There are clear limitations to metrics like BMI (Body Mass Index). In my case, I'm 5'4" but weigh 172 lbs. That gives me a hefty 29.5 score, deep into the "overweight," and, just shy of "obese." Now, I'm far from optimal shape, but when I was in the best shape of my life I was around 160-165 lbs with about 5.6% body fat. To hit the top side of "normal" I'd have to weigh in at a scant 145 lbs. The last time I weighed that, I was a starving intern. Before that, I was 14.

I come from a family of two body types. Tall and skinny, or short and muscular. Or, if you're my father, tall and muscular. Freak...

I once arranged for sea kayaks by phone in Maine. The guide was skeptical about my body description, and he was sure I'd never get into the thing, and worse--he thought my Grimace-esque physique would tip the kayak in a sudden swell, and I'd die because he'd never get me to shore safely. He had a let-down speech all prepared.

I guess this is my long-winded way of saying that BMI is not a good metric for me, and two, does anyone know what is?

* * *

Allow me to explain the discrepancy between my weight goal (155 lbs) and my description of best shape weight above. First, I was a high school gymnast at the time. I'll never be that strong, fit, or cut again, especially in that ratio. And secondly, I'm a rock climber now, and the extra weight is hindering my progress and I can't work beyond a difficulty ceiling I've hit. Worse, the extra weight is stressing tendons and ligaments in my arms from overuse. And three, it really wouldn't kill me to eat better and increase my cardio ability.