FacebookTwitter
Hatrack River Forum   
my profile login | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hatrack River Forum » Active Forums » Books, Films, Food and Culture » Body Mass Index: Is it really accurate?

   
Author Topic: Body Mass Index: Is it really accurate?
reader
Member
Member # 3888

 - posted      Profile for reader   Email reader         Edit/Delete Post 
I came across an article about BMI, and out of curiosity, plugged my height and weight into one of the BMI calculators that have proliferated online. My result: 18.1 - which is officially underweight. I have never gone on a diet in my life, eat nice big lunches and suppers (admittedly I usually skip breakfast, but that's just because I don't feel like eating in the morning) and in general do not avoid any kinds of foods in order to remain thin. So...would I really be better off if I weighed a couple of pounds more? Does it mean I need to excercise more? (I know that muscle weighs more than fat.) Is the BMI accurate for tall people? How can it be accurate altogether, if it is for both men and women? Also, if for some reason I lost a couple of pounds (I don't expect that to happen, as my weight has been pretty much stable for the past three years or so) should I actively try to gain weight? How does one go about gaining weight in a way that isn't unhealthy and won't put the weight where I don't want it to go?
Posts: 196 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
PSI Teleport
Member
Member # 5545

 - posted      Profile for PSI Teleport   Email PSI Teleport         Edit/Delete Post 
I think it means that your weight needs to be composed of more mucsle and less fat.

Not that your fat or anything.

*removes foot from mouth*

Posts: 6367 | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
mackillian
Member
Member # 586

 - posted      Profile for mackillian   Email mackillian         Edit/Delete Post 
BMI sucks my will to live.
Posts: 14745 | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
FlyingCow
Member
Member # 2150

 - posted      Profile for FlyingCow   Email FlyingCow         Edit/Delete Post 
::sucks mack's will to live::

::resists temptation to make lewd comment::

::fails::

Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
mackillian
Member
Member # 586

 - posted      Profile for mackillian   Email mackillian         Edit/Delete Post 
*thwap*
Posts: 14745 | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
sarcasticmuppet
Member
Member # 5035

 - posted      Profile for sarcasticmuppet   Email sarcasticmuppet         Edit/Delete Post 
I'm not an expert, but I always thought the fact that the BMI doesn't take into account bone density or muscle mass, it's crud. I think you have to weigh yourself underwater or something to get a good reading.
Posts: 4089 | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
J T Stryker
Member
Member # 6300

 - posted      Profile for J T Stryker   Email J T Stryker         Edit/Delete Post 
speaking as a wrestler who took his BMI daily along with his body fat %, i can say that the formula is fairly acurate. but unless you are a body builder or serious athlete, the index is a little off.
Posts: 1094 | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Raia
Member
Member # 4700

 - posted      Profile for Raia   Email Raia         Edit/Delete Post 
Does anyone have a link to this mystical thing I've never heard of?
Posts: 7877 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ryuko
Member
Member # 5125

 - posted      Profile for Ryuko   Email Ryuko         Edit/Delete Post 
It's not something you link, it's something you do... Basically they send a little zap through your body to tell you how much of it is made up of fat and how much is muscle.
Posts: 4816 | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Raia
Member
Member # 4700

 - posted      Profile for Raia   Email Raia         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
plugged my height and weight into one of the BMI calculators that have proliferated online.
[Confused]
Posts: 7877 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Book
Member
Member # 5500

 - posted      Profile for Book           Edit/Delete Post 
There are all kinds've ways... I think there's a height/weight ratio, too, right?
Posts: 2258 | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
imogen
Member
Member # 5485

 - posted      Profile for imogen   Email imogen         Edit/Delete Post 
Here you are, Raia.

