themels Posted December 9, 2010 Share Posted December 9, 2010 Mmmm? And all in the same sentence too! what i ment was that i used to judge people about how they looked ect when i was younger...... now i dont! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxforcefive Posted December 9, 2010 Share Posted December 9, 2010 what i ment was that i used to judge people about how they looked ect when i was younger...... now i dont! Well I interpreted it as you don't judge fat people (in your opinion) but you judge thin people (evident in your post). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themels Posted December 9, 2010 Share Posted December 9, 2010 Well I interpreted it as you don't judge fat people (in your opinion) but you judge thin people (evident in your post). i see what you mean! by gum theres some clever people on here this morning! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 9, 2010 Share Posted December 9, 2010 My issue with the BMI is this. It does not take into account a persons level of fitness, and I'll give an example. When I run my fitness classes (current and past), there have been ex-sports people who have trained/competed at very high levels in their 20s. There bodies slow down and they can no longer compete at that level. By the time these people get to their 40's, (in their words) there fitness levels are about 45% of what they were when at their peak. These people according to the BMI are overweight, simply because they physically cannot do what they did when they were younger. HOwever, in terms of fitness levels, the remaining 45% that they have, literally blows away your average gym goer, one of these so called fattys was still able to do 81 situps in one minute. Many of these fattys find the gym too easy. So how on earth would simply going for a walk or doing a gentle swim have any impact on there weight? Why are people judged simply on their weight, why not do a fitness test and find out more about these people? simply saying my graph says your fat is a waste of time and money in my opinion No, BMI doesn't take account of fitness levels because it is not meant to be an indicator of fitness. I'm afraid you seem to be very confused about what a persons Body Mass Index is - as it is nothing to do with their fitness levels, it matters not whether the person is an unfit wreck or whether they are a former athlete. It is a fact that muscle weighs more than fat so a person with very good muscle condition may have a BMI which is slightly higher but this would only be to a small degree and BMI tables are relaxed enough to accomodate that. Their BMI simply points out that they are overweight for their size and body type - it has nothing whatsoever to do with their fitness. A person's BMI may be at the perfect level but the person may still be very unfit. As you point out, a very fit person may may still be overweight and carrying fat so their BMI will rightly, indicate that they are overweight. Obviously, the ideal is to be both fit and the correct BMI for your height and body type. Failing on either of these counts means they are at risk, either through overweight or general unfitness. Whatever you care to believe, walking, swimming or any other aerobic exercise will help them lose weight if they are eating a correct diet - this applies whatever their weight or fitness level. It may be worth mentioning that any aerobic exercise only works if kept up for the correct amount of time, which is around 30 minutes or more. Exercise which is over and done with in a minute or two will have no effect on either weight loss or general fitness levels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shef_Fitness Posted December 9, 2010 Share Posted December 9, 2010 No, BMI doesn't take account of fitness levels because it is not meant to be an indicator of fitness. I'm afraid you seem to be very confused about what a persons Body Mass Index is - as it is nothing to do with their fitness levels, it matters not whether the person is an unfit wreck or whether they are a former athlete. It is a fact that muscle weighs more than fat so a person with very good muscle condition may have a BMI which is slightly higher but this would only be to a small degree and BMI tables are relaxed enough to accomodate that. Their BMI simply points out that they are overweight for their size and body type - it has nothing whatsoever to do with their fitness. A person's BMI may be at the perfect level but the person may still be very unfit. As you point out, a very fit person may may still be overweight and carrying fat so their BMI will rightly, indicate that they are overweight. Obviously, the ideal is to be both fit and the correct BMI for your height and body type. Failing on either of these counts means they are at risk, either through overweight or general unfitness. Whatever you care to believe, walking, swimming or any other aerobic exercise will help them lose weight if they are eating a correct diet - this applies whatever their weight or fitness level. It may be worth mentioning that any aerobic exercise only works if kept up for the correct amount of time, which is around 30 minutes or more.Exercise which is over and done with in a minute or two will have no effect on either weight loss or general fitness levels. Bold 1 I am aware what BMI, its simple a measurement of someones weight against their height and thats all it is. I simply object to the way people a labelled simply because they appear at a certain point on the BMI Chart. Bold 2 For a former athlete be it a Boxer, Footballer, Rubgy, any athlete you care to name, simply walking or swimming will barely register as an activity. I could put an ex-athlete, perhaps 20 or so years past their prime with a high BMI V a lentil eating streak of wee and I can absolutlely guarantee the former athlete will absolutley wipe the floor on every level of activity. Doesn't matter if its strength, stamina etc..... an ex athlete will wipe the floor with his BMI perfect lentil eating streak of wee opponent If you don't believe me, simply go along to any circuit class ran around the city, and you will see the so called porkers, and believe me, these people are 'fitness monsters'. For these people, walking, swimming a few lengths is laughable . My objection to the BMI, is the way it is used to bully people. If we want to save money, then there are other areas in our society that we could target. Sadly, the overweight are an easy target. