- New proposed BMI calculation
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…..*
* Boom Boom! – plenty more where that came from…Posted 5 years agozilog6128Subscriber
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?Posted 5 years agomogrimMember
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.Posted 5 years ago
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.Posted 5 years agomogrimMember
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…Posted 5 years ago
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…
DrPPosted 5 years agothisisnotaspoonMember
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.Posted 5 years agogeetee1972Member
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.Posted 5 years agozilog6128Subscriber
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?Posted 5 years agoolddogMember
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 🙂Posted 5 years agoampthillSubscriber
I’ve always thought the old one was height sqaures for mathematical simplicity.
I’m 6 foot 4 and this now tips me just the right side of 25. Which is fairer i think. On the old scale I’d have had to loose 5 kg to be 25. I’m still aimimg to loose 5kg but at that weight I’ll be a pretty healthy shapePosted 5 years ago
The topic ‘New proposed BMI calculation’ is closed to new replies.