Come on Sherlock. One does not have to a health expert to have figured this out. Actually it is not flawed, it was as you say a statistical population measurement tool developed by a mathematician in the 1830. It was never intended for measuring individuals. it is bordering on incompetence that the medical profession aided by the Ministry of Health and the Heart Foundation have continued with this for so long.
Duh. I have a naturally muscular, thigh, bum and breast heavy figure. Ive nearly always been overweight/obese according to bmi which completely fails to factor in muscle and the fact that some women will always have boobs. After a prolonged illness I briefly dipped into healthy weight once. I was a walking skeleton with visible bones and DD breasts and in no way healthy. Before that I always fixated on losing weight because bmi said I was overweight but seeing how I actually looked at the top end of healthy immediately made me realise what a joke bmi is.
How about people stop using a tool for something it wasnt designed for?BMI was designed as a gauge for measuring populations, not individuals. It was never designed to be used on an individual basis, as it is a simple calculation that relies on data averaging to get any meaningful information out of it.It doesnt take into account any individual variables: age, body type, body fat %, muscle mass, etc.If I had to figure out the general obesity level of a city or country given only basic information about each individual, like gender, height and weight, Id use BMI.
Of course the BMI isnt accurate, that was never its intention. We have accurate ways of measuring a persons body composition (body fat %, muscle mass, etc). The problem is, those accurate methods are time consuming and expensive, whereas the BMI only requires a few basic measurements.This kind of trade-off is so universal its basically a natural law. Even though the BMI will give inaccurate results for some people its still a useful way of measuring a populations changing body composition.
BMI and skin fold tests were discounted years ago by many in the medical fraternity and experts in the health and sporting industry.For example by BMI definition most All Blacks are classified as obese and that is quite incorrect. Skin fold tests should be used in conjunction with other factors including blood tests, VO2 max tests, diet, smoking, lifestyle and age
Being a mortician and also owning a weight loss / strength and conditioning chain, I have NEVER used BMI. !5 years ago I imported 2 Body Composition Units so we were not left guessing how we were physically changing people. Having said that, people seem to have a weight their body just feels right at. No back pain, run up a set of stairs with ease, get off the floor easily etc.... And for those who do not have a BCA unit this is what to aim for.
When I ran a marathon, the fittest Ive ever been, the BMI said I was over weight.
Most people who diss BMI are overweight and trying to justify it. Lol. Yes for sone athletes it doesnt work but for the average kiwi who is not an athlete its completely accurate.
BMI is used for populations because it requires only two pieces of data: height and weight. When talking about datasets for populations, if you have any data at all, these are likely to be the pieces of data that you have. So if academics are trying to judge the health of a population (comparing countries, or comparing people who live in cities vs towns, or whatever) then they are forced to come up with some guage of health of that population using the data they have available - which means BMI.If better data sets are available - eg waist circumference measures are somehow available for a whole population, academics will use that data. But it is hardly ever available, unlike weight and height.For individuals, you should use BMI as a rough indicator for your own health, but dont treat it as gospel.
It wasnt long ago the average man weighed 74kg and the average woman 59kgs in NZ. Now its 88 and 74kg respectively due to cheap available refined calorie dense food. Not helped by the fact we eat out, and get takeaways a lot more than we used to. So now people want to shift the goalposts rather than admit weve all got a lot bigger.
This article is about 30 years out of step.... Its old hat that the BMI index is seriously flawed. Its just a very broad basic reference to a very complex analysis, that covers overall body fat percentage, muscle mass and even genetic predisposition..
I use BMI but itâ's not the only thing I use. I also use general fitness, measurements, the scales and how clothes fit.
New Zealand does have an obesity problem, all these experts are saying that bmi doesnt work if youre muscular. Most of basic everyday New Zealanders arent overly muscular.
They dont use it as a standalone measure. Used collectively with a host of other measures it gives a good snapshot of your health. Its one pixel in your health picture.BMI still works well as a population statistic.
Actually, none of the experts say its an inaccurate health measure, they correctly point out that there are better measures at an individual level. However, this doesnt change the fact that as a population based measure, the BMI is quite useful.And guess what, everyone reading this is part of a population so you arent actually exempt.In fact, dear reader, for most people the BMI is probably too generous: you are probably fat and unhealthy while remaining well within the BMI.And yes yes, for the 0.2% of readers with the physique of SBW, you dont have to worry.
Blowing into a breath tester is not an accurate measure of someones driving ability, but for the most part, it works.
All this is 1, and it was never intended to be a metric for individuals, but the reality is that the vast majority of people with a bmi of overweight are indeed overweight.You cant compare yourself to an athlete or weightlifter unless you ARE an athlete or weightlifter, people.
Itâ's not a theory, itâ's just a tool being used in an inappropriate way.
One of the police departments in Asia have a simple formula to work out if you are fit enough, your waist size must not be bigger than your chest size.......
I have been technically morbidly obese according to BMI since 18 and once was told by a doctor to loose 30 kg so I pulled up my shirt and showed him my six pack abs and asked him where was I supposed to lose it from .
