MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
*only according to waist size and BMI
Mine came in at 22.7 which is about right as I don't carry much extra insulation.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-43697948
Legs like Wiggins, body like Biggins
BMI is really meant to be an indicator of the health of a large group, not individuals. Many athletes have fairly high BMIs because they have a lot of muscle mass, while people with average BMIs can have much higher body fat percentages because they have very little muscle mass.
24.1 which is OK but I know could do with losing a few pounds
25.1 Which is based upon a scale of wildly criticised methodology.
I'm fit and healthy, thats all that matters.
BMI is for a generally sedentary population not those who actually get out and do something. I did the linked test and my BMI is 26.8, so technically I'm overweight, the last comment on my weight was "you lost weight? you're looking fit".
22 point something so healthy which I guess is accurate. Half expected to be closer to underweight actually.
BMI is really meant to be an indicator of the health of a large group, not individuals. Many athletes have fairly high BMIs because they have a lot of muscle mass, while people with average BMIs can have much higher body fat percentages because they have very little muscle mass.
Apart from the guy who ran the marathon nearly as fast as Mo i suspect there arent many 'athletes' here...
23.7 here and I'm about what you would expect a not fat but not thin man to look like. Until 6 months ago I looked almost exactly like the overweight picture of a man on there, though, with a BMI of about 26. Feel much better now that's gone.
Somewhere in the middle. Can't do the calculator thing cos I haven't got a clue how much I weigh. I find measuring fat much easier using a mirror.
Existence of athletes with a hight BMI != Your high BMI due to pork pies. Good excuse though.
23 ish, hard to believe that 18.5 is health as at that I’d be the weight I was when I was 21 and had been ill for a year. Lived in Glasgow at the time and people kept asking me for drugs as I looked like a heroin addict
Age 54, BMI 23.4, waist 29 inches, abs visible.
I imagine a mirror is not very flexible Dez and aren't the sharp edges painful?
"Your BMI is 21.7 which is in the healthy category."
55 year old. 30" waist. Uncut... ;0)
25.6, 83 kg, 180 cm.
Until a few months ago and buying a road bike I’d been hovering around 90 kg and at the upper end of overweight. At that stage, I too used to hide behind the “yeah well, but leg muscles...”
Now having nearly returned to “healthy”, and being the lightest I’ve been for nearly 10 years, I feel one hell of a lot better. Not there yet, but definitely happy that I’ve lost a chunk of flab I really didn’t think I had!
obese.
but those silly chart things don't really work if you a built like a house side, do they.
28 - Overweight. I'm surprised I'm not classed as Obese really.
I find measuring fat much easier using a mirror.
tru dat.
Strip,stand in front of the mirror and jump.
Nothing above the hips should wobble 😉
20.7
inadvertently dropped a full BMI point this year when I decided to stop eating sugary snacks and eat peanuts/cashews etc instead. Hadn't actually wanted to lose any weight, I was just interested to see if it would affect my energy levels...
24.6
5'11"
80 kg
49
33"
BMI is a bit toss though.
21.3
Just nonsense though. I've been far fitter/healthier in the past at stone heavier than now.
23.5.
BMI is bollox as measurement of health.
I imagine a mirror is not very flexible Dez and aren’t the sharp edges painful?
Man doesn't know how to use mirror shocker. I help: Hold it in your left hand, move your hand behind your back, angle it downwards. Look at the reflection until you can see your buttocks. Now bend forward at the waist until you can see your smile. The further forward you have to bend, the fatter you are. If you can't bend forward far enough, then you are obese.
BMI is bollox as measurement of health.
Not really. It is a pretty good indicator of whether a person is a healthy weight. Doesn't tell you any more than that but it is not supposed to and couldn't possibly just from some height/weight numbers,
BMI of 22.7, ok with that, It'd be interesting to go on one of those fat scanners like an MRI machine and see where the fat / muscle is (I could probably guess and say it's torso, given I'm a cyclist and not particularly upper body strong). never been convinced by those home scales with fat calculators that do it by electrical resistance through the feet...
'yeah but I'm an athlete' QUOTE Prof Naveed Sattar from the Institute of Cardiovascular and Medical Sciences at the University of Glasgow says this is likely to apply to far less than 1% of individuals.
>Not really. It is a pretty good indicator of whether a person is a healthy weight.
Only for untrained people. Anyone who does any weights will have a score unduly high on it. Waist* to height ratio is probably a better single figure metric.
* As in real waist measurement and not trouser size, which can be up to 8" difference due to vanity sizing.
BMI is really meant to be an indicator of the health of a large group, not individuals. Many athletes have fairly high BMIs because they have a lot of muscle mass, while people with average BMIs can have much higher body fat percentages because they have very little muscle mass.
