The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX


Go Back   Rolex Forums - Rolex Watch Forum > General Topics > Open Discussion Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 31 July 2016, 01:58 AM   #31
Brenngun
2024 ROLEX DATEJUST41 Pledge Member
 
Brenngun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Real Name: Rick
Location: Smokin' Heaven
Watch: Rolex & Tudor
Posts: 3,820
I decided many years ago as a 20 year old not to play the your too tall, too short, too anything with the insurance industry. I've never paid a single penny of personal life insurance premium in my life and never will. Life's a gamble to begin with. I don't need to pay someone to play along with me. Especially if they have their thumb on the scale.
__________________
Simple solutions solve complexed problems more often than complexed solutions solve simple problems!

Brenngun is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 31 July 2016, 05:12 AM   #32
rr-nyc
Liar & Ratbag
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Real Name: Renato
Location: NYC / Miami Beach
Watch: Rolex Daytona
Posts: 5,344
Quote:
Originally Posted by BNALION View Post
x2


X3
While the BMI works for 90%+ of the population, there are several other factors that need to be take into consideration.

Body fat%, body type, etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
rr-nyc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31 July 2016, 07:37 AM   #33
Sublover2166
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Real Name: John
Location: Manassas,Virginia
Watch: Ol'Bluesy & Hulk
Posts: 2,871
I would not be surprised if the insurance industry created the whole BMI so they can jack up their rates on folks deemed overweight and high risk for physical issues. At 5 ft.8, it says I should weigh around 150 pounds or so. No way, I would have to be anorexic to be that thin. I weigh in at 215, exercise 5 days a week on average and try to eat sensibly. If I am considered obese, hey so be it.
Sublover2166 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31 July 2016, 07:39 AM   #34
Rolex addict
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Real Name: The Enabler
Location: South Cackalacky
Watch: me crash my bike
Posts: 5,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruud Van Driver View Post
BMI is BS. It's simply calculated using height and weight and does not factor muscle mass or fat content. Absolute nonsense
Amen!!!
Rolex addict is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31 July 2016, 08:39 AM   #35
Drudge
"TRF" Member
 
Drudge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 91
Damn 205lbs @ 9% is beastly. I stand 5'7" 170lbs @10% and look like Im in the 180s. You must be genetically gifted my friend and I would consider it a blessing.
Drudge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31 July 2016, 06:34 PM   #36
Ruud Van Driver
"TRF" Member
 
Ruud Van Driver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Real Name: Chopped Liver
Location: S. Wales Valleys
Watch: Mickey Mouse
Posts: 9,924
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abdullah71601 View Post
At 6'2" 175 lbs I would getting checked for a tapeworm.
I'm 6'1" 185 lbs and I'm not a big guy. I'm pretty small boned too, only size 7.5 feet (8 US)

Quote:
Originally Posted by brandrea View Post


Interestingly, I'm also at 19% body fat. No tape worm as far as I know
Maybe it's an alligator?
__________________
116520 Black, 116610 LVc, 116660 D-Blue, 116610 LNc, 116622 Blue, PAM359, PAM689, PAM737

"Why should you allow an AD to shake you down, just so you can buy a watch" - Grady Philpott
Card carrying member of TRF's Global Association of Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons
Ruud Van Driver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31 July 2016, 07:23 PM   #37
Mick P
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: UK / Spain
Watch: 39mm Explorer
Posts: 1,990
Chaps

I am 67 years of age and when my tailor last measured me for my suit, he commented that "Sir is of a portly disposition" .

I have been to a gym on just a handful of occasions and my working life has always involved long boozy lunches in ridiculously expensive restaurants.

I now seem to spend a lot of time attending funerals of friends who spent their entire life keeping fit in gyms or jogging etc.

Regards

Mick
Mick P is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31 July 2016, 08:40 PM   #38
Abdullah71601
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Calumet Harbor
Watch: ing da Bears
Posts: 13,568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick P View Post
Chaps

I am 67 years of age and when my tailor last measured me for my suit, he commented that "Sir is of a portly disposition" .

I have been to a gym on just a handful of occasions and my working life has always involved long boozy lunches in ridiculously expensive restaurants.

I now seem to spend a lot of time attending funerals of friends who spent their entire life keeping fit in gyms or jogging etc.

Regards

Mick
I read a study recently that essentially said being modestly overweight isn't bad in itself, it's how the body weight interacted with other risk factors that is important.

