[Closed] Whats your BMI (and is it a 'realistic calculation?)

20.56

is it realistic ..no idea tbh

FWIW i can loose 5 kg [at 5 10 and 65 kg] and still not be underweight.
That surprised me tbh

i can loose 5 kg [at 5 10 and 65 kg] and still not be underweight.

Thats crazy.

My bmi is about 21.
But I am a 12 foot tall body builder....

DrP

(Hang on, I got that wrong didn't I...)

27.7 - hora you fat bastard.

FWIW i can loose 5 kg [at 5 10 and 65 kg] and still not be underweight.
That surprised me tbh

Surprises me too - you're exceptionally skinny IIRC.

I need to be sub-80kg to just tip into normal, according to this. I had set my sights on 80kg as being my supreme racing weight 🙂

98kg and 6ft 1 is pretty tubby to be fair.

BMI is an indicated only and generally works for those of normal build. If you are in to any extremes of physique then it becomes less sensical as a measure.

My BMI is 26.5 apparently, not that I really care. I'm 6'1 and 14 stone 4. What I'm amazed at is that the NHS calculator reckons my healthy weight range is 9st 14 to 13st 7. I can tell you now at 9st 14 I would look seriously ill, like knocking on deaths door ill. Ridiculous

When I was very fit and training silly amounts it was 26.1 (6'5" 15.5 stone) which is apparently overweight. No one would have said I was overweight (to my face 🙂 ).

It's a helpful tool up to a point but doesn't really work well for tall/short people or those who do sports that tend to build muscle.

25 BMI me @ 5'10. about 79-80kg.

Well, I will fit well into the South Korean society apparently because I am very similar to them. hmmm ... must be the mongol gene.

I am a fatty apparently.

Surprises me too - you're exceptionally skinny IIRC.

98kg and 6ft 1 is pretty tubby to be fair.

I'd agree but then 34" jeans/trousers across all brands and tshirts in large max is hardly tubby. Must be down to the mythical heavy bones

But you're tall, aren't you Junkyard?

The lightest I've been at my full adult height is 13.5 stone at which point I was unhealthily scrawny and that puts me only mid range in the BMI chart. That was after travelling for a month and basically not eating because I didn't have any money...

22 according to your link. Realistic? - don't know.

I have fit 'less chubby' periods and sometimes have some 'muffin-tops' 🙂
Probably somewhere in-between right now.

22.1
-- I'm 51, 5' 8 1/2", 67kg (10st 5 or 6 lbs typically).

The thing is, that's bang in the healthy weight (as above). Now I know that if I lost even 2 or 3 lbs, I'd not really be in a good way - flab grab is minimal even at the moment, there'd be none! pretty fit, legs are decently strong, arms too - solid.

Healthy range is from 8st 10lb to 11st 11lb - I've been under 10st only once in recent past - 25 years ago after a posting in Japan (!) and it was not a healthy look.. under 9st? get away!

mine is 24 at 82 kg whilst I would say I am close to racing fit. At onl 3kg more i would be overweight whilst i would say that most people would still envy my riding then(I was 85 last year and climbed at 1000VAM)I could offcially mose ten kg and be healthy though in reality i would be close to death. And its not from gyming to much I haven't been in a gm for at least 5 year.

I have studied as a coach. BMI is good as a first indication for the general population. Though it is not accurate for muscular people and not accurat for quite tall or quite small people.

22 BMI and have a lower BMI than 94% of the UK!! bloody hell!! most like someone from Niger. TBH I though I'm 'Mr average" ... Turns out mr Average is a biffer

5'10" and 11st.

28.2 currently
Even when I was 7 kg lighter and pretty fit it was still 25!!!
I did hit 37 when i was a 20st chubbster (and occasional rugby prop)

But you're tall, aren't you Junkyard

Nope only 5 10

And 2 kg lighter than kcall

Junkyard - lazarus

But you're tall, aren't you Junkyard

Only when I lived in Wales

Nope only 5 10

And 2 kg lighter than kcall

That's underweight ... 😆

Had no idea, but having just looked it up 22. Blimey, at 6ft I'd need to be under 10st to be considered borderline underweight 😯

No idea. What will it help me to find out knowing such a thing?

