|
| Ideal Body Weight (Read 624 times) |
| view log Bif! Bam! Pow! |
posted: 5/14/2008 at 3:32 AM |
| Ahhh yes. just like I had to go through a special screening when I lost weight because I had "rapid weight loss" (average of less than 1.5 lbs/week for ~8 months) . Yeah its called diet and exercise...I did this on purpose. Because as jb's doc has explained ...weight loss is nearly impossible so if I lost weight, I must be sick. |
Beware the Pink Boxing Gloves of DOOM!
"It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds" - Captain Hammer
2008 Goals New PR's in 5K 10K HM, M
Faster than a speeding toddler..... |
|
|
| view log |
posted: 5/14/2008 at 12:32 PM |
| I think that sizes and what's normal have become skewed to save the feelings of people. I think some people test overweight based on the people around them. My dad's side of the family is obese - every last one of them. Compared to them I'm "too skinny" so they say. My BMI is 23 that's not even close to the underweight place. But comparitively I am very skinny so maybe doctor's do the same thing. |
Training is futile... i've seen the error in my ways...
Bring on the Monkey! |
|
|
| view log October 5...Freak Out! |
posted: 5/14/2008 at 12:56 PM |
| Quote from ShanHas on 5/14/2008 at 12:32 PM: I think that sizes and what's normal have become skewed to save the feelings of people. I think some people test overweight based on the people around them. My dad's side of the family is obese - every last one of them. Compared to them I'm "too skinny" so they say. My BMI is 23 that's not even close to the underweight place. But comparitively I am very skinny so maybe doctor's do the same thing.
I think there's a lot to that. I believe my BMI is about the same as yours. At 5'3.5" and ~140#s I am the tallest and thinnest woman in my family (at least on my dad's side...don't know a ton about my mom's side, since she was adopted). DH's family also has some shorter, heavier people in it. A few years back his grandma told me I was getting too thin (same weight I am now). I could stand to lose 20#s and I'd still be in the healthy weight range. Right now I'm hovering just below the line of healthy and overweight. |
Kirsten
• Ladies Locker Room •
.: 2008 Goals :.
• Get down to 123#s and STAY there!
• Run 1500 miles
• October 5 - 1st marathon - Milwaukee Lakefront - in my home state of WI
• PRs: 5k ~ 15k ~ 25k |
|
|
| view log Running public maps |
posted: 5/14/2008 at 1:42 PM |
| The last two doctors I've seen were very positive about my recent weight loss. I'm still in the 27's on the BMI scale, but it's better than the 32 I hit last year. |
Ross
2008 Goals
• Escape from O'Hare terminal G 11:45 5/3/08
• Run for 5 min - 15 min - 30 min
• 5k 10k - 4m/HM
• Weight < 200 |
|
|
| view log Got The Life |
posted: 5/14/2008 at 1:51 PM |
| Quote from Trent on 5/14/2008 at 1:58 AM: If the number is above 25, get your body fat percentage tested. If that is high, it does not matter if you are (or consider yourself to be) an athlete; you are still fat.
Agreed.
Some NFL players are indeed fat, i.e. lineman etc.
Brian Urlacher, however, is not fat and by BMI standards would be considered very obese. The list goes on and on.
Albert Pujols, not fat, obese by BMI standards.
I have seen a trend of a lot of physicians moving away from BMI and using the hip to waist ratio.
|
| The Gaijin Samurai. a.k.a The attorney dissin' attorney.
Read and Listen
|
|
|
| view log |
posted: 5/14/2008 at 1:58 PM
modified: 5/14/2008 at 1:59 PM |
I do look at my weight now and then, but tend to look more at clothing sizes to see how I'm doing. I've dropped from a 14 to a 10 (8 in some brands) since January, but show only approximately 10 lbs of weight loss. The size change is noticeable and has been commented on by multiple people. Converting to muscle from fat has really made a difference in all respects - but just doesn't show much on the scale.
BTW - am 5'1" 32-yo female now at ~140 lbs
MTA to add weight |
| Kerry |
|
|
| view log Funky Monkey |
posted: 5/14/2008 at 3:04 PM |
| Quote from DJ Marcus on 5/14/2008 at 1:51 PM: BMI standards would be considered very obese.
BMI is a screen, not a diagnostic test.
The BMI is the number, not the word. A BMI of 40 may have the word obese associated with it (and nearly everybody with a BMI of 40 has excess fat), but the word is not the BMI. The BMI is simply a number representing weight adjusted for height.
And BMI is a screen. Not a Diagnostic test.
