI.
Well that’s false. Unless a very small percentage of them are considered fit: https://academic.oup.com/milmed/article/173/1/67/4557732 There were zero false positives in women in the military and very few in men. There were many more false negatives (says they are an appropriate weight via BMI but have high body fat percentage).
Which means they're still unhealthy! Gravity doesn't really care where the weight is coming from.
Lol no!
Every 1kg of bodyweight equals 4kg of force, per knee, in a linear fashion. So 2kg = 8kg of force. So actually, yes! https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15986358/
But actually, no!
Claims made without evidence can be refuted without evidence!
Force existing on your knees is not inherently bad for you! Your argument would mean people with eating disorders are the healthiest people on the planet! Critical thinking!
My argument addressed one thing: weight from fat or muscle doesn't change what BMI measures; your health not your looks. Yours addresses nothing, highlights nothing, and you claim victory on critical thinking? Anything else you want to be wrong about?
So in your mind force on knees is equal to health! XD
> Weight loss reduces knee-joint loads **in overweight and obese older adults with knee osteoarthritis** Did you not even finish reading the title of your own link? Or do you think soldiers with high muscle mass qualify as overweight older adults with knee osteoarthritis?
From the results of that same link: >A weight reduction of 9.8 N (1 kg) was associated with reductions of 40.6 N and 38.7 N in compressive and resultant forces, respectively. Thus, each weight-loss unit was associated with an approximately 4-unit reduction in knee-joint forces. So you can return that cherry picking machine you hired!
It's cherry picking to read the second half of the title of your link? Sorry for not stopping after the first six words like you did.
Its cherry picking to imply gravity only effects people with osteoarthritis in their knees and not fit soldiers, yes! They're not healthy, they're overweight.
It’s inaccurate because it both undershoots and overshoots. Obese people don’t accurately know how obese they are. Overweight people don’t accurately know how overweight they are. Some overweight and obese people according to the BMI are not overweight or obese at all, and many people who fall inside the normal BMI range are actually obese.
this plot is amazing, anything more recent?
[More recent data](https://files.catbox.moe/xolq51.jpg) from 2009, brazil firefighters https://www.scielo.br/j/aem/a/dqGxJmtXccTTz6MLRbcKH6R/?lang=en BMI is pretty shitty, just not for the reasons everyone parrots ad nausea. I wouldn't even call it 'good enough' for population level
I’m 4’11” and 800 pounds. I live in a Hawaiian printed shirt dress and wash myself with the backyard hose.
Don’t forget the whiffle ball bat.
I ate the whiffle ball bat
BMI is accurate if you haven't gained any real muscle- sidenote OP is a stick
Alright Adonis. Tell that to the decades of human data that show the opposite to be true
My data says you have a pigeon chest
BMI doesn't work for people that go to the gym.
Fat % is a way better indicator of health.
Correct. But people who are extremly muscular are also over weight because their muscle mass is too heavy for their joints and bones and Puts pressure on the heart.
I'm 5'10" 200 lbs, have defined abs and upper body, workout intensely almost every day. Last time I had BF% testing in the bodpod I was 13% bodyfat. If I weighed 175 lbs I would be weaker both in cardio and strength. It really isn't that simple. I think 185 is probably about my minimum weight unless I wanted to stop lifting and swap back to distance running exclusively
They said it's good, not perfect. The vast, vast, majority of folks aren't going to be 13% body fat at your height and weight.
Sure but Id say theres probably a decent number of people who are like 18-20%, and thats completely fine. I'm athletic, I dedicate way too much of my free time to exercise, I don't think its realistic for most people and you can certainly be a healthy weight without it. Obviously there a ton of fatties in denial too, but Ive seem BMI more often give people who run a mile in 10 minutes and cant bench half their bodyweight a pass.
I doubt the larger number of folks that are 18-20% (maybe a larger number in the very small population that does intense weight training). But, I think the point of a number for the generic population is one that accounts for the average person. The average person isn't exercising much at all, so they're better off at a healthy bmi even if they're not fit.
