ExFlyBoy5
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
I think there's a point here that's valid, but, A) BMI as a medical tool is way overused and often way off base. It doesn't account for muscle or frame or the individual, and is overused as a reason to NOT look at other factors. Doctors miss cancer symptoms because, eh, just lose some weight you'll be fine...
but, also...
B) Many average people think they are above average. It is very common to overestimate and be overconfident in one's physical health and ability. Reverse body-dysmorphia, if you will.
No doubt and point A is important. I had to deal with physical fitness testing in the Air Force and one of the metrics they used was waist circumference. It didn't matter if you were 4'9" or 6'10"...if you exceeded a certain measurement (I think it was 39 or 40") then you failed. So, with that kind of restriction, there were very few NFL linebackers who would pass the physical fitness standard of the USAF. As I understand, this has been modified to account for the absurdity of this metric as an "instant" failure.
Nonetheless, the OP should still look at this baseline as just that...further tests/evaluation is probably prudent.