Why weight?

"DrLith" wrote in message
...

"Nick" wrote in message
...
Hello )

I was curious as to why so many people want to lose weight rather than
body
fat or other measures of health such as resting heart rate. I assume
that
it's body fat that you really want to lose, but why measure it with
weight?
Body Fat Percentage and Body Mass Index (BMI)together seem like a better
measurements to use when trying to reach goals related to health, looks
and
how you feel.

Since the only two variables in calculating BMI are weight and height, it
acts as a proxy for weight and is therefore no better than weight alone as
a
measure.

I agree that BMI is no better than weight when used on it's own. I think
that when used in conjunction with BF% then it become more usefull. When
BF% & BMI measure are taken then progress can be more accurately assessed.
For example, if BMI stays the same but BF% goes down then this is a strong
indicator of progress or if BF% stays the same and BMI goes up then this
also (to a lesser extent) is a good indicator of progress, since the
increase is likely to be due to a lean tissue increase or better hydration
which are both positive results.

This might interest some of you...

http://www.hhmi.org/cgi-bin/askascie...ans_014. html

Nick.

Unless your height changes, I suppose. "Look, hon, I lost 8 lbs today!"

"Well, yes, dear, but your BMI is actually higher. See, when you cut off
your head this morning, it also reduced your height by 7 inches."

) tee hee

On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 00:17:30 GMT, "Nick"
wrote:

Hello )

I was curious as to why so many people want to lose weight rather than body
fat or other measures of health such as resting heart rate. I assume that
it's body fat that you really want to lose, but why measure it with weight?
Body Fat Percentage and Body Mass Index (BMI)together seem like a better
measurements to use when trying to reach goals related to health, looks and
how you feel. Body fat scales can be bought for under $40 and at my gym it
comes free with my membership. Your BMI can be calculated from your weight
and height.

You're right -- at least in my case -- body fat percentage loss is the
goal. However, most methods of measuring body fat percentage are less
than accurate and not all that repeatable (in the sense that you can
measure twice in the same day and get significantly different
results). BF% scales measure only the fat in the lower body, and tend
to vary from one weighing to the next and to be significantly affected
by hydration levels. Caliper methods depend a lot on the measurer.
(Immersion methods are highly accurate but are not widely available
and are expensive.) Also -- if one loses a large amount of weight, as
I have done -- the excess skin tends to skew readings done via the
caliper method. Weighing on a scale is more convenient for most
people.

BMI, on the other hand, is nothing more than a function of weight and
height, and is no more valid as a measure of fat loss. (It's just a
function that allows you to capture the old weight-height chart
information in a single number.) It's probably safe to assume that
anyone here who has stated their goal in terms of desired body weight
knows how tall they are and has factored that in :-).

How does your gym measure BF%? Try doing it every day and see how
accurate you think it is.

Does everyone still use weight scales because of lack of knowledge about
body fat scales, lack of knowledge about how weight, fat & health relate,
because it's always been done like that, because slimming programs are based
around weight loss or is it something else or all these things or am I
missing something?

Well, in my case it's not lack of knowledge of any of these things,
but the reasons I mentioned above. Weight on a scale is still a
reasonable approximation of progress toward fat loss. One just has to
accompany it with knowledge of how to eat and exercise so as to
minimize the loss of lean tissue, and set one's goals based on one's
perception of acceptable level of body fat. I didn't decide on a goal
weight until I was close to it, and it wasn't really based on any
desired absolute number on the scale, but rather on reaching a point
where I felt my body was at an optimum balance of lean tissue and fat.

Weight can vary so much depending on what you're wearing, how hydrated you
are, how much you've eaten, how much you've put down the toilet and what
percentage or muscle, bone, water and fat you are.

Well, this is all true. But some of these are temporal things
(hydration, recent meals, bathroom events) and some are physiological
(muscle & bone). The temporal ones don't matter that much unless one
gets hung up on day-to-day weight fluctuations (and they can affect
BF% measurements as well). The physiological ones do relate to BF%
measurements -- to the extent that one can capture them accurately.
However, it's reasonable possible -- as I've noted above -- to be
sufficiently self-aware to set a goal that accounts for these
differences based on one's own body.

Body Fat % & BMI would
give a much better measurement of progress and these values are easy to
obtain daily.

BF% would be a much better measure if it were possible to accurately
obtain it daily, but it is not. BMI is not any better a measure than
body weight; it's equivalent. It varies exactly as body weight does.

