'On yer bike' says Boris...

Freakbro said:
He wouldn't be obese unless his bmi is over 30. 25-29 is just classed as overweight.

And to be fair, the 'normal' range usually covers 3-4 stone, so its quite generous. If you're over that you are carrying a bit too much fat.
Click to expand...

Doubt it would cover 3-4 stone with a child that's 5 years old.
 
Mekrel said:
It'll be a shame if things get taxed that much though as people enjoying bad food every now and then, i.e. in moderation, they'll have to pay significantly more.

Also, something that I've often wondered and would be interested in other people's thoughts and experiences: Aren't the 'common' principles around required calories too broad and in themselves, could lead to obesity? What I mean is the age old men require 2,500 calories per day and women require 2,000. I'm 5ft 8 and 80Kgs and my resting metabolic rate based on my lean mass says I only need 1,800 to maintain weight. That's a big difference of 700 calories a day. That's over 1lb of body fat per week if over eating to that extent.

I don't really look at calories anyway, I tend to just take a pragmatic approach as to what is healthy vs what is unhealthy.
Click to expand...

Never heard of the metabolic resting rate before. Apparently I'd need 1843 calories. Sent me down a bit of a wormhole now. Wondering how quickly I'd lose my jiggly bits if i cut out sweets and cookies from my diet.
 
I think they are going about this the wrong way, unlike smoking you need food to live. People are overweight from eating too much food not from simply eating junk food. It's about a whole life style change, getting people not only thinking carefully about their needs (calories, micro/macro nutrients) but also about what actually goes into their food and encouraging them to cook more.
 
MikeTheNative said:
I think they are going about this the wrong way, unlike smoking you need food to live. People are overweight from eating too much food not from simply eating junk food. It's about a whole life style change, getting people not only thinking carefully about their needs (calories, micro/macro nutrients) but also about what actually goes into their food and encouraging them to cook more.
Click to expand...

Portion size is definitely an important aspect, but why (genuine question, not leading or rhetorical) do you think people are eating more, seeing as obesity is rising?

I think junk food has been normalised. Fast food chains seem to be irresponsible in the food they develop and sell. It's not impossible for certain fast food chains to have meals reaching 1.5K calories. Offering 60%+ of a person's recommend calorie intake in one meal just seems like a recipe for disaster - it's difficult because again, I like the occasional treat but it appears a lot of people have no will power.

Based on the atrocity that is obesity in the USA, it really must be down to availability of unhealthy food, portion size and the acceptance of unhealthy lifestyles.
 
Mekrel said:
Portion size is definitely an important aspect, but why (genuine question, not leading or rhetorical) do you think people are eating more, seeing as obesity is rising?

I think junk food has been normalised. Fast food chains seem to be irresponsible in the food they develop and sell. It's not impossible for certain fast food chains to have meals reaching 1.5K calories.

Based on the atrocity that is obesity in the USA, it really must be down to availability of unhealthy food, portion size and the acceptance of unhealthy lifestyles.
Click to expand...

It's the way culture is going, where people cook for themselves less and less they are more detached from what actually goes into their food. You get an over reliance on ready meals and junk food, IMO the increase in junk food is the symptom not the cause if that makes sense. It's paired with sugary drinks laden with calories, having a glass a coke a day is fine but some people drink litres to the stuff and the decrease in the amount of activity people do.

My point is simply making junk food more expensive like tobacco will not work. You need the people to buy into eating a healthier diet, cooking for themselves more and exercising more.
 
Freakbro said:
Lol, no sorry that's the adult one! It's about a stone for children
Click to expand...

Yeah. So if my son it's a big lad (not fat) he got classes as obese.

I have a 44" chest. So even I've I lost every ounce of fat I have I would still be heavy. A calculator can't tell how broad someone is or how muscular.
 
BMI is fine when used appropriately , it's a tool to broadly measurably public health and a way for a doctor to show an overweight person they need to lose so weight a bit more nicely.
 
koooowweeee said:
Yeah. So if my son it's a big lad (not fat) he got classes as obese.

I have a 44" chest. So even I've I lost every ounce of fat I have I would still be heavy. A calculator can't tell how broad someone is or how muscular.
Click to expand...

How tall are you? The easiest way to measure for a wide frame is to do clavicle to clavicle.

You have to be pretty odd-shaped or well outside the averages for BMI to make no sense at all.
 
koooowweeee said:
I have a 44" chest. So even I've I lost every ounce of fat I have I would still be heavy. A calculator can't tell how broad someone is or how muscular.
Click to expand...

Maccy said:
Isn't BMI just a load of ****?
Click to expand...

Like all metrics that are produced for whole populations there are always a small % of that population for which the metric is either not accurate or potentially misleading. So BMI may not 'work' for highly muscular bodybuilders and athletes (and possibly other small sections of the population too), however for the vast majority (probably at least 80-90%) it is a good indicator of the extent to which they are carrying too much fat (as most people's 'excess' weight is usually fat not muscle).
 
AndyCr15 said:
I don't mind posting a pic of my 'overweight' BMI of 25+ but tbh, I don't think anyone's arguing it doesn't work for everyone. I think I am relatively muscular and it simply doesn't work for me.
Click to expand...
problem with BMI is the scale is huge
for me 6"3 its
Healthy weight range for your height:
67.5kg - 91.2kg
Click to expand...
there's a massive difference between 67.5kg and 91.2kg as a percent

surely 67.5kg at my height is like pencil thin stick insect?
 
Neighbours 11 year old kid has just walked past stuffing a bar of chocolate, I would bet money that she is heavier than my 22 year old son.
Obese kids is a disgrace.
I'm overweight on the bmi scale, and definitely have too much fat at the moment, after 4 months of lockdown.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom