BMI Outrage

[jdmalm123]

Originally Posted by bamazav

I don't know about you guys, but I kind of like being an anomaly.

That's the issue....

At 10% body fat and dead lifting double my body weight...my doctor would call me borderline obese if my BMI was 25+.

BMI has no regard for body comp if you are extra-muscled (or, normal muscled for those of us here).

My opinion is BMI is only indicative at the extreme ends (under 20 or over 30)...for the mid-range, much more accurate measures should be used.

[Fazc]

I'll once again put this into perspective by applying some real world numbers...

A man of 5 foot 10 weighing 200lbs in lean condition, let's say 10% would be at pretty much the peak of his natural potential. So he'd have the equivalent condition of a Grimek or Park in their primes at that weight.

So I daresay he'd be lifting a LOT more than double bodyweight deadlifts and he'd almost certainly have 1 pet lift where he would excel. I would say a man of that size would reasonably be putting out at very least a 500 squat, 350 bench and 550 deadlift. I know guys personally who lift more at the same weight and drug-free.

That man would be 28 on the BMI scale, and while slightly over the recommended amount he wouldn't be massively so. Schwarzenegger in my previous example was 30-31 and that was Schwarzenegger. You just have to realise, lifter or not, you're not going to be carrying THAT much more weight around that the average man UNLESS you are fat. Plain and simple. This all relates to overall potential. How much natural drug-free muscle do you really think you can build over what the layman carries? It isn't as much as people think.

So no, if we actually look at this realistically it's not a terrible scale at all. It just needs to be shifted a few points.

[Fazc]

Frankly the original company in question

Workers are fired up over a new plan to offer health insurance incentives based on their Body Mass Index, or BMI.

In a letter to staffers, managers announced a $13.33 credit every two weeks for folks who meet a 'weight target' or BMI of 30.

Are PAYING people EXTRA to get within a healthy range of under 30. They're not punishing those who don't but they are PAYING people to EXTRA to maintain and improve their own health.

I think that's a generous company.

[jdmalm123]

Originally Posted by Fazc

I'll once again put this into perspective by applying some real world numbers...

A man of 5 foot 10 weighing 200lbs in lean condition, let's say 10% would be at pretty much the peak of his natural potential. So he'd have the equivalent condition of a Grimek or Park in their primes at that weight.

So I daresay he'd be lifting a LOT more than double bodyweight deadlifts and he'd almost certainly have 1 pet lift where he would excel. I would say a man of that size would reasonably be putting out at very least a 500 squat, 350 bench and 550 deadlift. I know guys personally who lift more at the same weight and drug-free.

That man would be 28 on the BMI scale, and while slightly over the recommended amount he wouldn't be massively so. Schwarzenegger in my previous example was 30-31 and that was Schwarzenegger. You just have to realise, lifter or not, you're not going to be carrying THAT much more weight around that the average man UNLESS you are fat. Plain and simple. This all relates to overall potential. How much natural drug-free muscle do you really think you can build over what the layman carries? It isn't as much as people think.

So no, if we actually look at this realistically it's not a terrible scale at all. It just needs to be shifted a few points.

I have to respectfully disagree...I've had doctors tell me i'm overweight (with very athletic numbers) even thought they were looking right at me.

Also, let's say you have a new trainee who uses BMI as a gauge... If they re high on the scale, lose 10 lbs of fat and gain 10 lbs of muscle, their BMI is unchanged...I just don't think BMI is sensitive enough to give most people relevant feedback.

[Fazc]

Are you even reading what I've written?

[jdmalm123]

Originally Posted by Fazc

Are you even reading what I've written?

Yes.

I'm saying my BMI was typically 25~28 and I was performing well enough above average.

After only 3-4 months of real PL style lifting it was 28-30. If I had stuck with it and added another 5-10 lbs of muscle, my BMI would have been 30+. According to BMI, that's overweight/borderline obese and I was anything but.

I don't see how that's a useful scale. I see you called for it to be moved a few points, which I guess means we agree it's not useful as it is set up now.

Body Type BMI Index
Underweight <= 18.5
Normal weight 18.5 - 24.9
Overweight 25 - 29.9
Obese >= 30

[Fazc]

No, you really aren't. But since you have used yourself as an example, let's run with it.

Originally Posted by jdmalm123

After only 3-4 months of real PL style lifting it was 28-30. If I had stuck with it and added another 5-10 lbs of muscle, my BMI would have been 30+. According to BMI, that's overweight/borderline obese and I was anything but.

I'm just going to put a visual on JD's comments here and perhaps that will put into context these numbers that are being bandied around.

The picture below is Phil Ricardo, natural bodybuilder and at the peak of his bodybuilding potential. 5 foot 9 inches and 180lbs, which is BMI 26.6 here:



He could easily add 20lbs of pure fat and still look huge and muscular, 5 foot 9 inches and 200lbs would place him at BMI 29.5.

Now JD is proposing that after only 3-4 months he was at equal BMI to Ricardo and 'anything but fat'. And extrapolates from this, had he stuck it out he would have far surpassed a BMI of 30 and still not fat.

You're in denial.

I await any number of possible responses. However since you have dug yourself in this deep I'm thinking you'll either A) opt to carry on the example and invent some more numbers, or B) you'll just resort to calling me a dick for this reality check. Or even possible mystery answer C. Looking forward to seeing which way you go with this, JD!

[EliteDreams]

I'm not at all in denial,I have a gut with 22% bf. Sure I could drop 30lbs and look bitchin to the teen girls,but I would rather do my own thing and rock my bmi 40. I'm terribly weak compared to some 20-60lbs lighter than me,but keep in mind those people have a long headstart with lifting.

[jdmalm123]

Originally Posted by Fazc

Looking forward to seeing which way you go with this, JD!

No, I think you're missing my point.

Here's my question...is Phil Ricardo obese in that picture?

I say no, he's very fit...pretty much ideal. You are saying he's obese, since you are saying the BMI scale is a good measure.

I disagree. If anyone thinks BMI is a good indicator of health and fitness it just isn't.

BMI is billed as a meaningful measure of health and fitness. According to medicine and BMI application, Mr. Ricardo needs to immediately reduce his food intake (especially red meat!) and drop 40 lbs.

If you tell me the BMI number is accurate as a comparison vs. an average body weight, then yes, you are correct. However body weight alone tells me that. If I want to know anything more about health, then I need to know LBM, fat mass, strength levels, blood lab results, etc.

BMI can be dangerous if overweight people pursue weight loss at any means and stop when they hit a satisfactory BMI range without actually getting stronger or healthier.

[Fazc]

Originally Posted by jdmalm123

I say no, he's very fit...pretty much ideal. You are saying he's obese, since you are saying the BMI scale is a good measure.

And there it is.

Re-read my comments, we can't have a discussion if you just fabricate what I'm saying.