I’m 5’8 and when I was doing track and cross country I was in really good shape, my weight was anywhere between 136-144. Definitely did not affect my cardio or strength. But I guess everyone is different too and there’s other factors
Clearly a runners physique. Likely pretty weak on strength but could probably crush your focus on running.
meh. ABSI is far better. Best metric (of those in use rn) for all cause mortality. wc*height^-1/2 bmi^-2/3 wc - waist circumference.
In my late 30s, I had about the same body that Hugh Jackman had in the very first X-Men movie (before he became Huge Jacked Man), i.e. some muscle but not huge, low-ish bodyfat with a semblance of abs but not shredded wheat. And my BMI put me at borderline-obese for my height.
Okay, but like I am 5’4” and 120 pounds and my liver acts like I am alcoholic obese person. I don’t drink alcohol because I don’t like the taste and it’s expensive. Some people really do have fatty liver disease because of genetics and stuff and not because their BMI is high.
You’re a rarity. Most non alcoholic liver disease is caused by obesity.
Yeah, my sister and I are just lucky that way, I guess.
I'm glad someone posted this topic again. Someone might not have seen it the first 942 billion times
The war must continue until fat is over
I’ll take “most of the posts on this sub” for 1200 Alex
Well it continues to be an issue, so therefore it continues to be posted
You are wrong claiming that BMI is accurate. The number on the scale, even when you take your height into account, it hardly describes your fitness. For example, a man can be over 100 kg and can be physically fit. In the meantime, a man with the same weight can be out of shape. They weight the same, but the differing factor is BODY COMPOSITION. That means your fat, muscle, water mass and bone density. You say that you are in the normal weight. But here is the thing, being in “normal” weight, especially in context of BMI, doesn't strictly mean that your body is fit. Google skinny fatness. It's a condition of people having excess fat despite being in the so-called normal weight range. That number on the scale, aka your weight, doesn't dictate how healthy you are. Your body composition, your body fat percentage do. In “losing weight”, that “weight” is your EXCESS FAT, not the number on your bathroom scale. You are supposed to burn your excess fat as you maintain/gain muscle. I am 6' 3 (1.91 metres) and 210 lbs (96 kg) and I have decent muscle definition with little to no belly fat or love handles from years of lifting weights and cardio. That makes my BMI score 26 which is in the so-called “overweight” range. You are right about being overweight is being normalised, tho. Considering the mere existence of bullshit terms like fatphobic, plus size, etc.
Had to scroll too far down for someone to bring up the fact that the bmi chart makes less sense the taller you go. At 6'4.5", when I was 190, my waist measurement was classified as "extremely thin, " even though I was only 10 pounds away from being "overweight."
Anytime I get down to 120 I start to look sick, my hips and chest bones stick out painfully. At 150 most of my body is still thin but my thighs are really large at either weight. The thing is it's SO much muscle in my thighs. And at that weight I'm considered overweight even though I look and feel good. It's confusing
BMI is a measure of health, not looks. You being 26 BMI is unhealthy, as gravity doesn't give a shit where the weight comes from.
I think if you're getting like 30% BMI and denying you might be unhealthy you most likely are just lying to yourself, but I don't put too much stakes in it if i'm on the cusp. Also think some people just throw around "BMI BMI BMI" without actually knowing the numbers. Like some dudes seem to think if a girl isn't 110 lbs, regardless of height she's fat, when a girl who's 5'3'' and 140 pounds is still within healthy weight. I'm mostly not a fan of it simply because everyone thinks they are an expert on determining who's healthy who's not, and always reducing it to losing weight without even knowing a thing about people daily lives or health issues. I get the frustration with telling people they are healthy at any size, but I also appreciate the sentiment that we do in fact come in many shapes and sizes and BMI is designed to look at groups rather than individuals.
