Body mass index (calculator)

[Pete]

As I said before, it's very useful for the majority of the population who don't do *enough* exercise, be it in the form of some sort of structured exercise pattern or via physically demanding work, to see if they are carrying too much weight.

Yep, that's about the shape of it, I suppose. Which means, and sorry to get all 'up front and personal' with you Helen, but I don't forget that it was you who had a real 'go' at me in the past* ... what I wonder is, why have you been set a target which is below the 'magic' 25? Meaning that at your present 26-something, you're still needing to shed weight? After all you've done! Is there some sort of fixation with '25' amongst Weightwatchers? I would have thought that, compared to most ladies of your age, you do a tremendous amount of exercise! Unless you've been lying through your teeth on these forums and you don't really cycle at all... (only joking!). I put it to you that you have not only achieved your target, but over-fulfilled it. Already. Today!

*bygones be bygones? I may have shown less tact than I ought.

 

[wafflycat]

Putting it bluntly - I've seen me nekkid and you haven't. I still could do with losing some weight

The vast majority of folk who attend organisations such as WeightWatchers don't do anywhere near enough exercise, so BMI is a simple and generally effective way of setting healthy weight ranges for the vast majority and is adopted by organisations such as WW as they work for the vast majority of folk. To attend & not pay and yet carry on long term with help in keeping the excess off, as long as my goal weight is within the healthy range for my height, and I get there, it's within the rules of the organisation, and it's a good one. The rules have to be applicable to deal with the majority. Having a BMI of 25 or just below will not mean I'm on the verge of starvation, anorexia or bulimia. It will mean that I'm at a healthy weight and developing the eating patterns/behaviors to stay at a healthy level long term.

No-one other than me has set me a target below the 'magic 25' and by having a goal weight towards the upper end of the BMI range, with the amount of exercise I do will be well within the healthy range for me. No chance of going anorexic. Honest. I like my food too much. If I set my goal weight at, say a BMI of 20 (the low end of the healthy range for my height) - I'd be *skinny* and I have no intention of that.

Pete, if I've had a go at anyone, it's down to assumptions and lack of understanding of the complex issues surrounding why folk become obese and the ignorant comments they deal with on a daily basis. And as one who has been pointed at & poked fun at in the past (in real life) due to weight, I know just how damaging such comments are and how they do nada to assist folk in getting to grips with obesity. If anything, they can and do make it worse for a lot of people.

 

[summerdays]

I once had the %fat worked out by the electric current method and mine came out quite high - 40%, but I was told afterwards that its effected by how hydrated (or not) you are at the time.

On the BMI front, I'm just about on the 25 (either over or under depending on whether I say I'm half an inch taller or shorter than I am). I wouldn't say I was obese, but I definately have some bits where I wouldn't mind loosing a bit. However I don't gain or loose weight very quickly (and I never diet - too much effort and thought required), it seems to stay fairly similar most of the time.

I do think that fat gene thing has some basis - I am probably (ok definately) the lightest of my mum and all my siblings (some of which I suspect have the 2 fat genes (and one sibling has a car gene - the one when you can't go anywhere without having the steering wheel attatched)). I suspect I have one copy, and my hubby definately would be in the no fat gene group.

 

[wafflycat]

If your BMI is about 25, then you aren't obese.

The way it works is generally *about* this range:-

BMI under 20: underweight
BMI 20 - 25: healthy weight range (some interpretations go to a low end of 18, but that is *skinny*)
BMI over 25 - 30: overweight
BMI over 30 - 40: obese
BMI over 40: morbidly obese

 

[andy_wrx]

BMI is widely used because it's simple.
Just two measurements, weight & height.
Anybody can do the easy calculation, because it's so easy it can be put onto a cardboard-disc-with-windows-for-weigh-and-height sliderule calculator.

It's not very accurate, but so what ? It doesn't need to be, for the sort of purposes it's used for, for the sort of market it's aimed at : slimming clubs, well man/woman clinics, etc.
For them the sort of ranges wafflycat lists above are fine, it really doesn't matter if your BMI calculates-out as 24.7 or 24.8, just the sort of range it fits in.
If it calculates-out as 40 or 17, it's likely you do have a problem.