28.4 here (16st 9lb, 6'4") although I wouldn't class myself as overweight, just chunky.

Althought I have just put on 7lbs in the last week thanks to Matt's superb 3 course dinners at the White Rooms!

20.5 with 8.5% body fat, measured a few weeks ago.

188 and 73kg, or 6,2" and 11.5 stone.

About as low as I get as it's on the border of people thinking I'm ill.

22 - I'm 42, 1.8m, 72kg. Not surprised I'm in the middle of the healthy range - there's still a bit (not a lot!) of flab I could get rid of.

I'd say BMI is generally pretty accurate - have you got a gut? Then the BMI is correct. 6 pack and huge arms from playing professional rugby? Maybe not so much - but you'd know if that were the case.

I'm 28 as well Hora. And I'd say I'm definitely on the portly side. Which I'm actually trying to do something about for the first time in my life (in case anyone missed Greggs issuing a profits warning)

The range of weights its given me as an ideal weight is ridiculous though. I'd have to hack off a couple of limbs

20.4/"normal" (first time I've been called that!) at 5'10", 10st2.

Fighting weight is usually a little less than that. Below 10stone I notice my power output dropping, but I can climb bloody well. Much more than I am now, I really notice the extra weight when grinding up steep hills. I'm carrying a little more upper body muscle these days than I used to as I'm rock climbing regularly.

Most (non-sporty) people would call me skinny, but I wouldn't say I either feel or look it myself...

BMI is a crap measure - it takes no account of body make up so all it can tell you is the ratio of your height to your weight.

People seem to think it will tell then if they are under or over weight, which implies having too much fat, which it can't.

Chris Hoy is obese by his BMI - says it all really.

About as low as I get as it's on the border of people thinking I'm ill.

🙂 If I get any lower than what I am now (22 apparently) then mrs blobby really starts to complain!

BMI is simply a measure of risk. If you're white, risk of health problems (type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, various cancers) increase at a BMI of over 25, increase more at over 30 and even more at over 35. However, some people will deal better with excess weight than others. Another, more accurate, assessment of risk is waist circumference.
You have a higher risk of health problems if your waist size is:
more than 94cm (37 inches) if you're a man
more than 80cm (31.5 inches) if you're a woman
Your risk of health problems is even higher if your waist size is:
more than 102cm (40 inches) if you're a man
more than 88cm (34.5 inches) if you're a woman
The BHF tells you how to measure it: [url= http://www.bhf.org.uk/bmi/bmi_measurewaist.html ]Waist circumference[/url] (Don't just use trouser sizes - you're probably wearing them under your waist.)

If you are Asian your risk increases at lower weights /waist circumferences.

The BMI is widely used because it's pretty simple. If you are a professional athlete chances are your BMI will put you in the higher risk category but your waist circumference will be lower. It's not a hard test though - is my BMI >25? Am I an athlete? If I wear my trousers on my hips does my stomach overhang them?If the answers are Yes, No, Yes then you're at higher risk.

The ideal BMI is around 21-22 but you can go down to 18.5 before anyone gets really concerned. 60% of the population have a BMI of over 25 so people with lower, but still normal, BMIs look skinny to modern eyes (unless they've been airbrushed).

6'3" and 14 stone so 24.

I think at my height I can go down to 11 stone 3 - which would be pretty skinny, about what I was when I was 14yo (and the same height as I am now).

Jeans are sized to flatter in my experience - I think you'll find a couple of extra inches if you use a tape measure!

30.2

Yup, tubby funster here!

BMI is an indicated only and generally works for those of normal build. If you are in to any extremes of physique then it becomes less sensical as a measure.

The problem is people then kid themselves that they're not average to justify their BMI. I've got fair sized arms/shoulders/back and probably pretty good core muscles from sailing, and probably reasnoble legs from cycling. But that's not why my BMI's 30.

Realisticaly I remember being 80kg as a rugby prop in high school, and still being a bit tubby.

Jeans are sized to flatter in my experience - I think you'll find a couple of extra inches if you use a tape measure!

Depends on the brand and the size IME.

