Sneering at fat people.

Fat cnuts have yet another excuse for being a fat **** other that shoveling sugary/fatty shite down their piehole

"By the time she was 30, Sarah had severe obesity and was desperate to do something about it for the sake of her mental and physical health. She embarked on a year-long project with a personal trainer and completed an Olympic-class triathlon - swimming 1.5km, cycling 40km and running 10km. She also lost eight-and-a-half stone (55kg)."

55 kg per year is roughly 4.6 kg per month or 1 kg per week. That's the same as a bag of sugar. If she can chuck off a kilo a week and do a triathlon then the only reason she's returned to being a bloater is an overactive pie arm.

No one can cheat conservation of mass. If you've got fatter then you've put more mass in your gob than your body has got rid of.
 
Try it without wires, but how do you install determination ?

Cattle prod.
 

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
Cattle prod.
Or an electric fence around the kitchen.

Reference Angus Barbieri:
Wikipedia said:
He quit working at his father's fish and chip shop, which closed down during the fast.

Probably went bust as the pieabetic was eating most of the stock.
 
Yup. Seriously fit rugger forwards built like a brick shithouse are technically obese according to BMI indexing, while carrying a lot of muscle and very little fat.

Call Beast Mtwarira a fat cunt at your peril.
 
BMI is still useful for what it was designed for, giving a rough and ready idea of how over or underweight an average person or population is compared to a national average. Bearing in mind it's about 200 years old it's not doing too badly as a concept.

Pointing out that a small group of highly trained athletes make a mockery of it is like claiming midgets invalidate the average male height being around 6 foot.
 
Wouldn't say it's a small group. Plenty of stocky short arses around who don't carry much body fat. Also plenty of tall flabby types with the muscle tone of linguine and well padded arses.

BMI use as a qualifier would likely pick the wrong group to send to the gym to get them down to a decent number.

Couple of blokes I work with, one a Froggie ex SF type and the other Brit ex FFL. Both would fall foul of BMI guidelines. I scrape in but either one would out run me any day of the week while scoffing a boerewors roll and having a pint. I'd be the one trying not to chuck my guts up on the pavement.
 
Wouldn't say it's a small group. Plenty of stocky short arses around who don't carry much body fat. Also plenty of tall flabby types with the muscle tone of linguine and well padded arses.

BMI use as a qualifier would likely pick the wrong group to send to the gym to get them down to a decent number.

Couple of blokes I work with, one a Froggie ex SF type and the other Brit ex FFL. Both would fall foul of BMI guidelines. I scrape in but either one would out run me any day of the week while scoffing a boerewors roll and having a pint. I'd be the one trying not to chuck my guts up on the pavement.
I'd guess that the people classed as obese by BMI who just have a lot of muscle are a tiny percentage of the population. Maybe 2-3% by gut feeling?

BMI wasn't developed as a diagnostic tool for individuals. It can be used as one but that only makes sense if its limitations are known and catered for. BMI should be used as first step triage for a rough idea of who might be overweight. It's quick and easy, doesn't require a tape measure and can be done pretty accurately by almost any idiot.
 
To be fair, most of that kind of triage can be done by Mk1 eyeball these days. Our plan to fatten you lot up for the protein vats after the Harvest is going just peachy fine.
 

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
I'd guess that the people classed as obese by BMI who just have a lot of muscle are a tiny percentage of the population. Maybe 2-3% by gut feeling?
Gut feeling is a little unscientific don't you think ?

BMI wasn't developed as a diagnostic tool for individuals. It can be used as one but that only makes sense if its limitations are known and catered for. BMI should be used as first step triage for a rough idea of who might be overweight. It's quick and easy, doesn't require a tape measure and can be done pretty accurately by almost any idiot.
Explains it's popularly with Capita.

For use with individuals...
 
"By the time she was 30, Sarah had severe obesity and was desperate to do something about it for the sake of her mental and physical health. She embarked on a year-long project with a personal trainer and completed an Olympic-class triathlon - swimming 1.5km, cycling 40km and running 10km. She also lost eight-and-a-half stone (55kg)."

