what's your bmi?
 

Mine's 25.1. I'm 6 feet 185 lbs and my bmi says I'm overweight and high risk. How bout you?

For those that don't know how, you multiply your body weight in lbs by 705 then divide it by your height in inches, then divide it by your height in inches again.

18.22, what does mine mean?

low risk

im 6' 1" 146 pounds, BMI=19.3 it says im underweight

fine, don't calculate your bmi's. elitist bike snobs.

(please excuse me, this was after an entire bottle of cabernet)

25.5 @ 6'2" and 199lbs Body fat meter says I'm at 18%.

BMI = around 24 6' 1" and 185 lbs

% body fat is in the low teens.

Billy

27.2 here. A test showed my blood fat so high the lab could not get a clear reading on my HDL. Resting pulse 69-75 and BP 135/78. So Niacin, more salads, fewer donuts, and more biking (Oh poor me, more biking). Anybody know what the BMIs of top pro bikers run? Or marathoners or ballerinas.

the average bmi of a tdf winner is actually 21
i am trying to get mine up form less than 18 144lb 6foot 4 and bfp in the singles

22.1, 6% Body Fat (calipers, measured two separate times at 5.9% and 6%). 187cm, 77kg

22.9 (6', 169 lbs). Hope to be down to 22 or so by race season (around 162 lbs).

Who said you were "underweight"? According to the National Institutes of Health, and the World Health Organization, "underweight" is 18.5 and below.

FWIW, here's a good online calculator for those who don't want to pull out the calculator...it also includes some interesting statistics on how your BMI compares to others of your age, height, and gender:

http://halls.md/body-mass-index/bmi.htm

Mine is 27
I don't put a whole lot of faith in BMI. To get mine down to 21 (the aforementioned average for TdF winners) I would have to weigh in at 142. I have a measured LBM of 144. I don't have any desire to have 0% body fat (I don't even think that is possible).

i'm 18.5.

25.2 which puts me about 2 lbs overweight. This is great because this time last year I was in the 29s (lost about 30 lbs). I still plan on losing about 5 more pounds--not because of my BMI, I just need to drop a little more.

25.5
173 pounds/5' 9"

That's a few pounds overweight, As a 53-year-old I'm in the 34th percentile. That is 66 percent of people in my age group have a higher BMI. I wouldn't mind dropping 10 pounds, if only to make it easier to go up hills on my bike, but it doesn't get easier.

23.4, but I plan on losing about 4-5lbs

some of you guys have got to put on weight...

Im at 22.0 bmi BUT...
Remember BMI does not work well for muscular athletes and such... AND...
it is also not supposed to be a replacement for body fat measures. Remember, BMI is merely an index, and not a measurement.

As I've said in several other threads, BMI is meaningless for individuals but quite useful for populations.

My BMI is 20.1 at the moment, and according to that online calculator someone linked to, that's the 11th percentile for my age and height. I.e. 89% of people of similar height and age weigh more than me.

True, but...for most people (say, 90% of the population), BMI is a reasonable, and easily caculated, surrogate for "fatness".

The vast majority of people classified as "overweight" (BMI>25), or "obese" (BMI>30) are "overly fat", not "heavily muscled".

17.8 body fat % about 7-8

Currently 29.0

Ten years ago: 45.9

31.3= ME

I am going with the below excuse!!

You're absolutely correct. BMI is an index, but it's based on two measurements--height and weight. So I'm not sure what you mean when you say it's "merely an index."

An index is a useful (or not) comparison of two measurements. It's not "merely" anything--it's more than a measurement and "merely" implies it's less. The wind chill index "merely" comprises measurements of temperature and wind speed, and it merely tells you how cold you'll feel outdoors.

Body tissue composition measures lack even the first qualification for being a valid measure. They are not reliable. That means they will not always give you the same value when you repeat the measurement with the same method. They will also not give you the same number if you use two different methods to measure the same person. Without reliability, you cannot have validity. OTOH, Weight measurements are highly reliable, and height measurements are almost totally reliable.

BMI will not be a great measure for highly muscled individuals, as you said. So if you're in the NFL, forget about BMI. If you are Mr. Universe, ditto. But if you're the average cycling schmoe on Bikeforums, BMI is a perfectly reliable and valid instrument. Generally speaking, it's more meaningful to know your BMI than to know "merely" your weight. A six footer who weighs 150 is skinny, a five footer who weight 150 is fat.

I think Roody just called me fat!!!

HEY!!

:D