Validation

Okay, if you've read ANY of my previous posts, you know my feelings on BMI. But you also know I felt like I needed to fit that mold anyhow. The whole time I was saying that BMI is stupid and inaccurate, I wondered if it was as inaccurate as I was hoping. This week, I got my validation.

I've been right around 144 lately. According to BMI, that means I'm one pound from being overweight. Not cool. It also tells me that I could weigh 108 and be healthy. Uh, I don't think so. But BMI makes me doubt that this is a good weight for me. Maybe I should lose another 5-10 lbs.

I wear a size 8. That's pretty good. Single digits (well, mostly, but my 10s are a little big). (I just want to note here, double digit sizes aren't bad. But I know my body and know the size I am is good for me. If I was taller, 10 or 12 would probably be ideal.) But I'm definitely not a size 6 or 4. Size 0? Maybe if I was just skin and bones. So 8 is pretty good.

I assume my blood work would be good, since everything was good back in August when I was about 180and still considered obese. Since I've only gotten healthier since then, my blood sugar, cholesterol, hormones, etc. should only have improved.

I know my fitness level has improved, although that's harder to quantify. But if I have my HRM running before my WO, I've noticed my resting HR is pretty low. I've even seen it right around 50. My HR recovers more quickly too. And I feel so much better. I have more energy, I'm generally happier, I feel younger and less achy (my muscles are sore but that's because I work them).

My scale claims to measure body fat. It says I'm 26-27% BF. That seemed a little high. So then I used a website that takes measurements (with a tape measure) into account when estimating BF. That said about 25% and felt more accurate. So on Thursday when I got my BF calipers, I expected only slightly lower than that. Maybe 23%?

It came with a chart that uses just one measurement and your age. So I did it and referred back to the chart...and promptly measured again, thinking that I did it wrong. It said 19%, lean. 20-25% is considered ideal. I was shocked. Yes, I work out hard. Yes, you can start to see my upper obliques despite the loose skin. But I'm almost overweight. I'm an 8 or medium, not a tiny size or a small. So I went back to the same website, because you could get an accurate number using 3 caliper measurements. I had Ella pinch my tricep because Steve wasn't home to help and did the others myself. I plugged in the numbers and about fell off my chair. 15.93% BF! Low enough that the site warned about amenorrhea. As soon as Steve got home, I made him help me measure again, thinking maybe my 4 year old and I got it wrong somehow. Nope, same measurement. To give you a bit better idea of what this means, a woman's essential body fat is 9-10%, meaning if it gets that low or even too close to it, a woman's body assumes she can't support a pregnancy and stops menstruating. I'm not much above that. And BMI says I'm almost overweight. Hardly. So yes, I was right, BMI is wildly inaccurate for me. It must be accurate for some people but check other health indicators before assuming you're really overweight and therefore unhealthy. Weight alone is a poor indicator of health.

And this answers my question about whether or not I need to lose more weight. I don't. I'm going to keep working on my fitness but it wouldn't be healthy for me to lose more weight. Forget you, BMI. I'm sticking with BF measurements now. ChaLEAN Extreme is right!