Are you overweight by the BMI tables? (1 Viewer)

[SoBeDad]

I think the weight thing is about 85% what you eat and 15% exercise. Sure, you need some. But mostly I think it's what you eat.

Absolutely. I may even lean more into it being closer to 95/5.

The recent spike in the cost of eggs notwithstanding, food is much cheaper than it used to be. In the 1960s, I remember my grandparents had a chest freezer which was a money-saving appliance to store loads of grouper and dolphin my grandpa caught, vegetables like bushels of black-eyed peas we picked and my grandma blanched, a large portion of a cow cause it was cheaper, etc. Left-over grits were put in the frig and used next day - sliced, dipped in egg, and fried in left-over bacon grease. Nothing wasted. Going to McDonalds was a treat when the first one opened in Hialeah - too expensive to go regularly. For my single mom, mother of 5, with a good-paying job, hamburger helper was a staple. Fast-forward to my Gen Z kids, and a middle class income, cost was much less of an issue than it was in making choices at the store. And suddenly, Costco appeared!

>>Food cost as a percentage of the average U.S. household budget has decreased dramatically over time. Back in 1900, families spent about 40% of their income on food. By 1950, it was just under 30%. According to the most recent data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, in 2013, the average American household spent about 10% of its total budget on food.<<

https://www.valuepenguin.com/how-much-we-spend-food

 

[MAC_32]

The similar thread function on the forum is fun. From 2018 https://forums.footballguys.com/threads/whats-your-body-mass-index-bmi.772977/

I wonder how much we've changed?

I have changed quite a bit since that thread, but my opinion is the same. 180some pound me from 2017-2020 was in tremendous shape and BMI indicating otherwise is/was quite stupid - at least from a useful metric perspective. Skinny may generally be healthier than being fat but it is not in the same stratosphere as being fit, strong, and a nose 'over weight.'

BMI still says I'm overweight but unlike then I am now. I'm still at the gym on average every other day and net about 30 miles run per week but I eat poorly more frequently, am a lot more stressed, and stuff hurting more often now that I'm middle aged causes me to be relatively sedentary when I am not exercising. I get that info fed to me via body fat %, resting HR, vo2 max, quality of sleep, steps, etc. though. I guess buying new pants too

 

[BobbyLayne]

Minimum risk.

Was slightly overweight when I got (re)married last summer. My wife bride is a phenomenal cook - super delicious every night and ultra healthy. Just eating normally I have lost over 15 pounds in the last 10 months. Thanks to her I've developed some basic healthy habits: staying hydrated, eliminating dairy completely, eating marginally smaller portions, and cutting out unhealthy snacks.

 

[The Z Machine]

Do you think a "significant decreases in smoking rates." have contributed to people being more overweight?

Yes. Not more than those other things, but decreased rates of smoking have contributed to higher BMI in the population. I didn't think there was much controversy about that.

 

[fatness]

I shortened this up a good bit so as not to introduce too many extraneous things. I was born in poor health, was sick a lot as a kid. As a result I never developed a big frame and a body to fill it out (5'7", 141). I've made an effort over the years to not add surplus weight to my small frame, basically to spare my body the work of carrying extra weight around. And I got a decent amount of exercise when I was younger. The problems I have now all stem from high blood pressure, which began after the first and only time I've had the flu and has never stopped. My blood pressure was always low before that.

Back to the BMI topic, when I'm physically able, which is 3-4 days a week, I still exercise at home and do what I can to make myself better. For a 70 y.o. guy who's having trouble with walking and balance and blood pressure, I feel pretty fortunate. I still have a decent shot at getting better and I'm glad I never burdened my body with extra weight. My body's already got enough work to do.

So you're user name is a complete sham...

Fatness was my first dog's nickname. Part German shepherd, part corgi, 55 pound, medium legs, huge chest. immensely protective, who loved her belly rubbed while I talked to her. She could be 2 rooms away and when I said "where is that fatness?" she'd come running to me and flop herself over on her back dying for belly petting. Wonderful dog, wonderful friend.

Glad you asked, person not name Zow or Woz.

 

[-OZ-]

Only one of those though doesn't have other deleterious effects.

I'm guessing you were saying this looking for a fish and that fish is me saying cocaine is probably better for you than coffee, depending on the cut.

Coffee is an interesting substance. When consumed in moderation, it's bad for you. When consumed in large amounts, it can help detoxify your liver and whatnot. Or so some studies say.

Coffee is interesting and somewhat controversial with different studies but it’s the Sugar and cream that’s bad for you - especially the desserts many coffee places try to pass off as coffee. Like most things, over consumption is negative.

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/hsph-in-the-news/is-coffee-good-or-bad-for-your-health/#:~:text=“For%20most%20people%2C%20moderate%20coffee,%2C%20Parkinson's%20disease%2C%20and%20depression.
Is coffee good or bad for your health?
Although early studies of coffeesuggested that it could lead to health problems, recent research provides strong evidence that drinking coffee actually has a variety of health benefits.
“The overall evidence has been pretty convincing that coffee has been more healthful than harmful in terms of health outcomes,” said Frank Hu, chair of the Department of Nutrition at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, in an April 5, 2021, article in Discover. “For most people, moderate coffee consumption can be incorporated into a healthy diet.”
Hu said that moderate coffee intake—about 2–5 cups a day—is linked to a lower likelihood of type 2 diabetes, heart disease, liver and endometrial cancers, Parkinson’s disease, and depression. It’s even possible that people who drink coffee can reduce their risk of early death.
Early research linked coffee to diseases ranging from heart disease and asthma. But Hu noted that many participants in those studies also smoked, which may have led researchers to think that coffee was responsible for the adverse effects that are now linked with cigarettes. He added that anything people consume a lot of tends to come under scrutiny. “In the past, I think a lot of people thought, ‘Oh, coffee’s so delicious, there must be something bad about coffee,’” he said. “So I think the good news is that [for] most people, coffee actually confers some health benefits.”
Certain groups should be careful about drinking coffee, according to the article. Not much is known about the effects of coffee on children, and caffeine could be harmful to pregnancies. Too much caffeine can also cause anxiety in people with panic or anxiety disorders.
For those who drink coffee, experts suggest brewing it with a paper filter, because unfiltered coffee is associated with higher rates of early death, and can contain compounds that raise levels of LDL, or “bad,” cholesterol. They also advise not going overboard with added cream or sugar.