36" French connection jeans seem to be about the same as 32" **** and 34" Hillfiger, and even then the FC jeans measured up more than 36". But the bigger they go the more flattering they get, the difference between 32 and 34 is about 2", but 36 and 38" feels more like a 4" difference!

25.5 here, which makes me overweight. 32" waist would suggest that's not realistic, but like plenty of others on here I'm packing way more than the normal amount of muscle. Though I did used to have a BMI around 22.5 (and a 30" waist) until fairly recently, and back in my skinny triathlon days a BMI of ~21 (and 29" waist), so I'm clearly overweight compared to what I could be.

23.3 in the higher third of "healthy" weight sounds right-ish, I could lose a few pounds if I tried properly, lower end would need someone with a very slight frame.

In my twenties I had a BMI of ~26 and people thought I was OK weight, publics perception of healthy weight is not very accurate

... what Cyve said especially:

The BMI is widely used because it's pretty simple. If you are a professional athlete chances are your BMI will put you in the higher risk category but your waist circumference will be lower. It's not a hard test though - is my BMI >25? Am I an athlete? If I wear my trousers on my hips does my stomach overhang them?If the answers are Yes, No, Yes then you're at higher risk.

The ideal BMI is around 21-22 but you can go down to 18.5 before anyone gets really concerned. 60% of the population have a BMI of over 25 so people with lower, but still normal, BMIs look skinny to modern eyes (unless they've been airbrushed).

BMI is a crap measure - it takes no account of body make up so all it can tell you is the ratio of your height to your weight.

People seem to think it will tell then if they are under or over weight, which implies having too much fat, which it can't.

Chris Hoy is obese by his BMI - says it all really.

It's a perfectly good measure for the vast majority of the population - the limits are well known: elite (or very serious amateur) athletes, very tall and very short people. Unless you're in one of those categories the chances are you're just kidding yourself.

'Back in the day' my fighting weight was 95Kg near as no matter 15st, at the time I had a 48" chest and a 32" waist BMI said i needed to lose 1.5st where from?

BMI of 17

I've got a six pack though 🙂

21.5 and below 96% of males in my age group. Apparently I could lose 4 kilos, but I'm not sure from where.

Currently about 26.5; just under 6 ft and 13.10 (87kg)

I know I need to lose about 3kg / half a stone to get back to being proper comfy in my skin which would make me about 25.5 so still 'overweight' on the scale; lowest I've been for many years was just prior to the 12:12 last year at 12.13, and I did look quite gaunt.

My mid range BMI for healthy (22.5) would be 74.2kg, ie: 2st lighter than i am now, and bottom end would be 66kg (10st 5) I can't imagine I'd be healthy at that weight!!

There was a 'new' BMI proposed a couple of years back. The rationale that as people get taller, they also get wider and deeper, hence a system that takes your height change and only factors it as a square is over simplified, and was only devised that way because in the 1840's when the ability to do complex calculations and proper statistical analysis was more limited.

http://people.maths.ox.ac.uk/trefethen/bmi_calc.html

How do you stack on that calculator? (I'm still fat!)

The explanation http://people.maths.ox.ac.uk/trefethen/bmi.html is interesting, particularly wrt the impact of muscle vs fat.

What about the density of muscle vs. fat? We hear about this frequently in discussions of BMI (including in the Economist article I was responding to, which mentioned Olympic weight lifters), but it's a smaller effect. Muscle is about 18% denser than fat. This means that if you heroically exercised so much that you converted 10% of your body volume from fat to muscle (wow!), your BMI reading would go up just 1.8%. That's much less than the corrections just mentioned for short or tall people.

22 here

*chuckles at the tubbies*

I need to put on at least 3kg according to the NHS BMI calculator

Cakeathon!!

22 and definitely need to lose some. Too heavy for running. The other 92% of you are definitely too heavy for running 🙂

Muscle might only weigh a little bit more than fat, but you can gain a lot of it without being unhealthy, which is the point here I think.

20.7 after being told to put some weight on by the docs (though was still within 'normal' weight)

In a related topic, about offering gastric band surgery to people with high BMI and type 2 diabetes, one of the medical types interviewed blamed it on the easy access to 'obesigenic' foods.

