- 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
US BMI Distribution
Posted on 3/1/20 at 11:15 am
Posted on 3/1/20 at 11:15 am
I have been trying to find a study or chart reflecting the BMI distribution in the US population, but I do not seem to be having any success. The stats seem to say that a out 40% of adults are obese (>30 BMI), so I suspect that the distribution is probably left-skewed, with a mean around 28 or 29.
But I am finding mostly charts which show a normal (bell) distribution, which seems inconsistent with the 40% obesity figure:
I do not even want to disclose my embarrassing BMI from two or three years ago, but I have gotten it down to 26 (and still improving), and I am proud of my progress. I walk into a room, and I see myself as being in the fitter third or so of most gatherings. But THESE charts say that I am still not doing very well.
Can anyone provide any reliable data on US distribution of BMI?
But I am finding mostly charts which show a normal (bell) distribution, which seems inconsistent with the 40% obesity figure:
I do not even want to disclose my embarrassing BMI from two or three years ago, but I have gotten it down to 26 (and still improving), and I am proud of my progress. I walk into a room, and I see myself as being in the fitter third or so of most gatherings. But THESE charts say that I am still not doing very well.
Can anyone provide any reliable data on US distribution of BMI?
4
Posted on 3/1/20 at 12:09 pm to AggieHank86
BMI is pretty much crap. Does not really account for lean muscle mass gains. 6’ guy, 210, moderately ripped.
BMI shows him at 28.5.. overweight. Crap.
BMI shows him at 28.5.. overweight. Crap.
Posted on 3/1/20 at 12:17 pm to AggieHank86
While I don't know of a reliable study regarding BMI, I do know that it is the most 'unreliable' health statistic out there. It's literally just a height/weight formula that doesn't account for a hundred other potential indicators for health.
Posted on 3/1/20 at 12:30 pm to Shepherd
quote:
BMI is pretty much crap. Does not really account for lean muscle mass gains. 6’ guy, 210, moderately ripped.
BMI shows him at 28.5.. overweight. Crap.
On an individual basis, I agree with you. I'm an example of this myself. That being said, I do think it is a decent measure when presented over the entirety if a society.
Posted on 3/1/20 at 12:35 pm to Shepherd
quote:I understand that BMI and height/weight charts not perfect. In HS, all the charts said I was borderline obese, when I was 190 pounds of almost pure lean muscle starting on both sides of the ball with 30” waist and 42” chest.
BMI is pretty much crap. Does not really account for lean muscle mass gains. 6’ guy, 210, moderately ripped.
BMI shows him at 28.5.. overweight. Crap.
Now, at 55, I am 184#, 32” and 45” and I KNOW I am carrying much more body fat.
But BMI is a tool, albeit an imperfect one. As an older guy who is NOT in the gym every day anymore, I think it is a tool I can use to measure some things.
But thanks for the input.
This post was edited on 3/1/20 at 12:40 pm
Posted on 3/1/20 at 12:36 pm to AggieHank86
BMI is shite
by its standards im basically obese
by its standards im basically obese
Posted on 3/1/20 at 12:58 pm to Shepherd
quote:
BMI is pretty much crap. Does not really account for lean muscle mass gains. 6’ guy, 210, moderately ripped. BMI shows him at 28.5.. overweight. Crap
This is an incorrect way of thinking about BMI as it relates to fitness though. It's very common among fitness-minded people because they're surprised when BMI says their weight is unhealthy and believe BMI must be wrong or doesn't apply to them rather than accept that BMI can be correct about them as a health and longevity metric while making no claims about their fitness level or athleticism.
It's quite possible to be fit and athletic AND have an unhealthy BMI. Being fit and athletic doesn't make a person an exception to the BMI data.
That's just the way it is. Being big lowers life expectancy. There are very few if any 90 and 100 year old men who are very large. It's not because they were 250lb of muscle in their 30's and 40's then shrunk down to 150 later in life. The 250lbers died younger.
Posted on 3/1/20 at 1:20 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
But I am finding mostly charts which show a normal (bell) distribution, which seems inconsistent with the 40% obesity figure:
Suspect that that chart should read “BMI for a sample of 101 readily available college kids”
This is a little dated (I think the current nhanes dataset is 2017-2018), but it breaks it down by percentile under the calculator:
LINK
This post was edited on 3/1/20 at 1:21 pm
Posted on 3/1/20 at 7:15 pm to Shepherd
quote:
BMI is pretty much crap. Does not really account for lean muscle mass gains. 6’ guy, 210, moderately ripped.
BMI shows him at 28.5.. overweight. Crap.
Again, it's useful for trends/directional analysis. Unless we think we're having a lean-mass revolution (we aren't), then population-wide increases in BMI confirm what we see with our eyeballs--we fat and getting fatter.
Edit: I'm at 24 right now and am in a winter lax phase but have low body fat. On verge of being "overweight" despite looking rail thin compared to the reference group...esp outside CO and other active communities.
This post was edited on 3/1/20 at 7:18 pm
Posted on 3/1/20 at 11:13 pm to McLemore
I'm proud to be morbidly obese at 5'11", 223lbs. with 12% bodyfat. I wonder if my fat arse can claim disability. Maybe get me one of those rascal scooters or a stairlift for my one story house.
Posted on 3/2/20 at 6:45 am to Shepherd
quote:
BMI is pretty much crap.
No it isn't. Not at a macro level.
Unless you want to assume that the US is full of weightlifters.
I don't understand why people don't get this.
This post was edited on 3/2/20 at 6:46 am
Posted on 3/2/20 at 9:24 am to Shepherd
quote:
BMI is pretty much crap.
According to BMI I'm obese. You'd have a hard time calling me fat. It may be useful for insurance actuaries, but for the common baw you're better off doing measurements on yourself (waist, chest, bicep, etc.).
Posted on 3/2/20 at 5:41 pm to boxcarbarney
quote:
but for the common baw you're better off doing measurements on yourself
Average on this board? Maybe
Average as in population average? Wrong.
Posted on 3/4/20 at 9:31 am to Hulkklogan
quote:
Average on this board? Maybe Average as in population average? Wrong.
Better for anyone who is training. The OP is using BMI to gauge his progress. Because the BMI is not a good tool for judging progress, and certainly isn't a good tool for judging health at the micro level, he would be better served using personal measurements to figure out where he is and where he'd like to be.
Posted on 3/4/20 at 9:57 am to Shepherd
quote:
BMI is pretty much crap. Does not really account for lean muscle mass gains. 6’ guy, 210, moderately ripped. BMI shows him at 28.5.. overweight. Crap.
I have to shake my head some when people use this argument for why BMI isn't a useful tool. What percent of the population do you believe falls in the category of having so much lean mass that it skews their results.
Page 1 of 1
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News