Is BMI a good health indicator?

Question

I keep seeing people using it to determine if someone is at a healthy weight or not... I'll leave out my opinion

redeyemindtricks · Accepted Answer

First, the bare bones:
BMI -- as you already know -- is simply a formula calculated from height and weight.
Therefore -- obviously -- anything that isn't adequately captured by height and weight, can't adequately be captured by BMI either.

That's pretty much end of story, but, here are some examples.

___

The BMI **IS** fairly useful for the following:

• Pre-pubescent children
(... who, with a small handful of exceptions, don't differ that much from one another in body structure -- and *especially* not in muscularity, since that's a pubertal development)

• SEDENTARY adults of both sexes (= little or no exercise)
(... these people don't tend to have vastly differing amounts of bodyfat vs. lean muscle tissue)

• VERY SLIM adults -- especially women who've lost too much weight from ED's and are at risk accordingly
(... these people don't have much muscularity, because they're... well... very slim. Two girls with a BMI of 14, for instance, are pretty much going to look the same no matter what.)

• Health risks that go up with weight REGARDLESS of whether that weight is fat or muscle
For instance, the risk of coronary heart disease is high for BIG people of all types -- pretty much regardless of whether that "big" is fat, muscle, or a combination of both. Because... well, yr heart has to pump blood to all that weight no matter what kind it is.

(It's higher cumulative risk for fatter "big" people than for brawnier "big" people, because the fatter people usually have worse blood lipids, less active lives, etc. But the contribution of weight itself is pretty similar in both cases because, again, the heart's gotta do what the heart's gotta do.)

__

The BMI is **TOTALLY USELESS** for the following:

• Athletes with significant muscle mass -- especially male athletes
(... female athletes can't normally put on *that* much muscle mass, with the exception of a small percentage who are very stocky and powerfully built)

• Amputees, people with prosthetics, or anyone else with structurally altered body part (s)
(... obviously this is going to affect bodyweight, among many other things)

__

For others, it's in between.

It's interesting to note that Lambert A. J. Quetelet -- the dude who first came up with the BMI formula -- EXPLICITLY SAID that it is *NOT* meant to indicate "adiposity" (= body fat percentage)... despite what some people think.

There's some confusion on this, mostly because

BaileyisDarcy · Accepted Answer

It doesn't take into account muscle weight, so while your BMI might indicate you are over weight, you could in fact be perfectly healthy with a bit more muscle than the average person.

My friends look at me weird when I tell them I'm currently on my first ever diet (cutting my sugar intake in half) and they tell me I don't need to lose weight, I need to put it on.

I am pretty skinny, but according to my BMI I shouldn't go over 60 kg. Otherwise I'll be heavier than is healthy for me personally.
I am using this as a guide simply because I have little to no muscle to account for, so I believe my BMI is fairly accurate in my case.

feminismisnarcissism · Accepted Answer

BMI reminds me of public schools: Both treat humans as homogeneous creatures when we simply are not. People all learn differently, have different interests and public schooling is rather to make them all indoctrinated sheep. As I used to say to my own children, "time to go learn your lies" and send them to school.

Likewise with bodies-everybody is different and health is what matters, not weight. I do however have to point out that the whole narcissism movement known as "feminism" tries to make obese women "big beautiful women" when in reality-they are just obese and should not be encouraged to be okay with such a selfish, unhealthy lifestyle. No different than a severe drug addict-and should be regarded as the same - overindulgence, hedonism, nothing fancier.

That said-BMI is bullshit. Some women have the genetics to be very volumptuous and look hot as they are, as their genes intended them to be... meanwhile you have other women working so hard to be skinny, perhaps to the point of anorexia, bolemia that they look disgusting, trapped by their own adherence to cultural bullshit.

Bottom line: women should quit objectifying themselves. And feminism should quit pretending it's men doing the objectifying when it's really women-meaning the source of the problem is never even addressed.

Anonymous · Accepted Answer

No it's stupid because it doesn't take muscle mass into account. according to bmi this 5'8", 208lbs football player is obese. Does he look obese to you?

crazychickenlady · Answer

BMI doesn't account for muscle, water weight or people with larger bone structures. Nor is weight an accurate representation of health; when I was younger I weighed 107lbs, lighter than I do now, and yet I was much less healthier, because I was starving myself. Now I'm heavier, but I eat regularly and am active, so my BMI is higher, but from a medical standpoint I'm healthier.

Yumix · Answer

it gives you a rough idea... but nothing more.

if you are in the range where it says that you are at a healthy weight, you can be pretty sure it's correct... the problem is when you are slightly above or below.
I think below 18 would be underweight... but if you eat normally and look normal, then it doesn't matter what it says and you shouldn't start gaining weight because of it. Only when you are very far below or above it, then it's when you should pay attention.

and you're 17... the regular values you see are for adults, so it's not applicable to you. there are special charts which show you how it scales with the age

Frost_Byt3 · Answer

Do you have absolutely zero muscle mass?

If your answer is yes, then you are probably in the 99th percentile, and the BMI is actually accurate for you.
If your answer is no, then you are like everybody else and the weight of your muscle skews your BMI reading so much that it doesn't mean shit.

