healthy weight (BMI)

I'm not a doctor but… 
Cycling injury, recovery and health issues.
Forum rules
The information / discussion in the Cycling Health Forum is not qualified medical advice. Please consult your doctor.

Re: healthy weight (BMI)

Postby bigfriendlyvegan » Tue Apr 12, 2011 7:40 pm

philip wrote:I wonder what the average BMI of pro cyclists is.


Not pro-cyclists, per se, but a study of the body types of Olympic track cyclists. Sprinter's BMIs, both male and female, are around the 24-28 mark.

As for typical pro-cyclists, John G. of Velocast fame once commented that in the pro-peloton there "wasn't enough fat to fry a chip".

David
User avatar
bigfriendlyvegan
 
Posts: 3180
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 1:18 pm
Location: Denistone, NSW

by BNA » Tue Apr 12, 2011 8:06 pm

BNA
 

Re: healthy weight (BMI)

Postby philip » Tue Apr 12, 2011 8:06 pm

Image

vs.

Image
(Wiggins in the forest on Sunday)

:D
User avatar
philip
 
Posts: 1608
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:57 pm
Location: Lane Cove, Sydney

Re: healthy weight (BMI)

Postby bigfriendlyvegan » Tue Apr 12, 2011 8:24 pm

Holy crap, someone buy Wiggo a burger. Has food been banned by WADA or something?
User avatar
bigfriendlyvegan
 
Posts: 3180
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 1:18 pm
Location: Denistone, NSW

healthy weight (BMI)

Postby Redbull » Tue Apr 12, 2011 9:18 pm

I read some where that when Tyler Hamilton was getting close to TDF weight his wife could see the outline of his liver!!
The trouble with jogging is that the ice falls out of your glass
User avatar
Redbull
 
Posts: 1920
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 7:19 pm
Location: Rockingham

Re: healthy weight (BMI)

Postby casual_cyclist » Tue Apr 12, 2011 10:31 pm

gtfpv cycler wrote: i've received the dreaded , your looking too thin , your face is drawn , and your clothes are falling off you , from the wife , and i'm still in the overweight BMI catagory about 28 :shock:
wife says she doesnt want to be fatter than me !!! and i'd better start bulking up on the top half ,

Don't worry too much about what other people think. Years ago when I lost a lot of weight I was told that I looked "gaunt" and "underweight" but when I look back at photos from then I looked perfectly normal.

gtfpv cycler wrote: i'm shocked i need to lose about 8 more kg before i slide into the normal weight range .
i didn't knw what to say so i lifted my shirt and grabbed my belly , and said how can that be thin .

Yes, that last bit of stomach fat can be hard to lose :oops:

To help you evaluate your progress, have you had a look at some of the other measures like waist measurement and waist to hip ratio?
<removed by request>
User avatar
casual_cyclist
 
Posts: 7333
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:41 am
Location: Kewdale

Re: healthy weight (BMI)

Postby winstonw » Wed Apr 13, 2011 12:37 pm

I have a female cycling friend who is 64kg trying to get to 58-60. It is obvious to our cycling group she could lose fat off her thighs and butt. But her female work mates think she is already underweight, and are seriously concerned that she may have self image issues.

I've met 3 or 4 of these women, and they are all overweight to obese. Since my friend has learned more about nutrition, she reports that these women do not eat balanced healthy lunches. Nevertheless, these women have professional influence over my friend. The problem is society has been dumbed down and conditioned to believing overweight is healthy and normal. which is why so many kids are unhealthy. They have ignorant parents.
User avatar
winstonw
 
Posts: 1793
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 7:18 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: healthy weight (BMI)

Postby sogood » Wed Apr 13, 2011 1:32 pm

winstonw wrote:The problem is society has been dumbed down and conditioned to believing overweight is healthy and normal. which is why so many kids are unhealthy. They have ignorant parents.

You are smoking too much when you smoke 1 cigarette more than your doctor. You are fat when you are fatter than your friend. And so the chain reaction goes.
Bianchi, Ridley, Montague, GT, Garmin and All things Apple :)
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.
User avatar
sogood
 
Posts: 17012
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

healthy weight (BMI)

Postby Comedian » Wed Apr 13, 2011 1:45 pm

winstonw wrote:I have a female cycling friend who is 64kg trying to get to 58-60. It is obvious to our cycling group she could lose fat off her thighs and butt. But her female work mates think she is already underweight, and are seriously concerned that she may have self image issues.