She means cakes and pies, doesn't she?

I've got a six pack though

Just checked only way I could get my BMI down that low is to remove a limb 😉

Probably around 24, though I haven't weighed myself for a while.

I'm 5'6", I buy 32 inch jeans and can comfortable shove both hands down the front, or one up to the elbow.

But I've been told not to.

[quote=cyve ]You have a higher risk of health problems if your waist size is:
more than 94cm (37 inches) if you're a man

Wow - I need never worry about health issues due to my weight then, as even when I've felt fat I've been nowhere near that (34" waist at max). Though I'm less than convinced by the lack of scaling with that single measure - surely somebody 6'6" should have a larger waist than somebody 5'2"?

It's not a hard test though - is my BMI >25? Am I an athlete? If I wear my trousers on my hips does my stomach overhang them?If the answers are Yes, No, Yes then you're at higher risk.

Yes, Yes, No. I'm OK then?

[quote=theotherjonv ]The explanation http://people.maths.ox.ac.uk/trefethen/bmi.html is interesting, particularly wrt the impact of muscle vs fat.

Though as molgrips alludes, and the point missing there, muscle shouldn't really be included in BMI calculations at all if you're trying to determine whether somebody is healthy (if anything it could actually be used in the opposite sense). Hence if somebody loses 5kg of fat, but gains 5kg of muscle their BMI stays the same, but their health improves. The density of fat vs. muscle is a red herring - it's the fact that muscle is included as part of your weight when making this measure which causes the problems.

As an anecdote, since when I decided I really needed to lose some weight a few months ago, my actual weight on the scales has hardly changed, but my waist size has decreased and my t-shirts have gone from being tight around the stomach to being tight around the shoulders. I don't think the fact my density has hardly changed is really all that relevant!

5'7" and 11½st = 25bmi am overweight apparently, but I would doubt anyone would agree. And why on the NHS calc can you only tick up to "moderate" exercise?

Surroundedbyhills, powered by beer n chips!

I've struggled a little with the notion that at a BMI of 26, I am still 'overweight', despite having lost 26kg (OK so last January my BMI was 33.5 putting in a pretty risky group).

I think I am as 'fit' as I've ever been allowing for the fact that my previous period of fitness was in my 20s and with the best will in the world, there will be certain things I won't ever be able to match.

I'm climbing at somewhere between 900 and 1200 VAM now and am able to generate sustained periods of around 270 watts so I feel pretty good about how fit I am.

But, and there really is no getting away from this, I still have excess body fat. I only have to look in a mirror to see that I could still readily loose the four kilos I need to get to a normal BMI.

What's also uncomfortable is that I recently saw a report of all the average BMI for all the teams in the TDF and not one of them was above 22 (the SD was not published so there maybe some individuals that are at or above 25).

My problem is losing the last four kilos. I've been doing 350km a week since April and while the last six kilos have come off pretty readily, I seem to be stuck at 84kg as a low point and from there it very easily goes up to 85.5kg if I have a slightly indulgent weekend.

I'm not saying I can't lose it, I just don't know how to do it.

i might win this... mine is 33, 5'11" and 105kg, i could lose a few pounds but have 35" waist, ex semi-pro rugby and paratrooper and capable of cycling 250 miles in a day, so does that mean i'm going to die next week??

aracer - couldn't agree more. I've recently had a pie amnesty which has resulted in me losing 9 lbs in a few weeks. To my mind I don't think I look a bit different. Still as 'cuddley' as ever. But I can tell when putting certain item of clothing on that there's been a marked decrease in my ample girth

Hence if somebody loses 5kg of fat, but gains 5kg of muscle their BMI stays the same, but their health improves.

Yes, true, and that's why martin johnson / Chris Hoy are obese. the point made was about muscle [u]weighing more than[/u] fat and it doesn't substantially. As per the example, if you converted 10% of your body [u]volume[/u] from fat to muscle, your BMI would change by less than 2%

And ultimately hence why to true indicators have to be a mix of total weight plus fat %, and as fat % scales are unreliable and most don't have access to caliper testing (or would be unwilling to succumb to it) then the best measure is either 'do i have a fold over the top of my jeans' or 'when i jump up and down naked in the mirror, how much jiggles'

BMI of 27 and apparently I am most like men from Libya!!