 

[-OZ-]

The similar thread function on the forum is fun. From 2018 https://forums.footballguys.com/threads/whats-your-body-mass-index-bmi.772977/

I wonder how much we've changed?

I have changed quite a bit since that thread, but my opinion is the same. 180some pound me from 2017-2020 was in tremendous shape and BMI indicating otherwise is/was quite stupid - at least from a useful metric perspective. Skinny may generally be healthier than being fat but it is not in the same stratosphere as being fit, strong, and a nose 'over weight.'

BMI still says I'm overweight but unlike then I am now. I'm still at the gym on average every other day and net about 30 miles run per week but I eat poorly more frequently, am a lot more stressed, and stuff hurting more often now that I'm middle aged causes me to be relatively sedentary when I am not exercising. I get that info fed to me via body fat %, resting HR, vo2 max, quality of sleep, steps, etc. though. I guess buying new pants too

Interesting to look back. Back then I was running more, lifting less and 10 lbs lighter. The various BF % scales gave really different answers (like 5% - 21% difference). Lately I’m just using the handheld at the gym at work which gives a Probably right answer based on looks. (I’m definitely not below 8% despite what the egg said). I’m comfortable with the way my body looks now and feel mostly good. I still have sleep apnea but losing a few % isn’t going to change that.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Do you think a "significant decreases in smoking rates." have contributed to people being more overweight?

Yes. Not more than those other things, but decreased rates of smoking have contributed to higher BMI in the population. I didn't think there was much controversy about that.

Interesting. I'm no expert but I wouldn't put a decreased amount of smoking even near the importance of the things @Terminalxylem listed as factors in increasing BMI.

1. Processed foods and sugar sweetened beverages.
2. Bigger portions.
3. A more sedentary lifestyle.

 

[The Z Machine]

Do you think a "significant decreases in smoking rates." have contributed to people being more overweight?

Yes. Not more than those other things, but decreased rates of smoking have contributed to higher BMI in the population. I didn't think there was much controversy about that.

Interesting. I'm no expert but I wouldn't put a decreased amount of smoking even near the importance of the things @Terminalxylem listed as factors in increasing BMI.

1. Processed foods and sugar sweetened beverages.
2. Bigger portions.
3. A more sedentary lifestyle.

You're probably right.

 

[MAC_32]

I’m comfortable with the way my body looks now and feel mostly good

Same. I just wish I wasn't as consistently sore as I have been. While I'll never get back to where I was during that time I think if I can solve that problem I can settle in somewhere in between and drop 5-10 of the 15-20 lbs I probably put on. I was on my feet all day every day and full of energy back then, but try to do that now and I can't bend over after enough time on feet and need to finish the day on ice rather than playing ball out back with the kids. As I wrote sometime last year I've figured out a way to manage around my various ailments for exercise purposes - this summer's objective will be to re-integrate an active lifestyle along with it.

 

[Zow]

I shortened this up a good bit so as not to introduce too many extraneous things. I was born in poor health, was sick a lot as a kid. As a result I never developed a big frame and a body to fill it out (5'7", 141). I've made an effort over the years to not add surplus weight to my small frame, basically to spare my body the work of carrying extra weight around. And I got a decent amount of exercise when I was younger. The problems I have now all stem from high blood pressure, which began after the first and only time I've had the flu and has never stopped. My blood pressure was always low before that.

Back to the BMI topic, when I'm physically able, which is 3-4 days a week, I still exercise at home and do what I can to make myself better. For a 70 y.o. guy who's having trouble with walking and balance and blood pressure, I feel pretty fortunate. I still have a decent shot at getting better and I'm glad I never burdened my body with extra weight. My body's already got enough work to do.

So you're user name is a complete sham...

Fatness was my first dog's nickname. Part German shepherd, part corgi, 55 pound, medium legs, huge chest. immensely protective, who loved her belly rubbed while I talked to her. She could be 2 rooms away and when I said "where is that fatness?" she'd come running to me and flop herself over on her back dying for belly petting. Wonderful dog, wonderful friend.

Glad you asked, person not name Zow or Woz.

Your last sentence is somewhat incorrect.

 

[The Z Machine]

I did some quick google searching this morning on smoking rates and BMI. The results are not 100% conclusive, but generally it seems there is an effect.

Here's an interesting paper: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29179027/ - "Using randomized treatment assignment to instrument for smoking, we estimate that quitting smoking leads to an average long-run weight gain of 1.8-1.9 BMI units"

The strongest evidence supports the idea that smoking cessation leads to weight gain (causality). As more people in the population stopped smoking in the last 50 years, that caused their weight to increase, leading to a small population level shift in BMI. Also, there are lots of studies on weight gain (particularly in women) as a deterrent to smoking cessation. Basically, women who smoke see their weight increase when they stop, and therefore they go back to smoking to try and reduce that effect.

Also, I think it was reported above that nicotine decreases metabolism and I don't think that's correct. I believe that it increases metabolism and decreases appetite. Furthermore, as people spend money on cigarettes there's less disposable money for unhealthy snack foods.

The effects of smoking are likely small compared to the effects of a) the low cost and abundance of calorie dense snack foods, b) a less active lifestyle (less walking really), and c) portion size growing due to lower relative food costs.

 

[Terminalxylem]

I just listened to some bone broth pitch. To improve your gut and other stuff.

I think there were avocados and greenish bananas in there as part of it, too, but that was more as part of a healthy diet, not WITH the bone broth.

So it's for your gut. And then of course they added joints, sleep and I can't remember what else, as benefits. Probably memory.

While I don’t think bone broth is good for anything, the gut likely plays a role in our expanding waistlines. As our diets have collectively changed, the bacteria which coexist in our digestive tracts have changed as well, contributing to a bunch of diseases, including obesity.

