The is no dieting. Only nutrition. or This is why you are a Manatee

[broseph]

I think it’s a lofty but attainable goal. I’m 5’11” and this summer I cut down as low as 211 lbs with juuuuust visible at the right angle in the right light abs.

Like @TimK said, I don’t mean crazy bodybuilder totally shredded. But definitely leaner than I was @211.

[cwd]

Hm. Found this study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4511447/.

They DEXA scanned a bunch of white Australians to see what bodyfat percentages corresponded to the BMI numbers.

For a 50-year-old man, the 25 BMI cutoff for overweight corresponds to 22% bodyfat. So I'm just barely over the line by that standard.

Apparently DEXA shows that BMI mis-categorizes people (under/normal/over/obese) fairly often, but usually by under-estimating. I.e. there are a bunch of skinny-fat "normal" people out there for each "overweight/obese" lifter.

[DirtyRed]

+1 for "Pounds of Fatness", that's cool.

Saw refutation today, of the claim that "overweight" BMI correlates with higher lifespan than "normal" BMI.

The problem is that many fatal illnesses can make you lose weight (i.e. cancer, meth addiction), but few cause you to gain weight. So the lower BMI groups include a mix of healthy people and people who are circling the drain. If you correct for that in various ways, you get the expected result -- "normal" BMI people live longer than "overweight".

They also never, and I mean never, compensate for "overweight" people who are just remotely muscular or athletic. BMI is a completely shit metric with absolutely no redemption possible. Stop discussing it, and stop trying to make it work.

[cwd]

BMI is accurate or too kind for 99% of the population. The 1% that get rated over-fat can be easily filtered by the "do you even lift" eyeball metric.

It's not as if every family-practice doctor in the world has a DEXA pod in their office.

[GainsdalfTheWhey]

BMI is accurate or too kind for 99% of the population. The 1% that get rated over-fat can be easily filtered by the "do you even lift" eyeball metric.

It's not as if every family-practice doctor in the world has a DEXA pod in their office.

BMI, being weight/height^2, COMPLETELY disregards level of fitness, or variability in body types. It's good for studying general populations against one another where level of fitness averages out, but outside of that it's really poor.

What they should be using is something like the Navy Equation to be able to get bodyfat within 4-5% based on measurements of different parts of the body. It's something every doctor could do. Formula is in herehttp://bmi-calories.com/body-fat-percen ... lator.html

There are a few formulas out there based on measurements that everyone has access to on the cheap that are all miles better than BMI.

[cwd]

What they should be using is something like the Navy Equation to be able to get bodyfat within 4-5% based on measurements of different parts of the body. It's something every doctor could do. Formula is in herehttp://bmi-calories.com/body-fat-percen ... lator.html

That's what I use -- it's close enough for my purposes.

I wonder why docs don't measure at least waistlines? Just waist vs. height would be a better measure of over-fatness than BMI. Maybe they are trying to avoid pissing off customers. I know my wife might be offended at a waistline measurement. Probably a lot of people would be.

[GainsdalfTheWhey]

What they should be using is something like the Navy Equation to be able to get bodyfat within 4-5% based on measurements of different parts of the body. It's something every doctor could do. Formula is in herehttp://bmi-calories.com/body-fat-percen ... lator.html

That's what I use -- it's close enough for my purposes.

I wonder why docs don't measure at least waistlines? Just waist vs. height would be a better measure of over-fatness than BMI. Maybe they are trying to avoid pissing off customers. I know my wife might be offended at a waistline measurement. Probably a lot of people would be.

Completely agree, they should do that at least that. Last time I was at a doctor he was pretty good. With a BMI over 30, he said "While this saying you need to lose 60 lb is bull, you could definitely afford at least 20." WHY? Because he looked at my waistline. The eyeball test is not that hard, but if a metric is needed to justify telling someone they're fat and you don't want to go full Navy measurements, a waistline measurement compared to height is a better way to go than BMI.

[KyleSchuant]

I understand there is a movement about to change the "overweight" marker away from BMI and towards waist <= 1/2 height. No more Power Bellies for us lifters! Deals with the "skinnyfat" issue somewhat, too.

[PatrickDB]

It seems like a priori we can tell that BMI is a bad metric, since it's not invariant under scaling the person. It has units kg/m^2 instead of the normal kg/m^3.

Maybe @Savs can help me flesh this out. I don't really do "units" these days.

(Some googling turns up empirical evidence in favor of my suggested measurement: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28505241.)

edit: ah, I'm empirically wrong, the scaling really is quadratic, see https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4232013/

@Savs please explain this weirdness using only first principles.

[Savs]

I don't really do "units" these days.

I laughed then I sighed.

@Savs please explain this weirdness using only first principles.

