Page 2 of 2 [ 25 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2


What is your BMI
below 14 2%  2%  [ 1 ]
14 to 16 2%  2%  [ 1 ]
16 to 18 3%  3%  [ 2 ]
18 to 20 24%  24%  [ 15 ]
20 to 22 23%  23%  [ 14 ]
22 to 24 11%  11%  [ 7 ]
24 to 26 11%  11%  [ 7 ]
26 to 28 6%  6%  [ 4 ]
28 to 30 3%  3%  [ 2 ]
30 to 32 5%  5%  [ 3 ]
32 to 34 2%  2%  [ 1 ]
34 to 36 3%  3%  [ 2 ]
36 to 38 2%  2%  [ 1 ]
38 to 40 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
above 40 3%  3%  [ 2 ]
Total votes : 62

amazon_television
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,608
Location: I woke up on 7th street

10 Aug 2013, 10:50 am

It's a joke for sure, but for me it's probably reasonably accurate. I'm like 5'8" or 5'9" and 185-ish, and 28-30 BMI seems appropriate.

I just made a guess on the survey based on people I've seen at psych clinics at work, so if I somehow jacked up the survey my bad :lol:


_________________
I know I made them a promise but those are just words, and words can get weird.
I think they made themselves perfectly clear.


1000Knives
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Jul 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,036
Location: CT, USA

10 Aug 2013, 11:33 am

amazon_television wrote:
It's a joke for sure, but for me it's probably reasonably accurate. I'm like 5'8" or 5'9" and 185-ish, and 28-30 BMI seems appropriate.

I just made a guess on the survey based on people I've seen at psych clinics at work, so if I somehow jacked up the survey my bad :lol:


Yeah, it's accurate as a generality. It doesn't take into account having more muscle mass than average, or bigger bone structure (ie, most people have like 6 inch wrists, some actual bigger boned people have like 8" wrists.)

You gotta compare yourself to the "average" too. In America the "average" BMI is 28.3 for both men and women (strange, huh?) The average man is 5'9.5" and weighs 195 pounds. The average woman is 5'4 and weighs 165. So if you're under 28 BMI you are "skinny." I remember even at like 195, I probably had a bit more muscle, though BF was higher (20%, which is pretty average, too) and people would be like "What, you weigh 195?"

That said, I feel better and am more athletic at my current weight of like 174 pounds. Basically I lost a bunch of weight, went from 210 to 180, then to 195 when sorta "bulking" to gain more strength/muscle (Which was a dumb thing to do, but my ignorance of dietary practices and being on stupid weightlifter/bodybuilding diets did it) then I've been gradually cutting down from that. Now I do look more muscular than at my "old" 180 by far.

Last BF check was 17% at 189, so I'm assuming saying 12% at 174 isn't that unreasonable to claim. I've probably lost some lean mass, though. Not really sure.



Aspendos
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 21 Dec 2012
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 394
Location: Switzerland

10 Aug 2013, 4:38 pm

RetroGamer87 wrote:
It doesn't seem to be forming a bell curve. It's a bit worrying that I posted the highest BMI in the survey. Yesterday I bought a digital scale and it said I had 33% body fat. Very worrying.


I just upstaged you, and I dare anyone to beat my BMI: 56.8. Fat, gay, and AS - the perfect trifecta ... not.

P.S. wrists: 8.5"



alpineglow
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2012
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,002

11 Aug 2013, 6:01 pm

kx250rider wrote:
Body mass index is a joke, and is useless & meaningless. Why? Because mine is 35, but I have 4.8% body fat, and have a leaner, more fit body at age 46, than an olympic track competitor could dream of at age 19 8O (proven by displacement of water at the Cooper Fitness Institute in Dallas). BMI is just another government tool to blame citizens for their own health issues.

Charles (somewhat of an expert on this issue, if I may be so forward)


If Body mass index is a pointless measurement, then how do I go about knowing that I'm making good (or not) progress in my fitness? I am just starting seriously back to working out after a broken arm. Basically I got a lot flabbier while healing, but didn't gain more than a couple pounds luckily. I thought I was going to use body mass index to show if I was doing all right, but what is a better way? Other than driving to the Cooper Fitness Institute that is.
I'd never broken a major bone before, and the whole experience was really bad. Now that the pain has gone away I'm really grateful to be able to get back to working out.



1000Knives
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Jul 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,036
Location: CT, USA

11 Aug 2013, 9:15 pm

alpineglow wrote:
kx250rider wrote:
Body mass index is a joke, and is useless & meaningless. Why? Because mine is 35, but I have 4.8% body fat, and have a leaner, more fit body at age 46, than an olympic track competitor could dream of at age 19 8O (proven by displacement of water at the Cooper Fitness Institute in Dallas). BMI is just another government tool to blame citizens for their own health issues.

Charles (somewhat of an expert on this issue, if I may be so forward)


If Body mass index is a pointless measurement, then how do I go about knowing that I'm making good (or not) progress in my fitness? I am just starting seriously back to working out after a broken arm. Basically I got a lot flabbier while healing, but didn't gain more than a couple pounds luckily. I thought I was going to use body mass index to show if I was doing all right, but what is a better way? Other than driving to the Cooper Fitness Institute that is.
I'd never broken a major bone before, and the whole experience was really bad. Now that the pain has gone away I'm really grateful to be able to get back to working out.


Find some sort of way to measure bodyfat.



Gazelle
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2012
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,333
Location: Tropical island

11 Aug 2013, 11:42 pm

Actually yes it is true that BMI is not reliable when someone is muscular and athletic. An athlete who works out, lifts weights and has a BMI between 25 and 27 is healthy and they weigh more because of having more muscle mass. On the other hand a couch potato who has a BMI of 27 may or may not be so healthy and again they may have large build and maybe the person is still fairly young and fit even though they do not technically "work out" and maybe they are active at work, but not necessarily considered an athlete. Body fat % is a more reliable measurement when someone looks fit, but on paper it says they are overweight.

Men naturally have much less body fat % than women. Men should be no more than about 25% or so fat and women should not be more than 33% or so body fat. Long distant male runners have the lowest body fat% in general and I believe it is somewhere under 10%.

Swimmers usually have the most body fat% I believe and they can afford to have more since it may be helpful to be somewhat buoyant 8)


_________________
"Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate, but that we are powerful beyond measure."


alpineglow
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2012
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,002

12 Aug 2013, 12:31 pm

Gazelle wrote:
Men naturally have much less body fat % than women. Men should be no more than about 25% or so fat and women should not be more than 33% or so body fat. Long distant male runners have the lowest body fat% in general and I believe it is somewhere under 10%.


1000Knives wrote:
Find some sort of way to measure bodyfat.


Thanks.

I will not be concerned about the bmi anymore then. I think mine is in the neighborhood of 19.5 according to this page (link below) and my shape or waist to height ratio came to 0.4.

Instead I'll concentrate on building back my muscle strength and aerobic work such as fast walking and easy slow running.

BMI&waisttoheightratio



overseasalt
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 19 Aug 2013
Age: 43
Gender: Female
Posts: 33

16 Oct 2013, 1:55 pm

I'm a little nervous now that I am in the 80th percentile of people who answered this poll. I am 5' 2.5", am female, am in general good health, and am usually seen wearing a size "Medium" from Target. Yet my BMI is in the 80th percentile of the Wrong Planet (27-28 range)?!



InnaLucia
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 29 Feb 2012
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 220
Location: North east england.

16 Oct 2013, 4:24 pm

21.6