Chris
262/136/ (135-145)

On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 00:17:30 GMT, "Nick"
wrote:

Hello )

I was curious as to why so many people want to lose weight rather than body
fat or other measures of health such as resting heart rate. I assume that
it's body fat that you really want to lose, but why measure it with weight?
Body Fat Percentage and Body Mass Index (BMI)together seem like a better
measurements to use when trying to reach goals related to health, looks and
how you feel. Body fat scales can be bought for under $40 and at my gym it
comes free with my membership. Your BMI can be calculated from your weight
and height.

You're right -- at least in my case -- body fat percentage loss is the
goal. However, most methods of measuring body fat percentage are less
than accurate and not all that repeatable (in the sense that you can
measure twice in the same day and get significantly different
results). BF% scales measure only the fat in the lower body, and tend
to vary from one weighing to the next and to be significantly affected
by hydration levels. Caliper methods depend a lot on the measurer.
(Immersion methods are highly accurate but are not widely available
and are expensive.) Also -- if one loses a large amount of weight, as
I have done -- the excess skin tends to skew readings done via the
caliper method. Weighing on a scale is more convenient for most
people.

BMI, on the other hand, is nothing more than a function of weight and
height, and is no more valid as a measure of fat loss. (It's just a
function that allows you to capture the old weight-height chart
information in a single number.) It's probably safe to assume that
anyone here who has stated their goal in terms of desired body weight
knows how tall they are and has factored that in :-).

How does your gym measure BF%? Try doing it every day and see how
accurate you think it is.

Does everyone still use weight scales because of lack of knowledge about
body fat scales, lack of knowledge about how weight, fat & health relate,
because it's always been done like that, because slimming programs are based
around weight loss or is it something else or all these things or am I
missing something?

Well, in my case it's not lack of knowledge of any of these things,
but the reasons I mentioned above. Weight on a scale is still a
reasonable approximation of progress toward fat loss. One just has to
accompany it with knowledge of how to eat and exercise so as to
minimize the loss of lean tissue, and set one's goals based on one's
perception of acceptable level of body fat. I didn't decide on a goal
weight until I was close to it, and it wasn't really based on any
desired absolute number on the scale, but rather on reaching a point
where I felt my body was at an optimum balance of lean tissue and fat.

Weight can vary so much depending on what you're wearing, how hydrated you
are, how much you've eaten, how much you've put down the toilet and what
percentage or muscle, bone, water and fat you are.

Well, this is all true. But some of these are temporal things
(hydration, recent meals, bathroom events) and some are physiological
(muscle & bone). The temporal ones don't matter that much unless one
gets hung up on day-to-day weight fluctuations (and they can affect
BF% measurements as well). The physiological ones do relate to BF%
measurements -- to the extent that one can capture them accurately.
However, it's reasonable possible -- as I've noted above -- to be
sufficiently self-aware to set a goal that accounts for these
differences based on one's own body.

Body Fat % & BMI would
give a much better measurement of progress and these values are easy to
obtain daily.

BF% would be a much better measure if it were possible to accurately
obtain it daily, but it is not. BMI is not any better a measure than
body weight; it's equivalent. It varies exactly as body weight does.

Chris
262/136/ (135-145)

On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 02:47:53 GMT, "Nick"
wrote:

I agree that BMI is no better than weight when used on it's own. I think
that when used in conjunction with BF% then it become more usefull. When
BF% & BMI measure are taken then progress can be more accurately assessed.
For example, if BMI stays the same but BF% goes down then this is a strong
indicator of progress or if BF% stays the same and BMI goes up then this
also (to a lesser extent) is a good indicator of progress, since the
increase is likely to be due to a lean tissue increase or better hydration
which are both positive results.

Well, unless you are getting shorter, your BMI will go up only if your
weight goes up, so this is equivalent to suggesting that one measure
both BF% and weight.

I think you need to realize that BMI is the same thing as weight --
whether used on its own or in conjunction with BF%.

Chris

On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 02:47:53 GMT, "Nick"
wrote:

I agree that BMI is no better than weight when used on it's own. I think
that when used in conjunction with BF% then it become more usefull. When
BF% & BMI measure are taken then progress can be more accurately assessed.
For example, if BMI stays the same but BF% goes down then this is a strong
indicator of progress or if BF% stays the same and BMI goes up then this
also (to a lesser extent) is a good indicator of progress, since the
increase is likely to be due to a lean tissue increase or better hydration
which are both positive results.

Well, unless you are getting shorter, your BMI will go up only if your
weight goes up, so this is equivalent to suggesting that one measure
both BF% and weight.

