For starters, it can't distinguish between muscle and fat. So anyone muscular is obese per BMI.
More: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/bmi-is-a-terrible-measu...
The formula is kept simple `weight / height^2` to help 19th century doctors. A more accurate growth rate for healthy weight is something like `weight / heigth^2.5` [1]
This oversimplification causes standard BMI treshholds to underestimate obesity for short people (<1.6m), and overestimate obesity for tall people (>1.8m).
The linked article talks quite a bit about waist fat being explicitly bad. That's an interesting measure for me (the waist/hip ratio) and as someone who's currently hovering around a BMI of 26 (and is average fitness), I plan on making that waist/hip measurement when I get home tonight and seeing how measure relative to their research.
I've been planning to start a bit of a weight loss program (primarily food focused with maybe a 10-20% exercise increase) and if there's specific concerns related to waist fat then I'll do some more research on how to address that.
The number of people with a BMI over 30 who aren't obese is extremely small and they're very easy to spot. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Lee Haney won Mr Olympia with BMIs of around 30. Dorian Yates and Ronnie Coleman had off-season BMIs of over 40, but they were the most muscular men in recorded history.
IMO, "BMI is meaningless" is the new "I'm just big boned". The select group of people who really are lean at >30 BMI know that they're a healthy weight, while a much larger group of people are simply using the imperfection of BMI as a means to delude themselves. I'm happy to be corrected, but I haven't heard of a single incident of someone being incorrectly categorised as obese and advised to lose weight by a medical professional simply because of their BMI.
And that's why I said
> unless you're obviously an exception
Most of the time complaining about BMI is just an excuse for overweight individuals
If needed body fat can be assessed separately.