 

[MAC_32]

On one hand, cause-and-effect has always been an interesting subject for me. On the other hand, being fat is unhealthy...and so is smoking. For all intents and purposes one, both, or the other doesn't matter. Improvement comes from replacing a bad habit with a good one; not replacing a bad habit with a different bad habit.

 

[Juxtatarot]

FWIW, a while back, I was in the best shape of my life training for a couple of Iron Man triathlons and was eating pretty normally. And obviously training a ton. And still was around 190 which would be overweight on the chart.

Why did you stop training?

Two Ironmans was enough for me. I don't believe my body was meant to keep up that level indefinitely. Shifted to less and different training after that.

My experience with marathoning was similar. I enjoyed training right up until the point that I didn't, and for me that was a realization that I already run my last marathon and just didn't have any inner desire to do another one. One's willingness to get out of bed to log a mid-week 12-miler very quickly evaporates when there's no longer an end goal that you're building toward. That goes a long way toward explaining why the 30-30 AG is so loaded and the 50+ AG is comparatively empty.

The 50+ group has either moved to golf, Pickleball, the couch, or triathlon. Cycling and swimming are less hostile to our aging joints.

One of the things that disappoints me about middle-aged running culture is this preference for distance events as if the longer the distance the greater the accomplishment. It's B.S., of course. I give more credit to an older person that guts out a 5K at near max heart rate than someone who does the run/walk thing for a 5:30 marathon.

And, of course, the goal doesn't need to be a race. A better goal is to use running to reap the health benefits. Running can even be enjoyable when you do it right. I suspect that most runners who don't excessively push their limits, maintain a healthy lifestyle (including weight), and learn about their bodies should be able to keep running well into their 70s if not beyond.

 

[Terminalxylem]

Only one of those though doesn't have other deleterious effects.

I'm guessing you were saying this looking for a fish and that fish is me saying cocaine is probably better for you than coffee, depending on the cut.

Coffee is an interesting substance. When consumed in moderation, it's bad for you. When consumed in large amounts, it can help detoxify your liver and whatnot. Or so some studies say.

Coffee is great for you, in just about any amount. Aside from sleep disturbance, staining your teeth, and possibly contributing to some arrhythmias, coffee has numerous positive health effects. These include reduced risk of diabetes, dementia, heart disease, stroke, liver disease, and colon cancer. When all cause mortality was stratified by daily coffee consumption, it was reduced in a linear fashion, all the way up to six cups per day (the max they assessed). I’ve never seen anything scientifically validated that suggests moderate consumption in bad.

Mind you, I‘m not talking about the fat- and sugar-laden coffee concoctions sold at Starbucks, etc. Plain, black coffee.

 

[The Z Machine]

On one hand, cause-and-effect has always been an interesting subject for me. On the other hand, being fat is unhealthy...and so is smoking. For all intents and purposes one, both, or the other doesn't matter. Improvement comes from replacing a bad habit with a good one; not replacing a bad habit with a different bad habit.

I never suggested using smoking as a means of weight control, only that a reduction in smoking at the population level contributed to increases in BMI.

The reality is that many of us should just eat less overall, especially calorie dense, low nutrition processed foods.

 

[SoBeDad]

Most people I know who quit smoking had significant weight gain.

 

[-OZ-]

On one hand, cause-and-effect has always been an interesting subject for me. On the other hand, being fat is unhealthy...and so is smoking. For all intents and purposes one, both, or the other doesn't matter. Improvement comes from replacing a bad habit with a good one; not replacing a bad habit with a different bad habit.

I never suggested using smoking as a means of weight control, only that a reduction in smoking at the population level contributed to increases in BMI.

The reality is that many of us should just eat less overall, especially calorie dense, low nutrition processed foods.

boredom used to lead to smoking, now it leads more to mindless eating. Call it ADHD light (Or real) but many people, myself included, need something to keep themselves occupied other than the primary thing they’re “supposed” To be doing. Eating / surfing Facebook / responding on FBG.

 

[Keerock]

I identify as TransSlender... no BMI chart can tell me otherwise.

 

[MAC_32]

On one hand, cause-and-effect has always been an interesting subject for me. On the other hand, being fat is unhealthy...and so is smoking. For all intents and purposes one, both, or the other doesn't matter. Improvement comes from replacing a bad habit with a good one; not replacing a bad habit with a different bad habit.

I never suggested using smoking as a means of weight control, only that a reduction in smoking at the population level contributed to increases in BMI.

The reality is that many of us should just eat less overall, especially calorie dense, low nutrition processed foods.

boredom used to lead to smoking, now it leads more to mindless eating. Call it ADHD light (Or real) but many people, myself included, need something to keep themselves occupied other than the primary thing they’re “supposed” To be doing. Eating / surfing Facebook / responding on FBG.

I have noticed that as I've spent more time in the evening on the couch because I'm too sore from that day's activities that I am shoving more unnecessary calories in my pie hole whereas I used to sustain activity through the evening then get to the point in which I needed sleep so I skipped the pantry and went straight to bed holy run on sentence.

 

[MAC_32]

FWIW, a while back, I was in the best shape of my life training for a couple of Iron Man triathlons and was eating pretty normally. And obviously training a ton. And still was around 190 which would be overweight on the chart.

Why did you stop training?

Two Ironmans was enough for me. I don't believe my body was meant to keep up that level indefinitely. Shifted to less and different training after that.

My experience with marathoning was similar. I enjoyed training right up until the point that I didn't, and for me that was a realization that I already run my last marathon and just didn't have any inner desire to do another one. One's willingness to get out of bed to log a mid-week 12-miler very quickly evaporates when there's no longer an end goal that you're building toward. That goes a long way toward explaining why the 30-30 AG is so loaded and the 50+ AG is comparatively empty.

The 50+ group has either moved to golf, Pickleball, the couch, or triathlon. Cycling and swimming are less hostile to our aging joints.

One of the things that disappoints me about middle-aged running culture is this preference for distance events as if the longer the distance the greater the accomplishment. It's B.S., of course. I give more credit to an older person that guts out a 5K at near max heart rate than someone who does the run/walk thing for a 5:30 marathon.

