[MauiKai]

167.4

AND, this means I am officially no longer overweight! I am "normal" now. (Though I may bounce "overweight" a couple of times before I get down low enough to be out of that range.)

I've been waiting for this for what seems like ages!

[Jacqui_D]

CONGRATS!

[Chubabub]

Congratulations! That's been a lot of hard work - good for you!

Very curious what you're using to determine normal vs. overweight since by BMI you're already well into normal range and have been for a while now. I know you've mentioned you have a very small frame. Is this a weight chart based on frame size or something?

[lostkitty]

awesome!

[MauiKai]

Originally Posted by Chubabub

Congratulations! That's been a lot of hard work - good for you!

Very curious what you're using to determine normal vs. overweight since by BMI you're already well into normal range and have been for a while now. I know you've mentioned you have a very small frame. Is this a weight chart based on frame size or something?

http://halls.md/body-mass-index/bmi.htm

[Chubabub]

I'm missing something I guess. It makes no sense to me that if you were in your 20s you could weigh up to 175, or in your 40s you could weigh up to 173, but in your 30s you can only be up to 167 to be normal weight...

[HIheart]

Congrats!!

[nickilaughs]

Originally Posted by Chubabub

I'm missing something I guess. It makes no sense to me that if you were in your 20s you could weigh up to 175, or in your 40s you could weigh up to 173, but in your 30s you can only be up to 167 to be normal weight...

I think she's basing it off of the halls calculation further down the page. Halls appears To believe any bmi over 22.5 is essentially "more than the average woman for that height/age.
I would have to weigh 162 to reach that. It's not a very forgiving calculation and not for every one. I would ignore it myself. I think while it's possible for me, with my bone structures I'd look like a concentration camp escapee. I have a muscular build, I think hall isn't accounting for such things. However, maui maybe a build that works for.

[MauiKai]

I think if you review http://www.mybodygallery.com/index.html you'll find that no one looks skeletal at heights similar to ours in the 155-165 range. In fact, many of them in our height range look quite good even into the 140 range.

It's an individual choice as to how much weight you want to/are comfortable with carrying.

My choices are based on (first and foremost) my discussions with my doctor, and my past experiences at different weights. I was married at 148lbs and I was NOT skeletal. Not at all. If fact, here is a photo of me at my wedding, in my size 10/12 dress.




Halls MD is one of the better calculations out there. He states:

Are you overweight? Maybe Body Mass Index says you are, but actually you are not. BMI can be wrong. Look at the weight percentiles, because they adjust for age.

The older you get, the higher your BMI is allowed to be. For example, in people over age 50, BMI of 25 to 30 is still normal and very healthy. I also believe the 45th percentile weight is a good estimate of your ideal weight.
It’s educated guessing, based on an mix of scientific data and some assumptions. The "halls.md v2" method cannot possibly be perfectly correct. To some people, when things are not perfectly correct, they are wrong. However, the WHO & CDC criteria are not perfectly correct either.



It also further states:
We avoid calling kids overweight, unless it is really obvious. Preserving self-esteem is also important, even for adults. If the overweight threshold is too low, it will label nearly 100% of the people who are truly overweight, but also falsely label MANY normal people too. (That’s what the CDC criteria does to adults). These "false positives" should be avoided, even if it reduces the number of "true positive" people labeled as overweight. Thus, the halls.md v2 criteria are designed to have higher specificity than sensitivity.

The halls.md v2 criteria don’t adjust for race or nationality differences. There is some published medical literature available on this topic and I may try to implement it in the future, if demand exists. Also missing is an adjustment for muscularity, so that body builders don’t get insulted when their BMI suggests they are overweight or obese.

After I decided to try to create my own BMI criteria, I realized that there are a lot of potential areas for improvement.


It's also one of the few BMI calculations that specifically adjusts for FEMALE height, not just a general height scale.

Another feature of the halls.md model, is an extra adjustment of the Overweight criteria based on a womans height. In Adult men, median Body Mass Index is stable ( horizontal lines ) at all heights from short to tall. But for Adult women, short women naturally have a higher BMI than tall women4. This is true at ages 30 or higher, even for slim (10th percentile) women. It is probably related to varying leg length. Therefore, the Body Mass Index calculator makes an extra adjustment for this factor.

So while BMI is never going to be a perfect way to assess weight, it's not terrible either. It is an excellent TOOL, not the be all end all. I don't allow it to determine happiness or success, but I do use it as a loose guide on my way to being a healthier person.

[TripSwitch]

Congrats!

