Is BMI outdated?
Clockworkmark31
Posts: 1,053
Currently trying to get in to some form of shape.
Knowing that BMI seems to be the be all end all for military.
Is it not outdated?
My BMI should be max 25 or 80.9kg.
Dropping to 12.7 stone for me seems somewhat far fetched (would be like a twig, I can't shrink bones).
In the medical for military service do you have to achieve normal BMI? Or do you have different standards?
Knowing that BMI seems to be the be all end all for military.
Is it not outdated?
My BMI should be max 25 or 80.9kg.
Dropping to 12.7 stone for me seems somewhat far fetched (would be like a twig, I can't shrink bones).
In the medical for military service do you have to achieve normal BMI? Or do you have different standards?
0
Comments
-
Rubbish. Cycling builds a lot of lean muscle. Except for sprinters/track riders most cyclists are a 'normal' weight.
It's a guide. People like to wheel out the "rugby players are obese" line, but it's usually a coping mechanism for being fat IMO.
How tall are you that nearly 13 stone is unrelastic?0 -
If you are very tall BMI gives too high a figure. The opposite is true if you are very short. Also it takes no account of build.
At 6ft7 the "healthy" BMI range is 11 stone 10 up to 15 stone 10. At about 12 stone i would not be in a good way.0 -
And yet you're still a healthy weight at nearly 16 stone, that'll be why it's a range... :roll:
I'd expect most people at 6'8" to be able to get to nearly 16 stone. Few exceptions aside.
Easier to dismiss BMI though certainly.0 -
I'm 1.96m, 85kg and BMI 22. I've been that way with a fat content of 9-11% and at high teens about 17-19%. Same height and weight. Fat content measured on same body composition analysis scales, which BTW matched the fat content, lean body mass and water composition as measured with one of those proper setups some gyms have so reasonably reliable scales I think.
All makes me think BMI is pointless.0 -
BMI was never any actual use since it's figures are based on population averagesAnd the people bowed and prayed, to the neon god they made.0
-
I think it's a good guide and easily achievable even for bodybuilders. Normal is a very wide band.0
-
Maybe at competitive level, but even the likes of Phillip Riccardo have a bmi of 26 which is only just outside normal.0
-
It's a useful guide but seems hardest on the short. At 11St I'm considered borderline, before a health check the works nurse said that I don't need to worry as she sure I'll be fine. I said I won't, and came out over weight.
It very difficult to do sport when vertically challenged and stay in the range. I've got a 30" waist but considered overweight.
The maths they use need some tweaking IMO0 -
The string test is better as it takes account of where the flab is.
waist <= height /20 -
I agree, but I also agree with njee20.
For the vast majority of people its a good guide. Perhaps 10-20% tops will legitimately break the model.
There will be a large bunch of beer bellied MAMILs and synthol/roid abusing bodybuilders who will kid themselves that it doesn't apply. They will find criticism of BMI a tasty comfort blanket to munch on.0 -
The string test is better as it takes account of where the flab is.
waist <= height /2
Waist size is indeed a much indicator than BMI. BMI assumes a "normal" i.e. sedate person, and as muscle weighs more than fat, a very fit person could easily have a BMI that is "too high".WyndyMilla Massive Attack | Rourke 953 | Condor Italia 531 Pro | Boardman CX Pro | DT Swiss RR440 Tubeless Wheels
Find me on Strava0 -
1kg is 1kg, 1kg of fat takes more space than 1kg muscle.The string test is better as it takes account of where the flab is.
waist <= height /2
Waist size is indeed a much indicator than BMI. BMI assumes a "normal" i.e. sedate person, and as muscle weighs more than fat, a very fit person could easily have a BMI that is "too high".And the people bowed and prayed, to the neon god they made.0 -
1kg is 1kg, 1kg of fat takes more space than 1kg muscle.The string test is better as it takes account of where the flab is.
waist <= height /2
Waist size is indeed a much indicator than BMI. BMI assumes a "normal" i.e. sedate person, and as muscle weighs more than fat, a very fit person could easily have a BMI that is "too high".
Correct...so any given volume of muscle weighs more than the same volume of fat i.e. muscle weight more than fat.WyndyMilla Massive Attack | Rourke 953 | Condor Italia 531 Pro | Boardman CX Pro | DT Swiss RR440 Tubeless Wheels
Find me on Strava0 -
Your statement orginally was not for equal volumes. It's pedantic, but wrong and oft repeated
1kg is 1kg, 1kg of fat takes more space than 1kg muscle.The string test is better as it takes account of where the flab is.
waist <= height /2
Waist size is indeed a much indicator than BMI. BMI assumes a "normal" i.e. sedate person, and as muscle weighs more than fat, a very fit person could easily have a BMI that is "too high".
Correct...so any given volume of muscle weighs more than the same volume of fat i.e. muscle weight more than fat.And the people bowed and prayed, to the neon god they made.0 -
Your statement orginally was not for equal volumes. It's pedantic, but wrong and oft repeated
1kg is 1kg, 1kg of fat takes more space than 1kg muscle.The string test is better as it takes account of where the flab is.
waist <= height /2
Waist size is indeed a much indicator than BMI. BMI assumes a "normal" i.e. sedate person, and as muscle weighs more than fat, a very fit person could easily have a BMI that is "too high".
Correct...so any given volume of muscle weighs more than the same volume of fat i.e. muscle weight more than fat.
