1. Please take 30 seconds to register your free account to remove most ads, post topics, make friends, earn reward points at our store, and more!  
    TalkBass.com has been uniting the low end since 1998.  Join us! :)

New grade for kids?

Discussion in 'Off Topic [BG]' started by stedtale, Aug 28, 2007.

  1. As long as you also put the BMI of the teachers on the cards, then go for it.
  2. LMAO. LOL. And the worse part is, BMI is crap that doesnt even really portray a persons health. Isnt that kinda invasive though? Poor kids. Kids getting bullied based on their BMI. Damn.
  3. Mike Money

    Mike Money In Memoriam

    Mar 18, 2003
    Bakersfield California
    Avatar Speakers Endorsing Hooligan
    Those idiots who figured the BMI think we should all look like Ethiopians.
  4. need4mospd


    Dec 22, 2005
    You could put height on there and a midget would still get a 6'-2" on it because we don't want to hurt his feelings. So this BMI thing will be bogus in a few years anyways. We'll end up changing the ratings to acceptable, average, and adequate and no-one will really know what any of it means.

    It seems like they are doing the right thing to me on this topic though. They are offering extra physical time for the kids that score too high and offer better food in the cafeteria. Parents should be able to "opt out" if they don't think it's necessary. Any parent that gets "offended" over this should have their parenting license revoked. Your kid is fat you moron, do something. If the school doesn't point it out, the hundreds of other kids will point it out for him every single day. Which would you rather have? I hope the parents enjoy him hating them when he's 15-16 and realizes he can't get a girlfriend because he's fat.
  5. Baryonyx

    Baryonyx Banned

    Jul 11, 2005
    Marathon Man
    Well, it'll at least make some kids lay off the twinkies!
  6. Poop-Loops

    Poop-Loops Banned

    Mar 3, 2006
    Auburn, Washington
    Says I'm overweight at 190lbs and 5'10". Yeah right.
  7. Here's an ideal weight calculator. Gives a couple of suggestions about weight (all of which require I lose at least 20 lbs :( ).


    EDIT: Or I could always grow 6 inches.
  8. Poop-Loops

    Poop-Loops Banned

    Mar 3, 2006
    Auburn, Washington
    Still sucks because it says I'm overweight. If you really want, I can post a pic of what I look like topless to show you that I am not overweight at 190lbs and 5'10"
  9. markjazzbassist

    markjazzbassist Supporting Member

    Apr 19, 2005
    Cleveland, OH

    i am 6'2", weigh 185 lbs. and have 8% body fat. It says I need to lose 5 pounds. HAHAHAHA. I work out 5 times a week and have been for close to a year now. If I lost another 5 pounds my body fat % would be under what I should be, meaning I'd be doing damage to my body.

    Both of those calculators are wrong. Body Fat% IMO is the best indicator of fatness and being overweight or obese. Plus body fat accounts for the fact that we all need a healthy amount of Fat (ie, anything less than 2% = brain damage).
  10. Bard2dbone


    Aug 4, 2002
    Arlington TX
    BMI pisses me off.

    It only compares weight to height. It doesn't take in gender, frame, muscularity, anything.

    So at the skinniest I have been as an adult, a weight where all my ribs were visible and I kept getting sick because I'd gotten skinny enough to be puny: I was 29.8.

    That is the tiniest shade under the 'obese' range. When I looked like I had spent my summer vacation in Dachau, I was 0.2 BMI below obese. Look at some bony fashion model. See how you can look where cleavage belongs and see the shape of bones? I had that coming out of boot camp. And the BMI says when I had that level of body fat I was excessively overweight. It put's me at 44 now. Admittedly I'm actually fat now. But I'm not that fat.

    You hear a lot of big people who claim "I'm not fat. I'm big boned." But some fat people really are big boned as well.

    When I was at the best shape I will ever be in my life I still had a BMI of 38.4.

    I had a 54" chest and a 38" waist My max bench press back then was near 400 lbs. I actually regularly carried people on my back while running up bleachers steps (but put them down to run down the steps because that's more dangerous) at the time, that was the most effective way I could think of to simulate what I would need to be able to do.

    I was a monster shaped like a yield sign. The BMI system says I was a tub of goo.

    BMI pisses me off.
  11. IconBasser

    IconBasser Scuba Viking Supporting Member

    Feb 28, 2007
    Alta Loma, California

    yeah, I agree. Parents who complain are being unreasonable and quite selfish IMO.

    the thing said I had a BMI of 22.9

    Yeah, that's about right. I've got a small layer of fat over my abs, but nuthin too drastic.. ya can still see that there's muscle underneath it..
  12. BMI is a waste of time. I dont know why anyone still uses it!
  13. Ericman197


    Feb 23, 2004
    BMI isn't the be it and end all of health indicators, but it is still a useful measure. If someone is getting a high BMI, that usually means something. For example, someone who is 250 pounds and 6' is overweight, even at 5% body fat. All that extra muscle/bone/whatever is putting strain on the heart.

    For what it's worth, I'm 6' (might have said 6'2" at some point but really 6' :meh:) and 189lbs. In my case I am slightly overweight (25.6). Most of you guys scoring in the high 20s probably don't need to lose weight, but someone scoring in the 30s should probably consult a physician.
  14. Tsal


    Jan 28, 2000
    Finland, EU
    BMI is a good tool, as long as you consider it's to give the results for roughly average person - YMMV. You, my friend, just happen to be a freak :)
  15. Mike Money

    Mike Money In Memoriam

    Mar 18, 2003
    Bakersfield California
    Avatar Speakers Endorsing Hooligan
    I'm 6' even, and about 215.

    I need to lose 15 pounds, but i am far from morbidly obese. not even obese.

    i think qualify as chunky.
  16. Bard2dbone


    Aug 4, 2002
    Arlington TX
    That's fairly valid. I'm not shaped like the typical person. I didn't realize it for a long time, but on top of wierd genetics, my history aimed me at having an unusual frame.

    I was a reeeeeeally early premature baby. Back in 1964 they didn't have ventilators for preemies. I don't know that they had anything I would recognize as a ventilator for an adult back then, but definitely nothing for preemies. So they just put you in an incubator and sort of hoped for the best. The biggest variable on preemies is their respiratory status. The lungs are one of the last organs to develop. So if you have underdeveloped lungs, or in some other way impaired lungs, you have to work harder to breathe. So your ribcage and a few other bones have to grow to be able to allow your lungs to work that hard. Old school nurses can just look at you and tell you had a respiratory issue growing up. I still notice it on cystic fibrosis kids, but it's not so noticeable on ex-preemies anymore.

    So basically my bones are much thicker than yours and I have a ridiculously huge barrel chest, not in the good way so much, but I think at least my shoulders look good from being broader than some bodybuilders.

    Even when I wasn't fat, I was still way bigger than most folks. BMI just makes me mad because it doesn't differentiate between a large in-shape person and a large out-of-shape person, so therefore they are both out-of-shape people because they are large.

    That's just a big steaming crock of $#!+
  17. What's wrong with just having enough education about health and good eating habits, and plenty of physical education?
    It said in the report that some of the younger children developed a fear of food when given a BMI rating, now that's just dangerous.
    BMI ratings are a waste of time.

Share This Page