I've met 3 or 4 of these women, and they are all overweight to obese. Since my friend has learned more about nutrition, she reports that these women do not eat balanced healthy lunches. Nevertheless, these women have professional influence over my friend. The problem is society has been dumbed down and conditioned to believing overweight is healthy and normal. which is why so many kids are unhealthy. They have ignorant parents.

Yep substitute concern for jealousy. While she is standing next to them they all look that little bit more overweight. :(
Once you can climb hills on a bike it's all downhill. :mrgreen:

Hopefully I'll know what that's like..... one day. :shock: :lol:

Image
User avatar
Comedian
 
Posts: 4412
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:35 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: healthy weight (BMI)

Postby Eugene » Wed Apr 13, 2011 2:12 pm

Comedian wrote:
winstonw wrote:I've met 3 or 4 of these women, and they are all overweight to obese.

Yep substitute concern for jealousy. While she is standing next to them they all look that little bit more overweight. :(


These would be the women you see at shopping centers who feel the need to jam their size 16-18 arse into TIGHT tights and a too small t shirt, so we all may gaze upon their sexy bodies. almost makes you sick.
Eugene
 
Posts: 145
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 1:58 pm

Re: healthy weight (BMI)

Postby casual_cyclist » Wed Apr 13, 2011 4:04 pm

winstonw wrote: The problem is society has been dumbed down and conditioned to believing overweight is healthy and normal. which is why so many kids are unhealthy. They have ignorant parents.

Actually, I think it is the opposite. There is a massive anti-fat drive fueled by drug companies and the weight loss industry who have hi-jacked the health message to say one thing: being overweight is the only measure for unhealthy. There is a lot of fat phobia about and the diet drug and weight loss industries are booming. This has affected government policy as well. The reason why these health debate has been hi-jacked is simple: money. Drug companies and the weight loss industry make money by making people believe that they only need to lose weight to be healthy. Reality is that being active and eating fruit and veg every day are just as important. I think the fitness industry has balanced out a very fat phobic view to some extent by encouraging people to be active and new government advertisements targeting waist measurement and eating fruit and veg are a step in the right direction. Critical risk factors for cardiovascular disease that are not currently being addressed include: smoking, blood pressure and diabetes. I know there is a general anti-smoking campaign but I don't think that it highlights the serious risk of cardiovascular disease from smoking.

Are so many kids unhealthy? Health = physically active, eating fruit and veg every day and weight. You can't measure unhealthy by weight alone. I don't know the extent of physical inactivity, junk food and overweight in kids, although I suspect it may be higher than previously.

Edit: add passive smoking to the list of health risks for kids. That's a big one I forgot to mention.
<removed by request>
User avatar
casual_cyclist
 
Posts: 7333
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:41 am
Location: Kewdale

Re: healthy weight (BMI)

Postby gtfpv cycler » Wed Apr 13, 2011 4:24 pm

casual_cyclist wrote:
winstonw wrote: The problem is society has been dumbed down and conditioned to believing overweight is healthy and normal. which is why so many kids are unhealthy. They have ignorant parents.

Actually, I think it is the opposite. There is a massive anti-fat drive fueled by drug companies and the weight loss industry who have hi-jacked the health message to say one thing: being overweight is the only measure for unhealthy. There is a lot of fat phobia about and the diet drug and weight loss industries are booming. This has affected government policy as well. The reason why these health debate has been hi-jacked is simple: money. Drug companies and the weight loss industry make money by making people believe that they only need to lose weight to be healthy. Reality is that being active and eating fruit and veg every day are just as important. I think the fitness industry has balanced out a very fat phobic view to some extent by encouraging people to be active and new government advertisements targeting waist measurement and eating fruit and veg are a step in the right direction. Critical risk factors for cardiovascular disease that are not currently being addressed include: smoking, blood pressure and diabetes. I know there is a general anti-smoking campaign but I don't think that it highlights the serious risk of cardiovascular disease from smoking.
i am 42 years old i recently went on my 3km run which is 4 laps around a lake , i heard 2 children about 12 years old saying they should run too , as i passed them , one boy said are you kidding , i wouldnt make 1/2 a lap . when i was a kid from age 8 i mowed my fathers lawn and my grandmothers lawns weekly , ran around the block everyday , and went for bike rides daily . i am worried about kids fitness big time . the lack of fitnes in children under 15 i see , i can only hope that when they are 16 onwards , fitness and health concerns kick in . because between 17 and 30 are your peak fitness years .

