179cm, 81.7kg, shade over 26 on the scale. I definitely could do with losing a bit of weight, but am probably as fit as I’ve ever been…

I guess that means: Good News, you’ve put on muscle; Bad News, you need to lose some fat 😀

Strangely enough I actually found the opposite – when I recently bought a shirt I needed a medium when I tried the small first as usual. The small didn’t fit me round the shoulders rather than the waist – despite being a serious kayaker for 25+ years not a problem I’ve had before (though my current programme of higher intensity stuff and weights along with rock climbing might mean I’ve bulked up more). Is it also that normal people are more scrawny?

You seem to be confusing being healthy with being overweight. Clearly fat levels are an indicator of health, but not the only one, and if you are officially obese then unless you’re carrying the sort of muscle shown in some of the pics above the chances are you could be more healthy if you lost a bit of weight. Fortunately I don’t think any jobs (or indeed anybody apart from ignorant GPs) do use BMI in that blunt a manner.

I’m 2cm taller than you, and even at 94kg people didn’t think of me as fat

I didn’t really carry it well there was just a thick layer of extra Huw with the figure of Michael Rasmussen underneath.

Fat calipers are cheap as chips though – I may buy some.

What – the calipers or the chips..? ‘cos there may lie the problem… 😉

DrP

You seem to be confusing being healthy with being overweight.

He’s not.. it’s everyone else that does.

20 @ 180cm and 65kg

It’s about right, always been “athletic” still says I can drop to 60kg and still be healthy not convinced about that tbh

21.8, slightly lower than about a year ago, but not as low as I’d hoped.
( 5’8 & 63.8kg)

My BMI = 21 (183cm, 68kg), aged 33. Like lots of people my age though, there is a modest but persistent little belly – with me since my early 20s.

Most like a man from the Democratic Republic of Congo!

180cm and 85kg puts in a better place than 70% of my age group but I think that reflect more on my peers than it does me and It took fifty years to look this good.

42yr old, 1.77m tall, max weight 68kg gives 22 and Zimbabwe. You can see my ribs on my sides and I have a hint of a six pack in the right light (and without breathing in!) and most of my cycle kit is small, so god knows how you guys with a BMI of 20 think you can afford to healthily lose weight?

BMI is a clumsy tool, and for its intended function – to highlight that populations are getting heavier/fatter – causes as much confusion as it does help. Its amazing how many “steve redgrave would be obese” comments you get from people who havent used years of athletic training to increase their body mass, so it ends up being counter productive by being so open to ridicule.

BMI is a clumsy tool, and for its intended function – to highlight that populations are getting heavier/fatter – causes as much confusion as it does help

Exactly its not really fit for purpose. bBecause BMI rising in a population could an increase in average height

Its amazing how many “steve redgrave would be obese” comments you get from people who havent used years of athletic training to increase their body mass, so it ends up being counter productive by being so open to ridicule.

Sadly he is now 125 kg and out of training I think we can conclude he is no longer an example of high BMI healthy weight

But of course diabetes doesn’t help

19 should be about 18.5 but been off the bike and put about 3kg on round the middle.
Technically borderline undernourished but I eat more than most people.

No disrespect to a knight of the realm, but he is a genuine fat biffer nowadays!

BMI is a rough tool for the average build if you are a slight or stocky build it it useless.

170cm tall average man has a 36-38″ chest and 30″ waist (wetsuit sizing)

If you have a bigger chest ie 44″ and corresponding waist you come up as over weight and visa versa if a slight build but for the average its ok

Its a load of bollox. They did a BMI on a 6′ 7″ Olympic rower and deemed him clinically obese.

Once got a health check when I joined a new GP and got told by a wee dumpy nurse that my BMI was a bit on the high side at 26.
The fitness check at the gym though told me my resting heart rate was 45 and I had a body fat %age of 16. The gym test was a bit more accurate IMO.

Its a load of bollox. They did a BMI on a 6′ 7″ Olympic rower and deemed him clinically obese.

Yes It’s a load of bollox for an Olympic rower, doesn’t mask the fact that a significant proportion of the population are overweight or obese and that number is increasing. A fair few of those people are in denial about being overweight.

23.3 6 foot and 78kg but as above it is a total load of bollocks as someone like Cavendish would probably be deemed overweight.

Its a load of bollox. They did a BMI on a 6′ 7″ Olympic rower and deemed him clinically obese.

I’d love to know how he did on the height corrected one. I suspect that might be enough to put him in range as that is very tall

Also it doesn’t mean it rubbish just because it doesn’t work for olympic rowers

They did a BMI on a 6′ 7″ Olympic rower and deemed him clinically obese.

It’s long been known it doesn’t necessarily work for athletes. The question is, how many of us are athletes? 🙂

5’6″ 11st 5lb 44yrs. BMI 26. Could lose a few pounds. Rugby and Sprint training in my youth has left a legacy, I think, always been broad, will never be Robert Millar shaped.

It’s long been known it doesn’t necessarily work for athletes. The question is, how many of us are athletes?