Come on Sherlock. One does not have to a health expert to have figured this out. Actually it is not flawed, it was as you say a statistical population measurement tool developed by a mathematician in the 1830. It was never intended for measuring individuals. it is bordering on incompetence that the medical profession aided by the Ministry of Health and the Heart Foundation have continued with this for so long.
Duh. I have a naturally muscular, thigh, bum and breast heavy figure. Ive nearly always been overweight/obese according to bmi which completely fails to factor in muscle and the fact that some women will always have boobs. After a prolonged illness I briefly dipped into healthy weight once. I was a walking skeleton with visible bones and DD breasts and in no way healthy. Before that I always fixated on losing weight because bmi said I was overweight but seeing how I actually looked at the top end of healthy immediately made me realise what a joke bmi is.
How about people stop using a tool for something it wasnt designed for?BMI was designed as a gauge for measuring populations, not individuals. It was never designed to be used on an individual basis, as it is a simple calculation that relies on data averaging to get any meaningful information out of it.It doesnt take into account any individual variables: age, body type, body fat %, muscle mass, etc.If I had to figure out the general obesity level of a city or country given only basic information about each individual, like gender, height and weight, Id use BMI.
Of course the BMI isnt accurate, that was never its intention. We have accurate ways of measuring a persons body composition (body fat %, muscle mass, etc). The problem is, those accurate methods are time consuming and expensive, whereas the BMI only requires a few basic measurements.This kind of trade-off is so universal its basically a natural law. Even though the BMI will give inaccurate results for some people its still a useful way of measuring a populations changing body composition.
BMI and skin fold tests were discounted years ago by many in the medical fraternity and experts in the health and sporting industry.For example by BMI definition most All Blacks are classified as obese and that is quite incorrect. Skin fold tests should be used in conjunction with other factors including blood tests, VO2 max tests, diet, smoking, lifestyle and age
Being a mortician and also owning a weight loss / strength and conditioning chain, I have NEVER used BMI. !5 years ago I imported 2 Body Composition Units so we were not left guessing how we were physically changing people. Having said that, people seem to have a weight their body just feels right at. No back pain, run up a set of stairs with ease, get off the floor easily etc.... And for those who do not have a BCA unit this is what to aim for.
When I ran a marathon, the fittest Ive ever been, the BMI said I was over weight.
Most people who diss BMI are overweight and trying to justify it. Lol. Yes for sone athletes it doesnt work but for the average kiwi who is not an athlete its completely accurate.
BMI is used for populations because it requires only two pieces of data: height and weight. When talking about datasets for populations, if you have any data at all, these are likely to be the pieces of data that you have. So if academics are trying to judge the health of a population (comparing countries, or comparing people who live in cities vs towns, or whatever) then they are forced to come up with some guage of health of that population using the data they have available - which means BMI.If better data sets are available - eg waist circumference measures are somehow available for a whole population, academics will use that data. But it is hardly ever available, unlike weight and height.For individuals, you should use BMI as a rough indicator for your own health, but dont treat it as gospel.
It wasnt long ago the average man weighed 74kg and the average woman 59kgs in NZ. Now its 88 and 74kg respectively due to cheap available refined calorie dense food. Not helped by the fact we eat out, and get takeaways a lot more than we used to. So now people want to shift the goalposts rather than admit weve all got a lot bigger.
This article is about 30 years out of step.... Its old hat that the BMI index is seriously flawed. Its just a very broad basic reference to a very complex analysis, that covers overall body fat percentage, muscle mass and even genetic predisposition..
I use BMI but itâ's not the only thing I use. I also use general fitness, measurements, the scales and how clothes fit.
New Zealand does have an obesity problem, all these experts are saying that bmi doesnt work if youre muscular. Most of basic everyday New Zealanders arent overly muscular.
They dont use it as a standalone measure. Used collectively with a host of other measures it gives a good snapshot of your health. Its one pixel in your health picture.BMI still works well as a population statistic.
Actually, none of the experts say its an inaccurate health measure, they correctly point out that there are better measures at an individual level. However, this doesnt change the fact that as a population based measure, the BMI is quite useful.And guess what, everyone reading this is part of a population so you arent actually exempt.In fact, dear reader, for most people the BMI is probably too generous: you are probably fat and unhealthy while remaining well within the BMI.And yes yes, for the 0.2% of readers with the physique of SBW, you dont have to worry.
Blowing into a breath tester is not an accurate measure of someones driving ability, but for the most part, it works.
All this is 1, and it was never intended to be a metric for individuals, but the reality is that the vast majority of people with a bmi of overweight are indeed overweight.You cant compare yourself to an athlete or weightlifter unless you ARE an athlete or weightlifter, people.
Itâ's not a theory, itâ's just a tool being used in an inappropriate way.
One of the police departments in Asia have a simple formula to work out if you are fit enough, your waist size must not be bigger than your chest size.......
I have been technically morbidly obese according to BMI since 18 and once was told by a doctor to loose 30 kg so I pulled up my shirt and showed him my six pack abs and asked him where was I supposed to lose it from .