Are so many kids unhealthy? Health = physically active, eating fruit and veg every day and weight. You can't measure unhealthy by weight alone. I don't know the extent of physical inactivity, junk food and overweight in kids, although I suspect it may be higher than previously.

Edit: add passive smoking to the list of health risks for kids. That's a big one I forgot to mention.



kids are so different these days . i can tell you thier parents are fitter than them . kids dont ride bikes , and dont play with other kids . they stay inside, watch tv and eat . the only sporting activity they get is at school , and if thier parents take them to sport on weekends , like soccer football , tennes and netball .
we cant really change the social habbits of our kids generation . but the lucky ones like my kids , get taken to tennis training on weekends and comp tennis through the week . it isnt going to change thier tv habbits , or playing with other children habbits , but it gives them exercise .
so many kids dont play a sport , because thier parents dont force them to .
school cross country races are pathetic . my children arent runners but they will run the whole 3 kms on a cross country . over 80% of children are walking after 300metres in girls cross country primary level, 5TH PLACE walks across the finish line .
gtfpv cycler
 
Posts: 202
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2011 9:00 pm

Re: healthy weight (BMI)

Postby Sweeper59 » Wed Apr 13, 2011 4:52 pm

philip wrote:I wonder what the average BMI of pro cyclists is.


I'm not sure about the BMI of pro cyclists - I imagine it would be fairly low.

However, I recall seeing an article on rugby league players, and it stated that if you measured the BMI of every player in the 2010 State of Origin series - they would all be rated 'obese'. Now, most of these guys would be very fit, and muscular with very low fat levels.

It just goes to show that the BMI system is simply an indicative measure that applies to the 'average' person. It does not account for athletes, different body shapes, fitness, muscle mass etc.
Giant TCR 0
Nobody looks back on their life....and remembers the nights they got plenty of sleep !!
User avatar
Sweeper59
 
Posts: 795
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 12:37 pm
Location: Port Macquarie NSW

Re: healthy weight (BMI)

Postby philip » Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:20 pm

Sweeper59 wrote:It just goes to show that the BMI system is simply an indicative measure that applies to the 'average' person. It does not account for athletes, different body shapes, fitness, muscle mass etc.

right, but people in those groups (not so sure about the "different body shapes" one) know very well how healthy they are, your average person who says that is more than likely looking for an excuse.
User avatar
philip
 
Posts: 1608
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:57 pm
Location: Lane Cove, Sydney

Re: healthy weight (BMI)

Postby Comedian » Wed Apr 13, 2011 6:36 pm

Sweeper59 wrote:
philip wrote:I wonder what the average BMI of pro cyclists is.


I'm not sure about the BMI of pro cyclists - I imagine it would be fairly low.

However, I recall seeing an article on rugby league players, and it stated that if you measured the BMI of every player in the 2010 State of Origin series - they would all be rated 'obese'. Now, most of these guys would be very fit, and muscular with very low fat levels.

It just goes to show that the BMI system is simply an indicative measure that applies to the 'average' person. It does not account for athletes, different body shapes, fitness, muscle mass etc.


Look... I'm going to disagree with you there.. .kind of :)

The BMI scales are not one weight for one person. They are a range for people of a given height. The range is huge. In my opinion that is enough to cater for the vast bulk (groan) of society. Only hard core pro athletes might have issues with it.. IMHO. Everyone else is deluding themselves. :o

For me it's a range of 22kg for my height (187). That's from 65 right through to 87. Now I'm really a big framed guy.. not a bean pole by any stretch of the imagination. I'm about 79/80 now, but I reckon about the lowest I could go would be 75-77. For my height I reckon anyone who is over 87 would be overweight. Sorry :shock:
Once you can climb hills on a bike it's all downhill. :mrgreen:

Hopefully I'll know what that's like..... one day. :shock: :lol:

Image
User avatar
Comedian
 
Posts: 4412
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:35 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: healthy weight (BMI)

Postby casual_cyclist » Wed Apr 13, 2011 8:56 pm

Comedian wrote:
Sweeper59 wrote:
philip wrote:I wonder what the average BMI of pro cyclists is.


I'm not sure about the BMI of pro cyclists - I imagine it would be fairly low.

However, I recall seeing an article on rugby league players, and it stated that if you measured the BMI of every player in the 2010 State of Origin series - they would all be rated 'obese'. Now, most of these guys would be very fit, and muscular with very low fat levels.