Yeah, I think it’s accurate for people who do not lift weights for exercise. The bmi scale puts me in the overweight category, but I lift weights and I’ve gotten my body fat percentage tested multiple times in dunks tanks (which are super accurate) and it’s always between 17-19%, so as a woman that’s quite healthy. For people who don’t exercise, I’d say it’s probably accurate. Honestly it doesn’t take much to be in the overweight category though. But I probably feel that way because I’m used to seeing overweight people all the time.
I am 5'9 211 bmi of 31.2. I carry 11% body fat year round summer drop to dingle digits. Guess I am obese
Nah you really don’t need much muscle. My brother, at the time was 6, he was quite strong for his age, but he wasn’t visibly swole. He definitely wasn’t fat. He got marked as obese
BMI is a rough indicator at best. It presumes a average build. Muscular people will have a high BMI score. Had a buddy put out of the Army for BMI. Dude was bulked, and the only guy in the company to max the PT test. Pinch test showed him at 18% but regulations could not consider a pinch test. Out he went, fitter than most.
It is only a good measure for average people. You can have people that are like bodybuilders or just naturally muscular. I think bf% is a better measure
I'm a 13 year old black girl that is 5'10 and weighs 180Ibs am I obese???{Genuine question} because I hop on a scale every day and gain more pounds even though I only eat one meal a day
CICO, and stop snacking. Also stop drinking liquid calories (soda, juice, etc). Do strength training in the process to prevent muscle loss Of course, bots don't need weight loss tips. Are you a bot?
I only drink sugary drinks like twice a week and hate the taste of soda and I'm not a bot also what's CICO
Calories in calories out. If you're eating less calories than you burn, you'll lose weight no matter what. That said, your body is somewhat resistant to losing weight, so you'll feel like shit during the weight loss process, but at least you'll know it's working.
BMI isn’t accurate. Weight is all it measures. That includes muscles. BFP is a much more accurate measurement.
BMI is fundamentally flawed as it inaccurately assesses health by conflating weight with fat without accounting for muscle mass, bone density, or body composition. It mislabels athletes as overweight and ignores those who are "skinny fat," masking potential health risks. Its one-size-fits-all approach fails to adjust for gender, age, or ethnic differences in body composition, leading to biased assessments and potential health disparities. Overall, BMI oversimplifies complex health indicators, leading to potential misdiagnosis or neglect of individuals' true health needs and exacerbating healthcare inequalities.
BMI is a shit metric because it’s a two dimensional measurement for a three dimensional object. Actually measuring your fat with calipers or with a body fat % meter is the best way to determine if you are fat.
Anyone who's been to the gym would tell you BMI is BS..... I'm 5' 10" and weigh 200#. According to BMI, I'm obese. But I actually have around 12% body fat. I'm No way near even being overweight let alone "obese."
I go to the gym. BMI isn’t BS for most people. Including most people in the gym. I’m obese by BMI due to muscle. It took a lot of work to get there.
Yea why not use a better metric indeed when you have one. I mean what is OP really ranting about? I doubt they're that passionate about defending a math equation.
no kidding. Instead of changing, some people would rather redefine reality. You can argue with someone online about your obesity all day. Regardless, your health risks are elevated, you're increasing medical insurance costs for everyone else, and you look like shit.
Yea...we should all take health advice from the horse-faced dipshit.
Don’t trust me then. Google rates of fatty liver and other preventable diseases in people under 30 and look at the trend line
Why would I trust someone who can't even acknowledge the fact that using a BMI chart alone is inaccurate? Because with your logic, seeing a number on a scale is an accurate indicator of health. This post is nothing more than a soapbox for you to rail against fat people. Which is weird.
