AIBU to tell you that BMI doesn't apply to everyone!

[Randomuser456]

Foreword I know it's a blunt tool, etc, etc ,etc... and I DO exercise more than the average person (don't really ift heavy) but I've always thought my clothes size doesn't match my weight.

Anywho according to the Navy Body Fat formula I'm around 27-28%

A BMI extrapolation would put me at 38%. By reversing that calculation someone with my BF% is around 15kg lighter than my current weight.

Anyway just a public service announcement :)

To be fair, a couple of those were saying they had larger thighs and looked emaciated on their top half at under 10 st. Not that it was impossible for everyone.

I lost weight through illness a few years back. Was just under 9st at my lightest. I did look emaciated on my top half (like PP I carry my weight lower down, was still within healthy BMI range).

Now 9st 3/58kg at 5'7" and I do look very slim on top still. With a different/more evenly spread body type I'd look different.

Right, so how what measurement would you like doctors to use to talk to their patients?

"To be fair, a couple of those were saying they had larger thighs and looked emaciated on their top half at under 10 st. Not that it was impossible for everyone."

The British pear shape I suppose. When I'm at my best weight my collar bones look like clothes hangers, but my hips are still wide and I still have cellulite. I presume my body fat would still be higher than ideal at that weight so I wouldn't be able to improve it by more dieting.

This conversation is interesting. I can't work out if we've become so blind to larger bodies that we think everyone who isn't heavy is wasting away?

I am in the tall and under ten stone camp.

I'm 5 foot 9; 58 kilos/9 stone. This is the same weight I was when I was 20.

I am not emaciated. I work out 5/6 times a week. Eat healthily. I'm strong and slim. At almost 49 I feel fantastic.

I have no idea why you insist that I, not a doctor, should have an instant replacement ready for doctors to use, when doctors and medical institutions around the world are still figuring it out. But, for now, here you go..
In January, a Lancet report signed by 75 medical organisations around the world called for a “radical overhaul” in diagnosing obesity: rather than going by an individual’s BMI, a metric the doctors described as “inadequate”, the distribution of fat around the body and whether it genuinely impacts on organ and bodily function should be prioritised.

Here are some other helpful measurements that could be used instead of weight and the bullshit BMI:
Exercise, and access to exercise
Ability /disabilities
Support available
Socioeconomic status
Employment, affordability of desired lifestyle options
Friends and social activity
Happiness and self confidence
Mental Health
Loneliness and isolation
Eating disorders, current, past or potential

So many factors more important than fatness

Waist to height ratio is pretty good. There’s a world of difference between someone with solid legs and thighs and a person with skinny limbs but a large spare tyre around their midriff.

Ok, so body fat percentage.
Bad news for me and good news for OP!

I’m not sure it matters what doctors use, many people will still insist they are so far outside of it that it doesn’t apply.

I think for measuring higher BMI- 30+ (unless you’re a body builder/rugby player) and underweight BMIs, it’s probably fairly accurate. I think the grey area is probably 22-29ish. Women in those areas can have such different body shapes, fat distribution, muscle mass, fat ratios etc. Lower weight doesn’t necessarily = strength, fitness and health.

Dress sizes can also be fairly meaningless, unless tiny or very large. So many factors affect that- as well as height.

Are you slender though? As in narrow hips and shoulders etc
I mean I have a photo of me age 12 and I am towering over others plus twice the width and I wasn’t fat in the slightest

trying to think of an example
kate middleton I guess has a small frame? If you stood her next to the same height power lifter even at the same weight

I thought the best measurement was a photo whilst arm raised above head, body slightly twisted, and legs elongated?

look up correlation between higher BMI and health

@AquaPeer if you mean me, I said it would be impossible for me to be under 10 stone and if I was I would look awful, not other people. In response to you (I think?) saying 10 stone is a lot for a woman to weigh. Isn’t that the point of the thread? That different body shapes, fat distribution, muscles mean that different weights can look very different or be healthy/unhealthy even on people of the same height.

