What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Are you overweight by the BMI tables? (3 Viewers)

Do you weigh over a what's considered a healthy weight on the BMI tables for your height?

  • yes

    Votes: 90 67.7%
  • no

    Votes: 43 32.3%

  • Total voters
    133
Excited for the first obese dude to come in here and point out how many professional athletes are overweight according to BMI tables
It’s amazing what percentage of people believe they’re in better than average shape, and losing to a normal BMI would be unhealthy. Perhaps societal norms for what looks “healthy” aren’t healthy at all?

There are regional differences in perception, too. After moving to MI, it took me a while to understand what Michiganders considered normal didn‘t apply elsewhere. But human physiology and disease certainly aren’t influenced by skewed expectations.

Nobody is saying BMI is perfect. We’re all familiar with musclebound athletes being characterized as obese. Even considering outliers, on a population level BMI tends to underestimate adiposity (fatness) when compared to body composition analysis. So you‘re more likely to have excess fat than your BMI indicates.

I used to perform body composition testing on research subjects via DEXA (a type of x-ray). Seeing silhouettes of fat draped on tiny skeletons, which were surprisingly uniform (as it turns out, “big boned” is kinda rare) really drove home just how fat we are.

FTR, I’m 5’11” 165, BMI 23. As an adult, I‘ve been as light as 148 (after mountain climbing 10 days), and 172 at my heaviest (lifting 6 days/week), but feel best around 160-162. Now a middle aged schlub, I’m just hoping to keep BMI from creeping up as I age.
 
Fairly sure I'd be dead from malnutrition if I was at the low end of the supposed 'ideal' range for my height.
Probably not, but you'd likely be really hungry all the time.

That's the challenge. To be well within the healthy BMI range you have to be willing to be hungry a lot. Not many people sign up for that.

But being hungry much of the time would probably add 5 years to your life and decrease the likelihood of needing a knee replacement later in life.
I‘ve never seen anything suggesting thin people are hungrier than overweight/obese. I wouldn’t be surprised if the opposite were true.

Your second sentence brings up a very valid point though. You need to consider not only shortened lifespan, but also decreased quality of life related to any excess weight. People are usually quick to volunteer to die younger to eat as they chose (importantly, they lose their enthusiasm when death is actually imminent). But they completely ignore how chronic medical problems related to overweight/obesity negatively impact life for decades before that.

Is the pleasure derived from an extra beer and burger worth it? Dunno, but it's another trade-off people make before disease and debility sets in.
 
Once the price for Ozempic (Semaglutide) and all the T2 Diabetes drugs being taken for weight loss by rich people becomes affordable and insurance covers it, our obesity problems will be a thing of the past. In 10 years, taking Semaglutide et al will be as common as taking statins for high cholesterol. We'll be fine, guys. Right?
It helps you lose 10-15% of your weight. That's likely better than you'll do with diet/exercise, but not enough to get an obese person into healthy BMI range.

Every little bit helps though.
 
Fwiw, I'm now middle aged and overweight per BMI. Getting under 25 is doable but I definitely wouldn't enjoy life as much.

i don't know how healthy or unhealthy i am as I don't have a pcp and haven't had any health checkups ever really.
 
I‘ve never seen anything suggesting thin people are hungrier than overweight/obese. I wouldn’t be surprised if the opposite were true.

Your second sentence brings up a very valid point though. You need to consider not only shortened lifespan, but also decreased quality of life related to any excess weight. People are usually quick to volunteer to die younger to eat as they chose (importantly, they lose their enthusiasm when death is actually imminent). But they completely ignore how chronic medical problems related to overweight/obesity negatively impact life for decades before that.

