There is something seriously wrong with the height/weight tables.
03-26-07, 10:28 PM
#26
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bakersfield, Host of the 2012 ToC ITT
Posts: 1,747
Bikes: Waterford 2200
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
When Michael Jordon was playing basketball in his prime he was considered obese by the BMI charts.
__________________
Make mine a double!
Make mine a double!
03-26-07, 10:28 PM
#27
Out fishing with Annie on his lap, a cigar in one hand and a ginger ale in the other, watching the sunset.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: South Florida
Posts: 16,056
Bikes: Techna Wheelchair and a Sun EZ 3 Recumbent Trike
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 22 Times
in
17 Posts
Chuck Norris is obese by the BMI charts
__________________
. “He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.”- Fredrick Nietzsche
"We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." - Immanuel Kant
. “He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.”- Fredrick Nietzsche
"We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." - Immanuel Kant
03-27-07, 03:04 AM
#29
Look 555 fledgling
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Oahu
Posts: 313
Bikes: Vitus road bike, I bought used, graduated to a LOOK 555
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
03-27-07, 06:30 AM
#30
Ride it like you stole it
Originally Posted by catherine96821
Chart
__________________
"Never use your face as a brake pad" - Jake Watson
The Reloutionaries @ Shapeways
"Never use your face as a brake pad" - Jake Watson
The Reloutionaries @ Shapeways
03-27-07, 10:01 AM
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 76
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I guess I will be the lone dissenting voice on this. I am certainly not saying that the BMI is the be all and end all measure but it is "close" when people hold up athletes and actors who are ripped and say "see they are obese according to BMI so it is WRONG" they are being a bit disingenuous.
News flash most of us who are/were Clydes and UberClydes don't have a body composition remotely resembling the athletes and actors being used to make the argument. Tom Cruise is 5'7" to be considered obese he would need to weigh 192 pounds. Maybe he does weigh that much but if he does lean muscle mass.
The BMI is a rough guide and is put forth as such, it assumes an AVERAGE build. Oddly I have met very few folks who were heavy who would admit to having a small frame or average frame (myself included). Guess what once I lost the weight I found that in fact I have quite an average frame.
In general if you have a waist larger than 34 or 36 inches (as a male) you could afford to lose some weight. In my opinion it is quite silly to bicker over what your weight should be while you are a long way off. I would think the most prudent course in most cases would be to pick a goal of a medically recommended weight and try to achieve it. As you get close you can always re-evaluate your goal. Most folks I have known that have lost considerable amounts of weight and are highly active have actually re-evaluated their goal DOWNWARD as opposed to up.
Anyway that's my two cents not that it will buy much.
News flash most of us who are/were Clydes and UberClydes don't have a body composition remotely resembling the athletes and actors being used to make the argument. Tom Cruise is 5'7" to be considered obese he would need to weigh 192 pounds. Maybe he does weigh that much but if he does lean muscle mass.
The BMI is a rough guide and is put forth as such, it assumes an AVERAGE build. Oddly I have met very few folks who were heavy who would admit to having a small frame or average frame (myself included). Guess what once I lost the weight I found that in fact I have quite an average frame.
In general if you have a waist larger than 34 or 36 inches (as a male) you could afford to lose some weight. In my opinion it is quite silly to bicker over what your weight should be while you are a long way off. I would think the most prudent course in most cases would be to pick a goal of a medically recommended weight and try to achieve it. As you get close you can always re-evaluate your goal. Most folks I have known that have lost considerable amounts of weight and are highly active have actually re-evaluated their goal DOWNWARD as opposed to up.
Anyway that's my two cents not that it will buy much.
03-27-07, 11:24 AM
#32
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: San Francisco!
Posts: 909
Bikes: 2010 Surly LHT (main rider and do-everything bike), 2011 Bike Friday NWT (back-up bike and multi-modal)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Point taken, Mike. I didn't mean to say that all weight charts were useless. Just that I think taking body fat % would be a better measure for it, or at least something that takes bone density and muscles into account. It also ticks everybody off that insurance companies use BMI as the "be all, end all" de facto standard, without bothering to check for body fat % vs. muscle and bone weight at all 
03-27-07, 12:05 PM
#33
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 76
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by fat_bike_nut
Point taken, Mike. I didn't mean to say that all weight charts were useless. Just that I think taking body fat % would be a better measure for it, or at least something that takes bone density and muscles into account. It also ticks everybody off that insurance companies use BMI as the "be all, end all" de facto standard, without bothering to check for body fat % vs. muscle and bone weight at all
- It is difficult / expensive to get an accurate measure especially if someone is considerably outside a normal weight range. When I was 400'ish pounds and body fat measure short of hydrostatic would likely have been wildly inaccurate.
