Does anyone take the BMI seriously?

[bepah]

Ok, the thread made me curious.

......... It is not easy to keep you neck and shoulders out of the water.

Use fins

[Carl Watts]

Not allowed in the test, neither was swimming 50M as fast as you can. Fins are great though I use them for 60min every week in the pool to just cruise along and they load up the legs quite nicely.

[kayakr]

Around 10% your abs would clearly show

Yeah, I've got about a 4 pack, so 15% sounds about right.

fins

I think most people sink like stones when they breath out.
I try to keep the lungs full and maximize the relaxation/float effects.

Navy seals tread water for 5 minutes with feet and hands tied.
They must sink rapidly without air in the lungs because they have BIG STONES

[kayakr]

I found a pretty interesting part of "eat to live" available online.
More is available under "excerpt" at
http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/eat-to- ... 1100685073

Surprise! Lean People Live Longer
In the Nurses’ Health Study, researchers examined the association between body mass index and overall mortality and mortality from specific causes in more than 100,000 women. After limiting the analysis to nonsmokers, it was very clear that the longest-lived women were the leanest. The researchers concluded that the increasingly permissive U.S. weight guidelines are unjustified and potentially harmful.

Dr. I-Min Lee, of the Harvard School of Public Health, said her twenty-seven-year study of 19,297 men found there was no such thing as being too thin. (Obviously, it is possible to be too thin; however, it is uncommon and usually called anorexia, but that is not the subject of this book.) Among men who never smoked, the lowest mortality occurred in the lightest fifth. Those who were in the thinnest 20 percent in the early 1960s were two and a half times less likely to have died of cardiovascular disease by 1988 than those in the heaviest fifth. Overall, the thinnest were two-thirds more likely to be alive in 1988 than the heaviest. Lee stated, “We observed a direct relationship between body weight and mortality. By that I mean that the thinnest fifth of men experienced the lowest mortality, and mortality increased progressively with heavier and heavier weight.” The point is not to judge your ideal weight by traditional weight-loss tables, which are based on Americans’ overweight averages. After carefully examining the twenty-five major studies available on the subject, I have found that the evidence indicates that optimal weight, as determined by who lives the longest, occurs at weights at least 10 percent below the average body-weight tables. Most weight-guideline charts still place the public at risk by reinforcing an unhealthy overweight standard. By my calculations, it is not merely 70 percent of Americans who are overweight, it is more like 85 percent.

The Longer Your Waistline, the Shorter Your Lifeline
As a good rule of thumb: for optimal health and longevity, a man should not have more than one-half inch of skin that he can pinch near his umbilicus (belly button) and a woman should not have more than one inch. Almost any fat on the body over this minimum is a health risk. If you have gained even as little as ten pounds since the age of eighteen or twenty, then you could be at significant increased risk for health problems such as heart disease, high blood pressure, and diabetes. The truth is that most people who think they are at the right weight still have too much fat on their body.

A commonly used formula for determining ideal body weight follows:

The formula indicate I should be 165
I'll try for 175, but I seem to hit 182 "setpoint" and bounce back.
That's way better than my old carnivour setpoint of ... 210++ (it never seemed to stop)

[Oldcolonial]

The BMI formula is weight / height^2. This formula does a pretty good job of getting to the relation between weight and height correct if you are relatively short compared to most rowers or more appropriately near the average for people living in Belgium in the 1830's. (the place and time for which it was developed). If you are substantially taller, the square in the denominator does not capture the tendency for weight to grow by more than the square of height across individuals with increasing height. For instance, if you go through and apply the formula to players in the NBA you will find that a good chunk of them are considered overweight and some even obese according to the calculation. E.g. Dwight Howard BMA 27 = 120.2 kg / 2.11M^2 is firmly in the overweight category.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_mass_index

[carlb]

I found a pretty interesting part of "eat to live" available online.
More is available under "excerpt" at
http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/eat-to- ... 1100685073

I found the excerpt also posted here on a simpler page that prints
http://www.mamashealth.com/book/eatlive.asp

Thanks for posting it! I really like what I read and the way he writes it! Good subtitle "Digging our graves with forks and knives".

He hits on what I've found is the right dietary goal, and an easy one: "Regardless of your metabolism or genetics, you can achieve a normal weight once you start a high-nutrient diet style."

I had never thought about what is covered in the "True Hunger" section but I have noticed that I do not get hungry to the point it bothers me, and can outlast my wife and children easily. A lot of times I feel like I eat because it's time to eat.

"...Even when they delay eating and get very hungry, they no longer experience stomach cramps, headaches, or fatigue accompanying their falling blood sugar. They merely get hungry and they enjoy this new sensation of hunger in the mouth and throat, which makes food taste better than ever. Many of my patients have told me they enjoy this new sensation; they like being able to be in touch with true hunger and the pleasure of satisfying it...."

When I come back from a Cruise with a week of good eating (too much) then I do notice an unplesant hunger feeling for a few weeks.

[kayakr]

Yeah, it's easy to forget about true hunger. That was a great description.

When I travel to the west coast for the week, I stay on east coast time, get up at 4AM, work out, read, etc. and then eat breakfast around 9AM PST when I get into the office. Generally by this time, the standard oatmeal topped with toasted coconut and a side of melon will taste just AWESOME. Now, if only I can cut down on the snacking after dinner when I get home...