Is the pleasure derived from an extra beer and burger worth it? Dunno, but it's another trade-off people make before disease and debility sets in.
I've only recently become aware of this phenomenon because I'm seeing it in my own peer group. I'm sure you've seen it for decades in your line of work. But yeah, I know quite a few people my age who describe getting out of bed in the morning with what I think of as "old man aches and pains" that just stem from physical debilitation more than anything else. I know that's in my future at some point provided I live long enough, but I would be greatly disturbed and freaked out if I was experiencing that sort of aging at 50.

I am also starting to get some sense as to why people are so afraid of growing old alone. I always just assumed it was a normal need for human companionship. Now I'm beginning to realize that some of my colleagues should rationally be worried about shoveling their driveway, walking on icy sidewalks, stepping in and out of the shower, etc. I'm clumsy, and I've fallen probably half a dozen times while out running, but I was never worried about suffering anything worse than some scraped-up hands and bloody knees. It's hard to wrap my mind around the idea that something as simple as falling on the sidewalk could result in serious injury. (I'm not at that point of course, but I can see that from here.)
 
Fwiw, I'm now middle aged and overweight per BMI. Getting under 25 is doable but I definitely wouldn't enjoy life as much.

i don't know how healthy or unhealthy i am as I don't have a pcp and haven't had any health checkups ever really.
Good that you realize uncertainty about your health - many people just assume they're healthy, until they aren't. Part of the issue with chronic diseases is their insidious onset, and it's better to prevent than treat them.

Having just obtained a PCP myself, I know it can be a PITA. But it's probably well worth your time and expense. It's just a set of vital signs, a couple blood tests, an immunization or two, and colonoscopy for most middle aged peeps.
 
I‘ve never seen anything suggesting thin people are hungrier than overweight/obese. I wouldn’t be surprised if the opposite were true.

Your second sentence brings up a very valid point though. You need to consider not only shortened lifespan, but also decreased quality of life related to any excess weight. People are usually quick to volunteer to die younger to eat as they chose (importantly, they lose their enthusiasm when death is actually imminent). But they completely ignore how chronic medical problems related to overweight/obesity negatively impact life for decades before that.

Is the pleasure derived from an extra beer and burger worth it? Dunno, but it's another trade-off people make before disease and debility sets in.
I've only recently become aware of this phenomenon because I'm seeing it in my own peer group. I'm sure you've seen it for decades in your line of work. But yeah, I know quite a few people my age who describe getting out of bed in the morning with what I think of as "old man aches and pains" that just stem from physical debilitation more than anything else. I know that's in my future at some point provided I live long enough, but I would be greatly disturbed and freaked out if I was experiencing that sort of aging at 50.

I am also starting to get some sense as to why people are so afraid of growing old alone. I always just assumed it was a normal need for human companionship. Now I'm beginning to realize that some of my colleagues should rationally be worried about shoveling their driveway, walking on icy sidewalks, stepping in and out of the shower, etc. I'm clumsy, and I've fallen probably half a dozen times while out running, but I was never worried about suffering anything worse than some scraped-up hands and bloody knees. It's hard to wrap my mind around the idea that something as simple as falling on the sidewalk could result in serious injury. (I'm not at that point of course, but I can see that from here.)
This is what I was talking about when I mentioned how much exercise it takes to not have knee and back pain. It's a lot and most people don't do it. And of course weight plays a huge component into that as well
 
I‘ve never seen anything suggesting thin people are hungrier than overweight/obese. I wouldn’t be surprised if the opposite were true.

Your second sentence brings up a very valid point though. You need to consider not only shortened lifespan, but also decreased quality of life related to any excess weight. People are usually quick to volunteer to die younger to eat as they chose (importantly, they lose their enthusiasm when death is actually imminent). But they completely ignore how chronic medical problems related to overweight/obesity negatively impact life for decades before that.

Is the pleasure derived from an extra beer and burger worth it? Dunno, but it's another trade-off people make before disease and debility sets in.
I've only recently become aware of this phenomenon because I'm seeing it in my own peer group. I'm sure you've seen it for decades in your line of work. But yeah, I know quite a few people my age who describe getting out of bed in the morning with what I think of as "old man aches and pains" that just stem from physical debilitation more than anything else. I know that's in my future at some point provided I live long enough, but I would be greatly disturbed and freaked out if I was experiencing that sort of aging at 50.

