MoRina wrote:
Jay and I were watching an old episode of Gilligan's Island the other night, and I said  "remember how Ginger was considered 'voluptuous' back then? Today her picture would be splashed across the gossip mags saying that she was anorexic."



People like to get caught up poking holes in BMI, but the fact is that people are getting heavier and diabetes (among other issues) will be an epidemic in our future.

And the Skipper's role was to be clownishly fat in those days, contrasted to his "Little Buddy." Kind of like Laurel & Hardy.

Today, he would have looked pretty typical for his age. Maybe on the light side. The doctor might tell him to "loose a few pounds" during his yearly exams.

The Skipper died too young at 68, but it was because of thymus cancer

sospix wrote:
Doing a fair amount of weight training, I never pass the BMI part of the physical  .  .  .  BUT, my BF% is always a lot lower than what the norm is for my height and age  .  .  .  if we're just going by weight stats, at 6' and 210, I sound like a short, fat, old guy  .  .  .  in reality, I'm just a short, old, muscular guy  .  .  . 

SOS

6' is short? I must be missing the joke...in NM that's considered giant status.

Click Hamilton wrote:
Regardless of BMI or whatever measurement you prefer to use, the weight of many people around us is lunging higher at an alarming rate. I think  health issues associated with grossly unhealthy eating habits is a ticking time bomb for many of us.

All we have to do is go out in public and look around to see that obesity is a big problem for many people. It's the environment in which we now live.

Proper weight is an important contributor to good health.

I would agree and also point out this is a huge issue in a first world post industrial society. Only in such a place will the poor be struggling with obesity and the rich suffering from psychological eating illnesses. There's reasons why we value what we do in this society, because we value what is difficult to attain, just as in third world nations, fattening is seen as positive and elite and lack of sun is seen as attractive because only w poor have tans. This is not a criticism but rather a commentary.

scrymettet wrote:
BMI was invented by an actuary of a life insurance company.

Link, please.

I could not verify that Adolphe Quetelet worked for a life insurance company.

lynne g wrote:

I would agree and also point out this is a huge issue in a first world post industrial society. Only in such a place will the poor be struggling with obesity and the rich suffering from psychological eating illnesses. There's reasons why we value what we do in this society, because we value what is difficult to attain, just as in third world nations, fattening is seen as positive and elite and lack of sun is seen as attractive because only w poor have tans. This is not a criticism but rather a commentary.

I disagree with a  couple of your points. I know plenty of people who have/had eating disorders and NONE of them are rich. In some Asian countries men choose a wife that has a small mouth because they think that means she won't eat much. Not every country WANTS their people to be fat.

Erin Holmes wrote:

6' is short? I must be missing the joke...in NM that's considered giant status.

The gym I go to is populated with a lot of basketball players (pro, college, and HS), believe me in that environ I'm an absolute dwarf  .  .  . 

SOS

Isis22 wrote:

I disagree with a  couple of your points. I know plenty of people who have/had eating disorders and NONE of them are rich. In some Asian countries men choose a wife that has a small mouth because they think that means she won't eat much. Not every country WANTS their people to be fat.

+1.   Most people I've known or known of over the years who have eating disorders were by no means rich.

Eros Fine Art Photo wrote:
So let's say you've only got $80 to spend on groceries.

Wow. That's a lot of money just for food.

Eros Fine Art Photo wrote:
All that "bad" food will last at least until your next paycheck, so I'd say a lot of families take that route because they get more bang for their buck AND it's super easy to make.  So goes for fast food.  If you've only got $5 for lunch, you can buy one piece of chicken breast a Pollo Loco, or get 5 double cheeseburgers from McDonalds.

This is kind of funny. You compare two fast food dives instead of, well, real food. A fool and his/her money are easily parted. Perhaps learning how to COOK would be a good thing?

Eros Fine Art Photo wrote:
Sucks, but it costs a hell of lot more to eat healthy.  I know guys who are all into the Paleo diet and have nearly tripled their outgoing grocery bill just to eat the way they suggest.

Actually, you are dead wrong on this point. It's a lot cheaper to eat healthy food (fad diets and whatever the current fad food allergy someone thinks they have, excluded). Granted, it takes planning, knowing **how** to cook, knowing what healthy food really is, but it can be done with a little effort.

$5.00 for lunch? That's insane. $0.75 would be more in the ballpark.

Eros Fine Art Photo wrote:
Sucks, but it costs a hell of lot more to eat healthy.