And, of course, the goal doesn't need to be a race. A better goal is to use running to reap the health benefits. Running can even be enjoyable when you do it right. I suspect that most runners who don't excessively push their limits, maintain a healthy lifestyle (including weight), and learn about their bodies should be able to keep running well into their 70s if not beyond.

**tri-man loves this**

Medal monger...

 

[massraider]

FWIW, a while back, I was in the best shape of my life training for a couple of Iron Man triathlons and was eating pretty normally. And obviously training a ton. And still was around 190 which would be overweight on the chart.

Why did you stop training?

Two Ironmans was enough for me. I don't believe my body was meant to keep up that level indefinitely. Shifted to less and different training after that.

My experience with marathoning was similar. I enjoyed training right up until the point that I didn't, and for me that was a realization that I already run my last marathon and just didn't have any inner desire to do another one. One's willingness to get out of bed to log a mid-week 12-miler very quickly evaporates when there's no longer an end goal that you're building toward. That goes a long way toward explaining why the 30-30 AG is so loaded and the 50+ AG is comparatively empty.

The 50+ group has either moved to golf, Pickleball, the couch, or triathlon. Cycling and swimming are less hostile to our aging joints.

One of the things that disappoints me about middle-aged running culture is this preference for distance events as if the longer the distance the greater the accomplishment. It's B.S., of course. I give more credit to an older person that guts out a 5K at near max heart rate than someone who does the run/walk thing for a 5:30 marathon.

And, of course, the goal doesn't need to be a race. A better goal is to use running to reap the health benefits. Running can even be enjoyable when you do it right. I suspect that most runners who don't excessively push their limits, maintain a healthy lifestyle (including weight), and learn about their bodies should be able to keep running well into their 70s if not beyond.

Plus, ya know, never heard a woman admire a man's body and wonder if he runs marathons

 

[Terminalxylem]

FWIW, a while back, I was in the best shape of my life training for a couple of Iron Man triathlons and was eating pretty normally. And obviously training a ton. And still was around 190 which would be overweight on the chart.

Why did you stop training?

Two Ironmans was enough for me. I don't believe my body was meant to keep up that level indefinitely. Shifted to less and different training after that.

My experience with marathoning was similar. I enjoyed training right up until the point that I didn't, and for me that was a realization that I already run my last marathon and just didn't have any inner desire to do another one. One's willingness to get out of bed to log a mid-week 12-miler very quickly evaporates when there's no longer an end goal that you're building toward. That goes a long way toward explaining why the 30-30 AG is so loaded and the 50+ AG is comparatively empty.

The 50+ group has either moved to golf, Pickleball, the couch, or triathlon. Cycling and swimming are less hostile to our aging joints.

One of the things that disappoints me about middle-aged running culture is this preference for distance events as if the longer the distance the greater the accomplishment. It's B.S., of course. I give more credit to an older person that guts out a 5K at near max heart rate than someone who does the run/walk thing for a 5:30 marathon.

And, of course, the goal doesn't need to be a race. A better goal is to use running to reap the health benefits. Running can even be enjoyable when you do it right. I suspect that most runners who don't excessively push their limits, maintain a healthy lifestyle (including weight), and learn about their bodies should be able to keep running well into their 70s if not beyond.

I totally agree about the fixation with marathon (and longer distance) running. At the minimum, I don’t think it’s especially healthy. Dean Karnazes notwithstanding, it’s brutal on your joints to run 26+ miles, in honor of some Greek dude who died running.

This might belong in the athletic accomplishments thread, but my greatest running feat was completing a 5K at age 40 more quickly than my age 20 time. I finished a shade under 19 minutes, by pacing myself behind a woman.

As I neared the finish line, my plan was to put on the afterburners, to blow by her and reveal dominance of the Y chromosome. But she was up for the challenge, and had her own kick for the home stretch. While I like to blame it on Comfortably Numb inexplicably being included in my race day playlist, the truth is, she was faster. I couldn’t catch her, but I still took third place in my age group.

 

[massraider]

While I don’t think bone broth is good for anything

The more obscure and random these diet trends are, the easier they are to ignore.

Beef tallow! Ghee! Eat a bunch of organs!!

 

[MAC_32]

I totally agree about the fixation with marathon (and longer distance) running. At the minimum, I don’t think it’s especially healthy.

It obviously depends on the person, but generally I think it's more the challenge than it is health. Sure, like any habit it can become obsessive, but I think that's a lot more exception than rule.

One of my best friends did like me and set out to qualify for Boston. Like me, he did, barely, but unlike me he did not get squeezed by the number of that year's entrants. Qualifying for and running Boston was his goal; not racing it. His 26 mile stroll from Hopkinton to Boylston was his swan song and he trained like it too. Gone were the weeks of 50some miles and they were replaced with 25-30 miles per week and I think he only topped 12 miles in a run twice. He intends to continue short distance racing, but his days of getting up at 4 am to do 16 miles before a day full of dad are over. He challenged himself, conquered his goal, and now it's off to something else.

It's entirely possible that like me after several years of playing dad that he sets out to do it again, but that's a story for future us. For now we'll instead opt for a handful of miles and a day on the golf course the rare times we have to ourselves.

 

[Steve Tasker]

BMI approx 22.3. Still got it. Trying to add a little more muscle, within reason.

 

[urbanhack]

Do you think a "significant decreases in smoking rates." have contributed to people being more overweight?

Yes. Not more than those other things, but decreased rates of smoking have contributed to higher BMI in the population. I didn't think there was much controversy about that.

Interesting. I'm no expert but I wouldn't put a decreased amount of smoking even near the importance of the things @Terminalxylem listed as factors in increasing BMI.

1. Processed foods and sugar sweetened beverages.
2. Bigger portions.
3. A more sedentary lifestyle.

You're probably right.

Same as Day 1.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I totally agree about the fixation with marathon (and longer distance) running. At the minimum, I don’t think it’s especially healthy. Dean Karnazes notwithstanding, it’s brutal on your joints to run 21+ miles, in honor of some Greek dude who died running.