The NHS website reckons that my healthy weight range is 52.2 - 70.8kg.

I have been trying (somewhat sporadically) to get down to 70kg (from about 75), thinking that would be the lowest weight I would want to get down to.
But I could still lose another 18kg and still be 'healthy'!! Well, that ain't gonna happen. Even when I was a scrawny rake runner at school, I weighed more than 52.2kg!

i might win this... mine is 33, 5'11" and 105kg, i could lose a few pounds but have 35" waist, ex semi-pro rugby and paratrooper and capable of cycling 250 miles in a day, so does that mean i'm going to die next week??

Myostatin deficient for sure!

24.6 here, 6'2", 13st9 ish

Was up to 26+ last year, did some 5:2 diet together with some just being sensible to peg it back, feel better for it. I was feeling tight in 36" trousers, now back in 34" where I have been most of my adult life. Ride or gym regular and feel much better for kicking the pounds off, might try and drop a few more.

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

Hora bearing in mind i am 6ft 1 and 78kg - i wear 34 jeans and large tshirts, are you sure? I suppose tshirts have a large amount of streeeeetch as do the sweat pants you wear, do you have elastic in the waist of your jeans?

22 for me and according to the link:

[i]You're most like someone from ****stan[/i]

And if I add 22.5kg (to my 80kg) I get to average BMI for the UK...

My BMI is about 25.5
I think it's fair - I'm carrying a bit of fat and think I have an average build - neither particularly skinny or stocky.

Remember that BMI is not gender differentiated.

So the 18-25 'normal' range is for both.
A 'normal' male would probably hit about 23 and a 'female' about 20.

If a woman has a BMI of 25.5 (same as me), she'll be significantly fatter.

[quote=theotherjonv ]the point made was about muscle weighing more than fat and it doesn't substantially. As per the example, if you converted 10% of your body volume from fat to muscle, your BMI would change by less than 2%

Which is a complete irrelevance. The link you gave says "What about the density of muscle vs. fat? We hear about this frequently in discussions of BMI (including in the Economist article I was responding to, which mentioned Olympic weight lifters)" I don't believe that at all - I've never heard anybody mention density in such discussions. We talk all the time about muscle affecting the calculations, but not in the context of it affecting density - he is completely missing the point.

i might win this... mine is 33, 5'11" and 105kg, i could lose a few pounds but have 35" waist, ex semi-pro rugby and paratrooper and capable of cycling 250 miles in a day, so does that mean i'm going to die next week??

Myostatin deficient for sure!

I find it really difficult, last year in readiness for 250 Manchester - London ride, i was riding 100 miles every sunday, 67 miles commute on a tuesday plus 3-4 sessions in the gym doing interval work on bike and rower, felt as fit a fiddle and was capabale of keeping up with much skinnier friends and that was getting down to 99kg, for me it doesn't matter how much I cycle or diet, 20 years as a rubgy prop-forward means i am square in shape and will always struggle to find lycra that doesn't make me look like a bag of walnuts stuffed into a condom!

So personally, i don't go much on BMI, I have regular health checks and would be much more worried if blood pressure started raising etc. I have friends who are in the "normal" percentile of the BMI scale, yet do no exercise, drink like fish and have a terrible diet.

Depends where you buy your clothes from, but a lot of stores have vanity sizing these days. Gap are def the worst for it, but debenhams and Next are both v generous with their sizes. And don't forget that EN 13402 ( the standards that clothes are supposed to be made to ) are still in range, so L could be 102 - 110 cm pretty massive difference in size

24 for me - 172cm & 72kg. That's on the border of overweight according to the BMI scale - healthy range is 54.7kg - 74.3kg apparently. I'd look like a Belsen escapee at 55kg 😐

Aren't all clothing sizes being changed to small, slightly less small, not quite so small, and extra non-petite, so as not to hurt anyones feelings, and reduce the chance of lawsuits for self-esteem issues?