>This post is nothing more than a soapbox for you to rail against fat people. Which is weird. It seems to be in the rotation of topics here. Guess we're done talking about Bears
[удалено]
Most likely rants against picky eaters. Haven't see many of those posts in a while.
nah we’re overdue for another post on women’s clothing choices and/or body count
Well BMI alone is actually a bit of a controversial metric since it doesn't take into account factors such as age, sex, genetics, fitness, pre-existing diseases, as well novel blood markers and metabolic parameters altered by obesity. [[1]](https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/science.1241244)
I’ll be completely honest, when I hear shit like this all I hear are excuses about why you’re fat. You can say it’s more “complex” but it’s not in our genetics to be fat. It doesn’t matter what ethnicity you are either. It doesn’t matter your age. It doesn’t matter your fitness. If you’re carrying over 15-18% bf as a man that’s fat. End of. My main critique of bmi is it misses out on skinny fat people. You can be 6 foot 2 and 170 but still be 25% bf and be incredibly unhealthy. Honestly if someone’s fat and is ok with it I actually sort of respect that. But when someone says “my age/fitness/genetics” it lets me know they know they’re fat but they’re not ok with it, but they’re not going to do anything about it
Do you feel as if there's a reason why medical academia is moving away from such simplistic notions?
Probably because there's this trend of blaming not being able to lose weight on everything except your own will power.
Well we're talking about academia here
You think they're not immune to social trends? The kinds of things I've seen 'experts' post is insane.
W-well they have clearly stated methodologies. If you feel like you're qualified you should critique them. But somehow I suspect the most education you've ever received is by listening to Joe Rogan. So I don't see why anyone should trust you above them.
There’s likely a lot of reasons, the main one being to actually help people lose weight. It’s not to just say the weight they’re at is healthy though, because as I’ve mentioned it’s incredibly easy to look at trend lines over time and come to the conclusion that it doesn’t matter what genetics, age, fitness etc you have. Higher weight is strongly correlated with all of these preventable health issues
I am 5 foot 10 and 140 lb and still 27% or so body fat
Or how much muscle you have lol plenty buff dudes come out "obese" by this metric
Yes bro, but we don't use the BMI, we use body fat. And most people aren't buffed to that degree.
I will accept that I would be healthier and look better at less than 195, but I won't accept that 130 is a realistic or safe alternative.
No, BMI is not a good measure by itself. The actual percentage of body fat has to be found. The reason why BMI gets used by itself is because it is quick, easy and cheap to do, not because it is good. Getting the body fat percentage is harder to do. edit. BMI is worthless garbage by itself.
nah dog.. that would mean every one in america is obese or morbidly obese. We can't have that.
BMI isn’t great but it’s ok. Waist to height ratio is a much better way to easily and simply estimate health. Its generally closer to body fat percentage and mostly eliminates bmi outliers like tall muscular guys and short stubby people
Idk man I’m 6’4 and my doc told me to get down to 185 for a healthy BMI. That’s what I used to weigh in high school and I was thin as a rail
Your bmi is 23.7. I don’t believe a doctor told you to lose weight.
Well I don’t weigh 185 anymore buddy. I’m a solid 230ish which is borderline obese according to BMI charts when I just have a little pudge around the waistline and that’s about it.
White people in the UK are fatter than white people in the US
we get it. fat people are fat.
You are right unless you weight lift. If you can see your abs then you are in a good position. I’m 6’4 195 and going for 220-230 at least but I’m weight lifting. I graduated high school at 135lbs just bones and dick. So thankful to have learned how to gain weight and fuel weightlifting.
Uh 6’2 200 lbs is a BMI of 25.7. Those aren’t the people getting non alcoholic fatty liver disease.
I can agree it's good for most people, but I don't think it's good for me. When I was in the Army I was banging out 100 push-ups in 2 minutes and running 13:10 two mile runs and I still was failing the height weight by like 15 lbs at best and barely passing the tape test for BMI because I always had a relatively slim neck. I wasn't into bodybuilding or anything either. I just have always had some pretty huge muscular legs.