Sarahprincess · Answer

Its not perfect but its the best we have without taking precise measurements.
People always go on and say it doesn't take fitness, strength or natural bodyshape into account.

But its just meant to be used as a guide. Get a dr to calculate the % of your total body that is made up of fat.
This is done with the fat pinch test and a bunch of measurements. Its far more accurate

martyfellow · Answer

1221It's a good place to start. For many people, t will tell them what overall condition they are in.

Of course, it's based on averages. People with unusually large bones, for example, may show an unhealthy BMI even tough they work out and have good cardiovascular fitness. So you need to look at other factors to make sure you have a reasonable overall evaluation.

Jxpxtxr · Answer

It's a good general indicator but it's never 100% reliable as it doesn't really take things like bone density and amount of body fat/muscle mass into account. But yeah, if your BMI is really high or really low your body most definitely is in the unhealthy weight range.

AynonOMouse · Answer

It's completely inaccurate. Not weighing much doesn't mean that someone is as healthy as someone a little overweight that exercises frequently.
Plus BMI usually just goes by height/weight. So that means someone like Triple H is way over weight and unhealthy, but an anorexic person is healthy.
It's total BS.

Ygritte_snow · Answer

No because it uses how much you weight, literally. It doesn't make a difference if you have 10 kilos of muscle or 10 kilos of fat. For the BMI scale, it's the same. the BMI scale said that athletes were "overweight" (or OBESE for weight lifters) in an experiment , which of course they weren't. Their muscle mass was just heavy, and the BMI scale thought it was fat.

PrincessofNohr · Answer

BMI specifically coordinates to certain risk factors for things like heart disease, diabetes, etc. It has been proven that those who have a higher BMI are generally more at risk for these kinds of diseases than those with a lower one. That being said, it's pretty limited outside of that. It obviously doesn't indicate other factors for health, and it doesn't work at all for athletes since muscle outweighs fat.

Xfitchick · Answer

It is a first indication and very low or very high values are certainly not OK. A better measure is your muscle/fat balance. A BMI of 26 in a very muscular body can still be healthy, a BMI of 21 in a slim body with a lot of fat is not healthy at all.

EllieLexis513 · Answer

It is if you actually measure it using an instrument instead of the equation for the BMI chart. The chart says my BMI is 31 but my friend used an actually fat measuring device and my BMI is actually 27.

Mesonfielde · Answer

If you're between 19 and 22, it's unlikely that you're in a horrible state. So I voted yes. But if you're building ridiculous amounts of muscles, it'll start to fail.

RedHood7 · Answer

Not a good health indicator, but an indicator of a healthy weight range. Health goes beyond the weight.

Mustachekitteh · Answer

Nope since it doesn't include muscle mass, water weight, etc.

reixun · Answer

I think it works for people without a lot of muscle.

RedRobin · Answer

No, according to BMI the entire national New Zealand rugby team is considered obese when they're clearly incredibly fit, professional athletes.

lumos · Answer

It's an ok generalization but it's better to get a doctor's evaluation and to use your own common sense.

mooky06 · Answer

It gives you a rough estimation. Nothing accurate though

Dipsy · Answer

It's a rough indicator for when you have 2 minutes to calculate. You can, of course, also spend a few hundred bucks to let yourself get inspected.

TiffyPuff · Answer

If you don't exercise, it's serviceable, but not good. If you work out, it's useless. I vote No.

nala_rawr · Answer

its not very accurate, it just goes by weight. so i would say defintely NOT

steveisbored · Answer

It's okay as like a guideline or showing someone when they are clearly overweight, bur not a catchall to always be correct for every person.

Krillanr · Answer

It's only partial data. BMI is good for knowing your general fat content, but it's not all one needs to check.

HonestWhiteGuy · Answer

It's something to go by. It honestly I don't think it's that accurate since it doesn't account for other factors

blondfrog · Answer

Its not fully accurate those bmi calculators don't take muscle mass into consideration.

sexcrazy12 · Answer

it is not always accurate. it depends on your fitness level as wel and your overall health

lost_alice · Answer

I am underweight based on bmi so I don't think it is really right

Anonymous · Answer

It's not great but it's alright for a simple algorithm

Anonymous · Answer

its not the greatest tool, butt, ot's the only viable one to at least give you an idea of where you should be

sptennis13 · Answer

For the average person, it is a good measure of your well-being. For bodybuilders, not so much

Anonymous · Answer

it's only a rough estimator but better than nothing or the ones they had before

mimiblondychick · Answer

body mass index is way important

serious · Answer

Yes, that quite good I would say

Bandit74 · Answer

I think body fat % is a much better metric.

TwinFace · Answer

Only if u dont have any muscle mass

Thisperson98 · Answer

Hell no, it says I am extremely obese.

FrenchyRomain · Answer

To me it can be but not in all cases

scooogy · Answer

Yeah, researchers rely on that

AhGojira · Answer

No...

ShaeNielson · Answer

No, it's not.

akadatank44 · Answer

Nope.

PlzJustDie · Answer

Noooo

Is BMI a good health indicator?

Most Helpful Opinions

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

Is BMI a good health indicator?

Most Helpful Opinions

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

We're glad to see you liked this post.