- When you tell someone they should have say 20% body fat they have NO IDEA what that means to them.
- Impedance scales can be off by as much as 5% that is a HUGE difference. Time of day and fluid consumption *can* make the readings from these scales pretty wonky.
Body fat is a great way to determine if a person is at a healthy weight. The fact is none of us really need charts or body fat to know when we are carrying too much weight. In most cases we KNOW we just don't want to acknowledge it. At least that was how I was.
Once we are personally happy with our weight it really doesn't matter what a chart or test says. I think most of the debate over BMI comes because people aren't particularly happy with their weight and are trying to rationalize it on some level.
03-27-07, 12:13 PM
#34
Fat yet photogenic
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 108
Bikes: GT avalanche 1.0 disc
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Mike too many people use and take the BMI as the be all and end all, there in lies the problem.
03-27-07, 01:04 PM
#35
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 76
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by obelix67
Mike too many people use and take the BMI as the be all and end all, there in lies the problem.
Sure, any hard and fast rule that doesn't take extenuating factors into account isn't good.
In order to give "general advise" to the world at large (The CDC / NIH / and WHO use BMI as a rule of thumb world wide) there has to be a degree of generalization.
I would actually be willing to bet in most cases with people who are posting here claiming that their weight needs to be in the obese BMI range due to their build would be proven to be over the recommended body fat range as well.
I guess I also question what the argument with BMI is? Is the argument that the weight it "recommends" is in fact unhealthy? Is it "wrong" in that you could weigh more and still be healthy?
For me a 6'0" male to be considered obese by the BMI tables I would need to weigh at least 221. I do an hour of cardio a day and lift weights 3 or 4 times a week. I am NOT real muscular and could be far more so I just don't tend to build a lot of muscle. If I were to be "obese" due to muscle I would need to gain 50 pound of muscle (almost an impossible task at least for me). If I weighed 221 pounds and it wasn't all muscle I would be overweight and my doctor would be on me about it.
While the BMI tables may not give a person their perfect weight for the vast majority they are not wildly inaccurate.
03-27-07, 01:06 PM
#36
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 11,375
Bikes: '08 Surly Cross-Check, 2011 Redline Conquest Pro, 2012 Spesh FSR Comp EVO, 2015 Trek Domane 6.2 disc
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
6 Posts
I use calipers to measure my bodyfat, and an accurate scale to check my weight. I can use those measurements to gauge how much fat I've lost, and muscle I've gained, through my workouts.
The BMI chart went out the window years ago for me because of my keen interest in picking up heavy things and putting them back down again. (Used to lift lots of weights.)
In looking back at the charts again, I'm still amazed with the range for someone my height. I'm 6'6", and the healthy weight range is 165 to 215? Is 6'6", 165 actually healthy? Cripes! I was 100 pounds more than that. I can't imagine, even at my top weight, losing 100 pounds and NOT feeling like I was wasting away to nothing.
The BMI chart went out the window years ago for me because of my keen interest in picking up heavy things and putting them back down again. (Used to lift lots of weights.)
In looking back at the charts again, I'm still amazed with the range for someone my height. I'm 6'6", and the healthy weight range is 165 to 215? Is 6'6", 165 actually healthy? Cripes! I was 100 pounds more than that. I can't imagine, even at my top weight, losing 100 pounds and NOT feeling like I was wasting away to nothing.
__________________
"I feel like my world was classier before I found cyclocross."
- Mandi M.
"I feel like my world was classier before I found cyclocross."
- Mandi M.
03-27-07, 02:28 PM
#37
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 76
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by CliftonGK1
The BMI chart went out the window years ago for me because of my keen interest in picking up heavy things and putting them back down again. (Used to lift lots of weights.)
In looking back at the charts again, I'm still amazed with the range for someone my height. I'm 6'6", and the healthy weight range is 165 to 215? Is 6'6", 165 actually healthy? Cripes! I was 100 pounds more than that. I can't imagine, even at my top weight, losing 100 pounds and NOT feeling like I was wasting away to nothing.
In looking back at the charts again, I'm still amazed with the range for someone my height. I'm 6'6", and the healthy weight range is 165 to 215? Is 6'6", 165 actually healthy? Cripes! I was 100 pounds more than that. I can't imagine, even at my top weight, losing 100 pounds and NOT feeling like I was wasting away to nothing.
Many of my good friends are in your height class(6'5"), one or two of them are quite solid. They tip the scales between 250 - 270 and most of them would like to drop *some* weight depending on which one I am talking to the numbers I hear bandied about are between 200 - 225.
I agree with you that 6'6" and 165 would NOT be healthy.