This might belong in the athletic accomplishments thread, but my greatest running feat was completing a 5K at age 40 more quickly than my age 20 time. I finished a shade under 19 minutes, by pacing myself behind a woman.

As I neared the finish line, my plan was to put on the afterburners, to blow by her and reveal dominance of the Y chromosome. But she was up for the challenge, and had her own kick for the home stretch. While I like to blame it on Comfortably Numb inexplicably being included in my race day playlist, the truth is, she was faster. I couldn’t catch her, but I still took third place in my age group.

For me personally, my attachment to distance running stemmed from the fact that I'm not a very good runner. There was no amount of training I could do, ever, to run a sub-20 5K. My personal best was just under 22 minutes, which is an eternity from sub-20. I was not born with any natural athletic ability at all. But as the saying goes, speed is the gift your parents give you -- endurance is the gift you give yourself. Even a slow schlub like me can build up mileage, at which point the marathon becomes a fairly natural challenge to overcome. Like climbing Mt. Everest because it's there. Also, my willingness to put in a bunch of miles allowed me to out-compete men who are more athletically gifted than me, which was always kind of cool. Those guys would smoke me at shorter distances.

Eventually, though, people like me tend to encounter the same issue that @MAC_32 's friend encountered. Okay, I completed a marathon, but I can I finish in under 4 hours? Okay, I finished in under 4 hours, but how much lower could I get that number with another training cycle under my belt? Okay, I set a new PR, but can I get myself to the point where I'm legitimately racing this event as opposed to simply covering the distance in a per-determined amount of time? Done, done, done, and done. I'm never going to BQ, so there are no more natural goals for me to chase. I could keep racing and keep getting slower and console myself with "AG PRs" or whatever, but honestly I'd rather just move on to some other challenge. I can't flip a switch and force myself to be all motivated about yet another mid-week long run just to come up with excuses about how losing 5 minutes isn't really that bad for a guy my age. I know that, and everybody else knows that, so what am I trying to prove, and who am I trying to prove it to?

I never liked 5Ks, and I never liked speedwork. I would do them because they were a necessary part of training, but what I was really out there for is the quiet time when I'm alone with my own thoughts. Speedwork won't give me that, but a boring 5-miler on a weekday morning scratches that itch, and I don't need to follow it up with a race.

Hats off to the older guys who are showing up on race day. I totally respect that, and I kind of wish my preferences were such that I could be one of those guys. But they aren't, and that's okay.

 

[Zow]

Most people I know who quit smoking had significant weight gain.

As somebody who will sometimes eat to relax and to try to counter stress, I can see the argument/correlation here. I imagine my grabbing a bag of popcorn to wind down at night after a long day, or eating something I enjoy for lunch to distract my brain from a stressful work day, is very comparable to somebody taking a smoke break outside to turn off the brain for a few minutes.

 

[Zow]

I totally agree about the fixation with marathon (and longer distance) running. At the minimum, I don’t think it’s especially healthy. Dean Karnazes notwithstanding, it’s brutal on your joints to run 21+ miles, in honor of some Greek dude who died running.

This might belong in the athletic accomplishments thread, but my greatest running feat was completing a 5K at age 40 more quickly than my age 20 time. I finished a shade under 19 minutes, by pacing myself behind a woman.

As I neared the finish line, my plan was to put on the afterburners, to blow by her and reveal dominance of the Y chromosome. But she was up for the challenge, and had her own kick for the home stretch. While I like to blame it on Comfortably Numb inexplicably being included in my race day playlist, the truth is, she was faster. I couldn’t catch her, but I still took third place in my age group.

I never liked 5Ks, and I never liked speedwork. I would do them because they were a necessary part of training, but what I was really out there for is the quiet time when I'm alone with my own thoughts. Speedwork won't give me that, but a boring 5-miler on a weekday morning scratches that itch, and I don't need to follow it up with a race.

I find your comment here that I put in bold to be very interesting because I am the exact opposite. While I genuinely enjoyed intense 5-ks (back when I was in shape, of course, I probably can't even run a 5k without walking at this time), I could never enjoy and therefore continuously do the long, solo practice runs. I say this because at some point during a solo, recreational long run, regardless of what music or podcast I'm listening to my mind will start to wander (and wonder) and I'll think about stressful things going on in my life (almost always work) within my internal dialogue and the run then gets very unfun for me. This is why I have generally enjoyed the sports/recreational activities (e.g. all day softball tournaments, golf, basketball, etc.) where I'm not alone and there is constant stimulation/action so that my brain won't start thinking about anything else. And I need that so badly so that I'm not constantly thinking about work.

 

[Terminalxylem]

I totally agree about the fixation with marathon (and longer distance) running. At the minimum, I don’t think it’s especially healthy. Dean Karnazes notwithstanding, it’s brutal on your joints to run 21+ miles, in honor of some Greek dude who died running.

This might belong in the athletic accomplishments thread, but my greatest running feat was completing a 5K at age 40 more quickly than my age 20 time. I finished a shade under 19 minutes, by pacing myself behind a woman.

As I neared the finish line, my plan was to put on the afterburners, to blow by her and reveal dominance of the Y chromosome. But she was up for the challenge, and had her own kick for the home stretch. While I like to blame it on Comfortably Numb inexplicably being included in my race day playlist, the truth is, she was faster. I couldn’t catch her, but I still took third place in my age group.

I never liked 5Ks, and I never liked speedwork. I would do them because they were a necessary part of training, but what I was really out there for is the quiet time when I'm alone with my own thoughts. Speedwork won't give me that, but a boring 5-miler on a weekday morning scratches that itch, and I don't need to follow it up with a race.

I find your comment here that I put in bold to be very interesting because I am the exact opposite. While I genuinely enjoyed intense 5-ks (back when I was in shape, of course, I probably can't even run a 5k without walking at this time), I could never enjoy and therefore continuously do the long, solo practice runs. I say this because at some point during a solo, recreational long run, regardless of what music or podcast I'm listening to my mind will start to wander (and wonder) and I'll think about stressful things going on in my life (almost always work) within my internal dialogue and the run then gets very unfun for me. This is why I have generally enjoyed the sports/recreational activities (e.g. all day softball tournaments, golf, basketball, etc.) where I'm not alone and there is constant stimulation/action so that my brain won't start thinking about anything else. And I need that so badly so that I'm not constantly thinking about work.

