Newsweek has published a photo shoot, plus brief quotes, of people who are technically “overweight”, according to BMI, but are nevertheless athletic and physically fit.
I thought it was a great set of examples about how, contrary to popular fat-hating belief and the out-of-touch BMI indicator, it’s actually pretty darn difficult to determine how healthy a person is based solely on their weight and size.
I think Nicole is my favorite:
I don’t think thin women are necessarily anorexic, or anything, but it does seem like it’s often assumed that skinny girls are “in shape”, while fat girls are “unhealthy”.
Very interesting - many did not appear overweight (especially # 5!), or at least as overweight as you might expect based on their height/weight.
However, I disagree with your opinion of Nicole. She was the only one quoted who felt it necessary to denigrate people who are of a different body type than she is. Frankly, if you don’t want people to assume that you’re unhealthy because you’re fat, you also don’t get to assume that other people are unhealthy (or in Nicole’s case, that they’re weak) because they are skinny.
Huh. I didn’t think Nicole was talking about all slim women. The way I read it, she was talking exclusively about the ones who resort to unhealthy means (starving themselves) to appear thin, which society then reinforces as “fit”. I don’t read “100-pound starve-yourself-to-be-beautiful woman” as a description of every 100-pound woman from her point of view; I think she’s saying that eating disorders are unhealthy, yet “thin = fit, fat = out of shape” is a pervasive (and false) stereotype.
This shows why the BMI should be thrown out as an absolute indicator of healthiness for human beings. It’s worse than useless when applied to athletic people, and not very accurate for the rest of us, either.
Good genes and good diet helps. I “have”* a BMI of 31, and yet I have absolutely no health problems that could be detected to the many tests I got not long ago (17 pages of results, plus x-rays, ultrasounds, etc.!).
I credit low-stress, and a great diet. Hopefully I’ll escape my mom’s lousy genes and get my dad’s.
Also, I am very short. I have found that health-weight indicators don’t work so well for short people. All measurements indicate I should be 110 lbs. At my healthiest, most muscular, and most active (I was a runner) I was 140 lbs. That’s 20 lbs. lighter than I am and put me in the overweight category.
*I am currently losing weight, and am a lot more active, but the tests and BMI were from before I started losing weight. I have gallbladder stones, but have always been asymptomatic.
I think people are giving BMI too much credit in constantly trying to discredit it. It seems that the only people who actually care about BMI are the ones who consider their number somehow unjust. I really don’t think anyone uses BMI as the absolute guideline to determine health.
It’s a number that describes your weight to height ratio as compared to average. And you can’t tell me that each of these girls are not above average. You also can’t tell me that they wouldn’t be better off losing some weight. Every positive active and athletic quality they have would be improved in a measurable way.
And that, right there, is why BMI is a crock. What matters (if you think “fatness” needs to be measured) is not your height/weight ratio, but your BODY FAT PERCENTAGE, and even then, gender has to be taken into account. Overfat is NOT the same thing as “overweight.”
Yes, it has long been known that the BMI is bullshit, and I don’t know why anyone still treats it with any credibility. By the standards of BMI alone, every single bodybuilder and powerlifter is obese. It’s utterly ridiculous.
Also body fat percentage has to take age into account. A healthy granny is not expected to have the same body fat percentage as a healthy teenager.
Aerobic capacity is another important health indicator. You are not healthy if you are stick-skinny (or round as zero) and you can’t run up a fly of stairs, or run for your life. Although on this one the advantage goes to skinny people: predators will go for the soft and yummy.
Am I still a* fatass* if I weigh 250, but don’t ‘shove cupcakes’ in my mouth a dozen at a time? Or do I have to fit within your complete, complimentary stereotype? :rolleyes::rolleyes:
I agree that #5 seems out of place - the rest of the photos seem to be showing people who are overweight but active, but this guy is only “overweight” because of his muscle mass.
Anecdotally, the people I know who have the best body image are those who are physically active in something they enjoy. Hiking, rock climbing, martial arts, yoga, whatever. It’s hard to not love your body when you ask it to do something demanding and it responds perfectly.
I just got a new scale. The old one maxed out at 270. I have a paunch, I’ll admit, but I get regular excercise, and the last string of tests (albeit 6 years ago), were negative.
That said, the Über scale I got for cheap on woot says I’m 26% fat, have an obese BMI, and the body of an 80 year old. (FTR, I’m 40 and 6’5")
I’m not in as good a shape as I used to be, but I get an hour of cardio three times a week, and I’ve far from Obese.
If it’s not a Tanita scale, then the bodyfat measurement is almost sure to be an estimate or other type of crap. Even with Tanita scales and the other implements they make, the electrical impedance technology can only get in the ballpark, and even then only under certain optimal conditions (i.e., hydration levels matter). So … maybe you have a Tanita and read all the directions and have taken the measurements under the right conditions, but that’s pretty rare IME when people complain about the bodyfat number their scale gives them. Real true bodyfat measurements are best done in a special water tank. I think there are also some sort of pod things that sports medicine facilities have been experimenting with, but haven’t read up on them lately.
I think he (or she?) was saying that that comment is just as bad as the woman in pic number five who puts down 100 pound women for not being able to carry an 80 pound bale of hay.
