Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Leo Abstract's avatar

While you're on the subject of numbers and numbers-that-don't-mean-anything, I submit that none of the numbers mean anything. More on this in a sec, but first re: the BMI.

BMI is known garbage, but the basic instinct was good -- weight alone isn't useful but what if we plot weight against height and sex? Given that the scale is the most precise of easily-available measures (tape is too finicky and you'll unconsciously cinch yourself in half trying to get a smaller number), why not plot it against rowing power, or against deadlift, or something else?

As for numbers, they're arbitrary but they do have a psychological effect. For instance, a largely-built american who even as a college athlete never got below 210 pounds and now weighs 315 knows he can get to the nice round number of 300, but never to 200. Why shouldn't he aim instead for 100 kilos? In your case, you're already 100 kilos, but I can't imagine you find 98.2 or 86 very aspirational. If you want to dust off some of your historical britishness, we could say that you're now 16 stone and can certainly get to 15. A nice stretch goal might be 14 (though it's not as 'round' as 15). You're more likely to get to two hundredweight than 14 stone, though. Perhaps that sounds less bastard-american than '200 pounds'.

Expand full comment
Experimental Fat Loss's avatar

"allowing the proportion of potatoes in my stew to decay exponentially"

spoken like a true nerd lol

Below 98.2kg ever? Or within e.g. 30 days? Cause that's not even 1 full kg from where you're at, so I'd bet a lot of money that it'll get you below 98.2kg in less than a week.. maybe 2-3 days. Just in water weight.

Expand full comment
30 more comments...

No posts