How could the volume of a person be found?
I mean using DIY methods, rather than laboratory facilities!
--
Chris

Chris wrote:

How could the volume of a person be found?
I mean using DIY methods, rather than laboratory facilities!


Displacement of water in a bath?

--
Grunff

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 07:09:39 UTC, Grunff wrote:

Chris wrote:

How could the volume of a person be found?
I mean using DIY methods, rather than laboratory facilities!

Displacement of water in a bath?

But make sure you seal up all orifices first - gaffer tape will do...

I suggest IMM as a subject...

--
Bob Eager
begin a new life...dump Windows!

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 07:53:42 +0100, Chris ] wrote:

How could the volume of a person be found?
I mean using DIY methods, rather than laboratory facilities!


Archimedes is your friend here.


..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

Bob Eager wrote:


But make sure you seal up all orifices first - gaffer tape will do...

I suggest IMM as a subject...


If IMM is doing it, he could just wear his gimp suit. No gaffer tape
required.

--
Grunff

"Grunff" wrote in message
...
Bob Eager wrote:


But make sure you seal up all orifices first - gaffer tape will do...

I suggest IMM as a subject...


If IMM is doing it, he could just wear his gimp suit. No gaffer tape
required.

What's a gimp suit? Is this trendy around your way?

"Andy Hall" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 07:53:42 +0100, Chris ] wrote:

How could the volume of a person be found?
I mean using DIY methods, rather than laboratory facilities!


Archimedes is your friend here.

Correct. Use a bath.

In article , Grunff wrote:
Chris wrote:

How could the volume of a person be found?
I mean using DIY methods, rather than laboratory facilities!


Displacement of water in a bath?

Eureka!

Gordon
(sorry, couldn't resist)

Gordon Henderson" wrote in message ...

Eureka! (sorry, couldn't resist)

Hey, I was just about to say that!

Another method, is just to assume an average density of 1000 kg/m^3 so if
the body weighs, say, 80kg the volume must be fairly close to 80 litres.

Anyway, why does the OP want to know?

--
Andy

"Andy Wade" wrote in message
...
Gordon Henderson" wrote in message ...

Eureka! (sorry, couldn't resist)

Hey, I was just about to say that!

Another method, is just to assume an average density of 1000 kg/m^3 so if
the body weighs, say, 80kg the volume must be fairly close to 80 litres.

Anyway, why does the OP want to know?

Obesity is big problem. The government is outlawing it by restricting the
fatty foods fatties eat. Soon fatties will be totally out of order for
being what they are - which isl be a menace to society.

"Chris" ] wrote in message
]...
How could the volume of a person be found?
I mean using DIY methods, rather than laboratory facilities!
--
Chris

By using a noise level meter.

"Chris" ] wrote in message
]...
How could the volume of a person be found?
I mean using DIY methods, rather than laboratory facilities!


Liquidiser and a measuring jug?



--
Richard Sampson

email me at
richard at olifant d-ot co do-t uk

"IMM" wrote in message
...

"Andy Wade" wrote in message
...
Gordon Henderson" wrote in message ...

Eureka! (sorry, couldn't resist)

Hey, I was just about to say that!

Another method, is just to assume an average density of 1000 kg/m^3 so
if
the body weighs, say, 80kg the volume must be fairly close to 80 litres.

Anyway, why does the OP want to know?

Obesity is big problem. The government is outlawing it by restricting the
fatty foods fatties eat. Soon fatties will be totally out of order for
being what they are - which isl be a menace to society.



Define obesity.



--
Richard Sampson

email me at
richard at olifant d-ot co do-t uk

IMM wrote:

If IMM is doing it, he could just wear his gimp suit. No gaffer tape
required.


What's a gimp suit? Is this trendy around your way?

Come on, no need to pretend you don't know - we're all friends here...

--
Grunff

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 07:53:42 +0100, Chris wrote:

How could the volume of a person be found?
I mean using DIY methods, rather than laboratory facilities!

Weigh person.

Go to swimming pool. Float in water and make estimation of amount of body that
it above water line.

Note the volume will vary considerably whether or not a breath has been
taken or not.

Add the weight in kg to the volume above the water line (in litres).
This gives the volume of the whole person in litres.

--
Ed Sirett - Property maintainer and registered gas fitter.
The FAQ for uk.diy is at www.diyfaq.org.uk
Gas fitting FAQ http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/GasFitting.html
Sealed CH FAQ http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/SealedCH.html

RichardS wrote:
"Chris" ] wrote in message
]...
How could the volume of a person be found?
I mean using DIY methods, rather than laboratory facilities!


Liquidiser and a measuring jug?

LOL!

Si

wattie wrote:
How could the volume of a person be found?

By using a noise level meter.