I’m more in line with you. Shorter runs are perfect for clearing the mind, not a time for worrying at all. Even when running faster, I’m able to zone out. But long hikes are good for keeping stress in check, too, possibly because the scenery provides more external stimulation than running. Then again, I used to enjoy cycling as well, which I would hardly characterize as unstressful - though constant fear of being run over prevented any deeper thoughts.

 

[Dickies]

I totally agree about the fixation with marathon (and longer distance) running. At the minimum, I don’t think it’s especially healthy. Dean Karnazes notwithstanding, it’s brutal on your joints to run 21+ miles, in honor of some Greek dude who died running.

This might belong in the athletic accomplishments thread, but my greatest running feat was completing a 5K at age 40 more quickly than my age 20 time. I finished a shade under 19 minutes, by pacing myself behind a woman.

As I neared the finish line, my plan was to put on the afterburners, to blow by her and reveal dominance of the Y chromosome. But she was up for the challenge, and had her own kick for the home stretch. While I like to blame it on Comfortably Numb inexplicably being included in my race day playlist, the truth is, she was faster. I couldn’t catch her, but I still took third place in my age group.

For me personally, my attachment to distance running stemmed from the fact that I'm not a very good runner. There was no amount of training I could do, ever, to run a sub-20 5K. My personal best was just under 22 minutes, which is an eternity from sub-20. I was not born with any natural athletic ability at all. But as the saying goes, speed is the gift your parents give you -- endurance is the gift you give yourself. Even a slow schlub like me can build up mileage, at which point the marathon becomes a fairly natural challenge to overcome. Like climbing Mt. Everest because it's there. Also, my willingness to put in a bunch of miles allowed me to out-compete men who are more athletically gifted than me, which was always kind of cool. Those guys would smoke me at shorter distances.

Eventually, though, people like me tend to encounter the same issue that @MAC_32 's friend encountered. Okay, I completed a marathon, but I can I finish in under 4 hours? Okay, I finished in under 4 hours, but how much lower could I get that number with another training cycle under my belt? Okay, I set a new PR, but can I get myself to the point where I'm legitimately racing this event as opposed to simply covering the distance in a per-determined amount of time? Done, done, done, and done. I'm never going to BQ, so there are no more natural goals for me to chase. I could keep racing and keep getting slower and console myself with "AG PRs" or whatever, but honestly I'd rather just move on to some other challenge. I can't flip a switch and force myself to be all motivated about yet another mid-week long run just to come up with excuses about how losing 5 minutes isn't really that bad for a guy my age. I know that, and everybody else knows that, so what am I trying to prove, and who am I trying to prove it to?

I never liked 5Ks, and I never liked speedwork. I would do them because they were a necessary part of training, but what I was really out there for is the quiet time when I'm alone with my own thoughts. Speedwork won't give me that, but a boring 5-miler on a weekday morning scratches that itch, and I don't need to follow it up with a race.

Hats off to the older guys who are showing up on race day. I totally respect that, and I kind of wish my preferences were such that I could be one of those guys. But they aren't, and that's okay.

This sounds pretty similar to my newfound mountain bike racing hobby. I'm not "racing" to win, but to finish in a respectable manner and improve upon my past performances. I'm not a gifted athlete, and I'm not in peak physical shape, but it's a good motivational tool to push me towards living a healthier lifestyle. I will never "win" one of these races, but I'm happy with my own performances and just try to do better than the last race...... which is probably harder to judge than marathons as the lengths, elevation gain, and technical ratings of the trails are always different. My favorite part of the whole experience is the solitude of being 10-15 miles away from civilization, surrounded by the sounds of nature and my heart pounding through my chest.

Maybe one day I will tell myself I've accomplished everything I can, but right now it's a very rewarding experience.

 

[Brunell4MVP]

BMI is stupid, and it's sad that it gets treated as a serious scientific measurement.

It's just weight over height squared. Why squared? People are 3-dimensional. But it fit the very small data set the 18th-century Belgian scientist who came up with it was using in his study of populational averages. He never meant it to be used as a weight-loss guideline, and it sucks as one, but here we are almost 200 years later.

It's not just NFL players BMI gets wrong. It will also tell a skinny guy with no muscle and a beer gut that he's at an ideal weight. That was me 10 years ago. Thankfully I wasn't dumb enough to let that guide me.

This. The reason is stays around is insurance companies can use it to bump your life insurance and often medical premiums. And the govt is too lazy to find another measurement. Obesity is pretty obvious. We don't need a number to tell us who is obese. But if we did it would be body fat %. I'm 52, 6', and 252 pounds, but have a body fat of 15%. Right in the middle of normal per web MD. Pretty sure I'm morbidly obese on the BMI along with everyone else that played LB.

 

[xulf]

I totally agree about the fixation with marathon (and longer distance) running. At the minimum, I don’t think it’s especially healthy. Dean Karnazes notwithstanding, it’s brutal on your joints to run 21+ miles, in honor of some Greek dude who died running.

This might belong in the athletic accomplishments thread, but my greatest running feat was completing a 5K at age 40 more quickly than my age 20 time. I finished a shade under 19 minutes, by pacing myself behind a woman.

As I neared the finish line, my plan was to put on the afterburners, to blow by her and reveal dominance of the Y chromosome. But she was up for the challenge, and had her own kick for the home stretch. While I like to blame it on Comfortably Numb inexplicably being included in my race day playlist, the truth is, she was faster. I couldn’t catch her, but I still took third place in my age group.

I never liked 5Ks, and I never liked speedwork. I would do them because they were a necessary part of training, but what I was really out there for is the quiet time when I'm alone with my own thoughts. Speedwork won't give me that, but a boring 5-miler on a weekday morning scratches that itch, and I don't need to follow it up with a race.