I am also starting to get some sense as to why people are so afraid of growing old alone. I always just assumed it was a normal need for human companionship. Now I'm beginning to realize that some of my colleagues should rationally be worried about shoveling their driveway, walking on icy sidewalks, stepping in and out of the shower, etc. I'm clumsy, and I've fallen probably half a dozen times while out running, but I was never worried about suffering anything worse than some scraped-up hands and bloody knees. It's hard to wrap my mind around the idea that something as simple as falling on the sidewalk could result in serious injury. (I'm not at that point of course, but I can see that from here.)
Yep, it's like the proverbial frog in the pot of boiling water. People normalize all sorts of symptoms as "just getting old", without connecting the dots that much of it is preventable, or at least able to be delayed. By the time they accumulate enough problems to see a doctor, usually they've earned a disease or three, many of which limit their ability to lose weight.

Falls are a major risk for the elderly, too, as is harming oneself by forgetting something important when cognitive impairment sets in. Having a partner helps keep this in check, though other caregivers can suffice. And women tend to be a bit more sensible about health anyway.
 
I‘ve never seen anything suggesting thin people are hungrier than overweight/obese. I wouldn’t be surprised if the opposite were true.

Your second sentence brings up a very valid point though. You need to consider not only shortened lifespan, but also decreased quality of life related to any excess weight. People are usually quick to volunteer to die younger to eat as they chose (importantly, they lose their enthusiasm when death is actually imminent). But they completely ignore how chronic medical problems related to overweight/obesity negatively impact life for decades before that.

Is the pleasure derived from an extra beer and burger worth it? Dunno, but it's another trade-off people make before disease and debility sets in.
I've only recently become aware of this phenomenon because I'm seeing it in my own peer group. I'm sure you've seen it for decades in your line of work. But yeah, I know quite a few people my age who describe getting out of bed in the morning with what I think of as "old man aches and pains" that just stem from physical debilitation more than anything else. I know that's in my future at some point provided I live long enough, but I would be greatly disturbed and freaked out if I was experiencing that sort of aging at 50.

I am also starting to get some sense as to why people are so afraid of growing old alone. I always just assumed it was a normal need for human companionship. Now I'm beginning to realize that some of my colleagues should rationally be worried about shoveling their driveway, walking on icy sidewalks, stepping in and out of the shower, etc. I'm clumsy, and I've fallen probably half a dozen times while out running, but I was never worried about suffering anything worse than some scraped-up hands and bloody knees. It's hard to wrap my mind around the idea that something as simple as falling on the sidewalk could result in serious injury. (I'm not at that point of course, but I can see that from here.)
This is what I was talking about when I mentioned how much exercise it takes to not have knee and back pain. It's a lot and most people don't do it. And of course weight plays a huge component into that as well
There are different flavors of pain. For me, I experience just a little stiffness and pain after prolonged inactivity, which quickly goes away when I exercise. Chronic arthritis and muscle/tendon/ligament/disk damage are different, of course, but I firmly believe there is a lot of truth to the "use it or lose it" adage.

Also of note: fat is an inflammatory organ. It produces all sorts of substances which promote pain, independent of the increased wear and tear fat imposes on your parts.
 
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.
 
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.

I don't think BMi is the end all. And you're right that it fails the really skinny fat guy and the elite muscle bound athlete. But I don't think that it should be thrown out either
 
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.

I don't think BMi is the end all. And you're right that it fails the really skinny fat guy and the elite muscle bound athlete. But I don't think that it should be thrown out either
Other measurements like waist:hip ratio help, too. But BMI is the best experimentally validated, quick-and-dirty measure of adiposity, which correlates to disease and risk of death. As I said upthread, it tends to underestimate obesity, which hardly anyone ever complains about, shockingly.
 
