XTCali
|
  |
| Joined: 15 Jun 2013 |
| Total Posts: 15640 |
|
|
| 22 Nov 2013 07:37 PM |
Those of you who are like 5 and you're muscular... You're not fat...
#SWAGLORD |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 22 Nov 2013 07:38 PM |
no one on ot is muscular.
I am a pretty dragon. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
XTCali
|
  |
| Joined: 15 Jun 2013 |
| Total Posts: 15640 |
|
| |
|
|
| 22 Nov 2013 07:38 PM |
did circuit training
i got pretty buff from it.
u all fatties |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
XTCali
|
  |
| Joined: 15 Jun 2013 |
| Total Posts: 15640 |
|
|
| 22 Nov 2013 07:38 PM |
5" not 5 years old woops O_O
#SWAGLORD |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 22 Nov 2013 07:39 PM |
"no one on OT is muscular"
objection I have very toned pecs, calves, thighs and biceps
no abs though qq |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Inploded2
|
  |
| Joined: 29 Oct 2013 |
| Total Posts: 793 |
|
| |
|
XTCali
|
  |
| Joined: 15 Jun 2013 |
| Total Posts: 15640 |
|
|
| 22 Nov 2013 07:40 PM |
^same...
I'm not bulky more toned...
#SWAGLORD |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 22 Nov 2013 07:42 PM |
BMI doesn't need to account for muscle. It's body MASS not body fat.
Memento Mori |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Haglar
|
  |
| Joined: 17 Nov 2009 |
| Total Posts: 1320 |
|
|
| 22 Nov 2013 07:43 PM |
| angel can you do your irl showing those |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
XTCali
|
  |
| Joined: 15 Jun 2013 |
| Total Posts: 15640 |
|
|
| 22 Nov 2013 07:43 PM |
MUSCLE is heavier than FAT.
A guy with a 21.7 bmi could have less fat than a guy at 17.4.
#SWAGLORD |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 22 Nov 2013 07:44 PM |
But it's mass not fat, so there's no need to factor in muscle.
Memento Mori |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Haglar
|
  |
| Joined: 17 Nov 2009 |
| Total Posts: 1320 |
|
|
| 22 Nov 2013 07:45 PM |
| bmi does not necessarily reflect fat though |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
XTCali
|
  |
| Joined: 15 Jun 2013 |
| Total Posts: 15640 |
|
| |
|
lego268
|
  |
| Joined: 16 Jan 2010 |
| Total Posts: 1041 |
|
|
| 22 Nov 2013 07:45 PM |
I'm pretty round. Not gonna lie. I'm gonna take weight training in sophomore year (the only year I get a chance.)
-All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.- |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Inploded2
|
  |
| Joined: 29 Oct 2013 |
| Total Posts: 793 |
|
| |
|
|
| 22 Nov 2013 07:46 PM |
you can tell when someones fat or not
just look at them
its harder to tell if someone's muscular or not
Excuse me, but that's inappropriate for school. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 22 Nov 2013 07:48 PM |
@Haglar
No. I don't see a point in it. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
Slash2160
|
  |
| Joined: 13 Mar 2009 |
| Total Posts: 10275 |
|
|
| 22 Nov 2013 07:49 PM |
Bulider just took your "valid point", covered in it dirt, stomped on it, and threw it in the trash.
He's right. It's body mass, so it factors in, well, everything made of your body. Organs, muscle, fat, carbohydrates you ate for lunch two days ago, brain matter, saliva. Everything.
When combined with your height, you can come to a conclusion that hey, maybe you're over weight or not. Only you can tell though, because it's your body. If you're someone who works out everyday, and you're buff, you could be in the "overweight" section, but you're still in good shape.
What the calculator tries to prove is that the regular weight for someone of your height is normal, and you are below it, at it, or above it. It's as simple as that. If you're in good shape, you're fine. If you're in bad shape, you're not fine.
|
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|