It just goes to show that the BMI system is simply an indicative measure that applies to the 'average' person. It does not account for athletes, different body shapes, fitness, muscle mass etc.


Look... I'm going to disagree with you there.. .kind of :)

The BMI scales are not one weight for one person. They are a range for people of a given height. The range is huge. In my opinion that is enough to cater for the vast bulk (groan) of society. Only hard core pro athletes might have issues with it.. IMHO. Everyone else is deluding themselves. :o

For me it's a range of 22kg for my height (187). That's from 65 right through to 87. Now I'm really a big framed guy.. not a bean pole by any stretch of the imagination. I'm about 79/80 now, but I reckon about the lowest I could go would be 75-77. For my height I reckon anyone who is over 87 would be overweight. Sorry :shock:

That is such an odd thing to say but we have all been conditioned to believe it. The implication is that it is inherently "unhealthy" to be "too heavy". The more you think about it, the more bizarre it becomes. Bottom line is that BMI in isolation is simply not an accurate indicator of health. Without knowing anything else, you can't assume a person with a BMI of 20 is "healthy" but a person with a BMI of 27.5 is not.

Where BMI really falls down is that it cannot consider body composition at all. Last year, without dropping any weight, I dropped a trouser size, so around 5 cm to 6 cm from my waist. According to BMI, I was just as "healthy" or "unhealthy" at a 97 cm waist measurement as a 92 cm waist measurement. This flies in the face of actual medical research.

Bottom line is that there is no demonstrated relationship between weight and health. The reason I care is that I don't want people that I care about sitting back smugly because they have achieved the state of "normal weight" according to BMI and thinking they have achieved the state of "healthy" because we have all been conditioned to believe that thin is healthy. The thin, inactive smoker with high cholesterol who does not eat fruit and veg daily is at a higher risk of developing cardiovascular disease than an overweight, active, non-smoker who does eat fruit and veg daily.

The rub is that if you stop smoking, eat to reduce your cholesterol, are physically active and eat fruit and veg every day, you are less likely to be "overweight" in the first place. If you must use "weight" as a measure of health then at least use BMI + waist measurement as a more accurate indicator than BMI in isolation.
<removed by request>
User avatar
casual_cyclist
 
Posts: 7333
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:41 am
Location: Kewdale

Re: healthy weight (BMI)

Postby waynohh » Thu Apr 14, 2011 10:03 am

Forget BMI. It isn't half as dangerous as reading this thread. I have a brain embolism every time I see the words "loose" instead of "lose".
waynohh
 
Posts: 1041
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 8:05 am

Re: healthy weight (BMI)

Postby sogood » Thu Apr 14, 2011 10:31 am

waynohh wrote:Forget BMI. It isn't half as dangerous as reading this thread. I have a brain embolism every time I see the words "loose" instead of "lose".

Just embolism? I get immediate infarct. :roll:
Bianchi, Ridley, Montague, GT, Garmin and All things Apple :)
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.
User avatar
sogood
 
Posts: 17012
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Re: healthy weight (BMI)

Postby simonn » Thu Apr 14, 2011 11:03 am

casual_cyclist wrote:Bottom line is that there is no demonstrated relationship between weight and health.


Really?

Sure weight is not the only indicator, but...
Image
User avatar
simonn
 
Posts: 3634
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 10:46 am
Location: Sydney

Re: healthy weight (BMI)

Postby casual_cyclist » Thu Apr 14, 2011 1:09 pm

simonn wrote:
casual_cyclist wrote:Bottom line is that there is no demonstrated relationship between weight and health.


Really?

Sure weight is not the only indicator, but...

Do you mean weight or body fat, or abdominal fat? A person is not unhealthy because they weigh a certain amount if they have low cholesterol, normal blood pressure, abdominal fat within healthy parameters etc, etc. A 90kg person at 7% or 8% body fat is demonstrated to have less risk factors for disease than a 90kg person of the same height with 20%+ body fat. And yet BMI puts them in the same category. That is a bad way for us to measure our "health". Much better to use BMI + waist as a minimum although if we are really serious about our health we are going to have to learn to consider a lot more indicators than that.
<removed by request>
User avatar
casual_cyclist
 
Posts: 7333
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:41 am
Location: Kewdale

Re: healthy weight (BMI)

Postby simonn » Thu Apr 14, 2011 1:56 pm

casual_cyclist wrote:
simonn wrote:
casual_cyclist wrote:Bottom line is that there is no demonstrated relationship between weight and health.