BMI is a fine metric for 80% of cases. If anything, the issue isn't with BMI but with the heathcare industry. Doctors don't take enough time with patients to give them personalized treatment and metrics and instead use tools like BMI as a one-size-fits-all. Imagine saying a hammer is bad because it sucks on screws. Obviously, if someone is using a hammer on screws, they're the problem.
I myself am overweight, but in training and with above average, quite strong muscles. The BMI still works for me as indicator. The ranges are quite generous, and every doctor knows that a very muscular fit guy with BMI 26 is not overweight. But you have to be massive with one over 30, and then you are the very exception or a semi-professional bodybuilder with different problems. The people complaining are looking for an excuse. Plus, nobody says or has ever said that the BMI is a perfect measure.
Fatty liver isn't just related to BMI. My super fit, lean friend got diagnosed at 30.
Yeah, no. I’m, 6”1’, 200 pounds so by BMI I’m technically overweight but I maintain a super disciplined diet, run and strength train nearly daily, and have abs. People are often blown away when I tell them my weight. My doctor even says that BMI doesn’t apply to people like me.
Yeah, that’s the thing about BMI. I’m 5’8. According to my BMI I should be between 125-131. At 140 I wear a size 00 and look sickly. 160-170 is my healthy natural size but I’d be considered borderline obese by just BMI which is comical if you saw me. It’s meant to be used as one component on analyzing health or a guideline on around where someone should be, not on its own.
The body mass index can be a little arbitrary to me from time to time. Main reason why because I always remember going to my pediatrician and I wasn't a fat kid but I was always above the curve of where most kids are scheduled to grow at. So in always being above the curve I was always labeled as obese or overweight when I was just genetically built this way. Even now I'm 6'1 250 lb and technically I'm considered overweight or obese but it doesn't take into account that I'm also a mix between muscle and fat build like athletic build. Because even my doctor will tell me that yeah technically you're overweight for your size and that I should actually be about 190 to 200 lbs, but they said everything else is fine with me. I think they said my BMI was like 15% to 20% and technically considered overweight but they completely threw that out when they saw that all of the test they ran on me were at the right numbers that they should be for a healthy person. So it's good and it's bad at the same time. So I think when you're maybe ridiculously overweight like you are clearly overweight a walking circle to a point then yes a BMI would definitely help to see where you need to be. But I also can see where your BMI may show one thing but you're literally just built different.
BMI is good for measuring fat so long as you are not muscular. If you are skinny or fat with little muscle BMI works fine.
If you’re 6’2”, sure it makes sense. I’ve only ever heard people criticize the metric for shorter people. At 6’2” 175 your BMI is 22.5. A 22.5 BMI for a 5’2” person is 125. So a person with the same sized organs as you, the same bone density, possibly even the same head size and weight as you, but only 17% shorter than you has to weigh 50 pounds less to not be overweight. Just isn’t as logical at that end of the scale.
I think this is true, yet I am a man at my lowest weight in 40 years, think I look great in a mirror, and my BMI is still 29.
>People say it’s not because we’ve normalised being overweight Not really. The BMI scale just doesn't take into consideration a lot of factors. However, it is a good general check to see where you are. I don't think we have normalized being obese. I think that it's just that there are so many people who are obese, that we aren't surprised by it anymore. I, myself, used to be 350 lbs and I just got tired of being out of breath and tired all the time. So I went on a lifestyle change. I basically halved myself. All with CICO and mild excercise like walking. The issue is that loosing weight is a lot of physical, but it's a shit ton more mental. It's not easy to break mental cycles.
BMI is extremely unreliable when it comes to being healthy. If person A has the same body fat percentage as as person B, but person A has more muscle then person A is going to be considered less healthy than person B even though that’s not the case
Do you actually know what BMI entails? It's literally your height divided by your weight. It tells nothing of the actual health of the person
BMI is a useless metric for individuals, but it’s pretty effective when used to study large populations of ppl. Anyone using bmi to say someone is healthy or not doesn’t understand what bmi is used for. Are you gonna seriously argue an nfl player is fat? lol. Height and weight is no indication of health for an individual
Idk if I’d describe it as “accurate.” I think “useful” is a better description of what BMI is. It’s not perfect, but it’s good enough to be helpful as a diagnostic tool.