It depends on things like eating a proper portion size, rather than the whole tub of ice cream at one sitting.

Our meals are supposed to have lots of fresh vegetables. Fresh produce is pretty cheap, especially when we eat 1-3C at a time of mixed variety.

In my case, I cook for one person, or as many people who would like to join me for dinner (a frequent event). I fill my barbeque with lots of things waiting to be cooked, then freeze them in one portion sizes for the week or month to come.

When I cook soup, I make it by a large pot and throw in all kinds of sumptuous ingredients, particularly by walking through the garden -- kale or tomatoes, peppers and savory herbs. This all gets frozen in 1C, 1 portion size containers.  Lots of delicious and nutritious soup bases (think gazpacho or beef broth Pho) can easily be fortified with a portion from one of the other pre-cooked bags of meat, chicken, lamb, turkey or fish protein to make it a complete meal.

Last night I grilled an entire package of lamb sirloin "t-bones" (3 oz ea) and two packages of ground lean turkey in 4 oz packages (cooks down to 100g servings, or about 3.5 oz.) These all defrost into succulent protein additions to any meal or salad.

Yes, it would be decadent and easy to eat the entire package of lamb as it comes off the grill and wash it down with copious amounts of beer or a couple bottles of wine, followed with ice cream or cake or chocolates, and a glass of port wine or cognac with espresso coffee. But that's why so many people are getting so fat now. This food is intense, and needs to be eaten in moderation. One night a week is enough for lamb, because it is rich. Another night for steak. The other days of the week are better spent with fish, or chicken, or vegetable protein, etc.

Eating 2-4 oz at a time, I think I could buy fillet mignon on a lower food budget, compared to processed and packaged junk food.

Same for ripe fruits in season: At Costco yesterday I bought a 2 pound tray of fresh USA blueberries and a 2.5 pound tray of perfectly ripe strawberries. I throw the blueberry tray directly in the freezer, because the blueberries roll around after frozen and it's easy to put them in a ziploc bag. I slice the ripe strawberries into quarters and fill 1C tupperwares to freeze. The next day I pop those 1C strawberry cubes into a ziploc bag. If some of the strawberries are not yet ripe, they sit on the counter until the next day or two until they are, then they get sliced and frozen in 1C portions too. Banana's are perfectly rippened, then frozen in peeled halves, and I use 1/2 banana portion sizes conveniently from that point forward for several weeks. When they come out of the freezer, they are basically as fresh and nice as when they went in.

I think if we do our own clean "processing and packaging" without all the crud that food manufacturer's use, we can easily eat higher quality food and dramatically cut our food budget. All it takes is a little thought and minimal effort. Nothing gets wasted. Even my rinse water goes into a bucket for watering plants.

I make my own whole grain low calorie protein bread from whole wheat, soy flour, rye, flax seeds and sunflower seeds -- no oil, no shortening, no fat, no milk. Only 1t of sugar, 1/2t of cider vinegar and 1/2C of bread flour to make it rise.  It's a dense multi-grain bread that tastes far superior to anything we can buy in stores. I slice in 1/4" slices, freeze it and pop one slice at a time into the toaster. It comes to about 45 calories per serving, and it's full of nutrition from that food group of whole grains and nuts.

Time to prepare? about 5 minutes to put these ingredients into my bread machine, and 3 hours for the bread machine to do it's job without me. Cost? Probably under a dollar per 3 pound loaf of abundant nutrition. 15 1/4" frozen slices of protein bread lasts me for 2 weeks. So that awesome, toasted, nutty nutritional flavor for breakfast each day costs 50 cents per week.

I believe if we eat proper portion sizes in the right combinations, then the cost of high quality food becomes almost negligible. There is money leftover for a nice bottle of French wine to wash it down, especially if we drink wine in normal portion sizes (5 to 10 ounces at a time.)

I'm a hedonist. I enjoy accentuated life pleasures of many kinds. If anyone wants to join me in the garden for a sumptuous meal, the door's open. Sunday night barbeques have become a tradition around here, and people often drop in to eat. Next week we will be graced by the presence of two traveling super-models who I will be hosting during Comic Con.

Who could ask for anything more?

Eros Fine Art Photo wrote:
I'd say this is a huge reason for the weight issues we're facing...



It goes far beyond that though.  I heard once that most Americans are only about 2 paychecks away from being homeless.  They struggle to make ends meet, have almost nothing in savings, and have very little cash just a few days after they got paid.  If they have kids, then they have to feed them somehow. 

