What is your BMI?!

[MoonZapdos]

29.6.
Oh well.
Should probably get off my ass more often. xD

[Aqua]

21.6 *shrug*

[volar]

18.6 , could use some more fat

[Glwys]

At 5'8", and 108-112 lbs, I'm at 16.4 - 17.0


I really wish I could gain weight...

[Phlegethon]

When close to my ideal weight I'd have a fat percentage of under 4%, wich according to the doctor is not good.

[Deleted]

25.2 but wouldn't consider myself fat That BMI isn't really a good tool as someone with low body fat can still weigh a lot while being short and would end up being obese... go figure

[ägaren]

BMI was not created to be used on normal healthy people but to measure malnourished children.

[zeemeerman2]

74.5/(1.98*1.98)=19.0
So.. I'm nearly underweight. Still I eat a lot of junk food and other junk which I doubt if it is food at all. But I can't eat much; more than a portion of french fries and a basic hamburger for a fat junk food meal is just too much. I just can't eat more, my stomach is full at that time.

But me being on diet? Not at all. ^^

[Griepen]

26.7, i lift weights 6 days a week and i bench twice my weights, IM OBESE

[Lightcaller]

17.8

I guess I need to eat more. But I doubt that will work on me....

[Muckey]

In Sweden we call BMI "Bara Meningslös Information". Google it, you'd be amaced how innovative we are.

[Deleted]

23.2, I am content with this

[dizzer83]

17.4, thyroid problems has its ups sometimes i guess....

[Shamslam]

21.5

In high school while I was running I would often sit near overweight. BMI is stupid. >.>

[Digitalkilla]

BMI is garbage, don't ever use it.

You fail...

BMI is a good/easy tool for overweight people to set goals.

Rather than arbitrarily picking a number like "I want to weigh 160lbs" it chooses one for them & and in a specific manner. Not to mention the ranges defined on the BMI scale are done based on studies for health problems based on levels of obesity. People with a BMI of 22 have less health problems OVERALL than those with 28, or those with 16. Done based on actual studies.

Again

BMI is a good/easy tool for OVERWEIGHT people to set goals. (I suppose underweight as well)

[ThePotato]

23.1, only 5ft 7 so i'm quite short, but i'm not fat. I'm quite well built.

[Kezotar]

Guys, please take in mind that when you measure BMI you have to be 18+.

23 BMI

Was 19-20 and felt I was way to underweighted so I started eating more and training some.

[Lysah]

Precisely why BMI shouldn't even be taken remotely serious. I'm 6'5' 210 and apparently quite overweight. Just plugging in some values, it thinks 160 pounds is right in the middle of "normal weight". If I were to weigh 160 pounds, I could be broken in half.

If I weighed the 160 it thinks I should weigh...
I'm honestly pretty sure gender matters a lot, too, and this site at least doesn't seem to care either way. The body composition between male and female is quite different, I'm sure it affects weight in at least moderate ways.

[Sno]

32.9!
it's a good job i've been going to the gym, i dread to think what it was before i started that.

[Zeuq]

You fail...

BMI is a good/easy tool for overweight people to set goals.

Rather than arbitrarily picking a number like "I want to weigh 160lbs" it chooses one for them & and in a specific manner. Not to mention the ranges defined on the BMI scale are done based on studies for health problems based on levels of obesity. People with a BMI of 22 have less health problems OVERALL than those with 28, or those with 16. Done based on actual studies.

Again

BMI is a good/easy tool for OVERWEIGHT people to set goals. (I suppose underweight as well)

This is precisely the issue with BMI, though. It works well for people of roughly average height and weight, but it quickly skews for people that are tall or short. The reason for this is in simple math, that your height grows linearly, but your mass grows cubically; so more than a couple inches away from normal, and it's worthless. People who are shorter than average will appear relatively underweight, and people who are taller than average will appear relatively overweight. For instance, I'm 6' and 235, with around 10% body-fat; I work out pretty much obsessively, but my BMI is 31.9 and so I'm "obese".

So, sure BMI works well for large populations because, surprise, large populations will tend to be around the average. If you randomly select 1000 people, and calculate their BMIs, you'll probably see a general trend with weight related issues, but for and individual, it breaks down. It is often used for population studies because its quite easy to figure out someone's BMI with a couple questions on a questionaire, but calculating something more accurate requires either a specialist, or equipment, and yet, on large populations, the difference between the two will be relatively small. As such, it shouldn't be used for individuals.

If you're trying to gain or lose any significant amount of weight, you should see your doctor so he can do more precise tests that do correlate well to ones actual health, and he can help you set reasonable goals and choose reasonable methodologies. This is important, particularly for people who are on the skewed ends, because they may think they need to lose more than they do, and combined with a probably lacking knowledge of health and fitness, they may very easily put themselves in great risk through starvation, nutritional deficits, over-training, injury, or any number of other problems that can be raised by poor knowledge.


In short, BMI is fine in some circumstances, but relying on it as an end-all tool to health for everyone is dangerously simplistic. Never make health decisions based upon that sort of information without consulting a doctor.