Existence of athletes with a hight BMI != Your high BMI due to pork pies. Good excuse though.
Yeah, unless you're an elite shotputter or professional rugby prop your 'athleticism' probably isn't the reason for an overweight/obese BMI.
The average male olympian (from the data here: https://www.theguardian.com/sport/datablog/2012/aug/07/olympics-2012-athletes-age-weight-height#bmi ) has a BMI of 24, inside the healthy range.
20.4 apparently. Anyone beat that? I'm a skinny wretch.
BMI is really meant to be an indicator of the health of a large group, not individuals. Many athletes have fairly high BMIs because they have a lot of muscle mass, while people with average BMIs can have much higher body fat percentages because they have very little muscle mass.
I'm not calling everyone on this thread fat, but they're not all rugby forwards or Chris Hoy either.
It's like asking people are they an above average driver, suddenly everyone becomes 'athletic' and one of those outliers for whom BMI can't possibly be accurate.
20.4 apparently. Anyone beat that? I’m a skinny wretch.
20 (6ft, 67kg), take that fatso!
^ Bails, do you have to run around in the shower to get wet?
24 here, being a similar to HtS.
Fat bast**d here and I know it. But not as fat as I was, so heading in the right direction. Still some way to go though
At the fat end.
BMI 36ish. I was hovering around 40 6 months ago so not all bad news. I'm having an "over 40s" health check at the docs tomorrow so I'll find out if I'm about to cark it soon or not.
How do all you skinny chaps stay on the ground in a strong wind?
Strip,stand in front of the mirror and jump.
Nothing above the hips should wobble
It's still going. That's been an hour now.
I'm morbidly undertall
18.9
but this is shocking: "About 78% of men in your age group in England are overweight, obese or very obese."
and if you factor in the northern bias towards fatness the figure would be even greater in those areas compared to London which has the lowest (60%)
as ever it’s always somebody else’s problem, either the retailers/supermarkets/education/income/schools/parents etc etc. funny that there were no overweight kids at my school and olive oil was something you put in your ear and a mediterranean diet was scampi and chips.
people need to stop being in denial and take ownership of their health/weight issues and deal with them. (though it’s quite ok to not deal with them as long as you stop blaming society/others for your own ills)
28, based on last time I weighed myself (probably gone down a touch since) at 5'11 and 14st 5lb. Had to guess my waist at 33".
It's funny 'cos I *know* I could do with losing a good stone of fat (though I struggle with much more than that) but folk in my office tend to say 'oh you do loads of exercise (true), you don't need to lose weight (not true)'. But then I am by some way the slimmest here. Well apart from the guy who runs something ridiculous like 3:20 marathons. But we don't talk about him.
Reckon I could stand to lost a lb of beard too.
I’m not calling everyone on this thread fat, but they’re not all rugby forwards or Chris Hoy either.
Exactly. The people who are misrepresented by BMI calculation are probably in the 0.n%.
So on the whole a very good, and easy, indicator.
I am straddling the normal/overweight range and I think it is a fair result TBH.
22.5, would like to lose a couple of kg though to get to a decent race weight.
I used to race the NPS at 67kg, 70" tall, so BMI of 21.6 BMI. I'm now 79 kg, so BMI 25.5 so technically over weight, but my % fat (as measure by callipers) is exactly the same. I stopped cycling and took up weight lifting / gymnastic strength training. I have been 83kg at the same % body fat (BMI 26.7). Doesn't really tell you much....
I keep meaning to get a DEXA bodyfat scan, just out of curiosity...
BMI = 23.6
"About 69% of men in your age group in England are overweight, obese or very obese."
I'm going into the pie making business.
Being of an age where you get invited for medical check-ups I've had my BMI "officially" measured in the last few years. It's somewhat ironic being told you are overweight by someone who is both considerably shorter than yourself and much heavier!
In my youth I used to climb a lot. Looking at pictures of me from that time I was ripped, not quite front cover of Mens Health ripped but pretty decent muscle definition all over. I worked out my BMI for that time - 24, i.e. towards the top end of "normal"
As @MrSmith says, controlling my weight is my responsibility, if I have a splurge on biscuits or whatever then it's up to me to apply the necessary corrections.
30 here
yes im fat and unfit. 🙂
It’s somewhat ironic being told you are overweight by someone who is both considerably shorter than yourself and much heavier!
This is not ironic.
BMI of 29.1 ( ish )
waist = 36
and overweight, but not at all concerned when compared to 7 months ago
BMI of 41 ( ish )
waist was 46 + , and definitely obese, so progress has been made, and continues
@TheBrick - OK, fair point, disturbing or worrying might have been a better word.
