re: What does the OT think of larger women?

IMO, the perfect weight for a woman around 5’6-5’7 is between 140-160 depending on their chest and hip size. Anything less is borderline too skinny. Anything more is pushing fat.

quote:

---

I hate that this thread had me go and look for a weight-height-photographic chart

---

Upon observation I found one that I would hit, only to retract that statement realizing you lured me in the pedophilic territory with a 16 year old:

200 lbs at 5’7” is not obese!!!??? Holy shite.

The OT does not approve. I on the other hand, like big butts and I can not lie!

The dress covers her fat rolls dumbass

Imagine getting a 200 pound girl pregnant because you wanted to get off one night frick. That.

200 pounds isn't fat enough for the thick crowd here.

quote:

---

The dress covers her fat rolls dumbass

---

Extra weight is acceptable if her chest is that damn huge.

quote:

---

A 5’7” 200 lb woman is obese baw

---

Technically, yes, that's a 31.3 BMI. OP did say "insanely" overweight obese and IDK what the frick that is, but implicitly a 30 or 31 isn't a person who is "insanely" obese. Not overweight anymore, but past that to "merely" obese.

5'7", 5'8" is relatively tall for a female. And some folks just carry weight better than others. That same 190 to 200 pound weight is going to look "better" on a gal with broad shoulders, wide hips, big boobs and thick bones than, say a formerly thin girl who has just packed on weight in the belly and thighs.

But, big is big and on a woman the "good" options for a high BMI are fairly narrow. Again, a heavy boned, muscular woman is going to look "better" at a high BMI than a "skinny" fat or otherwise doughy woman at the same BMI. But, the broader and more muscular she gets, the less feminine she is going to look, at least generally.

BMI can be deceptive. Short guys with a lot of muscle can often times blow out the BMI chart, but most guys who think they look like Franco Columbu actually look like Jack Black. So, be careful with those stones you glass house living motherfrickers.

So, there is all of that.

quote:

---

That is morbidly obese

---

No, a BMI of 30 to about 32 is not generally considered "morbidly" - while the qualifier of obese "morbidly", "gravely", "significantly" obese are not well defined, most practitioners settle on a BMI of 30 (because that is what some now fairly long-standing science says) as the marker between merely overweight and obese. "Morbidly" (depending on whom you ask) is generally reserved for folks with a 35 or 40 BMI (or greater). 5'7" or 5'8", 200 lbs is definitely at the lower range of obese. Keep in mind there is an entire category of BMI for overweight that is between normal (ideal?) weight and obesity.

BMI is certainly not perfect. It underestimates the health effects for a naturally thin person who is inactive and it overestimates the negative effects of "good" weight (i.e. muscle, bone) in those with BMI range of 30 to about 32 or 33.

However, even "good weight", beyond a certain point and the body still has to deal with the extra weight - lower extremity joints don't care if the extra weight is muscle, bone, fat or fluid. The heart still has to cope with the larger mass, etc.

So, everyone is strongly encouraged to take a holistic approach to weight questions. The same pound of weight is going to affect everyone differently. Is it fluid? (And if so, is there a cardiovascular or kidney problem?) Is it muscle? (If so, how much muscle does the person need)? Is it fat? (If so, is the person carrying the fat in the midsection or around the organs?)

BMI is a good tool, but it is only 1 tool to evaluate the negative effects of extra weight. So many Americans have a weight problem in the 21st Century it shouldn't be ignored.

200 is definitely a bit big for my taste.

But also it depends on how she carries the weight.

I've seen girls at 190 that looks better than girls at 150.