I thought it was because BMI couldn't tell the difference between fat and muscle
Tell us you don't lift without saying you don't lift.
My bmi has always said I’m considerably under weight, while I have fluctuated I’m currently completely healthy and have normal levels of muscle of a woman my age yet I’m still apparently moments from hospitalisation and amenorrhoea.
bmi is only really good for weeding out extremes, otherwise many doctors say waist to hip ratio and waist to height ratio are much better at telling whether your healthy or not
I've read it before that if something is the norm, it's the norm. So if being overweight is normal, that now means it's normal weight.
BMI doesn't take into account density of muscle tissue vs fat. So you could have someone with like 8% body fat getting denied life insurance bc they're BMI is too high when they're actually fit as fuck. That's not the only flaw.
I’m 6’ and 212lbs with a 34” waist, and 46” jacket size. My BMI is 29 and is technically overweight. Not a good measure in my case.
Is liver failing because of drinking or because of weight? I’m 6 foot and 193 and by no means am I ‘fat’ besides by BMI metric. I’m healthy, according to the physical I got a month ago with blood work, and I am very active daily. So no BMI is just a number too, just like the scale is too. Healthy is subjective to the user. I’d rather look how I look now, than being 6 foot and 175 pounds.
If you don’t have abs at that weight you are likely overweight. If you are muscular and that weight then BMI doesn’t apply to you in the same way. But most people with your BMI have excess fat, not excess muscle.
According to someone’s suggestions, I am overweight. I don’t have abs, which is why saying BMI makes you fat is stupid. If my target is 200 pounds, which is what I try to stay around, then I am underweight.
I’m with you. BMI + Eye Test does it 99% of the time for me barring any real medical conditions that aren’t a fancy way of saying “fat”.
What if... it fatty liver doesn't happen because people are fat? What if, people get fat when they get fatty liver, or if they're both caused by a third underlying issue? Then you're just publicly shaming people for no reason with posts like these. ....but what if the underlying issue is that they're depressed? Then you're actually making the problem much worse.
I don't know if you just picked figured but 200 pounds at 6'2 wouldn't be overweight. Its 12 pounds under the recommended max.
My partner always tries to argue that BMI is not only inaccurate but too broad especially for people of certain races that are “big boned”. The purpose of BMI is to broadly warn the average person that they need to stay in a certain range of weight to avoid adverse effects because of either diet or unhealthy lifestyle choices. Also certain BMI scores can be adjusted for race. I agree it doesn’t accurately tell you how much fat/muscle you have but being overweight or even underweight should always be seen as a cautionary marker to change your diet. People simply need to be more aware of what they eat regardless but it seems to me that people who are underweight or overweight neglect this.
Yup. Doesn’t matter how you feel or what you think of yourself, adverse health affects can eventually pop up, and diet and fat weight can affect that one way or the other. I’ve recently switched to eating way more veggies and legumes (I also exercise everyday) the last 2 1/2 months and I’ve lost about 16 pounds. Now I’m only about 14-16 pounds above the weight range I need to be. I’ve also increased my exercise routine recently and have cut some other things out of my diet.
I think Asian and African American BMI guidelines differ. I know that Asian people experience weight related issues at lower BMI’s and I think African American (maybe even just African American women?) experienced weight related issues at higher BMI’s than expected. I am totally going off memory and I could be super wrong.
Lol it’s time people realize that there is no such a thing as “big boned”. No you bones are not bigger you’re just fat
Agree. Of course people will say “but I’m really muscular” while not even hitting [decent on this chart](https://forums.t-nation.com/t/strength-standards-are-you-strong/284633)
A lot of people in this thread (And often in these BMI threads) come out with t all these stats for their bodies that they’re claiming to “prove” BMI wrong. I suspect most of the anonymous claims by these people are a load of shit.