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 Quote Bold 2 For a former athlete be it a Boxer, Footballer, Rubgy, any athlete you care to name, simply walking or swimming will barely register as an activity. I could put an ex-athlete, perhaps 20 or so years past their prime with a high BMI V a lentil eating streak of wee and I can absolutlely guarantee the former athlete will absolutley wipe the floor on every level of activity. Doesn't matter if its strength, stamina etc..... an ex athlete will wipe the floor with his BMI perfect lentil eating streak of wee opponent If you don't believe me, simply go along to any circuit class ran around the city, and you will see the so called porkers, and believe me, these people are 'fitness monsters'. For these people, walking, swimming a few lengths is laughable . My objection to the BMI, is the way it is used to bully people. If we want to save money, then there are other areas in our society that we could target. Sadly, the overweight are an easy target. -------------------------------------------------------- We seem to be at cross purposes here - I understood that this thread is supposed to be discussing obesity & weight loss - NOT comparing the physical performance or strength/ stamina of fat/thin people which you are doing. You seem to understand that the BMI simply measures someone's weight against their height and body type so what's the point of objecting to it? - if you don't don't like it, ignore, it but it still doesn't alter the fact that overweight is still overweight no matter how fit and strong you are and therefore a risk to health (although I, personally, couldn't care less). I might point out also, that you are choosing to argue simply about ex athletes when, in fact, the percentage of obese people who are ex athletes are very small - the majority of obese people gained that status by overeating and leading a sedentary life. I don't have a problem at all with anyone being overweight but don't see that pointing out their BMI is "bullying". Despite your protestations to the contrary, you will find, if you study training methods and the way physical exercise works on the human body, that walking / swimming (or any PROLONGED physical activity) in conjunction with the correct type of diet, WILL bring about weight loss in the obese (including your ex athletes among them). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 But if this was about racism then people would be jumping on the defence. Weird how we have 'Anti Bullying' for one group and not the other. You don't make yourself white do you, you make yourself fat. Big difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 No, BMI doesn't take account of fitness levels because it is not meant to be an indicator of fitness. I'm afraid you seem to be very confused about what a persons Body Mass Index is - as it is nothing to do with their fitness levels, it matters not whether the person is an unfit wreck or whether they are a former athlete. It is a fact that muscle weighs more than fat so a person with very good muscle condition may have a BMI which is slightly higher but this would only be to a small degree and BMI tables are relaxed enough to accomodate that. Their BMI simply points out that they are overweight for their size and body type - it has nothing whatsoever to do with their fitness. A person's BMI may be at the perfect level but the person may still be very unfit. As you point out, a very fit person may may still be overweight and carrying fat so their BMI will rightly, indicate that they are overweight. Obviously, the ideal is to be both fit and the correct BMI for your height and body type. Failing on either of these counts means they are at risk, either through overweight or general unfitness. Whatever you care to believe, walking, swimming or any other aerobic exercise will help them lose weight if they are eating a correct diet - this applies whatever their weight or fitness level. It may be worth mentioning that any aerobic exercise only works if kept up for the correct amount of time, which is around 30 minutes or more. Exercise which is over and done with in a minute or two will have no effect on either weight loss or general fitness levels. BMI is simply flawed, it's based on two factors, height and weight. Unfortunately the relationship between them is incorrectly expressed as a square, when in reality the volume (and thus weight) of a person is related to the cube of our height. Thus BMI fails for short people and tall people, it also fails for athletes. In fact just about the only person it's of any use to, is someone of average height and weight, who luckily are told by BMI that they're okay because they fit the average! I think that getting_fit is trying to say (in a very obtuse way) that those athletes or ex athletes are not overweight in the first place, despite what the flawed BMI scale might tell you. I've no idea why he thinks that walking won't burn calories for them though, although I'm sure he's right that they won't loose any weight (and won't want or need to). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shef_Fitness Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 You don't make yourself white do you, you make yourself fat. Big difference. On this point I disagree with you. In some cases people do make themselves overweight, however for some people they are a naturally large build and can do very little to change that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shef_Fitness Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 BMI is simply flawed, it's based on two factors, height and weight. Unfortunately the relationship between them is incorrectly expressed as a square, when in reality the volume (and thus weight) of a person is related to the cube of our height. Thus BMI fails for short people and tall people, it also fails for athletes. In fact just about the only person it's of any use to, is someone of average height and weight, who luckily are told by BMI that they're okay because they fit the average! I think that getting_fit is trying to say (in a very obtuse way) that those athletes or ex athletes are not overweight in the first place, despite what the flawed BMI scale might tell you. I've no idea why he thinks that walking won't burn calories for them though, although I'm sure he's right that they won't loose any weight (and won't want or need to). I agree with you on this post (at last some common ground). My issue on the walking is this. I do keep using Rugby players as an example, simply because many are very heavily built, but frighteningly fit. With Rugby players, they are charging around for 90 minutes, being tackled by 18 stone blokes running at them knocking them over etc...... I don't care what anyone says, to do that for 90 minutes you have to be fit. The training these athletes needs, again not easy. So, to say go for a walk. or a gentle swim to someone, whos body is used to extreme training is silly. Going for a walk for this kind of person is not even going to register. Its like giving a heavy drinker, a glass of shandy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.