55 kg per year is roughly 4.6 kg per month or 1 kg per week. That's the same as a bag of sugar. If she can chuck off a kilo a week and do a triathlon then the only reason she's returned to being a bloater is an overactive pie arm.

No one can cheat conservation of mass. If you've got fatter then you've put more mass in your gob than your body has got rid of.

I feel your pain, Sarah. To lose weight, I would have to go and live in the Nazi wing of a Japanese POW camp in Chernobyl.
 
...It's quick and easy, doesn't require a tape measure and can be done pretty accurately by almost any idiot.

Tape measure and a scale required, IINM? Unless there's a new way of quantifying porkage.

Mk1 eyeball generally pretty accurate and works well picking out the rugby forwards and stupidly fit short arses from the universal mass of blubber out there.
 
Tape measure and a scale required, IINM? Unless there's a new way of quantifying porkage.
Most people know how tall they are to within an inch or two which is well within the tolerance of BMI. Scales would be needed but then it's just a matter of looking up two numbers on a graph. A grownup might be needed to make sure people aren't looking up 5'9" as 59cm but otherwise it should be fairly idiot proof.

I was thinking of the better methods like comparing waist, hip, chest, height etc. ratios which require someone to be paying attention with a tape measure and are prone to a lot of error / cheating due to sucking in guts, squeezing tightly with the tape etc. or body fat measurement which is quite expensive kit to do properly.
 
I'd guess that the people classed as obese by BMI who just have a lot of muscle are a tiny percentage of the population. Maybe 2-3% by gut feeling?

BMI wasn't developed as a diagnostic tool for individuals. It can be used as one but that only makes sense if its limitations are known and catered for. BMI should be used as first step triage for a rough idea of who might be overweight. It's quick and easy, doesn't require a tape measure and can be done pretty accurately by almost any idiot.
The biggest critics of BMI in the army were fat cnuts.
"But what about paras, Fijians, sporty people?
"Are you a para, Fijian or a sporty person?
"No"
"Then stop complaining about BMI you fat bastard"
 
Most people know how tall they are to within an inch or two which is well within the tolerance of BMI. Scales would be needed but then it's just a matter of looking up two numbers on a graph. A grownup might be needed to make sure people aren't looking up 5'9" as 59cm but otherwise it should be fairly idiot proof.

I was thinking of the better methods like comparing waist, hip, chest, height etc. ratios which require someone to be paying attention with a tape measure and are prone to a lot of error / cheating due to sucking in guts, squeezing tightly with the tape etc. or body fat measurement which is quite expensive kit to do properly.


...Or watching them waddle after a well thrown meat pie.
 

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
...Or watching them waddle after a well thrown meat pie.
You might be discriminating.
If a fit troep throws the pie, it'll go too far and the thought of waddling after it will create a cardiac incident in the VP.
If you give it to another salad dodger you'd have to cut the bastard open to find it.
 

Fang_Farrier

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Most people know how tall they are to within an inch or two which is well within the tolerance of BMI. Scales would be needed but then it's just a matter of looking up two numbers on a graph. A grownup might be needed to make sure people aren't looking up 5'9" as 59cm but otherwise it should be fairly idiot proof.

I was thinking of the better methods like comparing waist, hip, chest, height etc. ratios which require someone to be paying attention with a tape measure and are prone to a lot of error / cheating due to sucking in guts, squeezing tightly with the tape etc. or body fat measurement which is quite expensive kit to do properly.


Your waist should be less than half your height. Ie 6foot should be 36inch waist.

This is a slightly different measurement than BMI.

They can show different lay down of body fat thus different risks for diabetes or heart attack.
 
Your waist should be less than half your height. Ie 6foot should be 36inch waist.

This is a slightly different measurement than BMI.

They can show different lay down of body fat thus different risks for diabetes or heart attack.
By that reckoning I could add 5 inches to my waistline! I'd be a right lard bucket if I did.
 

Tool

LE
You might be discriminating.
If a fit troep throws the pie, it'll go too far and the thought of waddling after it will create a cardiac incident in the VP.
If you give it to another salad dodger you'd have to cut the bastard open to find it.
Solution: give it to a vegan. That would guarantee that it is neither eaten nor thrown too far, but will be away from other human beings.
 

Latest Threads

Top