BMI is not designed to diagnose anybody as fat. Rather, the BMI is to screen people who may be fat to see if they need better testing, such as body fat percentage.
All this negativity against BMI, much of which is based on denial, distracts us from the real problem.
The real problem is this: too many people are too fat.
Focus on that, not on derailing the BMI with anecdotes about NFL players. |
| It's all fun and games until the flying monkeys attack. |
|
|
| view log Got The Life |
posted: 5/14/2008 at 4:09 PM |
| Quote from Trent on 5/14/2008 at 3:04 PM:
The real problem is this: too many people are too fat.
Focus on that, not on derailing the BMI with anecdotes about NFL players.
I agree 100%. It was just my point that perhaps too much stock is put into BMI and it's clearly not a screen applicable to everyone, myself included.
And Albert Pujols is a baseball player 
Just sayin' |
| The Gaijin Samurai. a.k.a The attorney dissin' attorney.
Read and Listen
|
|
|
| view log dork.major dork. |
posted: 5/14/2008 at 5:03 PM |
| Quote from Trent on 5/14/2008 at 3:04 PM: BMI is a screen, not a diagnostic test.
The BMI is the number, not the word. A BMI of 40 may have the word obese associated with it (and nearly everybody with a BMI of 40 has excess fat), but the word is not the BMI. The BMI is simply a number representing weight adjusted for height.
And BMI is a screen. Not a Diagnostic test.
BMI is not designed to diagnose anybody as fat. Rather, the BMI is to screen people who may be fat to see if they need better testing, such as body fat percentage.
All this negativity against BMI, much of which is based on denial, distracts us from the real problem.
The real problem is this: too many people are too fat.
=.
Trent. I would agree with you. If this were how the BMI were applied both by doctors and by media and society. But, it is presented like the word, and like a lot of medical advice that people take as gospel while on teh internets does a good deal of harm. There are also doctors (I've been to them) who are willing to take this one number as the beginning, middle, and end of a conversation about weight, exercise and diet.
It takes some debunking (and occasional negativity) to counteract that, and to allow us to not carry BMI around like a gospel or a death sentence, but as just one piece of the puzzle that is living. |
| Reaching 1,243 in 2008 -- one day, one week, one mile at a time. |
|
|
meaghanchan view log |
posted: 5/14/2008 at 5:52 PM |
| Quote from Trent on 5/14/2008 at 3:04 PM:
All this negativity against BMI, much of which is based on denial, distracts us from the real problem.
The real problem is this: too many people are too fat.
Why is that a problem?
Independent of that question- I believe that the questioning of BMI as a tool for measuring anything (whether that thing is 'fatness' or 'health') is valid, regardless of whether it is distracting from any bigger picture. If someone wanted to measure people's incomes by measuring their heights, you would say that is ridiculous-- though, no doubt, there is a correlation. (children, who tend to be shorter than adults, earn usually nothing or very little; women, who tend to be shorter than men, tend to earn less than men, and taller men and women, probably because of bias, tend to earn more than their shorter counterparts.)
Though there may be evidence of correlation between a higher BMI and certain health problems, there is also evidence of correlation between a lower BMI and other health problems-- and in both cases, this is just correlation, and of course we all know correlation doesn't equal causation. While there is compelling evidence that certain behaviors (excercising several times a week, eating a diet high in fiber and low in saturated fat) may lower one's risk factors for many health conditions, I have yet to see compelling evidence that, controlling for these behaviors as well as other risk factors such as poverty or medical bias, a higher BMI results in more health problems.
This article from October 2006 discusses (briefly) the flaws in BMI:
http://www.pharmacytimes.com/issues/articles/2006-10_4003.asp
What's the use of trying to get people within a certain range on a yardstick if you're using the wrong yardstick? |
|
|
running yogi |
posted: 5/14/2008 at 5:59 PM
modified: 5/14/2008 at 6:04 PM |
| Quote from Trent on 5/14/2008 at 3:04 PM: BMI is a screen, not a diagnostic test.
The BMI is the number, not the word. A BMI of 40 may have the word obese associated with it (and nearly everybody with a BMI of 40 has excess fat), but the word is not the BMI. The BMI is simply a number representing weight adjusted for height.
And BMI is a screen. Not a Diagnostic test.
BMI is not designed to diagnose anybody as fat. Rather, the BMI is to screen people who may be fat to see if they need better testing, such as body fat percentage.
All this negativity against BMI, much of which is based on denial, distracts us from the real problem.
The real problem is this: too many people are too fat.
