Reached goal size, still over healthy BMI.... what now?

2»

Replies

  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    I'm a US 6-8 now and just at the very maximum BMI ...if you're happy stick with it
  • MoiAussi93
    MoiAussi93 Posts: 1,948 Member
    edited February 2015
    Francl27 wrote: »
    Got to ask, how can you be a size 6 but a size 12-14 on top? Maybe if you lost more you would lose from the top?

    But if you're happy where you are, you don't have to lose more. It depends a lot on your frame and how much muscle you have too... BMI doesn't mean that much. I have a friend who is a big smaller than me but weighs 10 more pounds but still look amazing.
    It's very easy...large breasts. I am also currently a size 6 in jeans (just bought new ones Sunday!!!) and probably a 12-14 top (I just bought a couple of size large shirts as well). I have large breasts and I suspect a large rib cage. I also think my shoulders are a little broader than many woman. My hips on the other hand are not wide, and my thighs are relatively slim.

    If you're not a pear body shape, it is actually quite common to be a larger size on top. Large breasts will just exacerbate that.
  • CaseySteenport
    CaseySteenport Posts: 41 Member
    edited February 2015
    BMI isn't a very good indicator of health...at best it's a super generalized metric.

    Like someone else mentioned, it doesn't take muscle mass into account. So, for example, a body builder with little Body Fat will still be considered "obese" on the BMI chart.

    If you can get your Body Fat % measured, do that instead. It will give you a better idea of your current health status.

  • MoiAussi93
    MoiAussi93 Posts: 1,948 Member
    OP, you said there is a 30 pound difference from the last time you wore a size six. I think if I were you I would decide which body you liked better. If you liked the more muscular size six, then I would first lose more weight and then focus on adding some muscle. Add in some strength training now then kick it up a notch when you have lost more of the fat.

    If you prefer your new less muscular body, then stop and stay where you are. The size is just a number.
  • silentKayak
    silentKayak Posts: 658 Member
    If you're a size 6, you're at a normal and healthy weight. There is no "safety zone". You can have a heart attack or stroke at any weight. You can get cancer at any weight. At any weight, the probability of eventual death is 100%.

    What is unhealthy is obsessing about numbers. BMI is just a number. It applies to populations, not individuals.

    Exercise is great. Maintaining your losses is great. If you want to be thinner and can safely lose weight, feel free to do so. In my opinion, maintenance is a reasonable (and challenging enough) goal. You might also think about switching from "body" to "performance goals" (e.g. longer and harder rides, faster times - maybe a race or a group ride - whatever excites you).

    Congratulations on your loss!
  • spoonyspork
    spoonyspork Posts: 238 Member
    MoiAussi93 wrote: »
    Francl27 wrote: »
    Got to ask, how can you be a size 6 but a size 12-14 on top? Maybe if you lost more you would lose from the top?

    But if you're happy where you are, you don't have to lose more. It depends a lot on your frame and how much muscle you have too... BMI doesn't mean that much. I have a friend who is a big smaller than me but weighs 10 more pounds but still look amazing.
    It's very easy...large breasts. I am also currently a size 6 in jeans (just bought new ones Sunday!!!) and probably a 12-14 top (I just bought a couple of size large shirts as well). I have large breasts and I suspect a large rib cage. I also think my shoulders are a little broader than many woman. My hips on the other hand are not wide, and my thighs are relatively slim.

    If you're not a pear body shape, it is actually quite common to be a larger size on top. Large breasts will just exacerbate that.

    ^yup, this. I have a wee waist, fairly large rib cage and smallish hips (hips and rib cage match) and HUGE chest. Which means I carry weight really well... which is how I didn't really notice the upward creep until it'd gotten really bad.

    I'm pretty happy with how I look, REALLY happy with how I feel. Only not-happy is the loose skin on my stomach which I figure will eventually shrink up - I hope!
  • TheVirgoddess
    TheVirgoddess Posts: 4,535 Member
    I'm a 36F (DDD) and easily fit into medium tops, so I'm confused, too.

    Anyway, if you're happy with your body right now, then stay where you are.
  • Dragn77
    Dragn77 Posts: 810 Member
    edited February 2015
    Go by how you feel when you look at yourself... If you like what you see, then you are where you need to be! Alternatively, go for continuing to lose a bit more weight, you may find that you start to lose from the top and become more evened out..what you imagine as looking *more* silly might actually turn into weight finally coming off other parts of your body and you like that more. And if you dont like it, you can always go back up again.

    I'm 5'10" pear shaped, I look teeny on top and then BAM on the bottom...I have about a 2-4 clothing size difference depending on my weight. Its crazy really, how I look so disproportionate until I hit about 155, and then my lower half just shrinks up... 145 is the lowest Ive been in my adult life, and while I looked more "normal" since my body was a lot more balanced, I really missed having a big butt lol So 155 is the lowest I know I can go before that will start to disappear...and 160 is purrrfect for me.

    So yeah, you wont know til you try. BUT if you like where you are now, dont feel pressured just based off BMI and charts and such. Getting to healthy weight and feeling good is what matters the most.
  • smboardsEE
    smboardsEE Posts: 2 Member
    I totally agree that BMI is mostly BS. More specifically I would like to say that BMI can be used as some kind of indicator only for "average" person, pretty much nullifying the whole point of the index.