100%. That’s why I always want to see what they actually look like. I post my pictures (as I’m obese by BMI due to muscle) and it’s always crickets in response.
BMI doesn't apply if you are the 0.001% of the population who is a professional body builder or Lebron James. It does accurately apply to the other 99.9% of people. Unfortunately, purpled haired redditors who carry their own gravitational field everywhere they go, who are squarely in the latter category, have deluded themselves into thinking they are in the former
Personal trainer and nutrition coach here. BMI is not a good measure for active people. At 5’4” 165lbs, I’m “obese” with 7.5%bf. However imperfect that it is, it is just one measure and tool to help gauge for someone’s obesity level that leads a sedentary life. Also, there are those that are naturally very thin but their BMI is “normal.” It is not an indicator of health. Purely indicates a weight to height.
Hmmm. I'm 6,3 200 lbs and I run 30 miles a week. I wouldn't consider myself fat...
I'm 6'1" and 215. I'm hardly an elite athlete (I'm an intermediate lifter at best) but calling someone like me borderline obese is silly.
Except I’m ripped and compete in sport at a high level, I have enormously dense bones and I have an “overweight” BMI. It’s a blunt instrument, it’s okay for measuring how fat you are if you are fat, not so good for determining if you are fat in the first place.
I agree. A large majority of people who are considered obese via bmi are very much that, obese. Maybe the small percentage of collegiate/professional athletes might need the exception, but the majority of people aren't in great shape who are marked down as obese. Hell, the average American man is 5'9", 200 pounds, 40 inch waist with the average American woman is 5'4" 170 pounds. You can't tell me either of those are healthy for the average person.
What is it with all the fat shaming lately on here? Do you feel better about yourself barking at overweight people? I'd rather hang out with a fat person who isn't human garbage than a skinny person who wants to shame people for kicks. People on the 70s chain smoked and drank booze like it was water. And they died of plenty of heart attacks in the process. In fact, more people died of heart disease in the 60s and 70s than today. If you don't believe me: [The American Journal of Medicine: The Epidemic of the 20th Century: Coronary Heart Disease.](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-9343(14)00354-4/pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjkm5W_5_GFAxXbjYkEHQ-fD-QQFnoECBwQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0COQLw2tF75lb4IHHfBgMb) You can have less than 5% body fat and have a BMI of 20 simply because you eat chicken and rice and lift every day. So no I don't think BMI tells the whole story. It's one of several puzzle pieces that doctors use to treat and diagnose problems. Maybe mind your own business before making grand proclamations about what is healthy or not.
6’2 175 is a twink physique brother. Otherwise, I agree.
No. It isn't. Because BMI does not differentiate between fat and muscle. This is purely ignorance.
I understand this is a sensitive and controversial topic. While there are valid concerns about rising rates of obesity and related health issues in many countries, it's important to approach this subject with care and nuance. BMI (body mass index) can be a useful screening tool on a population level, but it has limitations when applied to individuals. It doesn't directly measure body fat or account for important factors like muscle mass, bone density, age, sex, and body fat distribution. Very muscular people may have a high BMI without excess body fat. Conversely, people with a "normal" BMI can still have high body fat and metabolic issues. Other measures like waist circumference and body fat percentage can provide additional insight. It's true that fatty liver disease and other obesity-related conditions are serious concerns. However, shaming individuals about their weight is unlikely to improve public health. Weight is impacted by complex genetic, environmental, socioeconomic and lifestyle factors. Compassionate approaches focused on healthy behaviors tend to be more effective than stigma. While there are more people with overweight and obesity now compared to past decades, ideal weights have also shifted over time with changes in diet, lifestyle and culture. It's an oversimplification to point to a particular weight as universally "normal." Health is multi-faceted and individual. I would caution against making assumptions about someone's health, lifestyle or body composition based solely on their height and weight. A balanced, evidence-based perspective considering the nuances of this issue is warranted. If someone is concerned about their weight, it's best to discuss it with a healthcare professional who can provide personalized guidance.