[hjs]

The BMI formula is weight / height^2. This formula does a pretty good job of getting to the relation between weight and height correct if you are relatively short compared to most rowers or more appropriately near the average for people living in Belgium in the 1830's. (the place and time for which it was developed). If you are substantially taller, the square in the denominator does not capture the tendency for weight to grow by more than the square of height across individuals with increasing height. For instance, if you go through and apply the formula to players in the NBA you will find that a good chunk of them are considered overweight and some even obese according to the calculation. E.g. Dwight Howard BMA 27 = 120.2 kg / 2.11M^2 is firmly in the overweight category.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_mass_index

people are not getting taller very rapidly, but overall bmi has risen sharply in the 30 years...... the average man is mayby 175/180 cm, not much point dragging a 2.12 basketball player in the discussion.
next to bmi, waistline is important, this should always be the smallest part of your body..... almost rare these days.

[Bob S.]

next to bmi, waistline is important, this should always be the smallest part of your body..... almost rare these days.

Man, I must be way out of whack! My wrists and ankles are a hell of a lot smaller than my waist.

Bob S.

[hjs]

next to bmi, waistline is important, this should always be the smallest part of your body..... almost rare these days.

Man, I must be way out of whack! My wrists and ankles are a hell of a lot smaller than my waist.

Bob S.

body as in trunk , the part without the legs, arms neck and head.

[Bob S.]

next to bmi, waistline is important, this should always be the smallest part of your body..... almost rare these days.

Man, I must be way out of whack! My wrists and ankles are a hell of a lot smaller than my waist.

Bob S.

body as in trunk , the part without the legs, arms neck and head.

Sure, I knew what you meant. I just can't resist passing on silly ideas that pop into my mind. It was not intended as a criticism.

Bob S.

[_sleuth_]

A water immersion test is probably the most accurate way of measuring your body fat vs muscle mass. I spent 20 years in the military fighting that " your overweight" crap. While I was near a local university which had a sports medicine program, I found they did water immersion tests. The military standards stated I was 30+ lbs overweight, the water immersion test showed I was not only NOT 30 lbs over weight but I was at <10% body fat (at that time anyway) at the weight I was at. The commander and first sergeant were not happy but it's tough to argue with science and facts.

As far as I am concerned, BMI is something someone came up with and successfully peddled to make money. Just saying...

[pjwerneck]

Well... I'm 6'3" with a very large frame and two years ago, working out a lot, on a rigorous routine, I was 214lbs and less than 10% body fat as well, and had to take that "you're overweight" crap a lot too. Once I went to a doctor for a routine exam and he insisted I had to lose weight and recommended a diet. He said that my "ideal weight" would be around 180-200 lbs, even discounting for my large frame. In other words, I'd have to be almost 0% fat for him to be happy. Nonsense.

Some time later I got injured, reduced the workout intensity, then for several reasons I gained a lot of weight over the last two years. I'm now 275lbs, but didn't lose too much muscle, only gained a lot of fat. Again, I went to a doctor and she came with the same crap again. I know I'm obese now and I definitely need to lose a lot of weight, but down to 200 lbs? I said that even if by some magic I lost 100% fat in my body right now, I'd probably still weight over 200lbs and certainly over 180lbs. She didn't liked that and said I was making excuses. Nonsense again.
.

[hjs]

A water immersion test is probably the most accurate way of measuring your body fat vs muscle mass. I spent 20 years in the military fighting that " your overweight" crap. While I was near a local university which had a sports medicine program, I found they did water immersion tests. The military standards stated I was 30+ lbs overweight, the water immersion test showed I was not only NOT 30 lbs over weight but I was at <10% body fat (at that time anyway) at the weight I was at. The commander and first sergeant were not happy but it's tough to argue with science and facts.

As far as I am concerned, BMI is something someone came up with and successfully peddled to make money. Just saying...

No it is not, bmi is for following population over time. That does give a good view. Bmi in the western world has gone up big time the last 30 years, only one reason, we are getting fatter and fatter, 50 procent of adult man cn not see there privat parts anymore, while standing.

For an individuel it is a lot less helpfull. But in combination with waist size it still says a lot.

If someone has 10% fat anybody who is retarded can spot that in one glimps. A male with 10 has visible abs.

[quickstepper]

@hjs...

You hit it right on the head.... For society as a whole BMI is useful... Like macroeconomics is to the economy. OK... I'm grasping a bit on that one.

Combining BMI with waist measurements definitely helps give a more accurate picture of ones health. Throw in a full physical. Not only height and weight, but blood work, EEG (or is that EKG, ECG???), and throw in a whole slate of fitness/stress tests (which no doctor does unless you've got heart issues).

Just like you wouldn't say Oh... You've got assets worth 1Million. You must be healthy financially.
You need to find out other factors, like... Oh... Liabilities of 2 Million.... Income 50000/year, expenses 100000/year, just went through a divorce, just graduated etc... Until you get the full picture you really don't know squat. Same thing goes for your actual health status. One number does not mean anything without other numbers and situation backing it up.

On a similar note... I had to laugh one time back when Evander Hollyfield was the boxing HW champ. They threw up his statistics all of which were very similar to mine (I don't think there was a waist measurement but there was height, weight, arm size etc..) ... But I sure didn't look like Evander Hollyfield

Cheers