BMI Outrage

[jdmalm123]

Originally Posted by Fazc

And there it is.

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

Look, you can be dodgy, propose vague ideas like "shave a few points" and imply that Phil Ricardo and his ilk have "natural drug-free muscle."

Let's agree to this:

When people ask you what you dead lift or what your cholesterol is, just tell them your BMI. I will use other measures.

And, if you really want, I will post pics of my physique at the time my BMI was high and I was lean and muscular.

[Fazc]

Jeez JD, we're getting into an argument because you're just not reading what I'm writing.

We don't need to have an argument here, this isn't BB.com. You're completely arguing the wrong point, a point that I'm not even making. I haven't been dodgy, I've been clear and concise in my argument.

I really dislike this, because I've actually put some thought into my posts because I thought you might be a responsible member of the forum who actually reads and is open to some debate. However the result of that is this mess of a conversation.

[jdmalm123]

If anyone is even interested in this topic any more, here is more personal (gasp!) data to illustrate my point:

The Height you entered is 5 feet, 11.75 inches. The Weight you entered is 139 pounds. Your Calculated BMI is: 19.0
This was age 19 @ 4% BF. I was fitter than most US Marines, but BMI says I was "underweight."

The Height you entered is 5 feet, 11.75 inches. The Weight you entered is 175 pounds. Your Calculated BMI is: 23.9
This was when I was most balanced (but not particularly strong) overall @ 8% BF. I never really pursued deadlifting or bench at this time. BMI says I'm high normal. I was just the average guy."

The Height you entered is 5 feet, 11.75 inches. The Weight you entered is 183 pounds. Your Calculated BMI is: 25.0
Uh oh! Hardgainer finally gains a few pounds in the gym and all of a sudden BMI says I am "overweight."

The Height you entered is 5 feet, 11.75 inches. The Weight you entered is 194 pounds. Your Calculated BMI is: 26.5
This was after I added 10 lbs of muscle and 130 lbs to my dead lift in 4 months @ 12-15% BF. Strongest I had ever been but sadly, BMI says I am even more overweight than before. Same BMI as that fat f*ck Phil Ricardo...but, since my BMI is the same, we must be in identical condition!

The Height you entered is 5 feet, 11.75 inches. The Weight you entered is 214 pounds. Your Calculated BMI is: 29.2
This one is hypothetical supposing I gained 15 lbs of muscle vs my personal best and now I'm almost as obese as Arnold Schwarzenegger in his prime!"

[jdmalm123]

Originally Posted by Fazc

this isn't BB.com.

LOL. Yes, thank goodness!

Well, I asked you to clarify if I was missing the point and you keep referring me back...obviously, it's because I'm not catching your drift from prior posts.

You post well here and are quite knowledgeable...I'm making a point about the inaccuracy and relative uselessness of BMI. That is all.

No personal dislike or disrespect on my end!

PM sent.

[Fazc]

Thanks for the PM

To try and clarify this; the reason I gave Ricardo, Grimek and Schwarzenegger as examples is to show you a visual of what a muscular 26-30 actually looks like on a person in shape. And that is the key point I'm making, a muscular 26-30 is hard to achieve. A fat 26-30 is not hard to achieve. Going off the numbers you've posted I would posit that here:

The Height you entered is 5 feet, 11.75 inches. The Weight you entered is 194 pounds. Your Calculated BMI is: 26.5

I highly doubt your actual bodyfat was 15%. If you went on a diet and lost 5% of pure fat you would be a very lean 8-10% bodyfat and 184lbs. This would sit you at 25 BMI which is almost the same condition as Ricardo and that is where I draw issue. There is no chance in hell that you would be 8-10% bodyfat at 184lbs, admittedly matching one of the best drug-free bodybuilders currently alive, after admittedly only training a brief period.

So do you see? My point isn't that BMI is ok, my point is that to get a high BMI and still be muscular and in-shape you would need to be in the same type of condition and carry the same level of muscle mass as Ricardo or Grimek. That paints a huge question mark for me.

I think that's where we're getting mixed up. I don't agree with BMI as it stands, however I don't think we should go off in the other direction and use it to justify what is quite obviously just higher bodyfat levels.

[jdmalm123]

Originally Posted by Fazc

Thanks for the PM

You're welcome. Thanks for responding.

Originally Posted by Fazc

a muscular 26-30 is hard to achieve.

Yes, it was hard to achieve!

Originally Posted by Fazc

I highly doubt your actual bodyfat was 15%. If you went on a diet and lost 5% of pure fat you would be a very lean 8-10% bodyfat and 184lbs. This would sit you at 25 BMI which is almost the same condition as Ricardo and that is where I draw issue. There is no chance in hell that you would be 8-10% bodyfat at 184lbs, admittedly matching one of the best drug-free bodybuilders currently alive, after admittedly only training a brief period.

I have pics...

And, to clarify, I was training for almost 15 years at that point and had always been much leaner than most. I had only been strength training (on a legitimate PL routine) for 4 months.

Originally Posted by Fazc

So do you see? My point isn't that BMI is ok, my point is that to get a high BMI and still be muscular and in-shape you would need to be in the same type of condition and carry the same level of muscle mass as Ricardo or Grimek. That paints a huge question mark for me.

I think that's where we're getting mixed up. I don't agree with BMI as it stands, however I don't think we should go off in the other direction and use it to justify what is quite obviously just higher bodyfat levels.

Roger and agree.

[jdmalm123]

1. me BEFORE I bulked and ran a PL program...
2. me (a couple years after bulk) and out of shape (similar to my current condition)
3. me at 17 years old and 4% BF

[Fazc]

I'm glad you posted those pictures, the whole reason I took issue in this thread is because of the lack of realism over the internet. Steve knows this all too well from his time around the forums, you talk to guys about genetic limits and the mere mention of the word and people get riled up, immediately you get 10 guys jump all over it saying the limits are self-defeating and small. 9 times out of 10 these guys are basically over the limit because they're fat, plain and simple and nothing to do with them actually looking good. My comment about being in denial was directed to them.

I'm happy to be proved wrong in this case.

However just looking at your photos should give people a clear indication of what 170-190lbs looks like on a 6 foot frame in good condition.

Originally Posted by jdmalm123

And, to clarify, I was training for almost 15 years at that point and had always been much leaner than most. I had only been strength training (on a legitimate PL routine) for 4 months.

Well that would also account for the misunderstanding. Who I thought I was talking to was someone who admittedly had only trained seriously for 4 months and thought they had reached the pinnacle of drug-free bodybuilding!

Strong post JD.

[BendtheBar]

Slipping this in, non-related to the current convo between Fazc and JD. But just as a side note.

This is me in 2007 at a BMI of 34.3 (weight 232, height 5'9"). I claimed my height was 5'10", but she got 5'9". So anywho...

It was at the end of my transformation when returning to the iron. I would say I had about 10 more pounds to lose before my smallish belly fat went away.

My arms are 17.5, hidden well in my sexy shirt.

When I took my life insurance physical they told me that I was obese bordering on dangerously obese. They jacked my rates up quite high.

I don't think I ever looked or felt better in my life. And I was nearly "chronically obese."

[5kgLifter]

I'm just adding this for the generalised interest, nothing more:

File:Correlation between BMI and Percent Body Fat for Men in NCHS' NHANES 1994 Data.PNG - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

and

"In Singapore, the BMI cut-off figures were revised in 2005, motivated by studies showing that many Asian populations, including Singaporeans, have higher proportion of body fat and increased risk for cardiovascular diseases and diabetes mellitus, compared with Caucasians at the same BMI."

Body mass index - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia