[///MPhatic]

Originally Posted by Rickuda

BMI can be a bit misleading, especially for those who exercise regularly. It doesn't consider muscle mass versus fat, which is super important. A fit person might have a higher BMI because muscle weighs more than fat.

Everyone knows that, but the original point was that us muscular people shouldn't be listed on our charts as overweight when we clearly aren't. Same thing happens to me, even with notes about how they talked to me about it, yet not a word was said. I inquired about it and they said it was standard practice. How stupid is that for a doctor's office? I had them strike it from my record with their own notes as to my overall fitness.

One of these days I'm going to get a dexa scan and just bring it with me to my appointments.

[LivingInSalt]

Originally Posted by Rickuda

A fit person might have a higher BMI because muscle weighs more than fat.

lol

so how much does a pound of muscle vs a pound of fat weigh

[///MPhatic]

Originally Posted by LivingInSalt

lol

so how much does a pound of muscle vs a pound of fat weigh

That's not what he's saying.

With height being the only other metric, those with more muscle will weigh more than those with more fat at the same height.

BMI is stupid, and done absolutely incorrectly. There is no correct BMI without a Dexa scan, end of story. Some of these calculators take your sex and age into consideration, and even your ethnicity, but they're all trash, and a super crude guide.

[chassis]

Waist to xyz ratio is good.

Combining height and waist are good measurements.

In the end it’s about fat percentage. Fat resides principally in the lower torso and “near vicinity”.

[///MPhatic]

Originally Posted by chassis

In the end it’s about fat percentage.

"It?" "It's" actually not. It's about visceral fat vs subcutaneous fat, which means a Dexa scan.

[chassis]

Got a dexa scan yesterday, pretty cool. Easy, fast and accuracy is gold standard. Paid $200 oop.

Dexa result for me is lower than an impedance measurement on a scale. Not surprising the results are different. I wasn't sure which result would be the higher one, turns out the scale overestimates fat percentage. At least the scale I use.

[chassis]

Originally Posted by Thedevilogic

I’ve had the same talks with my docs, and they just don’t budge. BMI just doesn’t account for muscle vs. fat, so it’s not always accurate for people who lift or train hard.

Get a DXA (dexa) scan. It ends the debate.

[vreihen16]

Originally Posted by Thedevilogic

I’ve had the same talks with my docs, and they just don’t budge. BMI just doesn’t account for muscle vs. fat, so it’s not always accurate for people who lift or train hard.

[chassis]

An impedance-based device can suggest an upper bound on fat %. For example digital scale or handheld impedance device.

My DXA was significantly lower than indicated by my impedance-based so-called “smart” scale. Calipers to measure fat % are prone to error, as are tape measurements and their associated formulae.

Comparing to photographs of one's body shape vs DXA scan fat % is at least as accurate as an impedance measurement.

[vreihen16]

Originally Posted by perezxk5

Yeah, I’ve had the same issue with doctors marking me as obese based on BMI, even though it's just muscle weight. I’m 5'9" and around 195, and despite having visible abs, they still flag my chart because of BMI. It sucks how they stick to that system without factoring in muscle mass.