So let's say you've only got $80 to spend on groceries.  You can go to a place like Whole Foods and maybe get a handful of items that need to be prepared right away or else they'll spoil, or just go to Costco and buy a box of 24 Cup-O-Noodles ramen for about $4; a box of 20 corn dogs for about $7; two bags of sugary cereal for $4; a box of dino-nuggets (they're DELICIOUS by the way) for about $9; etc, etc, etc.

All that "bad" food will last at least until your next paycheck, so I'd say a lot of families take that route because they get more bang for their buck AND it's super easy to make.  So it goes for fast food.  If you've only got $5 for lunch, you can buy one piece of chicken breast a Pollo Loco, or get 5 double cheeseburgers from McDonalds.  It's almost like we're being corralled like sheep into obesity. 

Sucks, but it costs a hell of lot more to eat healthy.  I know guys who are all into the Paleo diet and have nearly tripled their outgoing grocery bill just to eat the way they suggest.  Most of us just aren't the position to spend that kind of cash on better meals.  Or...more likely...we just don't want to give up our luxury items, such as our cell phones, Ipads, cars, brand name clothes, video game systems, etc.

this time last month, I was eating incredibly "clean," the kind of diet that would be advised by a dietician. I was doing it perfectly. It was costing me close to $100 per week, just for myself and the food was not organically grown. Just regular grocery store food. This month, with the pressure of having to save money to move 900 miles away in August, I had to cut back to around $20/week in groceries. I'm pretty much living on rice and canned beans right now, noodles, etc. It's cheap and will allow me to have more money at the end of the month to go toward moving expenses. I feel AWFUL eating this way, woke up last night at 4 am with heartburn, and my digestive system is out of whack. Doesn't matter how your body feels when you have to feed yourself on $100/month. You eat what you can afford. People with kids have it rough, especially considering the average worker in the US, is taking home less than $30,000 per year (according to some statistics), but the average worker also has children to feed.

Lucky for me, once I get moved and into my new home, I can resume eating lots of fresh vegetables, fruits, good healthy food. I just have to cut back for one month. No big deal. It's not like that for most people. They have to eat crap for years and years.

Click Hamilton wrote:
It depends on things like eating a proper portion size, rather than the whole tub of ice cream at one sitting.

Our meals are supposed to have lots of fresh vegetables. Fresh produce is pretty cheap, especially when we eat 1-2C at a time of mixed variety.

In my case, I cook for one person, or as many people who would like to join me for dinner (a frequent event). I fill my barbeque with lots of things waiting to be cooked, then freeze them in one portion sizes for the week to come.

Last night I grilled an entire package of lamb sirloin "t-bones" (3 oz ea) and two packages of ground lean turkey in 4 oz packages (cooks down to 100g servings, or about 3.5 oz.) These all defrost into succulent protein additions to any meal or salad.

At 2-4 oz at a time, I think I could buy fillet mignon on a lower food budget, compared to processed and packaged junk food.

Same for ripe fruits in season: At Costco yesterday I bought a 2 pound tray of fresh USA blueberries and a 2.5 pound tray of perfectly ripe strawberries. I throw the blueberry tray directly in the freezer, because the blueberries roll around after frozen and it's easy to put them in a ziploc bag. I slice the ripe strawberries into quarters and fill 1C tupperwares to freeze. The next day I pop those 1C strawberry cubes into a ziploc bag. If some of the strawberries are not yet ripe, they sit on the counter until the next day or two until they are, then they get sliced and frozen in 1C portions too. Banana's are perfectly rippened, then frozen in peeled halves, and I use 1/2 banana portion sizes conveniently from that point forward for several weeks. When they come out of the freezer, they are basically as fresh and nice as when they went in.

I think if we do our own clean "processing and packaging" without all the crud that food manufacturer's use, we can easily eat higher quality food and dramatically cut our food budget. All it takes is a little thought and minimal effort.

I like the way you think Mr. Hamilton. One of my favorites is chicken boobies (the big family packs that are steeply discounted because they are coming up on their "sell by" date). Grill 'em or boil 'em with nothing added, and then freeze 'em. They can be seasoned and used for many different recipes when the time comes. A nice salad with seasoned chicken strips anyone? How about some curry? And the list goes on.

Another favorite is chicken thighs. De-bone and butterfly them so they look like steaks (which is what they do for tappan yaki in the sushi bars), grill, and then freeze. Even out here in the middle of nowhere they practically give them away when the "sell by" date arrives.