03-27-07, 04:10 PM
#39
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Toronto (again) Ontario, Canada
Posts: 6,931
Bikes: Old Bike: 1975 Raleigh Delta, New Bike: 2004 Norco Bushpilot
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
5 Posts
Originally Posted by Mike_Morrow
I guess I will be the lone dissenting voice on this. I am certainly not saying that the BMI is the be all and end all measure but it is "close" when people hold up athletes and actors who are ripped and say "see they are obese according to BMI so it is WRONG" they are being a bit disingenuous.
News flash most of us who are/were Clydes and UberClydes don't have a body composition remotely resembling the athletes and actors being used to make the argument. Tom Cruise is 5'7" to be considered obese he would need to weigh 192 pounds. Maybe he does weigh that much but if he does lean muscle mass.
The BMI is a rough guide and is put forth as such, it assumes an AVERAGE build. Oddly I have met very few folks who were heavy who would admit to having a small frame or average frame (myself included). Guess what once I lost the weight I found that in fact I have quite an average frame.
In general if you have a waist larger than 34 or 36 inches (as a male) you could afford to lose some weight. In my opinion it is quite silly to bicker over what your weight should be while you are a long way off. I would think the most prudent course in most cases would be to pick a goal of a medically recommended weight and try to achieve it. As you get close you can always re-evaluate your goal. Most folks I have known that have lost considerable amounts of weight and are highly active have actually re-evaluated their goal DOWNWARD as opposed to up.
Anyway that's my two cents not that it will buy much.
News flash most of us who are/were Clydes and UberClydes don't have a body composition remotely resembling the athletes and actors being used to make the argument. Tom Cruise is 5'7" to be considered obese he would need to weigh 192 pounds. Maybe he does weigh that much but if he does lean muscle mass.
The BMI is a rough guide and is put forth as such, it assumes an AVERAGE build. Oddly I have met very few folks who were heavy who would admit to having a small frame or average frame (myself included). Guess what once I lost the weight I found that in fact I have quite an average frame.
In general if you have a waist larger than 34 or 36 inches (as a male) you could afford to lose some weight. In my opinion it is quite silly to bicker over what your weight should be while you are a long way off. I would think the most prudent course in most cases would be to pick a goal of a medically recommended weight and try to achieve it. As you get close you can always re-evaluate your goal. Most folks I have known that have lost considerable amounts of weight and are highly active have actually re-evaluated their goal DOWNWARD as opposed to up.
Anyway that's my two cents not that it will buy much.
I think what folks are saying is that the BMI does not account for anything other then height vs weight, and for those who are large boned, or well muscled, that makes such charts dangerous. There are other measures that work better, such as the percentage of body fat.
03-27-07, 08:59 PM
#40
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 87
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I just looked up BMI. Dang. It says I should be about 180-185. At 6'4" the lightest I've been was 195. I was doing 3K miles per year and weight lifting 3 times per week. I doubt I could have lost another 10 lbs.
Then I got married. Now there is no way I can loose weight
Then I got married. Now there is no way I can loose weight
03-29-07, 08:07 AM
#41
Out fishing with Annie on his lap, a cigar in one hand and a ginger ale in the other, watching the sunset.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: South Florida
Posts: 16,056
Bikes: Techna Wheelchair and a Sun EZ 3 Recumbent Trike
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 22 Times
in
17 Posts
Originally Posted by loserflame
Studies have shown that waist size is in correlation with risk for heart disease. However, I think that generalizations here, as well as in the BMIs, are just that... general. This magical "34 - 36 inch waist" that I hear quoted everywhere is being just as abused as the old BMIs. I am in the Air Force, and in our new PT test you get points based upon your waist size (in addition to points for your run time, pushups, and situps). You basically don't start getting points for your waist until you are below 38 inches; once you reach that plateau, the points increase substantially the smaller your waist is. I have not been under a 38" waist since I was 15. I'm a big guy (6'5, 250 lbs). I will be the first to admit that I need to lose some weight (which is why i started riding to work, 10 miles each way). However, I will never be under a 38" waist again, no matter how hard i work out, short of moving somewhere where they don't have food. The bad thing here is that I can take the AF PT test, and have to run my ass off in order to make up points that I lost by not having under a 38" waist. Meanwhile, a guy my age who is 5' tall and skinny can max out his waist measurment points, and can basically slack at everything else, without having to try, and still pass the test. I have been on the Fat Boy program several times for not meeting AF standards. Everytime you get put on that program, you have to go see a doctor to be evaluated. Everytime, the doctor looks me up and down, and then asks "why are you here? you're not overweight." But, someone decided that they should base their regulations off of averages, so i am screwed. I understand that it's not feasible for the AF to do a submersion body fat test for every person or something similar, but there has got to be a better way than to just look at a table of averages and say "well, you have a 38" waist, so you are fat" without even taking into account factors like height or body mass...
ok i'm done. i'm out of breath from typing too fast... time to take a nap and rest it off.
ok i'm done. i'm out of breath from typing too fast... time to take a nap and rest it off.