    Just an example. I found my old FB post from Dec 6th 2014 when I was watching Beaver Creek Super-G competition. For every skier the vital stats were shown and from that I calculated that the winner of previous event had BMI 27.6, indicating significant overweight. Yeah, right, alpine skiers look just like sumo wrestlers...
  • cheshirecatastrophe
    cheshirecatastrophe Posts: 1,395 Member
    Boob fat is not going to increase your heart attack and stroke risk the way abdominal fat (visceral fat) is.

    It's one of the less remarked-on shortcomings of BMI, but it's there.

    You're fine.
  • spoonyspork
    spoonyspork Posts: 238 Member
    I'm a 36F (DDD) and easily fit into medium tops, so I'm confused, too.

    Anyway, if you're happy with your body right now, then stay where you are.

    I 'fit' in medium tops, but they tend to ride up my chest - particularly when riding - as they also tend to be a bit more short. That said, my closet is full of all shirt sizes from XS to XL: XL(12/14) is just my safest bet when shopping, especially online!
  • DKG28
    DKG28 Posts: 299 Member
    don't forget to factor in weight of big boobs! sounds like a same size/composition person every where else but with smaller ones would be right at that healthy BMI number. If it's boobs that's putting you slightly over where you want to be, don't worry about it! There's a difference between added weight in the boobs (genetic) and carrying it around on the waist.
  • Vailara
    Vailara Posts: 2,462 Member
    I was in a similar position to you a year or two ago. I lost 60 lb and it got me to a weight I was happy with, but still an overweight BMI. I ended up sticking there and maintaining, as it felt comfortable and natural.

    I've now decided I want to lose a bit more, but I'm not sure how low to go. One thing that's concerning me is how low my calories will have to be at maintenance if I get back to the weight I was at in my 30s. My sedentary TDEE at that weight would be around 1300, and I don't know if that's a realistic figure to stick with for life. I don't know if that's something that has been on your mind too, or even if it's something that should be a concern, but I thought I'd mention it. My feeling was that it was better to stay at an overweight BMI and be "comfortable" rather than struggle to stay at healthy BMI and end up yo-yoing. So I'm still not sure I've made the right decision in trying to lose more weight and upset the applecart of maintenance.

    Sorry, that's not much help - just my experience. But it's maybe one option - just maintain for a year or so and see how it feels - how easy it is to maintain, whether you're happy with where you are, what happens to your skin, etc.
  • LuckyMe2017
    LuckyMe2017 Posts: 454 Member
    zarckon wrote: »
    If you're a size 6, you're at a normal and healthy weight. There is no "safety zone". You can have a heart attack or stroke at any weight. You can get cancer at any weight. At any weight, the probability of eventual death is 100%.

    What is unhealthy is obsessing about numbers. BMI is just a number. It applies to populations, not individuals.

    Exercise is great. Maintaining your losses is great. If you want to be thinner and can safely lose weight, feel free to do so. In my opinion, maintenance is a reasonable (and challenging enough) goal. You might also think about switching from "body" to "performance goals" (e.g. longer and harder rides, faster times - maybe a race or a group ride - whatever excites you).

    Congratulations on your loss!

    I agree with you that there is no safety zone per se. However, for me, culturally it's acceptable to be obese. To guard myself against obesity and related health issues, I chose a goal within my BMI range so that I would have room to fluctuate a bit until I fully adapt to being a healthier person. This is what I am calling safety zone.
  • lemon629
    lemon629 Posts: 501 Member
    edited February 2015
    warnerlm wrote: »
    Francl27 wrote: »
    Got to ask, how can you be a size 6 but a size 12-14 on top?

    In for answer to this.

    Boobs.
    I am a size 8 on the bottom and 12-14 on top (34F or 34G), although in stretchy things like t-shirts and sweaters I can wear a 10/medium.
    When I get to my goal weight, I will probably be a 6 on the bottom and will still be a 12-14 on top.

    I don't think I look weird at all. It's just clothes are sized more to fit the typical rectangle/banana type shape rather than an hourglass shape which is a little annoying but no big deal. That is what tailors and wrap dresses/tops are for. My bust measurement is only one inch bigger than my hip measurement. I look very proportionate.

  • segacs
    segacs Posts: 4,599 Member
    lemon629 wrote: »
    Boobs.
    I am a size 8 on the bottom and 12-14 on top.
    When I get to my goal weight, I will probably be a 6 on the bottom and will still be a 12-14 on top.

    I'm the opposite. Smaller on top, bigger on the bottom.

    We all carry our weight differently. If you're happy with your body the way it is, then you're at the right weight.
  • Dragn77
    Dragn77 Posts: 810 Member
    Something that came to mind regarding sizes...keep in mind that they are up to the whims of clothing manufacturers and with vanity sizing, it really doesnt mean much unfortunately.

    I found out Old Navy is the *worst* with this when it comes to jeans..they are the only ones I can fit in to buy off the rack in a store (because of my shape plus I have a 36" inseam) in Old Navy, Im a size 10 jean. I cant wear a size 10...anything in any other brand out there...more like a size 14..12 if its an A-Line skirt, but even then, I'm pushing it.

    So yeah, dont even get hung up on sizes (because, it can really suck to think youre a size x and find out in another store, that size is way bigger or even way smaller..there just is no standard for this..not in America anyway) Its more about how you feel and how you look. If youre within a healthy weight range and feeling great, then thats all that matters.