Yeppers. Good food is not expensive when one knows how to cook (and has the ability to plan ahead).

Click Hamilton wrote:

And the Skipper's role was to be clownishly fat in those days, contrasted to his "Little Buddy." Kind of like Laurel & Hardy.

Today, he would have looked pretty typical for his age. Maybe on the light side. The doctor might tell him to "loose a few pounds" during his yearly exams.

The Skipper died too young at 68, but it was because of thymus cancer

This may interest you, Tina as a dancer before Gilligan's Island.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KB8U60xkXSA

Did you know she was a serious actress and wasn't really that interested in the TV show because she wouldn't be able to exercise her acting chops?

Jay  Edwards wrote:
BMI is a general tool which likely applies to at least 80% of individuals.  Sure, there are some exceptions to the ''rule'' but there is no mistaking that the US population (among others) is putting on the pounds.  There is also no mistaking that this weight gain is not healthy.

I fully agree.

It is valid and accurate for populations because of this:



Standard deviations and distribution on a bell-shaped curve explains many things under the laws of nature.

Buff, knowledgeable and ripped health enthusiasts like Koryn and Chris Rifkin are probably somewhere out in the 3rd deviation.

---

Amongst people who know they are overweight and unsuccessful at doing anything about it, there is ENORMOUS amounts of rationalization, self-deception, rejection of objective common sense, denial and hostile excuse-making in defense of their overweight condition.

Lohkee wrote:
I like the way you think Mr. Hamilton. One of my favorites is chicken boobies (the big family packs that are steeply discounted because they are coming up on their "sell by" date). Grill 'em or boil 'em with nothing added, and then freeze 'em. They can be seasoned and used for many different recipes when the time comes. A nice salad with seasoned chicken strips anyone? How about some curry? And the list goes on.

Another favorite is chicken thighs. De-bone and butterfly them so they look like steaks (which is what they do for tappan yaki in the sushi bars), grill, and then freeze. Even out here in the middle of nowhere they practically give them away when the "sell by" date arrives.

Yeppers. Good food is not expensive when one knows how to cook (and has the ability to plan ahead).

For awhile, I was buying those nearing date chicken pieces, because they are...well...cheap. The thighs, especially, seemed very fatty/greasy to me, even with the skin stripped away. It's a cheaper cut of meat, raised in a factory farming setting and those chickens are fattier and greasier than the type of meat you get from a local, family-owned, farm that sells much more expensive free range poultry. Because of this, I rarely eat any meat at all, unless I can afford to buy the leaner, more expensive kinds. The price of the cuts you are talking about is appealing, but the texture is not. It's not coming from lean, healthy animals. It's just gross.

Koryn wrote:
For awhile, I was buying those nearing date chicken pieces, because they are...well...cheap. The thighs, especially, seemed very fatty/greasy to me, even with the skin stripped away. It's a cheaper cut of meat, raised in a factory farming setting and those chickens are fattier and greasier than the type of meat you get from a local, family-owned, farm that sells much more expensive free range poultry. Because of this, I rarely eat any meat at all, unless I can afford to buy the leaner, more expensive kinds. The price of the cuts you are talking about is appealing, but the texture is not. It's not coming from lean, healthy animals. It's just gross.

Fair enough. I agree with most of your thoughts. I would suggest that preparation has a lot to do with it. For example, when I get a big pack of chicken boobs I trim the fat off and then (usually) boil them which removes almost all of the remaining fat. With a little thought, one can make these mass-produced birds taste pretty darned good at a fraction of the price.

Lohkee wrote:
Another favorite is chicken thighs.

Costco sells a lot, so they are fresh and plump.

Chicken thighs are more moist and succulent than breasts, and they are only $1.30 per pound at Costco. That means 32.5 cents per thigh. Cook for two, and you are up to 65 cents. Throw out the skin and scrape off the fat.

They come in ready-to-freeze bags of 4 thighs each.

Each thigh is about a 4oz serving, 23g protein and and about 158 calories.

It's one perfect protein portion size to add to a salad, 2C of soup broth or stir-fried with a variety of vegetables. Kick it up with some garlic, ginger, sliced Jalapeno's and fresh basil from the garden.

Meal complete. Satisfaction easily accomplished.

Jules NYC wrote:
This may interest you, Tina as a dancer before Gilligan's Island.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KB8U60xkXSA

Did you know she was a serious actress and wasn't really that interested in the TV show because she wouldn't be able to exercise her acting chops?