I really think that perceptions of normal have shifted. I lost about 2st to get down to my BMI of 24 (14st) and my friends tell me I am looking thin. Another of my friends has a BMI of around 22, is a keen runner, and he is called gaunt.

We are both mid (actually late -gulp) 40s so are well under the average for our age group. That said I am by no means thin by any sensible objective measure and my friend just has a really athletic build.

Thinking back, fat people really were the exception when I was growing up and worthy of comment (then again I grew up in North Derbyshire so there wasn't much exciting to comment on). I have photos of me in my swimmers when I was about 14/15 - my BMI would have been about 20ish at 11ish stone and 6' 3". I am all lean muscle, but not extremely thin in my view.

23. I'm 5ft2 and 124 lbs, so that's about right, over where I like to be but not overweight. I am most like someone from Gambia.

I really think that perceptions of normal have shifted

^^^This +1000000

FWIW my BMI is 24 - 1.83m & 81.5kg.

I've recently noticed that I now have to buy medium clothing in almost everything whereas previously it was large..

I laugh when clothing manufacturers list a 32 inch waist as "small".

Aren't all clothing sizes being changed to small

I would have needed to buy the womens but I decided against the pink ones

19.7

just for reference/ giggles ...

Chris Froomes bmi would be 20.75

Mine on the other hand ... a rather tubbier 26.1 🙁

I have no idea what mine is, but I look fabulous.

EDIT: Didn't realise you could google it; I genuinely thought forceps or something were involved to squeeze your fatty bits!

23.85

This man has a BMI of 24....

[img] [/img]

I'd agree but then 34" jeans/trousers across all brands and tshirts in large max is hardly tubby. Must be down to the mythical heavy bones

I call bullshit on that 🙂 - try John Rocha & Next trousers, I need 36" to be comfy. Mind you every bit of fat I have is on my gut.

82Kg (last weighed a few weeks back), 174cm, = 27 - need to get to 76Kg to be normal apparently which sounds like bloody hard work. I was aiming for under 80, 78 as a stretch target.. 76 puts me in Armstrong territory, can't be good!

I think that is Greipel? If so he is 184 and 75 kg = 22 bmi

http://www.letour.fr/le-tour/2013/us/riders/lotto-belisol/greipel-andre.html?xtmc=greipel&xtcr=1

I'm with you there scud, think my BMI is still around 34, 17 stone 10lbs 6' 01" ex rugby player . I wear my trousers round my substantial waist 38" ( brand dependant of course) and wear XXL t Shirts and detest skinny fit modern designed clothing as I am the wrong shape. At the age of 16 I had a 21.5" neck from propping but only weighed 12.5 stone and actually struggled to keep any weight on, I got to the age of about 21 and then found my size just grew massively. I peaked at my fattest at the age of about 28 when I hit 22 stone. Was very very fit playing three matches a week training every non match day I wasn't playing and cycling in to work too. I didn't remain that weight for long as I knew I was carrying too much fat so lost all I could.....culminating in LeJog in 2009 the pretty way averaging 100 plus miles a day. I was down to 16 and a half stone then but had a real battle keeping it down that low ( five years after being diagnosed type 2 diabetic at the age of 39). Since then try my hardest to keep healthy BP and diabetes stable but it ain't easy.....I would love in some ways to wind the click back and still be the 16 year old trying to keep my weight on but hey I can only do what my body will now allow me to do as a lot of the medications that I take have their own nasty side effects.
At least the docs no longer mention the words BMI!

BMI of 22 means I have a lower BMI than 94% of males aged 45-59 in the UK. To match the national average I'd have to put on an astonishing 19Kg (3 stone).
Carrying a bit of flab round the tummy I thought I could stand to [i]lose [/i]a few pounds.

I think that is Greipel?

82kg on the Lotto Belisol site.

Greipel is six foot and 75kgs? 😯

Then again, he does have rather pathetic thighs compared with some riders. He's the one on the left, in case you're wondering.

EDIT: 82kg I can believe.

[img] [/img]

Mine, at 5,7 and 72kgs, just teeters into the normal range (24.8). Could probably lose a couple of kgs though.

BMI of 24.

I was like someone from Madagascar but I refreshed the screen using the same data and all of a sudden I'm like someone from China!