weight goals?
Options
Replies
-
I decided that the lowest weight for me would be 200lbs. I also decided that I would be ok with being at 225 or around that weight. I decided that because of me being 6'1" that it would be a good range for me.0
-
My BMI tells me a healthy weight for me would be between 125-140 lbs., so I've set my goal at 130. That said, I haven't weighed 130 lbs. since I was in high school. Mostly, though, I'm setting short-term goals and reaching those one step at a time. Right now, I'm shooting to get under 200 lbs. and I'm almost there! Once I'm there, I'm setting my goal for 180. I'll just keep notching the goal down 20 lbs. at a time until I get where I want to be.0
-
my NUT is one of those who swears that the BMI chart is the end all / be all. when I ask him about a weight goal last Friday, the first day of my phase 4 diet. he insisted that i set my goal of a BMI of less than 25, i disagreed due to that making my weight at no more than about 164; I've been that weight before (one of my lose/gain periods) and i don't feel or look healthy. we agreed to a goal of 170-175 with a body fat (more realistic measurement) of less than 20%. so right now my goal is 170 and with any luck (and exercise) the body fat will be in line0
-
As a general rule, aiming for the middle of the healthy BMI range isn't a bad idea. Yeah, I know all the arguments over BMI, but it's better than nothing. A body fat percentage goal would make more sense, but it's much more difficult to do with any realistic accuracy.
A difficult goal can be more helpful than an easy one. It's just a goal, and doesn't make you a failure if you don't reach it. I ended up 65 pounds below my surgeon's goal for me.0 -
BMI is a joke. I'm sorry for everyone who "swears by it" it has no basis in science or health. Body fat % is more accurate although no measure gives a 100% picture of overall health.
Do what you feel is best but try not to measure health based on a number on the scale.0 -
I just read that if you are older your BMI should be between 25 and 27, BMI doesn't consider your muscular structure, a body builder would be considered overweight, body fat% is in fact a better measure. I agree with Axtec4life, BMI doesn't take into consideration many other factors. My husband who is quite slim was told he was overweight at a health fair, the chubby girl weighing him did not even look at him to see he had a 6 pack abs and very muscular running legs. yep he's fat alright....0
-
Here is the BMI chart that I used. I've never seen another one that takes body frame into consideration, so I thought it was a much more healthy alternative than someone telling me I'm supposed to weigh 106 lbs (which I haven't weighed since middle school).
http://blonz.com/bmi.htm0 -
Body fat percentage would be best, but most methods aren't reliable. Bodyfat scales are way off, calipers are useless on the formerly morbidly obese. Bod Pod is ok, DEXA scan is best. But they aren't widely available, and cost a bit of money to have done.
Other than bodyfat testing, what else besides BMI is there? Guessing? Picking some number that you last looked good? Clothing size, in this age of constant vanity sizing?
BMI isn't perfect, but it's something we can do easily and free at home. It makes more sense than any other totally arbitrary method. I used to trot out the same BMI attacks when I had a BMI of 60 -- professional athletes with no bodyfat are classed overweight or obese, yada yada yada. But they are just defenses. Short of having a DEXA scan, it's the only remotely scientific method I have.0