That was fun

Lohkee wrote:

Fair enough. I agree with most of your thoughts. I would suggest that preparation has a lot to do with it. For example, when I get a big pack of chicken boobs I trim the fat off and then (usually) boil them which removes almost all of the remaining fat. With a little thought, one can make these mass-produced birds taste pretty darned good at a fraction of the price.

I do that too with chicken boobies...either before I roast or bbq(and I actually leave the skin on..boiling away the fat makes the skin a non factor and keep one of my favorite things about chicken in my diet

Click Hamilton wrote:
I find these numbers to be remarkable.

Almost 70% of adults over 20 are overweight, including 35% of the adult population that are obese.

I wonder what qualifies as morbidly obese and what that percentage might be?

This is from CDC:

-----

Data are for the U.S.

Adults

    Percent of adults age 20 years and over who are obese: 35.1% (2011-2012)
    Percent of adults age 20 years and over who are overweight, including obesity: 69.0% (2011-2012)


Children and adolescents

    Percent of adolescents age 12-19 years who are obese: 18.4% (2009-2010)
    Percent of children age 6-11 years who are obese: 18.0% (2009-2010)
    Percent of children age 2-5 years who are obese: 12.1% (2009-2010)

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/obesity-overweight.htm
-----

This is a serious problem for the people involved.

This is a serious problem for all of us as a nation.

I think most people have no understanding at all about nutrition and eating healthy, or the causes and effects of being overweight and obese.

The situation now is hugely different from as recently as the 60's and 70's. All we have to do is look at photos and magazines from previous decades.

and on the other end of the stick....

I am almost 51 years old, 5'9" tall. I have had severe hyperthyroidism since I was 8. Today I weigh 94 pounds... and my weight has not varied more than a pound or two since I was 18 (aside from the addition of a couple of pounds of saline).

In the '70s I was considered 'thin'
In the '80s I was considered 'skinny'
In the '90s I was considered 'very underweight'
In the '00s I was considered 'dangerously underweight'
In the '10s I am considered 'severely and dangerously underweight'
... and when you look at my BMI I am somewhere between 'bereft of life' and 'dead'
(I assure you I am not dead )

Funny how the medical and social view of the same person with the same weight over a 40 year span changes so drastically.

JoJo wrote:
Funny how the medical and social view of the same person with the same weight over a 40 year span changes so drastically.

I think a lot of it is political in the sense that Americans have become so overweight that the scientists fudge the numbers in the hopes that people will at least try to hit the current "ideal" weight. If they published the real numbers many people would just give up hope and not even try because the goal would seem absolutely unobtainable IMHO.

Chris Rifkin wrote:
I do that too with chicken boobies...either before I roast or bbq(and I actually leave the skin on..boiling away the fat makes the skin a non factor and keep one of my favorite things about chicken in my diet

Chuckles. Here's an easy one - Teriyaki rice bowl (serves 2).

Bowl of rice.
Sliced scallion.
Sliced chicken thigh or boobie (grilled - thigh preferred).
Drizzle with Teriyaki sauce.
Grab chopsticks.
Chow down.

For under a $1.00

Lohkee wrote:

I think a lot of it is political in the sense that Americans have become so overweight that the scientists fudge the numbers in the hopes that people will at least try to hit the current "ideal" weight. If they published the real numbers many people would just give up hope and not even try because the goal would seem absolutely unobtainable IMHO.

Wait, are you saying that PC culture is meant to deceive and/or manipulate?

Why, I've never heard of such a thing!

Lohkee wrote:

Chuckles. Here's an easy one - Teriyaki rice bowl (serves 2).

Bowl of rice.
Sliced scallion.
Sliced chicken thigh or boobie (grilled - thigh preferred).
Drizzle with Teriyaki sauce.
Grab chopsticks.
Chow down.

For under a $1.00

Exactly...and it disproves the theory eating healthy can be expensive..I had to live on less than $75 a week for most of 2 years after my ex fiance left me and left me with $4500 a month in bills and a mortgage..(since renegotiated to very liveable albeit temporarily,but I digress)
Ate as healthy as ever and kept in amaing shape and at a budget

The biggest thing I did was buy frozen and bulk,while not 100% fresh ..I still was able to eat lean cuts of chicken and fish at a budget,and broccoli and squash aren't budget busters(spaghetti squash instead of pasts is a huge healthy tradoff for the same price

Jay  Edwards wrote:

Wait, are you saying that PC culture is meant to deceive and/or manipulate?

Why, I've never heard of such a thing!

Chuckles.

