Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I just went to get weighed/measured at the local gym and found out that im 12st 3lbs (77.8kg)!!!!

    Is this really *****. I think its alot cos last time i was weighed i was 11st 13 so ive put on 4lbs. Im baisically 6ft (well 5ft 11.5") and am fairly strong but am really worried that ive become overweight. Any ideas if this is too heavy?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Do you go to the gym a lot? Maybe you've just got some extra muscle? I wouldn't worry about it, you're hardly overweight
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by flyboy123)
    I just went to get weighed/measured at the local gym and found out that im 12st 3lbs (77.8kg)!!!!

    Is this really *****. I think its alot cos last time i was weighed i was 11st 13 so ive put on 4lbs. Im baisically 6ft (well 5ft 11.5") and am fairly strong but am really worried that ive become overweight. Any ideas if this is too heavy?
    Well your BMI is around 23 which is in the ideal range (between 18.5-25) so don't worry!!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    No, youre definently not over weight! thats an ideal weight for your height espeically if you go the gym, the extra muscle does add to your weight! its not a bad thing!

    Also, if its like me, my weight fluxuates! I go up 4/5 pounds and come back down its really odd! you also weight alot differently at different times of day depending on intake of food/drink! anyhoo, dont worry about it its fine it only seems drastic cause its gone from 11 stone whatever to 12 stone whatever, its only 4 pounds
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Just remember that BMI is not always accurate. Especially if you do lots of sports and therefore have lots of muscle as it doesn't take this into account.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ~*Sweetness*~)
    Just remember that BMI is not always accurate. Especially if you do lots of sports and therefore have lots of muscle as it doesn't take this into account.
    Ooops yeah I meant to mention that
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    If you're interested to know if its "too heavy" then, instead of BMI, get them to calculate your body fat percentage.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    4lbs...get over it.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    BMI is a fallacy; stipulating, among other things, that Arnold Schwarzenegger be deemed 'morbidly obese': it presumes muscle mass as a control variable.

    If there is nothing discernibly awry, however, then it occurs to me that you cannot see the wood through the trees.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Stop using the thesaurus please. ^^^
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mik1w)
    Stop using the thesaurus please. ^^^
    hah...shame he isn't

    He's simply saying BMI is not accurate because it doesn't differentiate between fat and muscle (which weighs more).
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    4lbs is nothing. I fluctuated that much in one day yesterday, and my weight is considerably less in the first place, making it a bigger percentage increase/decrease, if you see what I mean. I wouldn't worry about it too much - you're not overweight.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Profesh)
    BMI is a fallacy; stipulating, among other things, that Arnold Schwarzenegger be deemed 'morbidly obese': it presumes muscle mass as a control variable.
    In order for BMI to be fallacious it would have to be false or incorrect – it cannot be, it is a ratio of figures. It makes no stipulation – it is merely a ratio of mass and height. It is only misinterpretation of BMI output that would ‘stipulate’ Arnie as morbidly obese. The BMI charts that are calibrated and then used in order to categorise someone set boundaries that are an estimate based on some unspecified muscle mass. It remains an often-useful guide in gauging someone’s health – the vast majority of people who would be classed as clinically obese are not 6-foot-tall steroid-pumped body builders. In this case it is people who cannot interpret a piece of data in its context rather than the data itself that misleads.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by imasillynarb)
    4lbs...get over it.
    TBH he could probably lose that in one s*itting.

    MB
    Offline

    1
    (Original post by what_a_shambles)
    Well your BMI is around 23 which is in the ideal range (between 18.5-25) so don't worry!!
    :s:it said my BMI is 17.7 :confused:
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    well bodyfat is what counts, other than that it's all just crap, i think 4 lbs is something and I hate gaining 100 grams or even 1 gram, so don't worry you might have lost fats and repleaced them by muscles, so your healthier
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nige)
    In order for BMI to be fallacious it would have to be false or incorrect – it cannot be, it is a ratio of figures.
    The irony of the statement is that it is itself fallacious: fallacy does neither entail nor is it tantamount to falsity. A common misconception, but nonetheless false.

    It makes no stipulation – it is merely a ratio of mass and height. It is only misinterpretation of BMI output that would ‘stipulate’ Arnie as morbidly obese. The BMI charts that are calibrated and then used in order to categorise someone set boundaries that are an estimate based on some unspecified muscle mass. It remains an often-useful guide in gauging someone’s health – the vast majority of people who would be classed as clinically obese are not 6-foot-tall steroid-pumped body builders. In this case it is people who cannot interpret a piece of data in its context rather than the data itself that misleads.
    Anyone can simply multiply weight by height; BMI however, taken in the context of what it accords, is fallacious: the consequent variable has often been employed to stipulate 'obesity' (and thus mischaracterise) where, in fact, muscle mass was not normative. BMI 'obesity' simply is not a sufficiently pertinent factor to warrant its seeming ubiquity as an anthropometric observation; it adduces but does not deduce: a scientific determination of body fat percentage would prove to be more reliable for the purpose as well as safeguarding from persecution.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mik1w)
    Stop using the thesaurus please. ^^^
    Stop tarnishing me with your inadequacies, please.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    ohh pleasssssssssssssssssse
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lisac)
    ohh pleasssssssssssssssssse
    Go to AOL.
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: August 26, 2005
Poll
Black Friday: Yay or Nay?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.