Really?

Sure weight is not the only indicator, but...

Do you mean weight or body fat, or abdominal fat?


I mean that there is a correlation between health and weight. Healthy people who are overweight are a minority of overweight people and healthy people. IOW, "Bottom line is that there is no demonstrated relationship between weight and health." is wrong.
Image
User avatar
simonn
 
Posts: 3634
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 10:46 am
Location: Sydney

Re: healthy weight (BMI)

Postby casual_cyclist » Thu Apr 14, 2011 10:57 pm

casual_cyclist wrote:Bottom line is that there is no demonstrated relationship between weight and health.

simonn wrote:
casual_cyclist wrote:
simonn wrote:Really?

Sure weight is not the only indicator, but...

Do you mean weight or body fat, or abdominal fat?


I mean that there is a correlation between health and weight. Healthy people who are overweight are a minority of overweight people and healthy people. IOW, "Bottom line is that there is no demonstrated relationship between weight and health." is wrong.

Really? Proof? I have been looking but I haven't found any. Maybe this will be easier to understand... there is no proof that weight without waist is unhealthy. Weight isn't unhealthy if it is lean muscle. By overweight I think you mean overfat. Or is muscle unhealthy now?
<removed by request>
User avatar
casual_cyclist
 
Posts: 7333
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:41 am
Location: Kewdale

Re: healthy weight (BMI)

Postby casual_cyclist » Fri Apr 15, 2011 1:18 am

simonn wrote:I mean that there is a correlation between health and weight. Healthy people who are overweight are a minority of overweight people and healthy people. IOW, "Bottom line is that there is no demonstrated relationship between weight and health." is wrong.

Bottom line is that BMI is a bad way to measure health. Waist-to-hip ratio and waist circumference are superior to BMI. Here is a study to check out: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc1014730

This is what it says:
In practical terms, the relationship between BMI and all-cause mortality remains uncertain.... Waist-to-hip ratio and waist circumference are superior to BMI in predicting all-cause mortality, the rate of death due to cardiovascular disease,2,3 and the association between obesity and myocardial infarction.4 The waist-to-hip ratio, in particular, shows a low measurement error and high precision, and it is without bias over a wide range of ethnic groups.5 Since the waist-to-hip ratio is clearly a better predictor of total mortality than BMI, it is likely to be associated with death from obesity-related cancers. Standardized measures of central obesity should be included in future population studies.


Here is another study: http://ftp.utalca.cl/profesores/gicaza/Respaldo%20FONIS%20RCV/Marrugat/InterHeart%20Lancet%202004.pdf

This is what it says:
Body-mass index was related to risk of myocardial infarction, but this relation was weaker than that of abdominal obesity (waist/hip ratio), with body-mass index becoming non-significant with the inclusion of waist/hip ratio in the multivariate model (data not shown). Before multivariate adjustment, abdominal obesity (top vs lowest tertile) doubled the risk of acute myocardial infarction, but the effects were substantially diminished after adjustment for other risk factors, especially apolipoproteins.


Here is what the World Health Organisation says: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs311/en/
BMI provides the most useful population-level measure of overweight and obesity as it is the same for both sexes and for all ages of adults. However, it should be considered a rough guide because it may not correspond to the same degree of fatness in different individuals.

So BMI is a good measure for populations but NOT a good measure for individuals.

Another study: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2894715/
Although BMI is the most common method to define overweightness and obesity in both epidemiological studies and major clinical trials, clearly this method does not necessarily reflect true body fatness.


It is clear that excess fat, particularly abdominal fat, increases risk of disease. It is also equally clear that BMI is not useful for measuring body fat in individuals. Fat and abdominal fat can be measured with a tape measure but not with scales because scales treat fat and muscle the same.

I am so concerned about this that I am going out tomorrow to buy a tape measure and will start tracking my waist measurement and waist to hip ratio. I still need to track down healthy ranges for my height but my goal will be to get my waist measurement and waist to hip ratio into the healthy range. My health is too valuable to trust BMI to tell me if I am at a "healthy" "weight".
<removed by request>
User avatar
casual_cyclist
 
Posts: 7333
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:41 am
Location: Kewdale

Re: healthy weight (BMI)

Postby casual_cyclist » Fri Apr 15, 2011 1:47 am

BMI (for individuals) may actually be dangerous according to this article: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14483512/ns/health-fitness/

The waist-to-hip measurement is likely to catch people at risk for fat-related diseases who might otherwise think they were at a healthy weight, based on their BMI scores.

