BMI is a whole lot more complex than it looks, and it infuriates me when people assume my general body type due to my weight.Zantos said:The problem here is that you're assuming a certain BMI is healthy, which is the problem people with BMI. It's worked out on your weight and height, but bears no regard to the composition of the weight. A good example of this problem would be with the British and Irish Lions team currently on tour. These are extremely fit professional sportsmen with big frames and large amounts of muscle, yet if you check their stats you'll see that according to the BMI scale many of them are overweight or obese (something like half and a third, respectively). To put it as you did they have health, even though their BMI puts them as people at risk of heart disease and diabetes. You might say that that's just a special case and doesn't count for everyone, which is true, but only in the same way that weight can also be an indicator of being unhealthy. Things like body fat percentage may not be possible to work out at home, but provide a far better picture of someone's health than their BMI.Johnny Novgorod said:I'm going to side with the World Health Organization and leave crackpots to their webcams, I think. Creds to Penn & Teller though, I have huge respect for those guys, but how's genetics an argument AGAINST the Body Mass Index? It just shows some people have it (genetically) easy to be fit, and others not so much because of slow metabolism. And lastly, about the "feeling good and happy with yourself", I agree with the feelgood vibes, but health is not an opinion, either you have it or you don't.
It is actually cheaper to eat healthily then to not. Junk food, fast food, and even those cheap microwave dinners are all much more expensive then normal healthy food.Neverhoodian said:Fat people are one of the last "free passes" for ridicule by society, partly because it's harder to hide. Never mind if the person in question might have a physical condition that prevents them from losing weight. Never mind if they're too poor to afford better food. Never mind if they have a nice personality and friendly disposition. They're fat, therefore they're scum. That's what the media and the fashion industry preach in this day and age. Indeed, it's this obsession with thinness that drives some people to starving/purging themselves in the first place.
Are you sure about this? Because I'm well below 25 and hardly model material. If you were to gather everybody I know into one room (it's doable) and repeat this to the point where you conclude I'm underweight because I have a 22 BMI, they would die laughing and I with them.CrystalShadow said:Yeah, but that's from political pressure in and of itself.Johnny Novgorod said:By World Health Organization standards, any weight that results in a Body Mass Index higher than 18.5 and lower than 25. Apparently if you have a BMI lower than 18.5 you're underweight, if you're higher than 25 you're overweight (physically unhealthy) and higher than 30 is diagnosed as morbid obesity. If you're anywhere between 18.5 and 25, science declares you "average" - or healthy, which I think is a prettier word.SacremPyrobolum said:And isn't that the crux of it, what the fuck is "average"?Johnny Novgorod said:I should think any body type beyond "average" gets demonized one way or the other these days.
25 is actually the midpoint. below 25 is 'underweight', above 25 is 'overweight', because 25 is the exact 'ideal' weight according to BMI calculations.
Incedentally, original definitions put anything between 20 and 30 as healthy, but the whole 'overweight' stigma seems to have killed that, and the extension down to 18.5 still being considered healthy is entirely due to the fact that most models would otherwise be classed as severely underweight.
That drastically depends what country we're talking about.Dragonbums said:Both of them are equally looked down upon.
Under eating is just less frequent.
Well I'm from the States. I guess I should've put that in my original post.Johnny Novgorod said:That drastically depends what country we're talking about.Dragonbums said:Both of them are equally looked down upon.
Under eating is just less frequent.
It can go much farther than that. Some of us are just barrel-chested, dense-boned and heavy-muscled. When I had ~10% body fat due to fairly excessive daily cardiovascular workouts (about 2 hours a day, 5 days a week), at a time when I "didn't even lift"... I was by no means a bodybuilder... my BMI was ~27. Since then I've lost an inch off my height due to spinal compression and I'm around 15% body fat. I've also gained a moderate amount of muscle mass (I've gained a little under 10lbs), but I'm not "cut" by any stretch of the imagination. My BMI is ~31.CrystalShadow said:Yeah, but that's from political pressure in and of itself.Johnny Novgorod said:By World Health Organization standards, any weight that results in a Body Mass Index higher than 18.5 and lower than 25. Apparently if you have a BMI lower than 18.5 you're underweight, if you're higher than 25 you're overweight (physically unhealthy) and higher than 30 is diagnosed as morbid obesity. If you're anywhere between 18.5 and 25, science declares you "average" - or healthy, which I think is a prettier word.SacremPyrobolum said:And isn't that the crux of it, what the fuck is "average"?Johnny Novgorod said:I should think any body type beyond "average" gets demonized one way or the other these days.