Yes it is pedantic. I should have added "...for a given volume". My statement was correct, just not complete.WyndyMilla Massive Attack | Rourke 953 | Condor Italia 531 Pro | Boardman CX Pro | DT Swiss RR440 Tubeless Wheels
Find me on Strava0 -
No it was incorrect as it was incomplete
Your statement orginally was not for equal volumes. It's pedantic, but wrong and oft repeated
1kg is 1kg, 1kg of fat takes more space than 1kg muscle.The string test is better as it takes account of where the flab is.
waist <= height /2
Waist size is indeed a much indicator than BMI. BMI assumes a "normal" i.e. sedate person, and as muscle weighs more than fat, a very fit person could easily have a BMI that is "too high".
Correct...so any given volume of muscle weighs more than the same volume of fat i.e. muscle weight more than fat.
Yes it is pedantic. I should have added "...for a given volume". My statement was correct, just not complete.
And the people bowed and prayed, to the neon god they made.0 -
Sorry for the very late reply.
I think it is all very outdated, but from the people I have been speaking to at the AFCO and some of my brothers mates (including my brother) in RM they all got told to lose weight whilst joining.
But they have all put the weight back on now? What the hell.....?
I am 180cm and 95kg, So my BMI is 29.3.
Over the years I have put some weight on around 10kg, But from studying years I was always around 80-85kg. Even when I had a six pack I was still between 80-85kg. But I will still be classed as overweight.
Now I can lose some weight, but I only have one place to lose it from, everywhere else I am grabbing "skin".
My goal is to get back down to 85kg. But I am fretting a tiny bit. If I get told my BMI is still high I will struggle to lose more weight. Broad shoulders and chest
I am only going to have at maximum two chances to get in. Age is not on my side here. It was at one point and I did it all at one point. But life screwed me. Now I want it before it is too late.
Will be doing the initial 1.5m "march" followed by best attempt at a local gym and they measure and weigh you and give your BMI and if deemed to be over "normal" you have to lose the weight and do it again.0 -
Your gym should have scales which can estimate body composition based on bioelectric impendence, this will give you a better understanding of your body fat %age. However, if you have to hit a certain BMI for a specific test and your body fat %age is low and your lean muscle mass is high, then the only option if you MUST hit BMI, is to consider consecutive day fasting which will cause your body to burn both fat and Lean muscle or diuretics pre-check to reduce fluids. Both aren't particularly smart things to do.0
-
[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19720014#p19720014]Clockworkmark31[/url] wrote:Sorry for the very late reply.
I think it is all very outdated, but from the people I have been speaking to at the AFCO and some of my brothers mates (including my brother) in RM they all got told to lose weight whilst joining.
But they have all put the weight back on now? What the hell.....?
I am 180cm and 95kg, So my BMI is 29.3.
Over the years I have put some weight on around 10kg, But from studying years I was always around 80-85kg. Even when I had a six pack I was still between 80-85kg. But I will still be classed as overweight.
Now I can lose some weight, but I only have one place to lose it from, everywhere else I am grabbing "skin".
My goal is to get back down to 85kg. But I am fretting a tiny bit. If I get told my BMI is still high I will struggle to lose more weight. Broad shoulders and chest
I am only going to have at maximum two chances to get in. Age is not on my side here. It was at one point and I did it all at one point. But life screwed me. Now I want it before it is too late.
Will be doing the initial 1.5m "march" followed by best attempt at a local gym and they measure and weigh you and give your BMI and if deemed to be over "normal" you have to lose the weight and do it again.
As above BMI is useful (and designed) for population studies. where the very few outsizes people are of no statistical relevance to the overall result. but that said its not that inaccurate that having a BMI of near 30 can be considered to be normal (or healthy) unless you are of a very very unusual body composition. The old rugby prop argument doesn't really hold true as they will be deliberately keeping their weight high because it gives a massive advantage in their particular role in their sport which is viewed as over coming the downside of loss of agility, joint problems strain on heart etc. they are just the person you want if your car wont start, not your first choice if you want someone to run 5 miles to call you an ambulance after you heart attack. Id be going for the waif like mo Farah if I had a say
Where you would have cause for complaint is that at you old weight which gave a BMI of 26.2, you would have counted as normal up until comparatively recently, as the normal range used extended to a BMI 27, so people became ''over weight overweight, overnight with no change to their body at all. and its at those close margins that the BMI system to deeply flawed and some other factors ought to be included in the decision making process
As an example of just how silly it can get, my friend with a BMI of 32, who is by any fair assessment ''FAT'' was told she couldn't hve a gastric band operation on the NHS until she had reached and maintained for 3 months a BMI in excess of 34, So she decided to increase her BMI so she reached the criteria so she could be thin. IT cost her nearly as much in crisps and chocolate as she saved0 -
That is crazy isn't it.
Still probably the last crisps and chocolate she ate. They might have told her, btw we don't remove all the excess skin on the NHS, so you probably wont want to up your weight just to get an operation that could kill you.0 -
That is crazy isn't it.
Still probably the last crisps and chocolate she ate. They might have told her, btw we don't remove all the excess skin on the NHS, so you probably wont want to up your weight just to get an operation that could kill you.
yea,but aesthetics were lower down the list, her main motivation was her knees were giving up the unequal struggle and she could no longer walk or indeed get out of the bath, Getting an 18stone soapy fat bird out of a bath isnt easy0