I find your comment here that I put in bold to be very interesting because I am the exact opposite. While I genuinely enjoyed intense 5-ks (back when I was in shape, of course, I probably can't even run a 5k without walking at this time), I could never enjoy and therefore continuously do the long, solo practice runs. I say this because at some point during a solo, recreational long run, regardless of what music or podcast I'm listening to my mind will start to wander (and wonder) and I'll think about stressful things going on in my life (almost always work) within my internal dialogue and the run then gets very unfun for me. This is why I have generally enjoyed the sports/recreational activities (e.g. all day softball tournaments, golf, basketball, etc.) where I'm not alone and there is constant stimulation/action so that my brain won't start thinking about anything else. And I need that so badly so that I'm not constantly thinking about work.

You gotta just keep running and it all sorts itself out. Sure, the stresses of the world pop into my head during runs, but inevitably I either sort it out, figure out a plan, or realize those stressor really don't matter.

The only exception is trying to fit in a run in a tight window and freaking out if I will get it done or not. I WFH and have on more than one occasion been sweating pretty terribly for the first part of a call.

 

[culdeus]

BMI is stupid, and it's sad that it gets treated as a serious scientific measurement.

It's just weight over height squared. Why squared? People are 3-dimensional. But it fit the very small data set the 18th-century Belgian scientist who came up with it was using in his study of populational averages. He never meant it to be used as a weight-loss guideline, and it sucks as one, but here we are almost 200 years later.

It's not just NFL players BMI gets wrong. It will also tell a skinny guy with no muscle and a beer gut that he's at an ideal weight. That was me 10 years ago. Thankfully I wasn't dumb enough to let that guide me.

This. The reason is stays around is insurance companies can use it to bump your life insurance and often medical premiums. And the govt is too lazy to find another measurement. Obesity is pretty obvious. We don't need a number to tell us who is obese. But if we did it would be body fat %. I'm 52, 6', and 252 pounds, but have a body fat of 15%. Right in the middle of normal per web MD. Pretty sure I'm morbidly obese on the BMI along with everyone else that played LB.

Very hard to get a measure of BF% that is accurate that you can do on the daily. All those fancy scan based ones are $$$ to run and aren't really all that great either.

 

[Terminalxylem]

BMI is stupid, and it's sad that it gets treated as a serious scientific measurement.

It's just weight over height squared. Why squared? People are 3-dimensional. But it fit the very small data set the 18th-century Belgian scientist who came up with it was using in his study of populational averages. He never meant it to be used as a weight-loss guideline, and it sucks as one, but here we are almost 200 years later.

It's not just NFL players BMI gets wrong. It will also tell a skinny guy with no muscle and a beer gut that he's at an ideal weight. That was me 10 years ago. Thankfully I wasn't dumb enough to let that guide me.

This. The reason is stays around is insurance companies can use it to bump your life insurance and often medical premiums. And the govt is too lazy to find another measurement. Obesity is pretty obvious. We don't need a number to tell us who is obese. But if we did it would be body fat %. I'm 52, 6', and 252 pounds, but have a body fat of 15%. Right in the middle of normal per web MD. Pretty sure I'm morbidly obese on the BMI along with everyone else that played LB.

It’s not just body fat %, but distribution that is more closely linked to disease. Visceral fat (around the organs in your belly) is much worse than fat on your limbs. That’s why “apples” have more health problems than “pears”.

BMI is imperfect, but it’s a great screening tool for the general population, especially in concert with other simple measures like waist:hip ratio. To get more in depth body composition analysis is expensive, labor intensive and potentialy harmful, as some methods involve radiation exposure (eg. CT, DEXA).

And you must be incredibly muscular, which is really difficult to maintain at your age. How often do you lift/exercise, and what supplements do you take?

 

[MAC_32]

The only exception is trying to fit in a run in a tight window and freaking out if I will get it done or not. I WFH and have on more than one occasion been sweating pretty terribly for the first part of a call.

Oh, man...how many zoom calls have I signed onto bare foot and shorts with a button down trying to strategically limit the number of times I hit the camera off button because my dripping sweat is about to drench my laptop keyboard.

 

[MAC_32]

You gotta just keep running and it all sorts itself out. Sure, the stresses of the world pop into my head during runs, but inevitably I either sort it out, figure out a plan, or realize those stressor really don't matter.

But seriously, as I tell my boss all the time - 'I had a thought while I was out running because that's the only time I can think clearly.' I get that running is a stressor for many (most?), but once the habit is established it's actually stress relief. I'm physically and mentally normalized as long as I get that day's run in. Don't? And the domino effect falls...

 

[need2know]

I would fight any of you

 

[Drunken Cowboy]

I am 6'8" and according to BMI it says I am obese and need to lose 45 pounds to get to normal weight. Last time I weighed 228 pounds I super skinny with 7% body fat. That is not normal. BMI charts are full of ****.

Its not normal, but it is healthy.

 

[Drunken Cowboy]

I am a bit over 6 foot and 210-220 depending on the day. 220 is BMI 30 for me. I certainly need to get under 200, but I know I would be much better off around 170

 

[beer 30]

But seriously, as I tell my boss all the time - 'I had a thought while I was out running because that's the only time I can think clearly.' I get that running is a stressor for many (most?), but once the habit is established it's actually stress relief. I'm physically and mentally normalized as long as I get that day's run in. Don't? And the domino effect falls...

Some of my best work was done when I was putting one foot in front of the other at 4:30 am. Not quite the same on the bike now but there are desolate spots I ride into where there is not traffic to think about and your mind wanders as the body goes into muscle memory mode. It's actually a pretty cool feeling these days given all the things that via for our attention. Being able to blank your mind and just think about something is becoming a lost indulgence.

 

[-OZ-]

BMI is stupid, and it's sad that it gets treated as a serious scientific measurement.

It's just weight over height squared. Why squared? People are 3-dimensional. But it fit the very small data set the 18th-century Belgian scientist who came up with it was using in his study of populational averages. He never meant it to be used as a weight-loss guideline, and it sucks as one, but here we are almost 200 years later.

