How accurate is this? I have 26 BMI but my stomach is completely flat and I can see muscle tissue through my skin

How accurate is this? I have 26 BMI but my stomach is completely flat and I can see muscle tissue through my skin.

>can see muscle tissue through skin
xray vision confirmed

extreme example, but phil heath's BMI is 37.
the index assumes everyone has the same amount of muscle

>How accurate is this?
If you lift, not at all. For instance most of the rugby players on my country's national team would qualify for obese class 1.

under your skin

not through your skin

You know what I mean sweetie

>If you lift, not at all.
I meant to say if you've acquired a significant net increase in your weight but your BF% is still low then the BMI scale becomes increasingly inaccurate relative to your increase in muscle weight.

Did you have a 3rd party calculate you BMI through the clamps or water displacement, or are you calculating with the height weight formula or electronic reader? One way gives you your actually, the other is an estimate

For anyone who is fit (actually fit not fat) it isn't that reliable. Body fat is better.

Bmi puts me at 26

I used a scale at the gym that measures weight, height and BMI

If it does the electric impulse thing, those aren't entirely accurate. You can use them to see if your bf% goes up or down but don't rely on them for an actual measurement. The height weight calculation doesn't separate muscle weight from fat weight, enough said.

I agree with the inaccuracy, my scale says that I'm 3% bf, which is very, very unlikely

Mine says I'm 22% but my trainer used the clamps and pinned me at 18%

>3% bf
Sounds a bit fishy, you're right to be sceptical.

Everyone likes to talk shit about BMI but it's a useful measurement, just not really for individuals (unless you're sedentary). It's more for metadata studies and to use in evidence based medicine.

not accurate if you lift. went to my doctor, told me I had a BMI of 30 and was considered obese by those standards. i asked "holy shit am I really obese?" he starts laughing hysterically and tells me "no! that is a scale for people who aren't active or lifting weights. you have big muscles and are strong, that scale doesn't apply to you"

made me feel pretty good desu

BMI is just weight divided by height squared. you're thinking of bf%
BMI cutoffs are arbitrary, but as a population indicator it's pretty great. Even for nearly all individuals it's accurate, and it's hella easy to pick out who it isn't accurate for (ie. has muscle mass).

If you don't exercise then it's good. I noticed that used to be about 26 and when I looked down I couldn't see my dick. So I lost weight and I'm down to 23 and I can happily see my balls when I take a shower

It's a mediocre substitute for body fat. If you use body fat instead of BMI all the issues with BMI being inconsistent disappear.

Worst of all is that BMI is actually too lenient. Maybe 3% of men are obese/overweight but not actually fat. But 30% of people have normal BMIs but are still too fat.

"overweight" should probably start at around 20 for women and 22 for men.

>mediocre substitute for body fat
In what setting is it mediocre? Body fat is infinitely more expensive to take on a large scale, and is prone to inaccuracy without a ton of extra training. BMI literally takes knowing weight and height.

>reminder that arnie was considered obese in his prime because of the BMI.

The BMI was created around 1850 when weight training was near non-existent and sports training wasn't anywhere near what it is today.

Its a fucking stupid way of categorizing anyone that is active even in the slightest. Im considered obese and im sitting at about 17% BF.

It's literally a population metric of overweight and obesity. No one believes that at some particular exact BMI your organs just turn off, and people that use it are well aware that a few percent of people are muscular

BMI is good for average joes that don't have a lot of muscle.
It's a terrible measurement for anyone who has been lifting regularly for a period longer than a year.

My BMI is 30. Awww shit I'm obese.

Muscle has a higher density and different distribution than fat. BMI is only about total mass, not lean vs fat mass.

As a metric for studying populations its incredibly useful, but for the outliars its completely fucking worthless.

Anecdotally I have a BMI of 27, which classifies me firmly within the overweight category.
>move
>go to new doctor
>"your BMI is 27, that classifies you as overweight and puts you at risk..."
>get up and start leaving.
>"w-where a-are you going?"

Fucking hickville doctors with their crackerjack medical licenses.

not BMI's fault you have a shitty doctor

you think you're buff but you're honestly pretty fat

No shit. I don't have a six-pack, that's for sure. But obese is something else. That was my point.

>"overweight" should probably start at around 20 for women and 22 for men
Agree with your suggested numbers 100%. It would help people realize they're not "normal" and could need some exercise before it becomes a problem.

The limits are set when there is a strong correlation to obesity related diseases. It's why it varies between countries/ethnic groups as people from Singapore get heart diseases at much lower BMI than fatties in Houston, who manage to survive a lot more with their obesity.

What is your bf%?

mirin'