19.1 here.
I am not particularly active, don't eat that well and have an office job. I am far from fit.
However I don't eat that much, don't drink large quantities of alcohol and have always been skinny.
I've gained a couple of kilos in the last year or so, and could do with gaining some more lean muscle, which I plan to do through exercise and diet changes.
21.8
I've put on a few lbs too in the last 3 years since my daughter arrived and riding time has got less.
18.6
Last time the BBC did one of these it compared you to where you fit on the global fat scale. I.e. what country you are the closest to the average BMI of. I was closest to the inhabitants of Eritrea. A famine hit African country with an appalling human rights record.
21.5/178 cm/68 kg
could go lower but would be hard work. I eat 10 days of food per week already. Target race weight of 65 kg would probably result in divorce.
Most of the pros are actually about the same BMI. Some will have to work at it harder than others
BMI of 26.6 so officially overweight and I'm at an increased risk of diabetes and heart disease.
Funny that, because at 37 I've got c.12% body-fat, can do 15 strict wide-grip chin ups, bench 120kg+, and get to level 13.x on the bleep test.
Total bollox, as mentioned above. BMI was created to study whole populations and when used on an individual basis is totally meaningless.
A simple waist vs height ratio is far more indicative and involves exactly no online calculators or square roots.
Waist-to-height ratio more accurate than BMI in identifying obesity, new study shows
I keep meaning to get a DEXA bodyfat scan, just out of curiosity…
Same here, but can't quite justify the time, effort or cost. I'm always realistic about body-fat and occasionally use a caliper on the hip to get a ball park figure. 12% to me is you can clearly see abs but not a ripped six pack.
Total bollox, as mentioned above. BMI was created to study whole populations and when used on an individual basis is totally meaningless.
No it isn't, For the average person it is a good indicator. For someone who is not average and likes to spout body fat numbers and how much they can bench press it may not be very indicative - maybe an ego test or self worth test or something like that is more appropriate 🙂
You are in the 0.n% of people I referred to earlier. Walk down the street and look around you and you will see that....
I'm overweight and I know I am but I've got a very knackered knee, sciatica, a penchant for beer and a proclivity for pastry (and all things beige - bread, pasta, pies, chips etc). I'm slightly under the average for my age (46) which means that there are a lot of proper fat knackers out there. WALL-E is starting to look like Nostrdamus now.
All the posters above mixing metric and imperial units will be exiled when I become King. Arrgh!
19.1 - 10st - 6ft - 32w I'm 71 hence imperial measurements.
Never managed to reach 11st in my entire life. 32" waist since a teenager. Hill walker for over 50yrs with many years climbing, caving & last 25+yrs mountain biking.
25.4 BMI, which is about right, as it suggests I am slightly on the overweight side of things and that's the way I look. I am 179 cms tall and currently weigh 81.5 kgs, but am working to get down to my 'racing weight' over the next few weeks, so am aiming to be about 77 kgs by the end of May.
My BMI is around 28 but fat percentage is 15.
I am officially bordering obese!!!
For the average person it is a good indicator
It's just not. For the average person it will give a meaningless average result-ish that tells you nothing. Most people are average on the bell curve and it's a test to see who falls outside this, except for those that fall outside it it often doesn't work. It takes no account of frame size, amount, or not, or muscle carried, etc.
maybe an ego test or self worth test or something like that is more appropriate
Maybe! Being knowledgeable, positive and proud about your own body isn't very British! Ha!
You are in the 0.n%
Maybe 10 years ago, yes, but not these days. Plenty of the next generation are in fantastic shape especially with the increase in knowledge from the internet and things like Crossfit.
Most people are average on the bell curve and it’s a test to see who falls outside this, except for those that fall outside it it often doesn’t work. It takes no account of frame size, amount, or not, or muscle carried, etc.
Well, yes. But we do have a thread here in which almost the entirety of STW falling above 25 is claiming to be an outlier because they're Schwarzenegger/Hoy, not because STW is probably quite average, and they're quite average and quite average is now quite tubby.
I don't know how many STWers you've met in real life, but it's safe to say there's more pastry than Pilate's, and there has never been a forum ride ending at a salad bar.
19.1
180cm, 62Kg, 73cm waist - built like a Greek God (whoever the Greek God for Malnutrition was)...
Through lots of running/cycling and careful diet I lost about 10Kg 18 months ago, and it's stayed off thankfully - but my running times especially have improved massively - my speed appears to be completely connected to my weight - climbing on the bike's better too!
t’s just not. For the average person it will give a meaningless average result-ish that tells you nothing.
