5 ms·

I run four days a week, climb, and lift weights; my maximum bench was 315lbs. I'm also 5'8" and weigh 200lbs, giving me a BMI > 30. By this university's stand

by donw 17y ago

I run four days a week, climb, and lift weights; my maximum bench was 315lbs. I'm also 5'8" and weigh 200lbs, giving me a BMI > 30. By this university's standards, I'm thus obese and require supplementary physical education. When I was seriously into bodybuilding and weighed 175lbs, I looked like a take-home size action hero. Six pack, huge arms, etc. My BMI at that time was 25.8, which is still considered 'overweight', and 'unhealthy'. I'm all for encouraging fitness, but using some totally worthless metric to determine who needs to take a PE class is, at the very best, a waste of time and a blatant tax on the students.

Mz 17y ago
Similarly: When my career-military ex husband was on recruiting duty, he and all of the other recruiters at a conference (state-wide?) were told they were "overweight" by the height-weight tables of some insurance guy there. Every last one of them had to pass the PT test to remain in the military and could not be overweight. (The military accounts for such possibilities and has an alternate "tape test" standard which generally works well for those guys who are "overweight" due to bodybuilding -- or did at that time. I don't know what the current standards are.)
dan_sim 17y ago
Ok, maybe BMI is not a good metric but I'm sure the administrator of the school can make the difference between 200lbs of muscles and 200lbs of fat.
jdoliner 17y ago
The article actually claims completely falsely that BMI measures body fat percentage (a much more accurate metric). I wonder if this is actually poor reporting of the fact that body fat % is taken in to account. If you look over the school's football roster most of the players are actually obese. I can't imagine the school has enough blind faith in BMI to put football players in a class on fitness. rooster: http://www.lulions.com/roster.aspx?path=football&roster=41&#38 http://www.lulions.com/roster.aspx?path=football&roster=...;

by donw 17y ago

Mz 17y ago

Similarly: When my career-military ex husband was on recruiting duty, he and all of the other recruiters at a conference (state-wide?) were told they were "overweight" by the height-weight tables of some insurance guy there. Every last one of them had to pass the PT test to remain in the military and could not be overweight. (The military accounts for such possibilities and has an alternate "tape test" standard which generally works well for those guys who are "overweight" due to bodybuilding -- or did at that time. I don't know what the current standards are.)

dan_sim 17y ago

Ok, maybe BMI is not a good metric but I'm sure the administrator of the school can make the difference between 200lbs of muscles and 200lbs of fat.

jdoliner 17y ago

The article actually claims completely falsely that BMI measures body fat percentage (a much more accurate metric). I wonder if this is actually poor reporting of the fact that body fat % is taken in to account. If you look over the school's football roster most of the players are actually obese. I can't imagine the school has enough blind faith in BMI to put football players in a class on fitness. rooster: http://www.lulions.com/roster.aspx?path=football&roster=41&#38 http://www.lulions.com/roster.aspx?path=football&roster=...;