__________________
. “He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.”- Fredrick Nietzsche
"We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." - Immanuel Kant
. “He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.”- Fredrick Nietzsche
"We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." - Immanuel Kant
04-04-07, 06:32 PM
#42
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,132
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
THOSE TABLES HAVE ALWAYS SEEMED WRONG .. Talk about body-fat all you want..the real reason..like a couple few of you have said : a ploy used by ins. companies. Many of the charts I've seen certainly DON'T take into account muscle mass.
04-04-07, 11:15 PM
#43
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: eastern oregon
Posts: 63
Bikes: giant ocr2 carbon, raleigh 4.0
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
My wife, the retired Registered Nurse, tells me when I am too fat. She has lasers in her eyes, and I swear can tell to the ounce when I am over her standard (which is lifesaving, by the way). Being constantly in trouble, I have learned not to show her the BMI chart, as she says that it is foolish and a tool used by the drug companies and insurance megalopolies.
I obey, and have lost 40 pounds, 23 to go. I do not think knowing my BMI will matter in the long run anyway. There is enough to worry about (such as saddle selection, etc) out there.
cole
I obey, and have lost 40 pounds, 23 to go. I do not think knowing my BMI will matter in the long run anyway. There is enough to worry about (such as saddle selection, etc) out there.
cole
04-05-07, 05:32 PM
#44
Novist senior member
70% of NBA players are over weight 100% of NFL line men and most pro body builders. I am the same hight and weight as mike tyson when he was knocking guys out in under 2 minutes. Mike was'nt over weight but I sure am. Its the fat to muscle ratio that gets you
04-06-07, 10:17 AM
#45
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 1,768
Bikes: Trek Mountaineer modified with a NuVinci; Montegue Paratrooper folding mountain bike; Greenspeed recumbent; Surly Big Dummy with Stokemonkey
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
Originally Posted by loserflame
Studies have shown that waist size is in correlation with risk for heart disease. However, I think that generalizations here, as well as in the BMIs, are just that... general.
04-06-07, 11:47 AM
#46
Out fishing with Annie on his lap, a cigar in one hand and a ginger ale in the other, watching the sunset.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: South Florida
Posts: 16,056
Bikes: Techna Wheelchair and a Sun EZ 3 Recumbent Trike
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 22 Times
in
17 Posts
Waist= Midway between the groin and navel
__________________
. “He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.”- Fredrick Nietzsche
"We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." - Immanuel Kant
. “He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.”- Fredrick Nietzsche
"We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." - Immanuel Kant
04-07-07, 09:15 PM
#47
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Aus
Posts: 636
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by obelix67
I also prefer the metric that says to be healthy your waist should be equal or less than 50% of your height.
Is this for males or females?
04-07-07, 11:10 PM
#48
Out fishing with Annie on his lap, a cigar in one hand and a ginger ale in the other, watching the sunset.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: South Florida
Posts: 16,056
Bikes: Techna Wheelchair and a Sun EZ 3 Recumbent Trike
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 22 Times
in
17 Posts
Originally Posted by damnable
Is this for males or females?
I'll do a little trolling in the medical databases and see what I find out.....more later!
__________________
. “He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.”- Fredrick Nietzsche
"We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." - Immanuel Kant
. “He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.”- Fredrick Nietzsche
"We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." - Immanuel Kant
04-10-07, 05:06 AM
#49
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Aus
Posts: 636
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Gah. The waist isn't there.
It's not really based on a definitive anatomical feature (like the hips are). Most times I have read the waist is the thinnest part of your torso. I blame fashion for lowering it.
It's not really based on a definitive anatomical feature (like the hips are). Most times I have read the waist is the thinnest part of your torso. I blame fashion for lowering it.
04-10-07, 08:15 AM
#50
Out fishing with Annie on his lap, a cigar in one hand and a ginger ale in the other, watching the sunset.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: South Florida
Posts: 16,056
Bikes: Techna Wheelchair and a Sun EZ 3 Recumbent Trike
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 22 Times
in
17 Posts
Originally Posted by damnable
Gah. The waist isn't there.
It's not really based on a definitive anatomical feature (like the hips are). Most times I have read the waist is the thinnest part of your torso. I blame fashion for lowering it.
It's not really based on a definitive anatomical feature (like the hips are). Most times I have read the waist is the thinnest part of your torso. I blame fashion for lowering it.
It truly shrank after my weight loss!
__________________
. “He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.”- Fredrick Nietzsche
"We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." - Immanuel Kant
. “He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.”- Fredrick Nietzsche
"We can judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." - Immanuel Kant