It just is. Of course it tells you something. If one person is 35 and another is 22 the person who is 35 is overweight and that is very unlikely to be because they are some muscle bound athlete (again there will be 0.n% of those that are)
Most people are average on the bell curve and it’s a test to see who falls outside this, except for those that fall outside it it often doesn’t work.
You say often, where in reality it is a tiny amount, say 0.n%. Walk through a busy office, walk through a busy street and then come back and tell me how many people you see that are going to be heavy due to high muscle mass.
6.0ft - 74.5kg - 32” waist & 63yrs = 22.1 BMI.
Am I fit? Well since switching from the MTB to the road bike I have been doing an average of 200 miles a week. So reasonably......
my speed appears to be completely connected to my weight
Yep, I often imagine running/riding carrying a 10kg weight and realise losing weight would help
At 24.7 I'm on the upper end of healthy though - just got to be a bit careful which is fine. I'm happy to use BMI as an indicator rather than an absolute measure
According to the BBC thing I'm overweight - 28 BMI.
But I'm in better shape than most men my age apparently.
25.4 just overweight. But I've got childbearing hips and a MASSIVE head.
It just is.
Without staring odd forum tennis, it really is.
Let me give you an example: johnhighfield above. Sorry John!
74.5kg with a BMI of 22.
John loses 5kg of body fat and gains 5kg of muscle. He would not only be dramatically fitter, but look better and very likely be far healthier as well (John, I'm sure you look dreamy already).
His BMI would remain the same - but it's still a good indicator?
Madness.
Well, yes. But we do have a thread here in which almost the entirety of STW falling above 25 is claiming to be an outlier because they’re Schwarzenegger/Hoy
I'm sorry, but I'm not sure you understand where the bell curve lies. 20-25 is the "healthy" range, but this doesn't mean this is where the centre of the normal distribution falls, this is where it "should" lie according to whomever stuck arbitrary numbers of this outdated measure. The UK isn't particularly healthy and it's average BMI was 27.3 as of 2014, and I'm not sure it's improved since then, and this is borne out by the responses above.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_body_mass_index#WHO_Data_on_Mean_BMI_(2014)
My personal BMI of 26.6 is under the UK average so hardly a crazy outlier. Also, 12% body fat at a 26.6 bmi is no Arnold or Hoy. It's decent shape with an emphasis on having put a bit of muscle on a largish frame. We're not talking six packs and steroids here, we're talking deadlifts, chinups, steak and chips. Just over 14 and a half stone at 6'2".
According to the BBC thing I’m overweight – 28 BMI.
But I’m in better shape than most men my age apparently.
That's probably right. Most men are overweight or obese.
21.9, 31” waist (for what it’s worth).
Do people not know if they're overweight or not without having to fill in some quasi-scientific quiz?
Do people not know if they’re overweight or not without having to fill in some quasi-scientific quiz?
Apparently they won't know that they're overweight even after the quiz!
Last year I was 29.3 now I'm 23 and need a new cycling wardrobe
21.9, 31” waist
16st 2lb ,Overweight and I know it.
32.4 on the BMI scale (obese)
47 , 5'10" , 36" waist , 47" chest. I walk 10-12 miles every work day and ride at least a couple of times a week off road. I feel fairly fit but just enjoy my home cooked meals a bit more than I should. Ideally I'd like to get down to 15 stone and I'm half heatedly trying to cut back . The BMI scale reckons I should be a maximum of 12st4lb , I weighed that when I was playing rugby at 16 years old.
Apart from the guy who ran the marathon nearly as fast as Mo i suspect there arent many ‘athletes’ here…
How do you define athlete? Or are you just working in a way to be shitty to people for some reason?
As for being not fat but BMI > 25, it really doesn't take that much muscle to push you over. Plenty of people I work with are much narrower at the shoulder, bum and thigh than me, weigh less, but have a paunch.
22.8. Lightest I've been for probably 25 years at the moment.
Plenty of people I work with are much narrower at the shoulder, bum and thigh than me, weigh less, but have a paunch
This is why it's a bit of a joke and a good example of why waist vs height is a better simple metric, and without needing square roots.
Also, your skinny with paunch person loses a pound of fat and gains two pounds of muscle and they've suddenly become closer to being overweight and obese.
No idea what my BMI is, but I’m still sylph-like at 63...
Have a crisp lads.
25 but I am a tall git go the odds are slightly stacked in my favour. Bottom half looks pretty good if I do say so myself. Top half of the body is a different matter completely!
So, do I use my height from when I was taller? I have a set of those BMI scales and the results are clearly bollox because if you alter the height it changes the fat, muscle and other ‘readings’.
I weigh exactly the same as last year but there is more fat due to injury/too much input.