Quote (thesnipa @ Mar 10 2021 09:55am)

what's the alternative, that over 1% of the population are weight lifters or body builders?

in which case the horror involved is they dont pay attention to BMI while 99% of people still can use it?

exceptions dont disprove general rules, BMI is still a good health indicator. and in this case, those who can't use it to tell general health are plagued with all sorts of injuries from lifting or have complications from roids or supplements quite often. so a generally good looking but with underlying health concerns group cant use a general rule of thumb for health. shocker.

Quote (Thor123422 @ Mar 10 2021 10:00am)

Nah bro, a day laborer with a huge beer gut, vitamin deficiencies, annihilated knees, and some muscle mass from moving concrete bags is basically the same as Michael Phelps.

Quote (thesnipa @ 10 Mar 2021 07:55)

what's the alternative, that over 1% of the population are weight lifters or body builders?

in which case the horror involved is they dont pay attention to BMI while 99% of people still can use it?

exceptions dont disprove general rules, BMI is still a good health indicator. and in this case, those who can't use it to tell general health are plagued with all sorts of injuries from lifting or have complications from roids or supplements quite often. so a generally good looking but with underlying health concerns group cant use a general rule of thumb for health. shocker.

Quote (thesnipa @ Mar 10 2021 10:06am)

its almost like BMI, a general measurement for normal people, can't be used for people who eat 10k+ calories a day, work out for 2+ hours a day, and who don't have a goal of general health but instead peak athletic performance.

wild stuff.

Quote (InsaneBobb @ Mar 10 2021 10:11am)

No, Thor's entire premise is simply stupid. First, BMI does not accurately calculate body fat percentage because it doesn't measure body fat at all.

Quote (Thor123422 @ Mar 10 2021 08:52am)

BMI is a useful health indicator for 99% of the population. That there are edge cases does not discredit it's general use.

Quote (InsaneBobb @ Mar 10 2021 10:11am)

No, Thor's entire premise is simply stupid. First, BMI does not accurately calculate body fat percentage because it doesn't measure body fat at all. It assigns arbitrary ranges of weight vs height, does not take lifestyle into account at all, and calls it good. The fact is that the majority of blue collar workers, according to BMI, are classed as "overweight". No matter what their body fat percentage is. We aren't talking "body builders" here. We're talking standard laborers. 45% of all occupations are classed as "medium work" with another 13.7% as "heavy work" according to the bureau of labor. This is far higher than this magical "99%" number accounts for. Those in medium to heavy work ratios have a higher weight in muscle mass, on average, than the white collar worker. Thus, occupational factors (aka lifestyle) heavily impacts how accurate BMI is.

So, for men, acceptable body fat percentage is 6%-25%. For women, it's 14%-31%. If you fall anywhere in that range, you're "normal" and neither overweight or underweight. How does BMI measure that? It doesn't. So, with such a high portion of the population counted as "overweight" according to BMI, how many are really "overweight"? BMI isn't a "general rule" any more than an 850 calorie lunch being ideal is a "general rule". When discussing a person's health, that person's lifestyle must be considered individually. Hence why BMI statistics are mostly meaningless. :)

Quote (Thor123422 @ 10 Mar 2021 08:13)

Well there's your problem. I never said BMI measured body fat lol. Funny what happens when you don't even read my posts. What I said was

Quote (thesnipa @ 10 Mar 2021 08:18)

strangely enough we can define temperature on the sun in a general sense without actually going there.

Quote (InsaneBobb @ Mar 10 2021 10:23am)

You have yet to show any data whatsoever that your claim is in any way supported by ANY data. Why?

The answer is simple: BMI has only proven somewhat "accurate" in predicting the likelihood of health issues in the "Obese" and "Underweight" categories. The "Overweight" category, specifically, is not at all trustworthy without assessing the lifestyle of the individual. Even the CDC doesn't make any claims about "99% accuracy" even in the Obese category. You are literally the only person making that claim.

So, back up your claim with data, or stick to torturing mice. :)



If I tell you a man is six foot tall and 235 pounds, you're telling me you can accurately describe their body to me?

Go ahead, give it a shot. No matter what example you try to provide, I can easily provide you a completely opposite example. Your analogy is worthless. Why did you bother to post it?