2 ms·
140lbs is at the extreme low end for healthy 72” males. And it is correct. It is extremely, very, no-good bad to have excess body fat and if you are a 72” tal
by rocket_surgeron 4y ago
140lbs is at the extreme low end for healthy 72” males.
And it is correct.
It is extremely, very, no-good bad to have excess body fat and if you are a 72” tall male who is not physically active that is where you should be.
Of course, for athletes, BMI is not relevant but those people are edge cases not worthy of discussion when you it comes to BMI.
The fact that people think it is unreasonable shows how perceptions on weight have been warped over the last 20-40 years.
At 6” tall and 140lbs you probably would have been the target audience for the “pack on some beefcake muscle with Joe Rock’s muscleman workout” ads in the back of comic books and magazines. But you would have been healthy.
The median weight of a 72” tall college-aged male in the 1950s was 167lbs. Almost exactly in the middle of the “healthy” BMI range.
https://naldc.nal.usda.gov/download/IND43861419/PDF https://naldc.nal.usda.gov/download/IND43861419/PDF
- vba616 4y ago>And it is correct. With a fairly inactive lifestyle, I would still only be able to get to ~150 by losing all my body fat. 100%. The final ten pounds would have to come out of muscle, organ, or bone. It doesn't sound healthy. Also, I have been around 140 lbs as an adult, many years ago, and it did immediately precede my hospitalization, although it wasn't exactly due to an eating disorder. Official sources give 2% body fat as the minimum for men, but that also sounds a bit extreme. >The median weight of a 72” tall college-aged male in the 1950s was 167lbs. It's almost as though cigarettes and leaded gas had some positive effect...