I think what bugs me most about the stupidity of BMI is that not only does it only work for those who are more lightly built than average and not tall, it encourages the obsession with mass as an indicator of health. So many people would be better served by gaining some muscle mass, getting heavier initially and then getting lighter as their quicker metabolism works in their favour – and in the process sorting out a multitude of issues which arise from poor core strength or joint stability. And the older you are, the more beneficial this is.

38 (178cm / 120kg) which puts me squarely in the BMI is a load of bollocks camp. It was still 32 all through my late teens and twenties, when I was playing University and National League rugby, so I don’t put much by it. My BP is normal which is what my wife (a nurse) cares about. Last time I did a bleep test at work I was this weight and got to 12 something so I definitely think there are better indicators of health than BMI.

I definitely think there are better indicators of health than BMI.

I think everyone agrees. I’d be surprised if medical professionals were simply focusing on this and nothing else.

Fortunately I don’t think any jobs (or indeed anybody apart from ignorant GPs) do use BMI in that blunt a manner.

Some police forces do. I know someone who was turned down from a transfer from West Yorkshire to North Yorkshire based on BMI, and I know a gym instructor (!) who was told he has lose X kgs before he could join thames Valley as a PCSO.

I’m 27.1 and I’ve hardly any fat at all. 5″10 and 86 kg.it really is rubbish.

Waist to hip & shoulder ratio is probably the most reliable yet simple indicator of healthy levels of fat.

188cm and 81kg bmi 22

6ft & 65kgs BMI 20 aged 67. (have a lower BMI than 99% of males aged 60-69 in your country).
Could be interesting seeing some of your scores when you get to my age 🙂

I think the US army puts staff on a diet who are above a certain BMI.

Fortunately I don’t think any jobs (or indeed anybody apart from ignorant GPs) do use BMI in that blunt a manner.

Some police forces do.doesn’t that just make them idiots tho? pretty sure every BMI calculator I’ve seen (including the OPs) says “this is an estimate so check with your GP” or similar

pennine – Member

6ft & 65kgs BMI 20 aged 67. (have a lower BMI than 99% of males aged 60-69 in your country).
Could be interesting seeing some of your scores when you get to my age
I’ll be happy if I live to your age, cancer seems to rip through the males in my family before 65 🙁

Good work on your weight though.

24.82. So I’m nearly fat. Better have another toffee crisp then. (I’ve got a long back, big hip bones, am a professional athlete etc)

Abot right for me if I’m honest. Got a minor pie satchel since Mini S#2 came along and bikes were verbotten. Starting to shift it now though.

5’10” and 19 stones. 3 stones more than your competitive rugby weight, when you presumably had rather more muscle than now – that extra flab is enough to take you from being very skinny (which you presumably weren’t when a competitive rugby player at 16 stones) to being overweight. What is your waist size?

I definitely think there are better indicators of health than BMI.

Of course there are. BMI is however a fair indicator of unhealthy excess weight.

38″. For sure I’m overweight, but a BMI that high is like those people that go on the TV for getting taken out of their house through the wall. I’m not skinny, but I’m not one of them!

Which puts you quite firmly in the “at risk” category and suggests that BMI might not be quite such a load of bollocks http://www.bhf.org.uk/bmi/bmi_measurewaist.html

It’s a very rough guide for average builds. According to the scale, I’d be more healthy at 9st 10 than I am now, which is bollocks. 14st is my optimal weight at around 12-15% BF, which still counts me as overweight despite being in the healthy BF range.

BMI is not used to definitively diagnose obesity – as people who are very muscular sometimes have a high BMI, without excess fat – but for most people, it can be a useful indication of whether they may be overweight.
A better measure of excess fat is waist circumference, and can be used as an additional measure in people who are overweight (with a BMI of 25 to 29.9) or moderately obese (with a BMI of 30 to 34.9).
Generally, men with a waist circumference of 94cm or more and women with a waist circumference of 80cm or more are more likely to develop obesity-related health problems.

I’m carrying a good bit spare at the moment (due to 6 month old baby eating gym time) and my waist is still 2-3″ less than 37″ (94cm) so despite the BMI alarm going off, I reckon I’m OK.

Which puts you quite firmly in the “at risk” category and suggests that BMI might not be quite such a load of bollocks http://www.bhf.org.uk/bmi/bmi_measurewaist.html

Not seen that before – thanks. I’ve always been told – by Mrs TGA and the doc as above – something along the lines of ‘BMI is pish, don’t worry about it’.

Not read the whole thread but mine is 35 – do I win?

Now I am quite fat around my chest/stomach and do still need to lose a stone or two ideally, but I don’t really have the overall shape or the face of a fat person I don’t reckon. I would look ludicrous if I lost 40 kilos which is what my ideal weight would apparently be.

I’m around 34-36 in jeans and an L in most t-shirts etc.

I guess lots of fat people say this but I am pretty damn muscly. 🙂

Was beating two skinny friends up the hills out on the bike last night.

34!

I do more weights than riding and eat 150g of protein.

6ft2 116kg 33″ inch waist and 48″ shoulders.

I can press my Father overhead but he’s only 11 stone.

Need to drop 12kg for a 6 pack but aiming for my first contest in Sept.