25 is actually the midpoint. below 25 is 'underweight', above 25 is 'overweight', because 25 is the exact 'ideal' weight according to BMI calculations.
Incedentally, original definitions put anything between 20 and 30 as healthy, but the whole 'overweight' stigma seems to have killed that, and the extension down to 18.5 still being considered healthy is entirely due to the fact that most models would otherwise be classed as severely underweight.
Bleh. Politics and fashion. The original definition of 20-30 being healthy makes much more sense than the modified 18.5-25 range.
Being slightly overweight is hardly a huge health risk. It's only once you start to really get large that you get serious health problems.
For that matter, someone being in the 25-30 BMI range could easily be due to muscle; It weighs more than fat, and BMI is not a system that takes body composition into account - only weight and height.
I'm going to have to ask you, what part of the US do you live in? I'm in the Midwest, Indiana to be exact. Growing up, all I heard in health classes in school and on local and national television, and read in magazines, was the pitying of people with eating disorders, that it isn't their fault, that popular fashion media and advertising images are what is to blame.afroebob said:Mr.Snips
I think your fine in assuming that what the OP is talking about is rather odd. What you see over there is the same as over here.Zhukov said:I'm from Australia. We have plenty of fat folks too. Last I heard, our obesity rates were roughly on par with yours.
As for the US, I've never lived there, so there's only so much I can say. However, I can say that your media, like most media, is full of skinny women and athletic men. The only time you see a fat person in the limelight is when they're being made fun of.
Of course, media isn't reality, but it does reflect it.
I'm going to ask you too, what part of the States do you live? I have not once seen in the education system or local and national media, people that under eat get laughed at, called names, and get told "we are going to try are best to regulate the system and tell you what you can and can't eat, you stupid fatty, if you won't make the right decision, we are going to make it for you".Dragonbums said:Well I'm from the States. I guess I should've put that in my original post.Johnny Novgorod said:That drastically depends what country we're talking about.Dragonbums said:Both of them are equally looked down upon.
Under eating is just less frequent.
Outside of learning about what Bulimia and, anorexia are no: I can't say I've ever heard anything even resembling this. Personally, I chose not to eat most of the time because I'm neurotic about not having enough money to afford food...gas is more important anyway...and various other bills...(I'm from the US by the way)afroebob said:Anyhow, as we can probably all agree, people tend to harbor more negative feelings towards undereating than overeating.
Zhukov summed it up pretty nicely.Zhukov said:Under-eating isn't more "demonized" than overeating.
Not even fucking close.
It's so not close that I'm having trouble coming up with a sufficiently silly metaphor. Perhaps something involving fluffy bunnies and pedophiles?
Fat people are regarded and depicted as gross, revolting, unattractive, unintelligent and legitimate targets for ridicule. People who under-eat are, at the very worst, pitied as victims of body image and the media.
That's a pretty poor show, not sure how they intend to recruit people by recommending surgery to people.Dragonbums said:BMI is a whole lot more complex than it looks, and it infuriates me when people assume my general body type due to my weight.Zantos said:The problem here is that you're assuming a certain BMI is healthy, which is the problem people with BMI. It's worked out on your weight and height, but bears no regard to the composition of the weight. A good example of this problem would be with the British and Irish Lions team currently on tour. These are extremely fit professional sportsmen with big frames and large amounts of muscle, yet if you check their stats you'll see that according to the BMI scale many of them are overweight or obese (something like half and a third, respectively). To put it as you did they have health, even though their BMI puts them as people at risk of heart disease and diabetes. You might say that that's just a special case and doesn't count for everyone, which is true, but only in the same way that weight can also be an indicator of being unhealthy. Things like body fat percentage may not be possible to work out at home, but provide a far better picture of someone's health than their BMI.Johnny Novgorod said:I'm going to side with the World Health Organization and leave crackpots to their webcams, I think. Creds to Penn & Teller though, I have huge respect for those guys, but how's genetics an argument AGAINST the Body Mass Index? It just shows some people have it (genetically) easy to be fit, and others not so much because of slow metabolism. And lastly, about the "feeling good and happy with yourself", I agree with the feelgood vibes, but health is not an opinion, either you have it or you don't.
For example some military personnel was looking for new recruits. They called my house and asked me a bunch of questions. One of them was regarding my weight. When I told him he said that I should consider getting a liposuction.