LOL.
That made me smile.
:¬))


--
http://gymratz.co.uk - UK's best bodybuilding supplements,gym equipment.
http://gymratz.co.uk/hot-seat.htm - Live web-cam!
TRADE PRICED SUPPLEMENTS for Personal Trainers or individual purchase.
http://trade-price-supplements.co.uk

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 07:53:42 +0100, Chris wrote:

How could the volume of a person be found?
I mean using DIY methods, rather than laboratory facilities!

A guy in Greece found this out thousands of years ago.

Dave

--

Some people use windows, others have a life.

Define obesity.

Anyone fatter than him ?

Dave

--

Some people use windows, others have a life.

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 18:50:16 +0100, Dave Stanton
strung together this:

Define obesity.

Anyone fatter than him ?

Not many then....
--

SJW
A.C.S. Ltd

"Grunff" wrote in message
...
Chris wrote:

How could the volume of a person be found?
I mean using DIY methods, rather than laboratory facilities!


Displacement of water in a bath?

Eureka!

--
Grunff

"IMM" wrote in message
...


Obesity is big problem. The government is outlawing it by restricting the
fatty foods fatties eat.

If you'd been at Camelot last weekend you wouldn't think that.

Mary

"wattie" wrote in message
...

"Chris" ] wrote in message
]...
How could the volume of a person be found?
I mean using DIY methods, rather than laboratory facilities!
--
Chris

By using a noise level meter.

Oh, nice one!

"RichardS" noaccess@invalid wrote in message
. ..
"Chris" ] wrote in message
]...
How could the volume of a person be found?
I mean using DIY methods, rather than laboratory facilities!


Liquidiser and a measuring jug?

I like that too.



--
Richard Sampson

email me at
richard at olifant d-ot co do-t uk

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 20:50:39 +0100, "Mary Fisher"
strung together this:

I like that too.

I wouldn't mind your inane ramblings if you had something useful to
say once in a while. Until such time as you do start actually
providing helpful responses kindly refrain from posting utter
nonsense.
--

SJW
A.C.S. Ltd

"Lurch" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 20:50:39 +0100, "Mary Fisher"
strung together this:

I like that too.

I wouldn't mind your inane ramblings if you had something useful to
say once in a while. Until such time as you do start actually
providing helpful responses kindly refrain from posting utter
nonsense.

I don't mind inane ramblings either, which is why I read all yours ... :-)
--

SJW
A.C.S. Ltd

On 21 Jul 2004, Andy Hall wrote

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 07:53:42 +0100, Chris ] wrote:

How could the volume of a person be found?
I mean using DIY methods, rather than laboratory facilities!


Archimedes is your friend here.

Screw Archimedes....



--
Cheers,
Harvey

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 21:50:25 +0100, "Mary Fisher"
strung together this:

I don't mind inane ramblings either, which is why I read all yours ... :-)

But my inane comments are usually interspersed with helpful advice,
where's yours?
--

SJW
A.C.S. Ltd

"Lurch" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 21:50:25 +0100, "Mary Fisher"
strung together this:

I don't mind inane ramblings either, which is why I read all yours ...
:-)

But my inane comments are usually interspersed with helpful advice,

Mr Pole!!!! ??????????????

"Harvey Van Sickle" wrote in message
...
On 21 Jul 2004, Andy Hall wrote

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 07:53:42 +0100, Chris ] wrote:

How could the volume of a person be found?
I mean using DIY methods, rather than laboratory facilities!


Archimedes is your friend here.

Screw Archimedes....

Excellent!



--
Cheers,
Harvey

RichardS wrote:




Define obesity.




BMI (body mass index) = weight_(in kg) / (height (in cm) squared)


BMI 18.5 underweight
18.5 - 24.9 Normal
25 - 29.9 Overweight
30 Obese

Figures for women may vary

On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 10:46:12 +0100, Nick Brooks
wrote:

RichardS wrote:




Define obesity.




BMI (body mass index) = weight_(in kg) / (height (in cm) squared)


BMI 18.5 underweight
18.5 - 24.9 Normal
25 - 29.9 Overweight
30 Obese

Figures for women may vary

That's not quite the right formula. It's weight in kg divided by
(height in metres squared).

Also, it is only a fairly crude measure because the medical impact
depends very much on the distribution of the weight on the person.


..andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

Andy Hall wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 10:46:12 +0100, Nick Brooks
wrote:


RichardS wrote:


Define obesity.





BMI (body mass index) = weight_(in kg) / (height (in cm) squared)


BMI 18.5 underweight
18.5 - 24.9 Normal
25 - 29.9 Overweight
30 Obese

Figures for women may vary


That's not quite the right formula. It's weight in kg divided by
(height in metres squared).


Oops my mistake


Also, it is only a fairly crude measure because the medical impact
depends very much on the distribution of the weight on the person.



Indeed, and it doesn't take into account any other factors that affect
health such as exercise, diet, smoking, hereditary conditions etc etc
etc but it does give A definition of obese


.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

"Nick Brooks" wrote in message
...
RichardS wrote:




Define obesity.