I have had my body-fat measured using 7-point caliper measurement and I know how long it took, how much operator training would be required
See this calculator by contrast
http://www.linear-software.com/online.html

 

[punkypossum]

My BMI is always around 20, but I'm not particularly fit and not exercising much at the moment, supect it would go up if I built up more muscle

 

[zummerzet_lou]

Phew .. 21.97

but still way lardier than I was pre-kids ... back on the bike I guess?

 

[gavintc]

22.16, and I know that I am carrying some excess pounds. I need to lose about 5lbs, this would bring it down to about 21. I reckon if I was 25, I would be a pretty fat man.

 

[Crackle]

22.16, and I know that I am carrying some excess pounds. I need to lose about 5lbs, this would bring it down to about 21. I reckon if I was 25, I would be a pretty fat man.

Define fat: The best I've ever been in my life is about 21.5 and at that BMI I could see individual muscles and my heart beating! Currently 25.5 and aim to get below 25, which I think is realisitic for my age and fitness. At that BMI I have 'lurrve' handles and I can pinch more than an inch but I would not call myself fat

 

[Morrisette]

This is interesting, how different calculators give different results for one thing!

Mine: 20.4

The weight I got down to when I was a student (diet: super noodles, tea and egg on toast) put me at 17.9 which seems scary - I was skinny but not THAT skinny.

 

[Pete]

Am I wrong about what I said before? I mean, about not taking BMI too seriously, nor the magic '25' as some sort of weightwatcher's nirvana? Should I be taking on board, the fact that mine is over 30 at the moment - hence, obese? And doing something about it? Whatever the verdict, no way am I dieting at the moment, with heavy frosts outside and a nasty cold brewing in my chest...

 

[wafflycat]

A BMI of 25 is not some sort of 'magic' number, not a WW nirvana. BMI is a simple guide to working out whether someone is overweight, obese or morbidly obese. It works very well for those who do not do enough exercise and works as a rule of thumb guide even if you do exercise well. It has its flaws but that does not completely negate its value in working out if someone is too heavy. It's not just used by WW, but it's used by the medical profession too. If you (a generic you, rather than a specific you) have a BMI of 30, then yes, you are probably overweight at the very least. Even with all the cycling I do, when my BMI was 30, it was clear from looking at me that I was pretty overweight. Certainly better than a BMI of over 40, but not as positive as having a BMI in the healthy weight range for height. As for dieting - anyone who goes to an organisation such as WW will know that dieting is not the way to lose weight & keep it off long term. The term 'dieting' implies going without - I certainly don't go without anything I fancy eating.

 

[Bigtallfatbloke]

I still need to lose 3 stone to be at my ideal weight...wow...that'll take some doing...

 

[Rhythm Thief]

I would tell you all what my BMI is, but I have no idea what I actually weigh. I think I'm around 15 stone, so my BMI could be about 28. Equally, I could be anywhere up to a stone lighter or heavier. I must get some scales one day.

 

[Blue]

Back in the 1980's I lost more than 80lbs and have maintained a healthy weight ever since. I 'dieted', but not so much in the way of 'doing without'. What I did was keep the calorie equation as my rule and increased the exercise I did while seeking out lower calorie alternatives of, or for, the foods that I ate. This meant that I was able to continue eating almost the same quantity of food - so wasn't starving myself. I have to admit that some of the less fat/sugar alternatives tasted like chewing cardboard but, hey, the lbs fell off.

Overall, the experience changed me to a life of exercising and reading the labels of the foodstuffs I was purchasing. Exercising also awakened an interest in all aspects of healthy living. The weight stayed away. As far as I'm concerned it was all due to following the simple calorie equation, which is why I always mention it in threads of this nature. I now eat what I like, including high fat/sugar treats but being aware of the calorie equation is a constant reminder not to eat too much and to keep exercising - hence I'm still slim nearly 25 years post that 'diet'.