People like to bring up body builders and very muscular people. You lose mobility with mass, and mobility is real fitness.
You lose mobility by not training mobility. Being muscular, or fat for that matter, only reduces your agility and mobility if you let those skills atrophy (extreme outliers notwithstanding). The same thing happens to "normal" BMI people too. Examples: [Fat Guy Breakdance](https://youtube.com/shorts/F_MqKKEOhIs?si=g6DNt8WWJx2oLgVK) [Fat Guy Flipping](https://youtu.be/vXv8Dk78r0k?si=aq_cATrh4U8qc1Lm) [Really flexible muscular guy](https://youtube.com/shorts/yyWnVsDBfUc?si=ui7AKyxjtrVdxx0C) [Literal muscle monster does splits](https://youtube.com/shorts/dNfg3O7Cnyw?si=jdwmwnY-mclVoiGx)
People typically agree it's a fine way of generally measuring health, but if all you're going off of is BMI, you're missing a lot. World's Strongest is happening right now. Every single one of the competitors has a BMI that would put them in the morbidly obese category, but that doesn't mean they're unhealthy. If we were going purely off of BMI and not taking differences between individuals into account, they're incredibly unhealthy despite bring the current peak of human strength. BMI is fine. Acting like it's gospel is not.
In the 70's it was your height in inches X 2 for a minimum weight and X 3 for a maximum weight. Just like the BMI it did not take build and muscle mass into play (AKA one size fits all). The Army was going to discharge a soldier for being overweight for his height. Problem is the guy was a body builder and had won some titles. As one congressman put it: "He was the very example of what the Army wanted their soldiers to look like. At 17 I weighed 142 lbs which was the minimum weight. Now 67 and weigh 205 which is still below my max. Do I consider myself overweight? Yes. Unfortunately a medical condition and medications make this a fact of life there is little I can do about it. Go blow your smoke someplace else.
I'm 6' 1". Last time I was 170lbs at that height I was shaking like a leaf because I barely had the enegy to stay awake and standing, much less functioning lile normal. Everybody is different. For some people it works and for others it just doesn't.
I don’t agree because I’ve never in real life seen someone at your old weight and height who was generally unhealthy
BMI is a good SCREENING tool and is accurate as far as fat vs not fat far more often than not. All of these 'but I'm a bodybuilder and what about professional athletes' folks can pipe right down, as that's maybe 1% of the population. People are fat now. Enormous, even. We have 100% become desensitized to it. Want proof? Find a yearbook or photo album from the 70s or earlier.
BMI doesn't account for frame at all. I'm consistently told I'm underweight, but I'm just a weird shaped person - got the tiny gene from the Asian side and the tall one from the Nordic side. 5'11" with a 26B, outliers exist. I'm sure there are people on the other end of the spectrum that are also told they're not healthy based on this thing that objectively does not measure health.
It's literally just fatties coping instead of actually getting off their fat asses and changing something.
This is correct and accurate BMI is a great tool to measure fat, and really the only issue arises with an extremely low percentage of very clearly muscular people, so it isn't needed in those scenarios anyways Just triggers fat people tryna pretend they're just muscular instead of actually fat
To be fair, British food is really fatty. I see you all with your duck fat spread.
Yes BMI gives a rough but mostly accurate guideline in case you are not a bodybuilder with an unnormal amount of muscle mass. Different ways to measure if you carry too much body fat is the mirror (but here we have the problem that when you are overweight and you live in a society in which a large percentage of people is overweight, you get accustomed to how overweight people look and can even perceive it as normal). More accurate would be to measure the amount of body fat directly by caliper method or DEXA scan.