Discussion in 'Mayberry Lounge' started by Zeroinnes, May 29, 2014.
fatties gonna fat.
Survival of the fattest.
Its cheaper to get 3 double cheese burgers than a carton of strawberries.
Thanks Obama (Michelle)
BMI is a load of shit, apparently if a guy is over 83kg at 6 feet he's overweight which is ridiculous.
...those countries make up over 50% of the world's population.
It's a terrible system for small samplings, but it's pretty effective for large groups.
It's ineffective for anyone who isn't a couch potato.
But yeah for the vast majority of people it's an easy way to test for fatties over a large population.
I've heard this before - can you explain? Given a large sample size, what % of people considered overweight or obese through BMI are actually not fat and just more muscular?
Why should feel sorry for people who are fat. its their choice..
As I understand it, the point of the BMI is to determine what is "healthy." As much as men like to work out and be large, that isn't healthy. More mass requires more effort from the internal organs, puts a strain on the joints and feet, etc. Socially, large males are encouraged, but biologically there's not much benefit. Most men at 6 feet who eat decently, stay in shape, and aren't deliberately trying to bulk up will probably be below 83kgs, no?
I'm only below 83kg when I'm either cutting weight or my BF is extremely low.
I'm not a huge guy either, I just have a thick frame and chunky legs.
Dude, I am 6' tall and I have a picture of me at 83 kgs and I look malnourished.
Personally, I could lose 15lbs and I think for my height and build, 200-205lbs (90-93kgs) is probably a very healthy weight for me.
I'm all about looking big.
At 12% BF, I was at 31 BMI which is 'truly overweight' for my height/age/weight. Which, is ridiculous.
I wish it was that simple.
sometimes it is.
BMI caters to people who aren't active or athletic, because face it, most people aren't. Therefore, yes, someone who isn't active or athletic at 6' and over 83 kg is probably more likely to be unhealthy. It's absolutely nuts to think that someone 6' and over 83 kg who carries some muscle mass is at more risk to be unhealthy. My guess is that if you find people active/athletic with muscle at 6' 200 lbs vs. someone 6' 70.5 kg, you'll find the 6' 200 lbs people would have better results when testing their overall health.
It's utterly hilarious that 6' 140 lbs would be considered "normal" under BMI. The average male that is 6' and 140 lbs is going to be as weak as a kitten.
That's fair. But BMI is a global scale, too, I believe. If you're from a Western country, you're one of the most massive people on earth. It'd be like a Somalian dude seeing his BMI and saying that he's not underweight, he just has a small frame. It's relative.
^Try this out to see where you fit within your own nationality. You're probably pretty reasonably situated. My BMI is lower than 90% of American males my age, but I'm only slightly below the global average and I'm right where I should be given my ethnic background.
Separate names with a comma.