It's not just NFL players BMI gets wrong. It will also tell a skinny guy with no muscle and a beer gut that he's at an ideal weight. That was me 10 years ago. Thankfully I wasn't dumb enough to let that guide me.

This. The reason is stays around is insurance companies can use it to bump your life insurance and often medical premiums. And the govt is too lazy to find another measurement. Obesity is pretty obvious. We don't need a number to tell us who is obese. But if we did it would be body fat %. I'm 52, 6', and 252 pounds, but have a body fat of 15%. Right in the middle of normal per web MD. Pretty sure I'm morbidly obese on the BMI along with everyone else that played LB.

Very hard to get a measure of BF% that is accurate that you can do on the daily. All those fancy scan based ones are $$$ to run and aren't really all that great either.

The Navy fat calculator is adequate imo.
I like the Jackson & Pollard Ideal Body Fat Percentages because I’m below their ideal

 

[-OZ-]

But seriously, as I tell my boss all the time - 'I had a thought while I was out running because that's the only time I can think clearly.' I get that running is a stressor for many (most?), but once the habit is established it's actually stress relief. I'm physically and mentally normalized as long as I get that day's run in. Don't? And the domino effect falls...

Some of my best work was done when I was putting one foot in front of the other at 4:30 am. Not quite the same on the bike now but there are desolate spots I ride into where there is not traffic to think about and your mind wanders as the body goes into muscle memory mode. It's actually a pretty cool feeling these days given all the things that via for our attention. Being able to blank your mind and just think about something is becoming a lost indulgence.

This, and the pool is even better imo.
The combination of motivation from the gym (seeing all sorts of body types doing their thing is awesome) and then the serenity of the pool makes for a good morning.

 

[the moops]

I am 6'8" and according to BMI it says I am obese and need to lose 45 pounds to get to normal weight. Last time I weighed 228 pounds I super skinny with 7% body fat. That is not normal. BMI charts are full of ****.

Its not normal, but it is healthy.

Yep

 

[TripleThreat]

BMI is shade over 25 and I'd prefer to be 25.... 6'2" 203, feel best right at 195. Raced bicycles between 167 and 185... mountain biking at 185 felt best.

Thanks for the reminder to cut these 10.

Height to waist ratio is a better tool. Mine is healthy.

Waist-to-height ratio as a screening tool for obesity and cardiometabolic risk

The waist-to-height ratio (WHtR), calculated by dividing the waist circumference (WC) by height, has recently gained attention as an anthropometric index for central adiposity. It is an easy-to-use and less age-dependent index to identify individuals ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[Terminalxylem]

BMI is stupid, and it's sad that it gets treated as a serious scientific measurement.

It's just weight over height squared. Why squared? People are 3-dimensional. But it fit the very small data set the 18th-century Belgian scientist who came up with it was using in his study of populational averages. He never meant it to be used as a weight-loss guideline, and it sucks as one, but here we are almost 200 years later.

It's not just NFL players BMI gets wrong. It will also tell a skinny guy with no muscle and a beer gut that he's at an ideal weight. That was me 10 years ago. Thankfully I wasn't dumb enough to let that guide me.

This. The reason is stays around is insurance companies can use it to bump your life insurance and often medical premiums. And the govt is too lazy to find another measurement. Obesity is pretty obvious. We don't need a number to tell us who is obese. But if we did it would be body fat %. I'm 52, 6', and 252 pounds, but have a body fat of 15%. Right in the middle of normal per web MD. Pretty sure I'm morbidly obese on the BMI along with everyone else that played LB.

Very hard to get a measure of BF% that is accurate that you can do on the daily. All those fancy scan based ones are $$$ to run and aren't really all that great either.

The Navy fat calculator is adequate imo.
I like the Jackson & Pollard Ideal Body Fat Percentages because I’m below their ideal

Oh my, that Navy calculator is off. It said I had BF of 6.3%. Having measured my own BF and others via DEXA, and being in that range when I was younger, I’m pretty familiar what single digit body fat looks like. No way I’m anywhere close, probably at least double their estimate.

 

[-OZ-]

BMI is stupid, and it's sad that it gets treated as a serious scientific measurement.

It's just weight over height squared. Why squared? People are 3-dimensional. But it fit the very small data set the 18th-century Belgian scientist who came up with it was using in his study of populational averages. He never meant it to be used as a weight-loss guideline, and it sucks as one, but here we are almost 200 years later.

It's not just NFL players BMI gets wrong. It will also tell a skinny guy with no muscle and a beer gut that he's at an ideal weight. That was me 10 years ago. Thankfully I wasn't dumb enough to let that guide me.

This. The reason is stays around is insurance companies can use it to bump your life insurance and often medical premiums. And the govt is too lazy to find another measurement. Obesity is pretty obvious. We don't need a number to tell us who is obese. But if we did it would be body fat %. I'm 52, 6', and 252 pounds, but have a body fat of 15%. Right in the middle of normal per web MD. Pretty sure I'm morbidly obese on the BMI along with everyone else that played LB.

Very hard to get a measure of BF% that is accurate that you can do on the daily. All those fancy scan based ones are $$$ to run and aren't really all that great either.

The Navy fat calculator is adequate imo.
I like the Jackson & Pollard Ideal Body Fat Percentages because I’m below their ideal

Oh my, that Navy calculator is off. It said I had BF of 6.3%. Having measured my own BF and others via DEXA, and being in that range when I was younger, I’m pretty familiar what single digit body fat looks like. No way I’m anywhere close, probably at least double their estimate.

you have to measure right. Don’t add inches where you want them

 

[-OZ-]

BMI is shade over 25 and I'd prefer to be 25.... 6'2" 203, feel best right at 195. Raced bicycles between 167 and 185... mountain biking at 185 felt best.

Thanks for the reminder to cut these 10.

Height to waist ratio is a better tool. Mine is healthy.

Waist-to-height ratio as a screening tool for obesity and cardiometabolic risk

The waist-to-height ratio (WHtR), calculated by dividing the waist circumference (WC) by height, has recently gained attention as an anthropometric index for central adiposity. It is an easy-to-use and less age-dependent index to identify individuals ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Not better as a total measure of health, just different.