I go to the gym because I like to work out. I don't go to ridiculously expensive restaurants because they usually aren't worth the ridiculous expense. People aren't dropping dead around me (yet, thank God), but I do see a lot of people who struggle to get off the couch and huff and puff up a few stairs. Some of those people are skinny blokes, which leads me to believe that the newer studies on weight gain are much more useful than some of that old BMI drivel that insists skinny is the ultimate goal to long life.
Abdullah71601 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31 July 2016, 09:38 PM   #39
RationalPragmatist
"TRF" Member
 
RationalPragmatist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: USA
Watch: All
Posts: 500
Since a muscular individual with a low percentage of body fat may be classified obese using the BMI formula, it's a well-known deficiency; even insurance companies like AIG know that; see their BMI exception here:

https://www.aigdirect.com/learning-c...rance-rates#fv

So probably best to find a new insurance carrier that's clued in. For your 112/82 BP though, your diastolic reading could be considered pre-hypertension.
RationalPragmatist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31 July 2016, 09:45 PM   #40
brandrea
2024 Pledge Member
 
brandrea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Real Name: Brian (TBone)
Location: canada
Watch: es make me smile
Posts: 73,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruud Van Driver View Post
I'm 6'1" 185 lbs and I'm not a big guy. I'm pretty small boned too, only size 7.5 feet (8 US)



Maybe it's an alligator?
I'm not sure, but whatever it is, I haven't gained much weight since high school
brandrea is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 31 July 2016, 10:00 PM   #41
Star Ferry
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: down by the river
Posts: 4,926
I am 5'8" 165 pounds. I am at the edge of being considered overweight. My body fat level is nowhere near as impressive as that of the OP -- caliper test suggests around 18%

2 months ago, I started working out again. Simple 5K jogs every weekday and three days of lifting. Hoping to settle at about 160 pounds.

Regarding BMI, I don't fully trust it but I think it's a good guideline. I believe there is some health benefit to having a slighter build (independent of body fat percentage). HK locals don't eat particularly well, hardly exercise and yet they live a long time -- my unproven suspicion is that BMI plays a role here.

Sent from my SM-G9200 using Tapatalk
Star Ferry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 August 2016, 01:09 AM   #42
ajas
"TRF" Member
 
ajas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Real Name: Will
Location: Kuala Lumpur
Watch: SubC, Pam, Speede
Posts: 3,140
BMI was developed in 1830 not for individuals but statistics studies on larger populations and should be nothing else.
ajas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 August 2016, 01:50 AM   #43
jdlc1406
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Florida
Posts: 106
If your insurance company is insisting on using BMI for your rates, than insist on a proper BMI test. A water displacement test. On their dime. Screw em.
jdlc1406 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 August 2016, 02:15 AM   #44
gtnator
2024 Pledge Member
 
gtnator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: USA
Watch: DSSD, SD43, Pepsi,
Posts: 2,064
Ask them to send a nurse for observational confirmation. Some have an exception for "extreme athletic build".


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
gtnator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 August 2016, 03:19 AM   #45
azguy
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Real Name: -------
Location: -------
Watch: ---------
Posts: 12,609
I do insurance from time to time and the charts are like from the 1950's, it's laughable.

I work out everyday and I'm 5'9" and 218 lbs as of yesterday, last caliper test I had was 11% body fat.
azguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 August 2016, 04:24 AM   #46
Fredrik
2024 Pledge Member
 
Fredrik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Sweden
Watch: 1680
Posts: 1,825
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajas View Post
BMI was developed in 1830 not for individuals but statistics studies on larger populations and should be nothing else.
+1

I would pick a different insurance company.
Fredrik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 August 2016, 12:50 PM   #47
masyv6
2024 Pledge Member
 
masyv6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Real Name: Mike
Location: 35000ft
Posts: 3,747
BMI is a silly measure of body composition.
masyv6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 August 2016, 02:34 PM   #48
Abdullah71601
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Calumet Harbor
Watch: ing da Bears
Posts: 13,568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Star Ferry View Post
I am 5'8" 165 pounds. I am at the edge of being considered overweight. My body fat level is nowhere near as impressive as that of the OP -- caliper test suggests around 18%

2 months ago, I started working out again. Simple 5K jogs every weekday and three days of lifting. Hoping to settle at about 160 pounds.

Regarding BMI, I don't fully trust it but I think it's a good guideline. I believe there is some health benefit to having a slighter build (independent of body fat percentage). HK locals don't eat particularly well, hardly exercise and yet they live a long time -- my unproven suspicion is that BMI plays a role here.

Sent from my SM-G9200 using Tapatalk
Everybody is living a long time, and always have. If you take infant mortality out of the life expectancy formula it turns out that people have always been living a long time (Ben Franklin was an overweight pipe smoker who lived to 84). The human body has a typical time span and the numbers don't change much over the centuries.

Indexes like BMI aren't based on any real data that directly associates health to body attributes. It's voodoo used to describe something not well understood for people who need some kind of 'measure' to manage risk.
Abdullah71601 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 August 2016, 08:48 PM   #49
Tony64
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 2,796
Interesting topic. Numerous studies from the Mayo clinic and others show pretty convincingly that mortality is lower in the moderately overweight and higher in underweight individuals, based largely on BMI.

Food for thought...
Tony64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

DavidSW Watches

Coronet

Takuya Watches

Bobs Watches

Asset Appeal

My Watch LLC

OCWatches


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.