People always go on about how to be of healthy size you need to be within BMI 18-25, and although i guess this is sort of reasonable, many people (woman in particular) would argue that some people have heavy bones. Is this a reasonable comment to make? If a person thinks they are not over weight, but have a BMI of 25 or 26, could it be they have heavy bones? I know many people think this an excuse, but personally I believe that it is possible to have heavy bones. Any comments??
2007-03-11 12:32:35 · 15 answers · asked by cheeky_ro 2 in Health ➔ Diet & Fitness
The BMI scale is essentially flawed because it works on averages and takes no account of genetics.
Each person is unique. Some are genetically geared to be thin, whilst others are geared to be fat.
You genetic code determines your size. If you are the size that your body has decide is right for you, (by the way, to find out what your size should be simply eat healthily and exercise regularly) you will be healthy.
The bones issue is actually a contributing factor as bones differ in size and thickness.
Someone with Brittle Bone Disease for instance will weigh less than an average person that is EXACTLY the same size and mass.
2007-03-11 12:46:47 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
A couple of years aog I worked as a show groom, as well as having 2 horses of my own. This kept me very fit and I still had a BMI or 30!!!! I was most definatly not fat, I had a light covering over my muscles, but only a little. I don't know if big bones are true or not, but if they are I guess I would have them. I'm only 5'2'' but I am very broad, especially across my shoulders, and naturally have a lot of muscle.
This might sound strange, but I always think of people as if the are a breed of horse, and as with horses there is no way to compare weight directly.
I would say I am a draft horse
http://www.thejoyofhorses.com/may98/ardennes.jpg
And that the BMI is for a throughbred
http://www.shadeoakstud.co.uk/uploads/images/rakaposhi.jpg
2007-03-11 21:04:38 · answer #2 · answered by Fred 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't understand the whole thing about BMI. I dont' think it takes into account heavy bones or even muscles.
They say that if your BMI is greater than 25 then you are clinically obese. But then again this guy had a BMI of 26 and I could not reasonably agree that he was fat at all, he was a very tall guy with heavy bones, didn't have a belly or doubly chin, his face was thin and yet this idiot said to him: You are obese!
2007-03-11 12:39:40 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
BMI is a rough estimate of body fat, however there are always exceptions. This is why if you find yourself with a higher BMI but feel you are healthy, you can have your body fat percentage to be sure. If you have larger bones or a higher muscle mass, you may weigh more and still have a healthy body fat percentage.
Obviously if someone is obese, then using being big boned as an excuse is just a cop out. But if you are just slightly overweight, this could be a perfectly legitimate reason.
HTH : )
2007-03-11 13:35:17 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I haven't seen anything about "heavy bones" in my reading on the BMI issue. What I have heard is that BMI doesn't always take muscle into account. Now this is for people who are very athletic... like professional level. For instance, female athletes who are very muscular might have high BMIs, but their fat-to-muscle ratio is healthy.
The bigger issue is whether people who are in the overweight range of BMI (25 to 29) are in the same category of risk as people who are obese (30 and up). The data are confusing as to whether it is possible to be "fat and fit," e.g. a person who exercises a lot, but is still "fat," or "chubby" or overweight by BMI standards.
The thing to remember is that BMI is just a screening tool, it is not a tell-all score. Weight measurement, body fat percentage, hip to waist ratio, etc, are all indicators or whether a person is a healthy size.
2007-03-11 12:43:21 · answer #5 · answered by thedrisin 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
the BMI index is not fair at all according to this rating Johnny Wilkinson the English rugby player would be unhealthy cos he over what the BMI reckons is good. the runner Paula Radcliffe(shes a size zero, which opens up a whole new can of worms!!) would be unhealthy because she would be below a healthy bmi rate. i don't think any one sane would claim top athletes were unhealthy. the bmi index has its flaws but as rough guide its fine just don't beat yourself up if you are not a perfect rating.
death to body fascists etc
2007-03-11 12:52:12 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
YES! BMI does matter. Someone I saw here answered that it does not.............yes it does. You know if you are overweight, and you know the difference between having to much fat or if you have muscle. It is true that BMI index does not take into account muscled individuals such as the person who body builds. Women do not go above 25. If you are a body building woman, and you certainly know if you are, then you know you can't adhere to the BMI index completely, but for goodness sake people you all know where you fall in the non muscled and muscled group.
The bone structure goes like this.........small frame, medium frame and large frame. Find a site that tells you how to measure your wrist for this, or how to measure between the 2 bones in your elbow. Its easy and effective.
2007-03-11 12:55:12 · answer #7 · answered by Meg V 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
No. The BMI is total bull with no science behind it and it doesn't take into consideration the most basic things, like vital body mass (bones and organs) vs. fat.
Actual scientists (well, mathematicians) made up the Met Life tables. I would consult those if you must have some kind of external validation.
2007-03-11 12:37:57 · answer #8 · answered by Lisa A 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Anything is "possible"...but it's also very likely that someone with a BMI>25 has an unhealthy amount of body fat. See the link below for some more explanation. Good luck.
- Mike
2007-03-11 12:42:13 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
ok we could first draw the line between weight problems and obese. weight problems may be deadly jointly as obese on the different hand, isn't that severe. the scientific charts do no longer repressent each and every build and shape, so being slightly obese or underweight isnt a huge deal. case in point, say on your top, the chart says which you'll be between a hundred forty five-150 five yet you're a hundred and sixty or a hundred sixty five or your a hundred and forty or a hundred thirty five.....the two are in user-friendly terms severe while impacts your wellbeing. there are various circumstances while persons are below or obese and fully wholesome. It in basic terms relies upon on you
2016-09-30 13:09:12 · answer #10 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