- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: More Fatties Than Ever Before in the United States of Inevitable Diabetes
Posted on 1/27/15 at 12:50 pm to thesoccerfanjax
Posted on 1/27/15 at 12:50 pm to thesoccerfanjax
quote:
5'9" 175 lbs is either stocky as all hell, straight up fat, or if lean a body builder body type. So I'd say your example actually supports BMI.
Stocky is not fat and that is possible even without lifting weights.
1
Posted on 1/27/15 at 12:50 pm to thesoccerfanjax
quote:
98% of our population doesn't lift weights.... ever.
98%?
Posted on 1/27/15 at 12:52 pm to tween the hedges
Body fat percentage is a better indicator by a lot than BMI for obesity.
Posted on 1/27/15 at 12:52 pm to BayouBandit24
(no message)
This post was edited on 5/26/23 at 9:16 am
Posted on 1/27/15 at 12:54 pm to More beer please
stocky, pudgy, a little fat are now all called "obese" which is why I fricking hate BMI and obesity hysteria
Often times I see some fat frick doctor (like the one in "super size me" opining on the poor health habits of others
Often times I see some fat frick doctor (like the one in "super size me" opining on the poor health habits of others
Posted on 1/27/15 at 12:54 pm to More beer please
Certainly not enough to carry enough muscle to skew BMI.
Posted on 1/27/15 at 12:55 pm to DelU249
quote:
I love how a pudgy guy is now "obese"...that's pretty much what I hear from liberals
Put down the milkshake and stop blaming liberals for your obesity.
Posted on 1/27/15 at 12:56 pm to DelU249
No. We're just becoming immune to how fricking fat we are.
Posted on 1/27/15 at 12:56 pm to DelU249
quote:yeah, it was just a bunch of idiots with no education, no experience and no review. They got drunk, picked some random arse numbers and whalah!
who decided the scale of thin to obese for the resulting number? How did they determine that...I'm always wary of pseudo liberal science
Why Use BMI?
This post was edited on 1/27/15 at 12:58 pm
Posted on 1/27/15 at 12:57 pm to thesoccerfanjax
quote:
5'9" 175 lbs is either stocky as all hell, straight up fat, or if lean a body builder body type. So I'd say your example actually supports BMI. Most people don't ever touch a weight.
My best friend from high school was a little coon arse who played football at 5'8" 160-165. He and I started lifting weights when we got to LSU and by his sophomore year he was around 182. Granted he was lifting weights, I doubt you would ever mistake him for a bodybuilder. The size you described is actually very average among the male population.
Posted on 1/27/15 at 12:57 pm to thesoccerfanjax
quote:
Certainly not enough to carry enough muscle to skew BMI.
I work out and not even some crazy amount and I qualify as overweight. While I certainly could be leaner, no one would see me and think that I was overweight. Hell if anything I hear comments about being skinny.
It doesn't take much muscle mass at all to skew these numbers. Especially if you have a strong lower body.
Posted on 1/27/15 at 12:59 pm to Winkface
(no message)
This post was edited on 5/26/23 at 9:17 am
Posted on 1/27/15 at 12:59 pm to Ross
quote:
Body fat percentage is a better indicator by a lot than BMI for obesity.
Yes, and lean body mass is not far behind.
The problem is that BMI is cheap and easy with little scientific calculation (apart from te chart which has already been established), while measuring body fat requires more sophisticated equipment.
Posted on 1/27/15 at 12:59 pm to thesoccerfanjax
quote:
Certainly not enough to carry enough muscle to skew BMI.
For males it most certainly is.
Posted on 1/27/15 at 12:59 pm to saint amant steve
You're right. It is average. And on average we are fat.
Posted on 1/27/15 at 1:04 pm to More beer please
Hardly. Only if they're carrying more fat than is optimal in the first place. I lift three days a week and weigh 155-160 @ 5'9" and while I'm far from huge (and don't want to be) you can certainly tell I lift.
Posted on 1/27/15 at 1:07 pm to DelU249
quote:
I do know a lot of stuff that is parroted as science and is not science...when I hear that being 135 lbs is healthier than being 175 lbs, then my bullshite barometer starts reading off the charts.
BMI over 30 is a fairly well established risk line - and individual circumstances, genetics, etc., also play a role, but being under is the smart thing.
As to the other side of your argument - not obesity, mind you, but "overweight" - which a significant portion of Americans are over 2/3 of Americans 20 and older are overweight, including over 3/4 of American men - there is little question that it is healthier to be a little overweight (25 to 26 1/2 BMI) than a little underweight (less than 18 1/2 BMI).
But, that's not what science is pushing - science is pushing a normal BMI, unless you are excusing yourself due to a relatively high lean muscle mass (or low BF %) - and those are the exceptions, not the rule.
If your "job" doesn't require/strongly encourage you to hold extra weight (professional bodybuilder, NFL player, etc.), the best health choice you can make is to get your BMI as close to 25, or under, if you can - staying above 18 1/2, of course.
This post was edited on 1/27/15 at 1:08 pm
Posted on 1/27/15 at 1:09 pm to Ace Midnight
So innumerable variables are not considered. You can see how that smells like bullshite right? (And I don't know if it is)
Posted on 1/27/15 at 1:10 pm to thesoccerfanjax
Yeah and Im 5'9 190, lift a lot, have abs, and still dont look "huge". But put that 5'9 guy next to me with an "ideal" weight of 140 lbs and he looks like he is in junior high.
It simply does not take muscle mass into account for males. You dont even have to factor in lifting weights. Males take up the vast majority of blue collar jobs that require heavy lifting and a large workload. They dont need to lift weights to have muscle mass that exceeds the BMI.
It simply does not take muscle mass into account for males. You dont even have to factor in lifting weights. Males take up the vast majority of blue collar jobs that require heavy lifting and a large workload. They dont need to lift weights to have muscle mass that exceeds the BMI.
Posted on 1/27/15 at 1:10 pm to LoveThatMoney
BMI is adequate enough for general population and I believe the new obesity rate report. Just go to your local mall or walmart and look around you for proof. Fat people roaming around everywhere. There are more fat people than normal people.
Page 3 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News