(Edit: Ack! My BMI used to be 21, and now it's gone up to 22.6. I guess that's what happens when you're a shorty and gain weight)

[ March 08, 2004, 09:39 PM: Message edited by: imogen ]

Posts: 4393 | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
J T Stryker
Member
Member # 6300

 - posted      Profile for J T Stryker   Email J T Stryker         Edit/Delete Post 
the best formula uses heigth, weight, and fat measurements that can be taken electroniclly or more acreatly by the pinch method with a special kind of tweezers
Posts: 1094 | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Phanto
Member
Member # 5897

 - posted      Profile for Phanto           Edit/Delete Post 
16.3
Posts: 3060 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Raia
Member
Member # 4700

 - posted      Profile for Raia   Email Raia         Edit/Delete Post 
[Kiss] Thanks, imogen.
Posts: 7877 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Book
Member
Member # 5500

 - posted      Profile for Book           Edit/Delete Post 
It's incorrect if you're a fairly muscular person. If you lift weights, it'll show you as overweight, or close to.
Posts: 2258 | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
J T Stryker
Member
Member # 6300

 - posted      Profile for J T Stryker   Email J T Stryker         Edit/Delete Post 
the online version that you put on here is just a tad off, unless i went from 11.6 to 20.4 in a week'n a half
Posts: 1094 | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
imogen
Member
Member # 5485

 - posted      Profile for imogen   Email imogen         Edit/Delete Post 
11.6? Isn't that clinically dead or something?

If they are following the right formula (weight (kg) / height (m) squared ) it should be accurate.

Hmmm.
*Goes off on a BMI calculator comparison hunt*

[ March 08, 2004, 09:50 PM: Message edited by: imogen ]

Posts: 4393 | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
imogen
Member
Member # 5485

 - posted      Profile for imogen   Email imogen         Edit/Delete Post 
This one gives me the same result. As does this one.
Posts: 4393 | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
J T Stryker
Member
Member # 6300

 - posted      Profile for J T Stryker   Email J T Stryker         Edit/Delete Post 
11.6 isn't dead, it's a top of the line High school wrestler, who cuts alot of wheight(i was top 10 before i got hurt). I'm not knocking these formula's, I'm just pointing out that they don't work for me.
Posts: 1094 | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jon Boy
Member
Member # 4284

 - posted      Profile for Jon Boy           Edit/Delete Post 
For my BMI to be 11.5, I'd have to weigh 85 pounds. I'm six feet tall. There's no way that's healthy. I think your calculator must be inaccurate.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
imogen
Member
Member # 5485

 - posted      Profile for imogen   Email imogen         Edit/Delete Post 
Hey Stryker - welcome to Hatrack by the way!

As mentioned previously, BMI doesn't work for athletes. The BMI system supposes a certain 'normal' fat percentage of body weight - so for those people with very low fat percentage and high muscle, their BMI will show them as overweight, or even obese, when they are not.

However, I am curious about 11.6: if anything, being a wrestler should give you a higher BMI, not such a low one. It seems likely that you got 11.6 using a different system.

For illustration's sake, a BMI of 11.6 would require a 6 foot man to weigh 37.6 kg (82.7 pounds).
Edit: pipped to the post by Jon Boy!

[ March 08, 2004, 10:05 PM: Message edited by: imogen ]

Posts: 4393 | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
J T Stryker
Member
Member # 6300

 - posted      Profile for J T Stryker   Email J T Stryker         Edit/Delete Post 
It can't be that inaccurate, it’s the one that the IHSAA (Indiana High School Athletic Association) uses. Then again, I also have a disgustingly low body fat percentage.
Posts: 1094 | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
imogen
Member
Member # 5485

 - posted      Profile for imogen   Email imogen         Edit/Delete Post 
Yeah, but a low body fact percentage would cause you to have a higher BMI.

I'm sure it's just a different test (not BMI at all).

Posts: 4393 | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
J T Stryker
Member
Member # 6300

 - posted      Profile for J T Stryker   Email J T Stryker         Edit/Delete Post 
Ignore me, I'm so confused, I'm just going to bow out of this thread befroe i make a real fool out of myself (it's too late, isn't it).

P.S. I'm so glad i finally found a set of forums where the people are more intelligent than me, maybe I won't be as cocky from now on.