And you looked stunning in that wedding dress btw...

I really like that Halls MD BMI calculator... I've used it before and for me it offers a pretty good range based on my past experiences... I've found I look pretty good at the top of the range it offers... But personally, I feel I look great and at my best in the middle of range... So that's what I'm shooting for... Of course I have people telling me I look great right now and to not lose anymore weight... But I have a certain "look" in mind that I'm going for based on what I used to weigh, so that's what I'm basing my "goal" on...

[Chubabub]

I get what you're saying, but when I plug in weights for a woman 6'1" and find the weight where it switches from marginally overweight to normal for someone in their 20s, then 30s then 40s, it makes the woman in her 30s weigh the least. That's what I'm finding confusing. Why do women in their 30s have to weigh so much less than women in their 20s or 40s?

[nonameslob]

Congrats and well done!

[nickilaughs]

I understand, you look great in the 140s and gorgeous on your wedding day. All i meant was that calculation would not work for everyone.

Theres something with my body composition that would look off in the 140s. my sister who is slightly taller at 5' 11" looks good in the high 140s. For whatever reason the 150s is where I start to look sickly. My sister currently weighs 15 #s less than me and we wear the same size and have similar measurements.

Either way, your killing it Maui.

Originally Posted by MauiKai

I think if you review http://www.mybodygallery.com/index.html you'll find that no one looks skeletal at heights similar to ours in the 155-165 range. In fact, many of them in our height range look quite good even into the 140 range.

It's an individual choice as to how much weight you want to/are comfortable with carrying.

My choices are based on (first and foremost) my discussions with my doctor, and my past experiences at different weights. I was married at 148lbs and I was NOT skeletal. Not at all. If fact, here is a photo of me at my wedding, in my size 10/12 dress.




Halls MD is one of the better calculations out there. He states:

Are you overweight? Maybe Body Mass Index says you are, but actually you are not. BMI can be wrong. Look at the weight percentiles, because they adjust for age.

The older you get, the higher your BMI is allowed to be. For example, in people over age 50, BMI of 25 to 30 is still normal and very healthy. I also believe the 45th percentile weight is a good estimate of your ideal weight.
It’s educated guessing, based on an mix of scientific data and some assumptions. The "halls.md v2" method cannot possibly be perfectly correct. To some people, when things are not perfectly correct, they are wrong. However, the WHO & CDC criteria are not perfectly correct either.



It also further states:
We avoid calling kids overweight, unless it is really obvious. Preserving self-esteem is also important, even for adults. If the overweight threshold is too low, it will label nearly 100% of the people who are truly overweight, but also falsely label MANY normal people too. (That’s what the CDC criteria does to adults). These "false positives" should be avoided, even if it reduces the number of "true positive" people labeled as overweight. Thus, the halls.md v2 criteria are designed to have higher specificity than sensitivity.

The halls.md v2 criteria don’t adjust for race or nationality differences. There is some published medical literature available on this topic and I may try to implement it in the future, if demand exists. Also missing is an adjustment for muscularity, so that body builders don’t get insulted when their BMI suggests they are overweight or obese.

After I decided to try to create my own BMI criteria, I realized that there are a lot of potential areas for improvement.


It's also one of the few BMI calculations that specifically adjusts for FEMALE height, not just a general height scale.

Another feature of the halls.md model, is an extra adjustment of the Overweight criteria based on a womans height. In Adult men, median Body Mass Index is stable ( horizontal lines ) at all heights from short to tall. But for Adult women, short women naturally have a higher BMI than tall women4. This is true at ages 30 or higher, even for slim (10th percentile) women. It is probably related to varying leg length. Therefore, the Body Mass Index calculator makes an extra adjustment for this factor.

So while BMI is never going to be a perfect way to assess weight, it's not terrible either. It is an excellent TOOL, not the be all end all. I don't allow it to determine happiness or success, but I do use it as a loose guide on my way to being a healthier person.

[MauiKai]

Originally Posted by TripSwitch

Congrats!

And you looked stunning in that wedding dress btw...

I really like that Halls MD BMI calculator... I've used it before and for me it offers a pretty good range based on my past experiences... I've found I look pretty good at the top of the range it offers... But personally, I feel I look great and at my best in the middle of range... So that's what I'm shooting for... Of course I have people telling me I look great right now and to not lose anymore weight... But I have a certain "look" in mind that I'm going for based on what I used to weigh, so that's what I'm basing my "goal" on...

Thanks

My wedding was awesome , and my dress was great because it wasn't crazy expensive, and it was comfortable in the heat.