New proposed BMI calculation

I have not read the article fully, but the new calculation aims to address the anomalous results you get for very tall or short people

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21229387

I score 25.00 on the old scale and 23.55 on the new scale 8)

Oooh, we appear to be the same person…

I’m now in the middle of overweight.

Wow…. i’m ‘normal’ for the first time in 20+ years…

considering at my worst i was mobidly obese… i’m happy 🙂

Hmm,
I agree in purely scientific principles.
However, if you waddle into my room, don’t have to duck to get through the door, and make my chair creak and my couch flex, then a mathematical equation probably isn’t needed to spot the elephant in the room…..*

DrP

* Boom Boom! – plenty more where that came from…

from the article:

So why do we continue to use it?

“It is useful when applied to populations. The population does mean you get a more precise estimate of BMI simply by averaging over large numbers.”Not considered that usage of BMI before! On a large scale it makes sense to me. Utterly pointless when applied to individuals though. So why do so many apparently reputable people/institutions continue to use it to assess individuals?

ooh as a tallerist I’m 23.3 “normal” now rather than borderline – me likey, now wheres that pie?

I’ve now gone from being ‘slightly overweight’ to ‘only just overweight’.

Now where are the pies?

Your new BMI: 25.27
Your old BMI: 25.54

now where’s that pie

That’s still 3.14…..

DrP

Well speaking as a very tall person (6’7″) I can see the sense in this. A linear division based on height always seemed a bit unfair – big height = big frame.

Your new BMI: 19.75
Your old BMI: 21.52

Your new BMI: 19.34

Your old BMI: 20.82

still just about normal

1.96m tall

Wait a minute my BMI has increased into the slightly more overweight than before. How’s that work/fair. short yes but not exactly making the chairs creak.

23.1 -> 21.9 woohoo, being tall is awesome, more cake please.

Your new BMI: 21.53
Your old BMI: 22.16

Not too worried either way…

I’m guessing it’s more use for people who are actually fat , but just consider themselves “cuddly”, it’s a useful non-judgemental number that a doctor can use. Similarly for anorexics.

Arguing that it’s useless just because people like Pitt or Wilkinson gave incorrect results is a bit stupid: they are going to be perfectly aware of just how fit they are, and a BMI measurement is not going to be an issue.

Arguing that it’s useless just because people like Pitt or Wilkinson gave incorrect results is a bit stupid

Well, there are plenty of people going around saying ‘my mate fred is an elite athlete and is supposedly overweight, so it’s all rubbish. Pass me the cake’. I think if it were more demonstrably accurate it might be more respected as a measurement.

Well, there are plenty of people going around saying ‘my mate fred is an elite athlete and is supposedly overweight, so it’s all rubbish. Pass me the cake’. I think if it were more demonstrably accurate it might be more respected as a measurement.

Suppose so, but then there are plenty of people going round saying that as Uncle Mick made it to 90 smoking 20 a day, they can too…

We don’t need a new formula. We need to ask the question “do you look like Brad Pitt at the time of Fight Club or England rugby player Jonny Wilkinson in his prime?”, then only use the BMI if the answer is no. Problem solved.

It doesn’t allow for very lean meat, so numerous fit peeps do come out as overweight, when every body fat measurement method has them in the very fit category. Works for the average height/body composition though.

Yup it is a lot more reliable.

The new version makes me more obese.

I’ll now have to be 59k to be normal, previously I could be 62k.
🙁

^^^
Interestingly, we’re all rubbish at judging how fat kids are just by ‘eyeballing’ them, and children’s BMI calculations are notoriously difficult to ‘handle’ (very age/sex dependant, and constantly change).

But yes – if your belly wobbles when you walk, there’s probably a bit too much ‘cuddlyness’ to be comfortable…

DrP

Woohoo! I just went from ‘obese’ to ‘overweight’. I can celebrate, can’t I? 😳

Its rubbish it takes no account of build

.

Your new BMI: 22.27
Your old BMI: 23.48

Pass me the cake! 😀

seems rubbish to me. I was obese on the last one and I still am on this one.

Crap, I’m big boned actually! it runs in the family were all fat big boned.

Your new BMI: 20.93
Your old BMI: 21.60

I could put on 10kg and still be in the normal range in either version 🙂

I’m apparently very dense. I don’t think anyone would call me fat as such, but I’m well overweight in both measurements.

I’m apparently very dense. I don’t think anyone would call me fat as such, but I’m well overweight in both measurements.

Do you look like Brad Pitt at the time of Fight Club or England rugby player Jonny Wilkinson in his prime?

If you screw your eyes up a lot maybe.

i have gone from being overweight to healthy just from clicking a few buttons. imo bmi is all bullshit really.

It assumes excess weight is fat. True for most people.

If you look like this BMI is not important

If you look like this BMI is important.

bmi is for fat plp in denial

Crap… I’ve gone up.
Truth. I am fatter

It’s funny how many fat ‘atheltes’ there are on STW, on the basis you rarely see “Brad Pit from fightclub” on STW rides Vs the number of people who complain that their BMI is inacurate 😛

More dissapointing, at the gym last night I realised I now need the machine set to 50kg of assistance to do 30 (propper, not barely shoulder width) wide grip pull ups. I used to eb able to do that ona normal bar! Perhapse I should change the measument criteria on that and settle for underhand chin ups instead.

It’s still a crock of nonsense. I accept I need to lose weight now but when I was 27 I weighed 92kg (I’m 1.83m) and I would still be considered over-weight.

This despite having a resting heart rate of 45bpm, the ability to run 13 miles over Kinder Scout and being a national champion ‘continuous fighting’ champion in my particular style of karate.

Its rubbish it takes no account of build

.

Fatty alert

Yet, I’ve dropped 1bmi, not that I’m any less of a chubster in reality

More dissapointing, at the gym last night I realised I now need the machine set to 50kg of assistance to do 30 (propper, not barely shoulder width) wide grip pull ups. I used to eb able to do that ona normal bar!

You used to be able to do 30 pullups? That is (was) quite exceptional. And you’ve put on 50kg or somehow got substantially weaker since? Or is there something I’m missing?

Your new BMI: 21.30
Your old BMI: 22.47

My bmi went down by 1.4!

BMI is just an easy rule of thumb. It works well enough for everyone who isn’t a serious athlete. We get the occasional pro rugby players training at our gym and they are a breed apart from even the buffest gym bunnies.

I hit pretty much the same point in the scale for bmi, (actually about half way between, old and version) waist to height and body fat – and my own perception for that matter. And I do have a big build, wide across the shoulders and tall. The height waist one is worth doing to compare against bmi – but you really have to measure your waist rather than rely on jean size which seems to knock off a couple of inches, at least, for vanity 🙂