Body Mass Index???

Who was the wise guy that determined "acceptable" Body Mass Index (BMI) values? Did my weekly weigh-in, now sitting at 193.4 pounds - about 7 pounds BELOW goal. My family has (often) stated that I am looking positively skeletal. However, when the BMI is calculated, it shows me at 26.2 - OVERWEIGHT! Who the heck do they think they are kidding? >.

The BMI is a TERRIBLE measure of a "normal" weight for many people for several reasons:

1) It was developed in the 1800's (yes, that long ago) when people were significantly smaller overall.  (I live in a suburb of Dayton, Ohio and we have lifesized statues of Orville and Wilbur Wright, and you would not believe how SMALL the Wright brothers were!!  Short and skinny, which was pretty typical.) 

2) it was never intended to be a measure of fat... It was intended to just identify typical human proportions for studies across the world population.  It was never intended to be used on individuals to determine how fat they were.  I was for wide-scale categorization and comparison only.

3) the biggest flaw is that it is a simple height weight ratio that does NOT take into account your bone or muscle mass.  Almost every athlete in the NFL is obese (or morbidly obese) because of their muscle mass. A high percentage of MLB players (don't remember the number in the article I read) are also obese by the BMI chart.  For women who are very large busted, that can play into it as well.

4) in 1998, the U.S. Government lowered the upper thresholds for each category (even though we are already significantly larger, even without fat, than the people were in the 1800's when the BMI was first charted). It was part of a government health initiative.  Overweight used to be 27 not 25.  I forget what the others were, but they were also about 2-4 points higher than they currently are. 

A MUCH better gauge of a health body composition is the body fat percentage, which DOES take into consideration bone and muscle mass.  The "chart" associated with it also takes age into consideration for determination of what is "optimal" (but not for what is "healthy").  

Ignore the freaking BMI chart.  Find somewhere that you can have your body fat % tested (even if it is only using a basic impedance device rather than a Bod Pod type thing). Many hospitals have periodic "health fairs" or otherwise offer it for a small fee. (I got my RMR and BF% done for like $25 a few years ago.)  your surgeon may even know where you can get it done.

it is just a number, and a BS number at that, so don't let it dictate how you feel. As far as what other people are saying, though... Well, you shouldn't pay too much attention to that, either.  The people who have been used to seeing us obese, MO, or SMO for a long period of time, tend to "overreact" a bit to our smaller size.  They may say we are "too thin", but that isn't an objective statement... it is  compared to what size we USED to be, are often does NOT mean that we really ARE too thin.  They also often react to the temporary gaunt look that many, if not most, people have to their face following massive weight loss.  It is temporary, but it does tend to make us look unhealthy or sickly while it persists.

Lora

Personally, I do not think there is anything "wrong" with the BMI scale. It's not the only indicator of good health, but it is a place to start. Another good measure is waist size. 32 and under for women and 35 and under for men. It's the fat around the mid-section that can lead to heart problems down the road.

My brothers are both 5'10" and have always weighed around 175-180. They look great. I assume you are around 6' tall. 197 does not sound too thin to me.

But even the waist measurement doesn't "work" for people who are naturally wide waisted.  Even now, after tummy tuck and all, I have  31 inch waist.  Have always been wide there.

Lora

For ME, and my body composition, the BMI Index works perfectly well ...   I sit at just around "normal" and at my age (50) it's a goal I am happy with.  

I did actually lose down to around a 22 BMI and it really was not a good look for me - at my age, you tend to have to choose face or figure and I am happier being slightly heavier and without the gaunt look that the lower BMI gave me.

I do believe there are studies that show that people who are slightly overweight (BMI wise) are healthier than those who are "normal" or "underweight"

We all make personal choices as to our goal weights and what we are happier with!   I certainly wouldn't let my family choose mine!!!!

The bmi I would think is good as far as giving us an idea of where we fall in the spectrum of the population. For me, I'm 5'6" and 116 pounds, which makes my bmi 18.7 .... Underweight  starts at 18.4 ..... I don't feel that I look anywhere near almost underweight! And my husband is 6'3" and 208 lbs, so according to same chart he falls in overweight!  Yet we both just look like normal average sized people for our height. So I think it is just to be used as a guide, but  not to make us feel bad about our bodies no matter what end we fall on :) the nice thing about us being humans is that healthy humans come in all shapes and sizes :)

Now, Miss Calla!  YOU are TINY and look like a model!  I have seen the pics and yes, I would call you tiny.  Maybe on the thin side even but it seems to be a great look for you.  LOL on you don't feel that you look anywhere underweight!  You are delightfully small!  How many ways to say it, LOL!

LOL, ok... "delightfully small" I LOVE that term! haha but you know what I mean, like my mental picture of someone who is underweight looks all sickly and frail and skeltorish ... And i cant imagine if i lost 2 more pounds and fell into the BMI term underweight, like I would look like my mental image of an underweight person... from now on I am going to go with delightfully small! 

how do i get the weight numbers and letters under my widget/ ticker thanx.

I am not a fan of BMI. If you've been overweight for any length of time at all, you've built bone density and muscle mass just by carrying your body weight around. As of right now, my BMI is at the veeeeeeeeery top of what is considered "normal". But I'm wearing size 4-6 jeans. My body fat is 14%. . . Not shabby for a woman in her mid-30s!

The BMI, while slightly better than scale weight, is flawed because half of the equation is scale weight! It's kind of a shame, in my opinion, that we call bariatric procedures "weight loss surgery". With a name like that, how can you help but fixate on the scale?