Instead of just tracking weight, a lot of health care professionals recommend computing your Body Mass Index. This simple formula is supposed to indicate whether you are susceptible to a variety of medical problems, from diabetes to heart disease.

The formula is: Weight (in pounds) X 703 / Height (in inches)^2 (weight times 703 divided by height squared)

My current BMI is 29.02, rating me as "overweight" but not "obese." In order to be "healthy weight," I'd have to weigh 189.5 or less. Here's a few of the problems I have with that.

First, I have to say that I have weight to lose. Anyone who has taken even a cursory glance at my blog for the past month+ will see daily logs of what I've been eating and exercises I've been doing. But I haven't seen 189 since Junior year of high school. And BMI doesn't take into account any form of body composition; for BMI, lean body mass doesn't mean a thing. You could be the doughiest 189er in the world, and BMI would pat you on the back for it.

The Army actually tells me that if I'm 205, that's cool. 16 pounds over a "healthy" BMI, but they're fine with that. There is the caveat that, while this is the standard, it is encouraged that all soldiers strive to be 5% below the maximum screening weight: That would put me at just under 195 (still above healthy BMI). Not that the Army is the final authority on this by any means... their body fat measurement process leaves a lot to be desired (body circumference taping is one of the least accurate methods, especially when performed by laypersons, i.e. relatively untrained NCOs), but at least they're trying to take composition into account.

But circumference measurements can be another mark of health, or at least progress towards weight loss goals. The only one that seems to matter to most people is the waist; maximum healthy measurements are usually 35 inches for women and 40 inches for men. For Army standards, if I'm 6'1" (73") tall and have a 40" waist, I need a 16.5" neck in order to be in compliance with the body fat standards for my age (24% maximum, 28-39 years old). (My waist is currently closer to 38" although my neck is about that big right now.)

I need to look into good methods to do body circumference measurements by myself as I don't really have a ready partner to apply a tape measure to various portions of my anatomy. Waist is useful to track, and I'd do the neck as well for Army consistency... but I wonder what else I should go for. Chest? Arms/biceps? Thighs? These each could be indicators of how much muscle I'm putting on (which is especially psychologically useful in case I stop losing weight or even gain some back).

Anyway, the overall fitness of the individual is what's important, and that isn't easily encapsulated by a single measurement, whether it's weight, BMI or waist circumference. It would be a range of measurements that would truly provide the full picture of health."

Comments
on May 22, 2007
I'm about 10 lbs. over a healthy BMI. My waist to hip ratio is fine, though, and my waist measurement is also fine. If my scale is to be trusted my body fat is too high.

I wish I were just one of those naturally thin people so I didn't have to carry all this weight baggage (literal and figurative) around.

I worry about weight #, but I do understand that measurements and "size" are probably a better indicator of health and fitness.

I seriously doubt that I'll ever be "thin". I'm just not willing to put as much effort into it as thin would require. Not actively killing myself with food an inactivity is good enough for me.




*And here is me being a good girl and not making an inappropriate comment about your need for a ready partner to measure you. Hahahahaha*
on May 22, 2007
Well, I am well over what I should be BMI wise, but I have been working diligently for 8 weeks now with the program the doctor tasked me with, including walking at least 6600 steps per day, but usually averaging 8000-10000. I also started going to a weight training class at the gym about a month ago. A few days ago I got on the blasted scale we have that shows body fat as well as weight, and was disappointed that I hadn't lost any weight in a few days. But then I noticed the difference in the body fat.

The total in 8 weeks? 20 pounds and 4%

I haven't done any other measurements, though. I probably should, but I can tell a difference in the way things fit, so I'm happy anyways. If you do happen to find ways to measure solo, please share.
on May 24, 2007
The total in 8 weeks? 20 pounds and 4%


That's awesome. I've actually had similar losses; 19 pounds since I started in early April, and my BF% (Army calculation) was nearly 5% under my maximum allowable.