Focus on that, not on derailing the BMI with anecdotes about NFL players.
That's what happens when you hand people out something as convinient as a formula. When we have a formula we think that we don't have to think.
PS: I think Shaq is fat.  (or shud this be a new topic ? )
|
|
|
| view log Funky Monkey |
posted: 5/14/2008 at 6:43 PM
modified: 5/14/2008 at 6:53 PM |
| Quote from meaghanchan on 5/14/2008 at 5:52 PM: Why is that a problem?
Good point.
Given the current science we have, excess fat is an independent risk for excess morbidity, early mortality and excess cost to society (in terms of lost productivity and increased healthcare costs).
If you do not see these outcomes as problems, then excess fat is not a problem.
Quote from meaghanchan on 5/14/2008 at 5:52 PM:Though there may be evidence of correlation between a higher BMI and certain health problems, there is also evidence of correlation between a lower BMI and other health problems
Yes. The science is fairly consistent and clear. BMI > 30 (note, not >25) is associated with excess morbidity and early mortality, as is BMI < 18. This makes sense. Most folks with BMI > 30 have excess fat. Most folks with BMI < 18 are malnourished.
Note. I said "most". I did not say "all".
Anybody who tries to use BMI as a definitive tool, ask them to define the difference between screening and diagnosis. Tell them that you are patient and happy to wait...
Quote from meaghanchan on 5/14/2008 at 5:52 PM:I have yet to see compelling evidence that...a higher BMI results in more health problems.
Mot of the major BMI studies were published in JAMA. JAMA is probably the number 2 medical journal (behind New England Journal of Medicine).
JAMA is not compelling but Pharmacy Times is?
Here is a corpus of literature from different investigators and different patient/subject populations from around the world. The studies all test different hypotheses. The studies show consistently that high BMI and low BMI are independent predictors of death and disease and that these predictors remain when controlled for confounders such as comorbidiites, level of exercise, smoking, socioeconomic status. Most of these are in JAMA.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18056904
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16505525
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17986696
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16551713
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16478900
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15840860
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17670912
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15353531
---
The BMI is a very useful number in terms of guiding policy and services and for following an individual patient who you have already identified to be unhealthy due to being both overweight and fat. BMI is much easier to follow than body fat, which can be hard to test.
BMI is a screening test. Body fat measurements and the mirror test (i.e., look into the mirror while nekkid and be honest) are individualized tests that have much greater cost and time associated with them. Screening tests are supposed to have high sensitivity and poor specificity (you do, of course, know what that means), and be very inexpensive to perform. BMI is perfect in this regard. Diagnostic tests, by contrast, are supposed to have excellent positive predictive value and cost/time considerations are less relevant. So BMI is a great place to start.
When faced with YOUR BMI, as with your weight, you should not rush to be defensive (e.g., "that stuff is just rubbish, it does not apply to us athletes"). Rather, you should supplement that information with a measure of your body fat, blood pressure and lipids. If any of these are out of the normal range, you stand a chance at improving your health and life by reducing them. |
| It's all fun and games until the flying monkeys attack. |
|
|
| view log Resonate |
posted: 5/14/2008 at 6:51 PM |
| As usual, well said Trent. |
Mike | Current Training Plan
Out near the edge where life is in full color. |
|
|
| view log Playmaker / nemesis |
posted: 5/14/2008 at 6:59 PM |
| Quote from Trent on 5/14/2008 at 6:43 PM: Given the current science we have, excess fat is an independent risk for excess morbidity, early mortality and excess cost to society (in terms of lost productivity and increased healthcare costs).
If you do not see these outcomes as problems, then excess fat is not a problem.
 |
20th Century: 800m: 2:04 |1600m: 4:37 |3200m: 10:06 |5k: 16:23 |10k: 35:38 |15k: 54:20 |25k: 1:35:59
21st Century: 5k: 19:42 |10k: 43:00
What are you doing? |
|
|
| view log Got The Life |
posted: 5/14/2008 at 7:05 PM |
| Quote from Trent on 5/14/2008 at 6:43 PM:
When faced with YOUR BMI, as with your weight, you should not rush to be defensive (e.g., "that stuff is just rubbish, it does not apply to us athletes"). Rather, you should supplement that information with a measure of your body fat, blood pressure and lipids. If any of these are out of the normal range, you stand a chance at improving your health and life by reducing them.
I pretty much thought this was a given. In fact, it's exactly what I did. |
| The Gaijin Samurai. a.k.a The attorney dissin' attorney.
Read and Listen
|
|
|
|
|