Just into the overweight at a 26 @ 6 foot and 195.
While my BMI says I’m overweight I went for a heart scan last week and got the results back today. My calcium score was a zero with zero lesions detected! :pickle::pickle: The scan says it corresponds to an arterial age of 39 (I turn 48 soon). So overweight is good? :scared:
 
Just into the overweight at a 26 @ 6 foot and 195.
While my BMI says I’m overweight I went for a heart scan last week and got the results back today. My calcium score was a zero with zero lesions detected! :pickle::pickle: The scan says it corresponds to an arterial age of 39 (I turn 48 soon). So overweight is good? :scared:
That score is good for coronary artery disease risk, but doesn’t give you a pass for all the other conditions associated with being heavy.

The fact the test was even ordered implies you have elevated LDL cholesterol, and an intermediate pre-test risk of vascular disease, between 7.5-20% over the next 10 years.
 
This is an interesting conversation because it's a bunch of dudes. If you go look out at women they don't really have this whole "but I'm built, brrah" angle to lean on and they are getting fatter and fatter. Women as a gender now contribute more weight of the planet, and are accelerating towards a world where they are 50% obese, not just over weight.
 
This is an interesting conversation because it's a bunch of dudes. If you go look out at women they don't really have this whole "but I'm built, brrah" angle to lean on and they are getting fatter and fatter. Women as a gender now contribute more weight of the planet, and are accelerating towards a world where they are 50% obese, not just over weight.
It's true. Women almost have it worse. Thankfully they have Lizzo and Ashley graham trying to sell to dudes that big is better.
 
This is an interesting conversation because it's a bunch of dudes. If you go look out at women they don't really have this whole "but I'm built, brrah" angle to lean on and they are getting fatter and fatter. Women as a gender now contribute more weight of the planet, and are accelerating towards a world where they are 50% obese, not just over weight.
Women contribute more weight? That can’t be right?
 
This is an interesting conversation because it's a bunch of dudes. If you go look out at women they don't really have this whole "but I'm built, brrah" angle to lean on and they are getting fatter and fatter. Women as a gender now contribute more weight of the planet, and are accelerating towards a world where they are 50% obese, not just over weight.
Women contribute more weight? That can’t be right?
Women as a gender weigh more than men on the planet now. This is skewed a bit because there are more of them. Several Asian cultures women are considerably fatter than their male demographic counterpart.
 
BMI is stupid, and it's sad that it gets treated as a serious scientific measurement.
It's not stupid. For 90%+ of the population it is a quick and easy measure of just how damn fat we are. If you are in that 10%, just ignore it and carry on
It's complete garbage even as a quick and dirty measure. "Hey, scale of 1-10, how fat is that guy?" would be a far more useful obesity metric. BMI doesn't tell us anything we can't figure out with an eye test, and it even gets some of that wrong.
 
BMI is stupid, and it's sad that it gets treated as a serious scientific measurement.
It's not stupid. For 90%+ of the population it is a quick and easy measure of just how damn fat we are. If you are in that 10%, just ignore it and carry on
It's complete garbage even as a quick and dirty measure. "Hey, scale of 1-10, how fat is that guy?" would be a far more useful obesity metric. BMI doesn't tell us anything we can't figure out with an eye test, and it even gets some of that wrong.
If all the dudes here posted pictures of themselves you would have a point. Considering we can't use the eye test in here, BMI is fine to get a general sense of how fat you all are :)
 
Just into the overweight at a 26 @ 6 foot and 195.
While my BMI says I’m overweight I went for a heart scan last week and got the results back today. My calcium score was a zero with zero lesions detected! :pickle::pickle: The scan says it corresponds to an arterial age of 39 (I turn 48 soon). So overweight is good? :scared:
That score is good for coronary artery disease risk, but doesn’t give you a pass for all the other conditions associated with being heavy.