Excuse me? What do you think I look like? A pot belly pig?
Most of my weight goes to my thighs, and more than one person has said that I'm heavier than I look.
He also never took my height or whether I'm more muscle than fat into account.
Ugh. Really upsetting.
I wish they would tell this to the general public. Not make broad stereotypes.
No offense to you, but what part of the world do you come from? I'm considered slightly overweight, due to being, and I'm proud to admit it, 218lbs and getting skinnier by the weeks due to moderation, and yet most people where I'm from know better than to say something to me in my face. Not everyone where I'm from is too stupid/lazy to eat healthy and exercise and even wonder how I lose weight so fast due to my habits of walking everywhere and eating what I can. Hell, I even see people fatter than me, but eat a hundred times more healthy than myself & exercise each day. Saying "Most" people do that, really assumes you've only met a set group of people who do that, instead of meeting many people who go through being overweight and try to find ways around it. And also, where I'm from, it actually costs quite a lot more to buy healthy food than junk food, seeing as I can get a full meal that can last for a few days and is unhealthy to a point for $5, but that much can only get me small fruits and stuff. Actual Vegetables in good supply, healthy food choices instead of junk food substitutes, vitamin waters & super milks cost about $5 just for one of said thing, if not more money involved where I am.Little Gray said:Fat people are demonized more because they are ugly, disgusting, stupid, lazy slobs. While it may not be right all stereotypes have some amount of truth in them. Most people who are overweight are that way because they are either to stupid/lazy to eat healthy, to lazy to exercise, gorge them selves on food, or just dont give a shit about their body.
Plus have you ever seen an obese guy walking down the street on a hot summer day? Holy shit sometimes its enough to want to make you hurl.
It is actually cheaper to eat healthily then to not. Junk food, fast food, and even those cheap microwave dinners are all much more expensive then normal healthy food.Neverhoodian said:Fat people are one of the last "free passes" for ridicule by society, partly because it's harder to hide. Never mind if the person in question might have a physical condition that prevents them from losing weight. Never mind if they're too poor to afford better food. Never mind if they have a nice personality and friendly disposition. They're fat, therefore they're scum. That's what the media and the fashion industry preach in this day and age. Indeed, it's this obsession with thinness that drives some people to starving/purging themselves in the first place.
I live in Virginia.Sonic Doctor said:I'm going to ask you too, what part of the States do you live? I have not once seen in the education system or local and national media, people that under eat get laughed at, called names, and get told "we are going to try are best to regulate the system and tell you what you can and can't eat, you stupid fatty, if you won't make the right decision, we are going to make it for you".Dragonbums said:Well I'm from the States. I guess I should've put that in my original post.Johnny Novgorod said:That drastically depends what country we're talking about.Dragonbums said:Both of them are equally looked down upon.
Under eating is just less frequent.
Every reaction to under eating I've seen is, "You poor thing, don't worry, it's not your fault. You have a decease and it it is the fault of fashion media and commercials with them constantly bombarding you with images that you've got to be thing, stop eating so much."
They do? I've never heard anything about under-eating being looked at worse than over-eating.afroebob said:Anyhow, as we can probably all agree, people tend to harbor more negative feelings towards undereating than overeating.
Although I SERIOUSLY disagree with the person's post who you are responding to, they are largely right about the whole "healthy food is way more expensive" idea being a myth. This is probably the most reliable diet I've come across and I've been into health and fitness for 13 years:Emaruse said:And also, where I'm from, it actually costs quite a lot more to buy healthy food than junk food, seeing as I can get a full meal that can last for a few days and is unhealthy to a point for $5, but that much can only get me small fruits and stuff. Actual Vegetables in good supply, healthy food choices instead of junk food substitutes, vitamin waters & super milks cost about $5 just for one of said thing, if not more money involved where I am.
That's the thing though, what the OP was talking about is people demonizing and making fun of people that under eat.Dragonbums said:I live in Virginia.Sonic Doctor said:snip
I have a friend who has an eating disorder, and I know multiple people that are really underweight.
The issue here is that some people are honestly just thin I have a friend for instance who eats junk all the time, and the only weight she gains is in her boobs.
However to those that are indeed underweight the doctors never really pity them for being victims of self esteem. They treat it as a mental disorder, and encourage them to eat more bit by bit.
This may not be the same everywhere in the states. It may not even be the same withing the state of Virginia as a whole. However in the area I live in, that is the experience most of the people who under eat have.