I think you need to realize that BMI is the same thing as weight --
whether used on its own or in conjunction with BF%.

Chris

"Nick" wrote in message
...
Hello )

I was curious as to why so many people want to lose weight rather than
body
fat or other measures of health such as resting heart rate. I assume that
it's body fat that you really want to lose, but why measure it with
weight?
Body Fat Percentage and Body Mass Index (BMI)together seem like a better
measurements to use when trying to reach goals related to health, looks
and
how you feel. Body fat scales can be bought for under $40 and at my gym
it
comes free with my membership. Your BMI can be calculated from your
weight
and height.

Does everyone still use weight scales because of lack of knowledge about
body fat scales, lack of knowledge about how weight, fat & health relate,
because it's always been done like that, because slimming programs are
based
around weight loss or is it something else or all these things or am I
missing something?

Weight can vary so much depending on what you're wearing, how hydrated you
are, how much you've eaten, how much you've put down the toilet and what
percentage or muscle, bone, water and fat you are. Body Fat % & BMI would
give a much better measurement of progress and these values are easy to
obtain daily.

I get my body fat tested at each visit to my nutritionist's office. Sounds
like he has somewhat the same machine your gym does -- with the electrode on
hand and foot (more accurate than Tanita, which just doubles the
lower-body-fat number to get a whole number -- so if you carry your weight
in the lower body, you will get a falsely high reading on a Tanita). I do
believe that body fat is a much better indicator than the number on the
scale -- as I always say, "The scale tells only *part* of the story."

Mary M

"Nick" wrote in message
...
Hello )

I was curious as to why so many people want to lose weight rather than
body
fat or other measures of health such as resting heart rate. I assume that
it's body fat that you really want to lose, but why measure it with
weight?
Body Fat Percentage and Body Mass Index (BMI)together seem like a better
measurements to use when trying to reach goals related to health, looks
and
how you feel. Body fat scales can be bought for under $40 and at my gym
it
comes free with my membership. Your BMI can be calculated from your
weight
and height.

Does everyone still use weight scales because of lack of knowledge about
body fat scales, lack of knowledge about how weight, fat & health relate,
because it's always been done like that, because slimming programs are
based
around weight loss or is it something else or all these things or am I
missing something?

Weight can vary so much depending on what you're wearing, how hydrated you
are, how much you've eaten, how much you've put down the toilet and what
percentage or muscle, bone, water and fat you are. Body Fat % & BMI would
give a much better measurement of progress and these values are easy to
obtain daily.

I get my body fat tested at each visit to my nutritionist's office. Sounds
like he has somewhat the same machine your gym does -- with the electrode on
hand and foot (more accurate than Tanita, which just doubles the
lower-body-fat number to get a whole number -- so if you carry your weight
in the lower body, you will get a falsely high reading on a Tanita). I do
believe that body fat is a much better indicator than the number on the
scale -- as I always say, "The scale tells only *part* of the story."

Mary M

P.S. -- forgot to mention that I think BMI numbers are a really bad way to
measure fitness -- my trainer who has a perfectly muscular gorgeous build is
considered obese by BMI standards.

Mary

P.S. -- forgot to mention that I think BMI numbers are a really bad way to
measure fitness -- my trainer who has a perfectly muscular gorgeous build is
considered obese by BMI standards.

Mary

Mary,

Thanks for your posts. As I stated elsewhere in this thread I also think BMI
is comparable to weight and useless on it's own, but when used in
conjunction with BF% the combination provides a useful measure of progress.
I don't advocate BF% on it's own because someone can have a low BF% but be
really unhealthy skinny with wasted muscles, although I know this is far
from most peoples situations. If someone's BF% has stayed the same for a
month but their BMI has gorn up then this is good because it means they've
put on more lean tissue. If BMI stays the same but BF% goes down then this
is also good news as it means that fat loss has been equal to lean tissue
increase. Using just weigh the first scenario would show a negative result
when it was infact positive. In the second scenario using weight would show
no change when in fact progress had been made. I suggest BMI over weight
because it's easier to measure against a standardised chart that suggests a
healthy range for ones BMI. Also BMI is more easily comparable with other
people's BMI but I can't think of a reason why this is particularly
advantages.

I agree BMI on it's own is not a good measure, such as the case of your
trainer.

Nick.

"Mary M/Ohio" wrote in message
...
P.S. -- forgot to mention that I think BMI numbers are a really bad way
to
measure fitness -- my trainer who has a perfectly muscular gorgeous build
is
considered obese by BMI standards.

Mary