The fact the test was even ordered implies you have elevated LDL cholesterol, and an intermediate pre-test risk of vascular disease, between 7.5-20% over the next 10 years.
Yes I know doctor. I was joking.

My primary ( who I’ve seen since I was 19) ordered it for two reasons. I am almost 48 and he’s big on pre-checks, and two I’ve been skinny all my life and I’m about 15 pounds heavier now that I was 10 years ago.
 
6'1" - 172 this morning. I have a slight belly and could probably lose 5-10 more pounds.
You want to be 6’1”, 165lbs ?!? Seems extremely thin to me.

I would not look thin at 165.

That is the weight I was in highschool when I played football and weightlifted every day, although I ran track at under 160. I was a pole vaulter(among other events) and had to pass weigh in's every week.

I am much more likely to hit 180 before I hit 165 though. I have to constantly watch what i eat or else my weight would quickly balloon up to 190 pounds. I have a brother who is 6'3" ~260 or so. No breakfast for me today and for lunch just having peanut butter on organic whole wheat bread that is high in fiber.
 
Just into the overweight at a 26 @ 6 foot and 195.
While my BMI says I’m overweight I went for a heart scan last week and got the results back today. My calcium score was a zero with zero lesions detected! :pickle::pickle: The scan says it corresponds to an arterial age of 39 (I turn 48 soon). So overweight is good? :scared:
That score is good for coronary artery disease risk, but doesn’t give you a pass for all the other conditions associated with being heavy.

The fact the test was even ordered implies you have elevated LDL cholesterol, and an intermediate pre-test risk of vascular disease, between 7.5-20% over the next 10 years.
Yes I know doctor. I was joking.

My primary ( who I’ve seen since I was 19) ordered it for two reasons. I am almost 48 and he’s big on pre-checks, and two I’ve been skinny all my life and I’m about 15 pounds heavier now that I was 10 years ago.
Sorry, hard to tell with all the hyperbole and hot takes in this thread. Also, most insurers won’t pay for expensive tests if there isn’t an approved indication, as there are downstream consequences and risks involved (eg. radiation exposure) with every study.
 
6'1" - 172 this morning. I have a slight belly and could probably lose 5-10 more pounds.
You want to be 6’1”, 165lbs ?!? Seems extremely thin to me.
That's basically where I'm at, 6'7" 190 lbs. A BMI of 21.5 puts me right in the middle of the healthy range. But without factoring in muscle mass and cardiovascular health, I could be a tall skinny fat person in terrible shape. I do have thin genetics, however I also think that food restrictions and choices like skipping breakfast might be working against people who are trying to lose weight. I grew up on healthy food so my taste buds prefer that over whatever processed stuff is now going into fast food. Medication can also easily manipulate people's weight. My stomach ballooned and I went up to 220 when being forced to take anti psychotic pills and kept cooped up inside for 2 weeks.
 
6'1" - 172 this morning. I have a slight belly and could probably lose 5-10 more pounds.
You want to be 6’1”, 165lbs ?!? Seems extremely thin to me.
I’ve met @MTskibum. He looked a healthy weight, but that was in ski clothes.

But perhaps what our society characterizes as “extremely thin” is actually healthy?

Many people in this thread [not you) mention the only time they were near normal BMI was high school/college, when they were more active. Do you guys think you’ve maintained or increased bone or muscle mass as you’ve aged?
 
6'1" - 172 this morning. I have a slight belly and could probably lose 5-10 more pounds.
You want to be 6’1”, 165lbs ?!? Seems extremely thin to me.
That's basically where I'm at, 6'7" 190 lbs. A BMI of 21.5 puts me right in the middle of the healthy range. But without factoring in muscle mass and cardiovascular health, I could be a tall skinny fat person in terrible shape. I do have thin genetics, however I also think that food restrictions and choices like skipping breakfast might be working against people who are trying to lose weight. I grew up on healthy food so my taste buds prefer that over whatever processed stuff is now going into fast food. Medication can also easily manipulate people's weight. My stomach ballooned and I went up to 220 when being forced to take anti psychotic pills and kept cooped up inside for 2 weeks.
Normal BMI doesn’t guarantee health, just as elevated BMI doesn’t = unhealthy 100% of the time. But the odds you have one or more chronic medical problems increase as you get into the obese range. Same goes for underweight.
 