BMI (body mass index) = weight_(in kg) / (height (in cm) squared)


BMI 18.5 underweight
18.5 - 24.9 Normal
25 - 29.9 Overweight
30 Obese

Figures for women may vary

that's the answer that I thought would come back.

The problem with BMI can be shown by the fact that Mr Schwarzenegger's well
publicised vital stats from his competing days put him into the category of
"Obese", all of the sprinters in the forthcoming Olympics will probably also
be in that category!

So, guess which indicator our wonderful government uses to tell us all
there's a growing obesity problem....


--
Richard Sampson

email me at
richard at olifant d-ot co do-t uk

On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 11:57:33 +0100, "RichardS" noaccess@invalid
wrote:

The problem with BMI can be shown by the fact that Mr Schwarzenegger's well
publicised vital stats from his competing days put him into the category of
"Obese", all of the sprinters in the forthcoming Olympics will probably also
be in that category!

So, guess which indicator our wonderful government uses to tell us all
there's a growing obesity problem....

So which indicator do you suggest would be better? Remembering, of
course, that the actual body measurements used must be simple, quick
and cheap, if GP's and Joe Public is to use them.

Regards, VivienB

"RichardS" noaccess@invalid wrote in message ...
"Nick Brooks" wrote in message
...
RichardS wrote:




Define obesity.




BMI (body mass index) = weight_(in kg) / (height (in cm) squared)


BMI 18.5 underweight
18.5 - 24.9 Normal
25 - 29.9 Overweight
30 Obese

Figures for women may vary

that's the answer that I thought would come back.

The problem with BMI can be shown by the fact that Mr Schwarzenegger's well
publicised vital stats from his competing days put him into the category of
"Obese", all of the sprinters in the forthcoming Olympics will probably also
be in that category!

So, guess which indicator our wonderful government uses to tell us all
there's a growing obesity problem....


The latest issue of Men's Health has just this point in it. Jonny
Wilkinson et al all being examples of 'obesity' based upon this
simplistic formula.

Shano

On Wed, 21 Jul 2004 23:27:29 +0100, "IMM" strung
together this:

Mr Pole!!!! ??????????????

And while we're on the subject, you can **** right off as well.

There, I like having public rants on newsgroups, seem to be doing
quite a bit of it lately though, ah well, worse things happen at sea
and all that malarkey.
--

SJW
A.C.S. Ltd

"VivienB" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 11:57:33 +0100, "RichardS" noaccess@invalid
wrote:

The problem with BMI can be shown by the fact that Mr Schwarzenegger's
well
publicised vital stats from his competing days put him into the category
of
"Obese", all of the sprinters in the forthcoming Olympics will probably
also
be in that category!

So, guess which indicator our wonderful government uses to tell us all
there's a growing obesity problem....

So which indicator do you suggest would be better? Remembering, of
course, that the actual body measurements used must be simple, quick
and cheap, if GP's and Joe Public is to use them.


Well, there's the rub. There isn't an ideal quick, cheap and easy
measurement that is actually meaningful. Skin Fold Thickness isn't bad, but
that requires some skill to take and a calculation, and IIRC breaks down as
a meaningful measurement when a person has a very high body fat percentage.

But, the one thing that is sure is that BMI is fundamentally flawed.

Fat has a lower density than muscle, therefore a fit, lean person would get
a worse reading than an unfit, flabby (for want of a better word) person of
similar physical dimensions.

And that just can't be right...

--
Richard Sampson

email me at
richard at olifant d-ot co do-t uk

In article , Nick Brooks
writes
RichardS wrote:




Define obesity.




BMI (body mass index) = weight_(in kg) / (height (in cm) squared)


BMI 18.5 underweight
18.5 - 24.9 Normal
25 - 29.9 Overweight
30 Obese

Figures for women may vary

You are not an alcoholic until you drink more than your doctor ...
so go and weigh him for an 'obesity' check.
--
Andrew

You are not an alcoholic until you drink more than your doctor ...
so go and weigh him for an 'obesity' check.

That's a very good point - I'm a GP and I see it as a minor role of
mine to preach about lifestyle. People want to be fixed, then get on
with their life as they see fit.

I bet you don't get formula one pit crew tutting to drivers and saying
"well if only you drove a little more slowly and occasionally got out
for a break your engine would be less strained and last longer"

It's much cheaper for politicians to shout at the populace to be more
healthy than let them decide, and provide sick-shops to clear up the
mess.

You only have to measure the girth of politicians to realise why
health promotion doesn't work.

Even John Reid admitted that for some people smoking is their only
pleasure. If one of my elderly patients said that it would be fine,
but for a senior politican responsible for firing competent managers
for not meeting his stalinist health targets that's unforgiveable
hypocrisy.

As far as I'm concerned people can be the size they want. I'll advise
them of the consequences, but then they can choose. If people wear out
their knees aged 40 because they're carrying the equivalent of 2 heavy
suitcases of lard everywhere they go then I'll point it out, give them
the help but that's as far as I can go. It's about choice and
responsiblity....

*rant mode: OFF*