Posts: 1094 | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Book
Member
Member # 5500

 - posted      Profile for Book           Edit/Delete Post 
Were you like a super buff wrestler or a super ripped one, or both?
Posts: 2258 | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ryuko
Member
Member # 5125

 - posted      Profile for Ryuko   Email Ryuko         Edit/Delete Post 
[Eek!] I'm apparently clinically obese according to the weight thing... [Frown]

But I'm going to assume it's wrong, being as a lot of my weight is made up of muscle... Or at least some of it is... I mean... You can't get your black belt without having at least SOME muscle, right??? [Cry]

I duwanna be obese... [Cry]

Posts: 4816 | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jon Boy
Member
Member # 4284

 - posted      Profile for Jon Boy           Edit/Delete Post 
I think making a fool of yourself is half the fun of Hatrack.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
J T Stryker
Member
Member # 6300

 - posted      Profile for J T Stryker   Email J T Stryker         Edit/Delete Post 
Ripped and 119, i was confusing the BMI with the body fat %, like I said, ignore my comments.
Posts: 1094 | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
pH
Member
Member # 1350

 - posted      Profile for pH           Edit/Delete Post 
I don't know about BMI, but my doctor once told me that ideal weight charts and such become freakishly inaccurate when you're tall. I'm 6', and apparently the thing says I should weigh 170+ pounds (I'm currently 135). So I don't know how you can really tell how in-shape you are unless you do one of those underwater body fat percentage things.
Posts: 9057 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
imogen
Member
Member # 5485

 - posted      Profile for imogen   Email imogen         Edit/Delete Post 
BMI is generally accurate for most people.

Of course, that means it's inaccurate for others. [Smile]

The third calculator I linked to is on a quite interesting site - it has some other ratios and forumlas, as well as calculations of 'ideal' weight according to different theories. (Depending on the theory, mine is between 54 and 59 kg).

And they state that BMI is *not* always right - it's better just to listen to your body and eat healthily etc etc. Some people are just naturally bigger/smaller/whatever.

By the by, a low BMI does not always mean healthy either. I had a BMI of 20 for ages in highschool, but I was skinny-fat. Not a lot of me, but no muscle to speak of. I'm much healthier now with more muscle on me.

Oh and Stryker - I make a fool of myself on a regular basis. It gets to be kind of fun after a while. [Big Grin]

Posts: 4393 | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rivka
Member
Member # 4859

 - posted      Profile for rivka   Email rivka         Edit/Delete Post 
BMI is a good indication for most people. An indication -- not something to get crazy over. [Wink]

Body-fat percentage is a more meaningful number, but it's harder to get accurately. The dunk test is VERY accurate (but who wants to do that on a regular basis?); using calipers (the "pinch method") varies from very accurate (high-quality calipers, and experienced measuring person) to somewhat accurate (cheap calipers and/or inexperienced measurer); the electric zap test is highly INaccurate (and potentially dangerous, especially if you have a pacemaker or are pregnant).

Back to reader's question, a very low BMI means two things, probably. You could stand to get more muscle (and maybe more weight, but I would DEFINITELY talk to a doctor (or nutritionist) before attempting that, as you may not really be underweight) on you; and I will have to hate you now.

It's nothing personal . . . [Wink]



Oh, and welcome to Hatrack, JT. [Wave]

Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Rabbit
Member
Member # 671

 - posted      Profile for The Rabbit   Email The Rabbit         Edit/Delete Post 
I think people are confusing the BMI (body mass index) with % body fat. They are not the same thing. A % body fat of 10% is completely normal for an athletic male. Professional bike racers commonly run between 6 and 7 % body fat. A BMI of 10, would indeed put you somewhere in the dead range.

To ask whether or not the BMI is accurate is a bit strange since the BMI is defined to be the ratio of your weight in kg to your height in meters squared, it is accurate if your height and weight are measured accurately. It does not however say anything about your percent body fat. If you get more muscle but don't gain weight, your BMI will not change. The real question how meaningful is the "normal range" for the BMI. The BMI gives a fairly broad range for "normal" BMI. I currently have a BMI of 19 which puts me kind of on the low side of normal but I could gain 30 pounds before I would be considered overweight. I have a very slight build and if I weighed an additional 30 I would be quite fat.

On the other hand, I used to weight about 15 pounds less than I do now (BMI of 17). At that time, I was suffering from a maladsorption disease and I do indeed feel much healthier now that I weigh a bit more. A BMI of 18 puts you just below the low end of normal range. If you are under 25 and have small bones, I wouldn't be too concerned about it.

Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

   Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Hatrack River Home Page

Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2