Just into the overweight at a 26 @ 6 foot and 195.
While my BMI says I’m overweight I went for a heart scan last week and got the results back today. My calcium score was a zero with zero lesions detected! :pickle::pickle: The scan says it corresponds to an arterial age of 39 (I turn 48 soon). So overweight is good? :scared:
That score is good for coronary artery disease risk, but doesn’t give you a pass for all the other conditions associated with being heavy.

The fact the test was even ordered implies you have elevated LDL cholesterol, and an intermediate pre-test risk of vascular disease, between 7.5-20% over the next 10 years.
Yes I know doctor. I was joking.

My primary ( who I’ve seen since I was 19) ordered it for two reasons. I am almost 48 and he’s big on pre-checks, and two I’ve been skinny all my life and I’m about 15 pounds heavier now that I was 10 years ago.
Sorry, hard to tell with all the hyperbole and hot takes in this thread. Also, most insurers won’t pay for expensive tests if there isn’t an approved indication, as there are downstream consequences and risks involved (eg. radiation exposure) with every study.
No worries at all. And yeah I had to pay for my test. Insurance wouldn’t cover it.
 
Just into the overweight at a 26 @ 6 foot and 195.
While my BMI says I’m overweight I went for a heart scan last week and got the results back today. My calcium score was a zero with zero lesions detected! :pickle::pickle: The scan says it corresponds to an arterial age of 39 (I turn 48 soon). So overweight is good? :scared:
That score is good for coronary artery disease risk, but doesn’t give you a pass for all the other conditions associated with being heavy.

The fact the test was even ordered implies you have elevated LDL cholesterol, and an intermediate pre-test risk of vascular disease, between 7.5-20% over the next 10 years.
Yes I know doctor. I was joking.

My primary ( who I’ve seen since I was 19) ordered it for two reasons. I am almost 48 and he’s big on pre-checks, and two I’ve been skinny all my life and I’m about 15 pounds heavier now that I was 10 years ago.
Sorry, hard to tell with all the hyperbole and hot takes in this thread. Also, most insurers won’t pay for expensive tests if there isn’t an approved indication, as there are downstream consequences and risks involved (eg. radiation exposure) with every study.
No worries at all. And yeah I had to pay for my test. Insurance wouldn’t cover it.
Out of curiosity, how much did they charge?

Also, although it seems counterintuitive, “VIP“ healthcare may be associated with worse outcomes, for the reasons I mentioned above.
 
Last edited:
"The BMI was introduced in the early 19th century by a Belgian named Lambert Adolphe Jacques Quetelet. He was a mathematician, not a physician. He produced the formula to give a quick and easy way to measure the degree of obesity of the general population to assist the government in allocating resources."
 
But perhaps what our society characterizes as “extremely thin” is actually healthy?
This is probably accurate. We are a nation of eaters. Nearly every person in here would benefit by cutting a decent amount of calories out of our diets
It’s absolutely accurate. All this talk of starving to death, looking malnourished/extremely skinny, etc. at a healthy BMI is nonsense. There‘s really not a good excuse why we can’t maintain our weight +/- a few pounds as we age.

And while our genes are a big determinant of the potential for obesity, behavioral changes and a cultural acceptance of being overweight has gotten us in this mess. We certainly didn’t evolve as a species to explain the shift in overweight/obesity over the last 50+ years.
 
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. :shrug:
 
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. :shrug:

When I first met you and you pulled me in for a bro hug my first thought was "my god, JB is yoked!".
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top