Chris Rifkin wrote:
Exactly...and it disproves the theory eating healthy can be expensive..I had to live on less than $75 a week for most of 2 years after my ex fiance left me and left me with $4500 a month in bills and a mortgage..(since renegotiated to very liveable albeit temporarily,but I digress)
Ate as healthy as ever and kept in amaing shape and at a budget

The biggest thing I did was buy frozen and bulk,while not 100% fresh ..I still was able to eat lean cuts of chicken and fish at a budget,and broccoli and squash aren't budget busters(spaghetti squash instead of pasts is a huge healthy tradoff for the same price

Hue and I live on $100.00 week. This number includes all of her goofy female stuff (fancy shampoo, hand lotions, etc) and all household cleaning supplies. We eat very well. So well, in fact, that I still have 60lbs to loose (I've already lost 80) according to my doc.

Click Hamilton wrote:
If you want to cut the calories in half, eat one.

Wait! What? Are you saying that someone could eat two? Holy crap! No wonder we are all fat.

(it's that portion thingy)

Alabaster Crowley wrote:
I went to elementary school from about 1995-2001. I did not learn a single thing about nutrition. 2001-2008 was high school. We had a health class, but it wasn't about nutrition. All in Arizona.

What about everyone else?

USDA Nutrition Guides have changed many times over the years. When I was in elementary school we learned about the "Four Food Groups" and I remember a pyramid. Then a circle. We also practiced jumping under our desks for bomb drills.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of … ion_guides

I don't think they've ever gotten it right. It's better to study health and nutrition on your own and draw from a much broader base of data and studies. Medical science and health research is far more rich and complex than government bumper-sticker mentality with their rudimentary slogans and graphics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nutrition

It depends.

The health needs and lifestyle habits of individuals vary widely

Alabaster Crowley wrote:
I went to elementary school from about 1995-2001. I did not learn a single thing about nutrition. 2001-2008 was high school. We had a health class, but it wasn't about nutrition. All in Arizona.

What about everyone else?

I had basic nutrition taught to me in elementary school, maybe middle school too. My health teacher became my stepfather but I don't remember him teaching anything about nutrition. Hell, he used to be a smoker! I did take a nutrition class in college. I have always been interested in it so I have always studied it on my own as well. I think parents should be teaching about nutrition. It's like sex education, why leave something so important up to the schools?

Good Egg Productions wrote:
You can be overweight, and even obese (according to the numbers) and be healthy.

I'm 5'9" and 162 pounds, but I'm likely one of the most unhealthy people I know.  One day, I'll go get a physical so a doctor can tell me just how unhealthy I am.

I am 5'3 110lbs  and I know I'm extremely unhealthy I have no clue how the hell I'm even this weight by the way I eat I should atleast be close to 200 lol.

My sister works out and drinks only water she has abs and muscles. She looks very fit and ripped. She is 5'1 95lbs but she also is unhealthy because she suffers from High Cholesterol. So the way she looks and her weight tell you nothing about her health. by simply looking at her you would think she was super healthy.

So the BMI thing is kind of useless

A-M-P wrote:

I am 5'3 110lbs  and I know I'm extremely unhealthy I have no clue how the hell I'm even this weight by the way I eat I should atleast be close to 200 lol.

My sister works out and drinks only water she has abs and muscles. She looks very fit and ripped. She is 5'1 95lbs but she also is unhealthy because she suffers from High Cholesterol. So the way she looks and her weight tell you nothing about her health. by simply looking at her you would think she was super healthy.

So the BMI thing is kind of useless

Some of the most ripped women I've ever met in "real" life exist on nothing but protein powders, and processed "food bars." It's pretty rare for a human being to look like that unless their eating habits are severely limited, and somewhat obsessive. I don't think that's bad, considering many people's bodies are their sport which is fine and I personally admire these people's dedication -- but it isn't necessarily healthy when half of your day's caloric intake comes from whey isolate.

Click Hamilton wrote:

And the Skipper's role was to be clownishly fat in those days, contrasted to his "Little Buddy." Kind of like Laurel & Hardy.

Today, he would have looked pretty typical for his age. Maybe on the light side. The doctor might tell him to "loose a few pounds" during his yearly exams.

The Skipper died too young at 68, but it was because of thymus cancer

Wow, so true.  I can remember back then thinking of him as notably overweight and everyone else on the show as fairly normal, with Giligan maybe being a little thin, but not underweight.

Looking at that photo in today's context the Skipper doesn't look nearly as overweight.