It’s quite possible to have an acceptable BMI and still have some belly paunch, says Dr. Louis Aronne, clinical professor of medicine at the Weill-Cornell Medical College and director of the Comprehensive Weight Control Program at New York Presbyterian Hospital.

So BMI can trick unhealthy people into thinking their weight is ok when they are actually carrying dangerous belly fat. That really is alarming!

At least the article has a starting point for me to start researching a healthy waist-to-hip ratio for men. According to the article,
a healthy waist-to-hip ratio for [men] is 0.95

Will have to vaildate that one. Will be interesting to see how far away I am from a healthy waist-to-hip ratio.
<removed by request>
User avatar
casual_cyclist
 
Posts: 7333
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:41 am
Location: Kewdale

Re: healthy weight (BMI)

Postby Eugene » Fri Apr 15, 2011 6:35 am

Thank you casual_cyclist, you were able to articulate what I was trying to say.

I know that I am carrying more weight than I should be, that is why I working to improve that, but chasing a low BMI is not my goal, smaller waist, and much lower body fat % is my goal, I would like to get to 9-10%, but I dont know if a 42 year old can achieve this safley, but I know getting close to it instead of being above 30% has to be a good thing, but I am not willing to reduce the amount of muscle mass I have to get to my ideal BMI.

I see body fat %, hip-waist ratio, overall waist size, cardio endurance (inc resting heart rate etc) and general mental health to be more important factors in determaning a persons health, BMI is just a tool or indication, but there are too many variables for it to be applied to the whole population.
Eugene
 
Posts: 145
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 1:58 pm

Re: healthy weight (BMI)

Postby gtfpv cycler » Fri Apr 15, 2011 5:06 pm

Eugene wrote:Thank you casual_cyclist, you were able to articulate what I was trying to say.

I know that I am carrying more weight than I should be, that is why I working to improve that, but chasing a low BMI is not my goal, smaller waist, and much lower body fat % is my goal, I would like to get to 9-10%, but I dont know if a 42 year old can achieve this safley, but I know getting close to it instead of being above 30% has to be a good thing, but I am not willing to reduce the amount of muscle mass I have to get to my ideal BMI.

I see body fat %, hip-waist ratio, overall waist size, cardio endurance (inc resting heart rate etc) and general mental health to be more important factors in determaning a persons health, BMI is just a tool or indication, but there are too many variables for it to be applied to the whole population.


i'm 42 years old as well , i've ridden 200kms in the last 8 days , and have put on 1kg . i'm not taking measurements although i wish i did , because i was pulling my belt up around my belly button and squeezing it in to hold my pants up , under my belly button was still bigger than my hips so unless i did this my pants would fall down . now my belts are where they should be , around my waist as it is now smaller than my hips , however my stomach is stil larger than my waist . the point i'm trying to make are a few , you can lose quite a bit of weight and still look fat in body proportion , my belts are all too big for me now , and my clothes are loose , but naked i can stick my stomach out :shock:
aside from bmi , we know if we are over weight naked . and the muscle thing , well i'm going hard to lose weight >( the gut now ) and have put on 1kg this week , my thighs are smaller though and harder , so this could be a long haul to get the right body fat loss , its a case of gaining while losing , think of the image relationship now , smaller thighs to belly ratio , i'm actually looking a little fatter naked , it's the 1st time in a long time where my goals now just arent pure weight related . we can look good in clothes , and still be over weight because clothes hides it , but really look in the mirror at your proportions , when they are right , take your bmi then , and i bet you'll be close to the money .
cheers and good luck . remember all here in this thread are doing it too . :wink:

also i dont know about body fat , but when i was 20 my room mate was very into fitness and marshall arts, he was like a steel door , with a twig waist . he had 7% body fat , he would get every flu or sniffle going around , and would spend a day in bed if he missed a meal . i wouldnt aim for any body fat before speaking to a proffessional .
gtfpv cycler
 
Posts: 202
Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2011 9:00 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Cycling Health

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users



Popular Bike Shops
Torpedo 7 Torpedo7 AU
Ground Effect Ground Effect NZ
Chain Reaction Cycles CRC UK
Wiggle Wiggle UK
Ebay Ebay AU

“Bicycles BNA Twitter
“Bicycles BNA Facebook
“Google+ BNA Google+
“Bicycles BNA Newsletter

> FREE BNA Stickers
> BNA Cycling Kit