The FastDay Forum

It's also an age thing, if you are older you need a bit of padding not to look ill.

Agreed!!

Maybe, but is that because we really need the padding or because we have unhealthy ideas of how we want to look when we are older? (i.e. we want to look younger!) I think my mother kept quite a bit of weight on because she felt it helped her skin tone. It may have done, but then it probably didn't improve her longevity (understatement).

Understand. Make that a LITTLE extra weight! I have had my weight down very low and was surprised to see the "wrinklies" that showed up on my face!

[carorees]

Shorter people are likely to be healthy at a lower BMI than the official bands suggest, while taller people will be be healthy at a higher BMI than the official bands suggest. However as pointed out, the BMI takes no account of build. Actually the key measurement is waist: height and waist: hip ratios.

BMI is a useful way of dividing populations for research. In the real world, looking at a person is the best way of determining of they are overweight but that's too vague for research purposes and the whole target driven culture of the NHS these days so people focus on BMI rather than just taking a good look!!

Shorter people are likely to be healthy at a lower BMI than the official bands suggest, while taller people will be be healthy at a higher BMI than the official bands suggest. However as pointed out, the BMI takes no account of build. Actually the key measurement is waist: height and waist: hip ratios.

BMI is a useful way of dividing populations for research. In the real world, looking at a person is the best way of determining of they are overweight but that's too vague for research purposes and the whole target driven culture of the NHS these days so people focus on BMI rather than just taking a good look!!

So I could actually go lower than 18 BMI and still be healthy because I'm short?

(Note: I am not going to do this).

It's logical Pip and please see an earlier post (of mine ) about a new revised BMI which is better adjusted for outsize people here.

[carorees]

Depends on your build! Probably best use fat % and waist measurement as your guide.

I've always thought that the BMI range is too generous. But I think body frame size is important and makes a difference to how one looks with less or more weight. I've been near the top and near the bottom of the BMI 'healthy' range and looking back at photos of when I was nearly 11 stone (I'm 5'8") I definitely look overweight. But I have a small frame.

Here is a spot of comedy:
BMI is not a good indicator of obesity. For instance the rugby player Jonah Lomu, when he was match fit playing for New Zealand weighed 125 kg. His height was 1.96 m. So his BMI is 125 / (1.96 * 1.96) equals 32.5. Jonah Lomu was obese.
BMI doesn't take muscle mass into account...

It's also an age thing, if you are older you need a bit of padding not to look ill.

Agreed!!

Maybe, but is that because we really need the padding or because we have unhealthy ideas of how we want to look when we are older? (i.e. we want to look younger!)

I'm now getting to be older and the weight has gone off my face first, leaving a wrinkley neck. It's all a balance but life is miserable if everyone is telling you that you look ill or scraggy.

I'm probably a bit like a smoker, there's an assumption you always want to give up...you're not actually supposed to like being fat but I actually do like being cuddly and don't really want to be thin and gaunt looking, which is what I would look like within my BMI.

Hey, but we'll see, won't we as it doesn't look like any of us are disappearing off the forum!

If I get to the point I can jump up and down and it's all solid, that'll be me, regardless of the number on the scale.

It's logical Pip and please see an earlier post (of mine ) about a new revised BMI which is better adjusted for outsize people here.

I did. It makes me out to be bigger

My stats are: 5ft1 and 8st3. Try it.

Hey, but we'll see, won't we as it doesn't look like any of us are disappearing off the forum!

If I get to the point I can jump up and down and it's all solid, that'll be me, regardless of the number on the scale.

Me too! Adds a point.

62 kgs is the top of the range for me. Ha, ha, looks like I'll be here for the duration.

Wow, interesting to see how much height affects the BMI calculations. I'm only 5'6 and I can be up to 11 stone to stay under a BMI of 25. So I was surprised to see that just 4 inches of height difference made over a stone difference in the healthy weight range. But in my book, no-one who can fit into size 10 trousers can possibly look overweight! I dream of size 10 trousers!
And huge congratulations on the weight loss so far! Is that all by following the 5:2 plan?

Yes!

But that's the thing, women don't feel good about themselves at pretty much any weight, if you go on what people here are saying.

If you do feel good, you eat and look after yourself better, imho. Genetically, I am always going to have a higher BMI than my very slight sister and I eat well and exercise as much as some people almost half my size.

Feeling good about yourself and weight are two entirely different things.

Agree with the rest of the post about probablities...that all any tool can do, cover the majority of cases and model outcomes for them.

....and I know people who keep within their BMI by throwing up after they've eaten.

Been interesting to read everybody's contributions.

This is a really interesting thread. My husband is always told that he is in the overweight, sometimes obese category based on BMI, but seriously, he's hardly that. He has a broad frame with meaty legs and is generally muscly, but not tall. He hasn't played rugby since at school and is hardly Jonah Lomu, but I bet that many rugby players are the same. My daughter takes after him, short and broad...