Best way to measure health and fitness

[BendtheBar]

Originally Posted by IronWill

Interesting, never heard that before.

The equivalent weight for a 5'10" lifter would be:

5'10" adult male:

Underweight at 128 pounds or less (BMI <18.5)
Normal weight at 129 to 173 pounds (BMI = 18.5-24.9)
Overweight at 174 to 209 pounds (BMI = 25-29.9)
Obese at 210 to 243 pounds (BMI = 30-34.9)
Extremely obese at 244 pounds or more (BMI = 35 or greater)

These numbers are calculated off the Department of Health & Human Services website.

If this study is accurate, and I encourage everyone to do their own research, then a 5'10" 243 pound male has about the same risk of death as a "normal weight" adult. I don't meet many 5'10" 129 pound adult males, for what it's worth.

[TitanCT]

Bmi....
Bhhahahahahaahhaahaha

[glwanabe]

BMI,

That's the Bullshit Meter Index that Dr's use to justify the uneducated opinions on topics they have no training in.

[IronManlet]

Health: Easy enough. Normally-to-excellently functioning internal organs, reflexes, immune system; healthy skin, eyes, etc.

Basically, you are in good working order and can fight off sickness well.


Fitness: Also easy, though not as straightforward. The basic level of human functionality would be the ability to perform regular, daily tasks without breaking down. However, our "daily tasks" have changed dramatically from even 100 years ago as compared to most people's cushy existence today.

Therefore, fitness should be defined, to my mind, as a combination of various strengths. I would not consider a strong-but-obese man to be "fit," nor would I consider a paper-weight, 95lb weakling who couldn't squat his own bodyweight "fit."

Fitness is a combination of good levels of strength, stamina, agility, and speed.

[angie828]

I go by how I feel and what I see. I can tell if I am gaining weight or whatever. And I figure that if I feel good about myself healthwise, I am headed in the right direction and I keep working hard to get to my goals.

[Chillen]

For me this is a difficult question to answer.

For years, I have read about people whom are seemingly healthy, athletic, in shape it seems, see a doctor regularly, take stress tests, try to eat right, take no illegal substances, or abuse alcohol, (etc), live long and prosper or die an early death--or still live to average age. Some are sudden without warning, and for others is a disease of a major organ (for no known reason, or personally caused), or by other means.

Meanwhile, I have read about people whom are aren't healthy, non-athletic, out of shape and overweight, do not eat right, regularly consume illegal substances, or abuse alcohol, (etc), live long and prosper, or die a early death or still live to average age. Some are sudden without warning, some live longer than compared to their seemingly healthier humans, and for others is a disease of a major organ (for no known reason, or personally induced).

Now, consider the average age of death for men and woman (where things are considered equal).

It becomes a pretty interesting subject matter.

Obviously, what we do...or do not do, on the things we have control over...effects our health dependent on what we are discussing.

Today, at the hotel, for example, I was talking to a world war 2 vet, whom is 92 years old. Very intelligent, has his mind, and gets around great. He is a smoker of cigarettes and cigars (as witnessed from the lobby).

Is he considered healthy? And, since he smoked since the age of 16 (as we talked later), would he have been considered healthy then?

Is this an exception rather than the rule? Why is "he" an exception as compared to someone else, whom may do the same exact things but die much earlier? Genes? Heredity?

Why is it that someone who "tries" to be reasonable healthy while living, die at "average age" and the 92 year old, in which may be "doing things" some would logically decide not healthy, live nearly 20 years longer in comparison?

Some dust seems to settle on: The things in which we have control over (eating habits, exercise, smoking, etc), our environment, genes and heredity, how we are put together and efficient in functioning, and the things in which we do, and how tolerant (as a whole) our bodies are.

Obviously, we are not all put together the same way, though we are made of the same things.

The path we take isn't "always" up to us. Though we can try to alter it, improve it, delay it, etc, what trumps all, is the little biological beasts inside us all.

Its called the efficiencies/deficiencies inside us (and family history) , and how this is processed within our bodies. And each of us are different. There is no guarantee that you live long and prosper eating right and staying fit.

Odds increase you live longer? Maybe, maybe not.

But I like the "odds" on the diet and exercise side of the equation, despite the potential biological factors that play a role within me.

But death is a guarantee. This is going to happen.

However, its rare you see "a morbidly obese" person at the average age of death (say for men) around 76 years old.

[Transformed]

Originally Posted by IronWill

Interesting, never heard that before.

That fact is interesting. I too have never heard it before. I can not really imagine why that would be correct as it is just stunning to believe.

[5kgLifter]

Originally Posted by glwanabe

BMI,

That's the Bullshit Meter Index that Dr's use to justify the uneducated opinions on topics they have no training in.

We likey



Oddly, on hubby's rehab info sheets, they utilise the BMI, however, it states clearly underneath the chart that the BMI reading should not be used in isolation if a person appears to be muscly to some degree (don't recall the exact wording and don't quite know where hubby has placed the chart); I haven't seen that written on any BMI chart before, so that was interesting to come across.

Maybe, they starting to learn, slowly but surely.