I do find it fascinating how we can all be so different and at some point I will learn to accept my thighs (maybe). I have slim arms a really good waist and some nice little baby abs popping through, so I can’t complain too much, even if my mum is giving me loads of hassle about looking “gaunt” and sending me facial yoga videos 😂. If I drop to just over 10 stone I look bony and my thighs look even bigger in comparison

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/style_and_beauty/5304346-i-just-took-k-my-measurements-to-buy-the-right-size-of-jeans-and-apparently-i-should-be-buying-size-20-even-though?page=2&reply=143181455

Interesting thread to go along side this. Levi suggest I should wear their size 4. Absolutely not. But, the OP wears a 14 and measures as a 20 in them. So how can she need sizes much bigger and yet I supposedly need sizes much smaller? This makes no sense!

I misread. It puts me in a 2. Fucking MAD. I'm not.

It puts me at a size 6. My Levi's jeans are 26. I'm an average size 8. It tracks in my case

I think it just adds weight to your argument!

On the other thread you wrote "Errrrr. Well, I'm an 8 (although another thread on here about bmi absolutely disputes this at 9st 11 and 5ft 2 that I could possibly be an 8, anyway, I digress...) and this has me as a 4. I'm absolutely not a 4! I've only just gone in to an 8 after 7st weight loss. My waist is 25.5inches and hips 34 inches. Mad."

It is very interesting because I'm maybe an inch or even just half an inch taller, weigh much less (around 52kg) and am a 10-12! It is hard to believe that you are a 6-8 at nearly 10 stone and only 5'2".

I've posted pictures on here. I 100% am. Although I can wear a 10, even a 12 in jeans (not tops, they drown me) and I'd not think they were massive, just a bit roomy. But an 8 is the best fit. And I wear skinny jeans. My mum insists she's a 14. I put a pair of my size 10 skinnies on her. They fit, did up, and weren't too tight. She was in disbelief. I think she just doesn't like clothes to be fitted, where as I do.

it doesn’t matter does it? Levi don’t influence uk clothes sizes- they don’t even sell their jeans in those sizes.

its like the posters who has said a few times that she was an 8 in a wedding dress- wedding dress sizes are a load of rubbish. I was a 0 in my wedding dress. I’d be a bleating idiot to use that to pretend I’ve finally found my true size 😭😭😭

edited to add- it’s really, really common for women to lie to everyone (and themselves) about their dress size. I have loads of friends who do.

Bodies are so different! I am 9st 5, 5ft 2 and a size 10 in nearly all brands. Size 12 will fit but baggy. Size 8 too tight.

people also wear clothes differently. I saw a lady in tick to and she was trying on size 12 in Marks and Spencer. She claimed clothes fit her perfectly but to me everything was too tight. The material was very stretched over the thighs and when she had her own clothes on her jeans were also tight and uncomfortable looking (to me). But that’s how she likes them clearly.

People forget that it’s not just about height and weight but also body shape.
I’m 5ft 7 and was anorexic at a size 10, people thought I was a 6/8 but I only just neatly fit into a size 10. Periods stopped, grew hair everywhere, freezing all the time. I have a wide skeleton.
People with the same height and weight can have totally different shapes and weight distributions.

The wearing clothes differently is very true and partly what drives some of the more hysterical vanity sizing claims. People don't realise that clothes are not sized so that they are precisely the width of a size 8 (for example). The designer includes a certain amount of ease that varies and is deliberate. So just because you normally wear a 12 and can get a size 8 jumper on doesn't mean sizing has changed necessarily, it may be that it's meant to be worn much looser. It all becomes much clearer if you make your own clothes and you can see the difference in patterns between actual garment size of the size 8 and the body size they suggest should wear it.

Obviously (and one of the joys of sewing) you can disagree and prefer it more fitted or with more ease. In stretchy fabric you can also have negative ease.

Puts me at a 12. I am a 10 sometimes 8, in jeans. I currently have on a pair of 8 jeans that are roomy.