I don't know. I clicked on your last link and saw the claim that BMI goes like height squared. I have to think about that one. I don't really do "humans" these days.

[cwd]

If taller humans were exactly as slender as shorter humans, I'd expect weight to scale with height ** 3.

In practice, taller people are more slender on average. Apparently the actual scaling is closer to height ** 2 according to the study you linked, @PatrickDB, at least for white people. Black men for some reason scaled with height ** 2.4. Maybe the tall Black guys lift.

[Savs]

If taller humans were exactly as slender as shorter humans, I'd expect weight to scale with height ** 3.

In practice, taller people are more slender on average. Apparently the actual scaling is closer to height ** 2 according to the study you linked, @PatrickDB, at least for white people. Black men for some reason scaled with height ** 2.4. Maybe the tall Black guys lift.

Maybe. I don't even know what BMI is*, and today is a day full of chores so I don't even know when I'll get a chance to look up BMI on wikipedia, or something like that. Fucking chores. I just want to sit and think.
*Edit: and don't really care enough to learn.

[AaronM]

I understand there is a movement about to change the "overweight" marker away from BMI and towards waist <= 1/2 height. No more Power Bellies for us lifters! Deals with the "skinnyfat" issue somewhat, too.

Hope that's a gut sucked in measurement...

[Wilhelm]

IDGAF as long as i stay under 205 till after the meet.
Pretty much holding steady after dropping a couple pounds going from 3,500 to 3,000 / 3,200 a day recently
200 is top PM weight.

[chrisd]

What they should be using is something like the Navy Equation to be able to get bodyfat within 4-5% based on measurements of different parts of the body. It's something every doctor could do. Formula is in herehttp://bmi-calories.com/body-fat-percen ... lator.html

That's what I use -- it's close enough for my purposes.

I wonder why docs don't measure at least waistlines? Just waist vs. height would be a better measure of over-fatness than BMI. Maybe they are trying to avoid pissing off customers. I know my wife might be offended at a waistline measurement. Probably a lot of people would be.

Waist to hip ratio is an accepted measure. 1:1 is okay for men, slightly less for women. Waist to height would seem to be an odd choice. shorter people aren't just scale models of taller people, surely.

[Wilhelm]

Gonna break training tonight.
Wife made keto freindly pumpkin pie and whipped heavy cream.
Was gonna have it in tomorrow's numbers, but screw that noise.
Nommage

[cwd]

What they should be using is something like the Navy Equation to be able to get bodyfat within 4-5% based on measurements of different parts of the body. It's something every doctor could do. Formula is in herehttp://bmi-calories.com/body-fat-percen ... lator.html

That's what I use -- it's close enough for my purposes.

I wonder why docs don't measure at least waistlines? Just waist vs. height would be a better measure of over-fatness than BMI. Maybe they are trying to avoid pissing off customers. I know my wife might be offended at a waistline measurement. Probably a lot of people would be.

Waist to hip ratio is an accepted measure. 1:1 is okay for men, slightly less for women. Waist to height would seem to be an odd choice. shorter people aren't just scale models of taller people, surely.

According to the studies I skimmed, waist to height was a better predictor of obesity than waist to hips or BMI. I agree that seems counterintuitive.

[AaronM]

What they should be using is something like the Navy Equation to be able to get bodyfat within 4-5% based on measurements of different parts of the body. It's something every doctor could do. Formula is in herehttp://bmi-calories.com/body-fat-percen ... lator.html

That's what I use -- it's close enough for my purposes.

I wonder why docs don't measure at least waistlines? Just waist vs. height would be a better measure of over-fatness than BMI. Maybe they are trying to avoid pissing off customers. I know my wife might be offended at a waistline measurement. Probably a lot of people would be.

Waist to hip ratio is an accepted measure. 1:1 is okay for men, slightly less for women. Waist to height would seem to be an odd choice. shorter people aren't just scale models of taller people, surely.

Waist to hip ratio works out in my favor, unlike 1/2 of height. Squats and increasing my bodyweight by 50% put 10" on my hip measurement

[cwd]

Eh. We can argue about these standards, but I can just look in the mirror and see that my waistline is not ideal. There's flab there.

It doesn't hang over my belt, but I'd look better and be healthier with less fat. Lots of room between where I am and being too lean for ideal health.

[broseph]

If taller humans were exactly as slender as shorter humans, I'd expect weight to scale with height ** 3.

In practice, taller people are more slender on average. Apparently the actual scaling is closer to height ** 2 according to the study you linked, @PatrickDB, at least for white people. Black men for some reason scaled with height ** 2.4. Maybe the tall Black guys lift.

This strikes me because I always think the strongest tall people look more like giant short people. I've never said that out loud because it sounds ridiculous, but it makes sense considering your analysis.