How did you decide your target weight?
Options
Replies
-
I used this spreadsheet made by an MFP community member
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Amt7QBR9-c6MdGVTbGswLUUzUHNVVUlNSW9wZWloeUE
That looks really cool, but I can't make head or tail of it. How did you use it? Did you write out your own info on paper following the steps?
Edit: Never mind I looked closer & realized you needed to copy it. I'm definitely looking into it,thanks!0 -
I used this spreadsheet made by an MFP community member
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Amt7QBR9-c6MdGVTbGswLUUzUHNVVUlNSW9wZWloeUE
That's great. I'm going to copy and play with it.0 -
Save a copy using File->Make a copy. This will save it in your own Google drive. Then change the fields in yellow (just start with the first page). The form will fill in the rest. On the second page, you can log your progress. The following pages are just to tweak things if you have specific goals or want other tweaking.I used this spreadsheet made by an MFP community member
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Amt7QBR9-c6MdGVTbGswLUUzUHNVVUlNSW9wZWloeUE
That looks really cool, but I can't make head or tail of it. How did you use it? Did you write out your own info on paper following the steps?
0 -
azulvioleta6 wrote: »nordlead2005 wrote: »I've never been overweight so my goal was purely vanity based. I'm slightly below bmi and I'm honestly pretty happy here. I gained a few pounds back and maintaining 98-100, but I have energy, I get to eat a ton, and I'm satisfied with how I look as I'm pretty lean at the moment. I had a friend in a college just a tad taller than me who was about 115 pounds of what looked like pure muscle And she looked awesome so once I heal from an injury I'm certainly open to gaining a bit in more in the since of muscle mass with lifting. But I'm a pretty vain person and personally I wouldn't be comfortable or satisfied in a higher bmi because I know I could do better. I also feel like higher weights would hinder activities I enjoy to some degree.
underweight BMI for vanity isn't a good goal. Once you get into the "healthy" range of BMI, BF% would be a better indicator. Also, muscle mass almost never interferes with activities you enjoy unless you have to be lightweight (like someone has to lift you). In almost every activity more muscle benefits you. Even with pole (as in your profile photo), more muscle means an easier time lifting yourself.
What I am saying is that in the range of healthy weights, for vanity reasons I choose the lower end of that range. Being 1 or 2 lbs underweight is no worse than being a few lbs overweight. I have no problems pulling myself up in pole as it is
and actually being heavier would make that more difficult because you'd have to lift more weight. Since I've lost 10 pounds I find it's easier to invert myself in pole not harder. My best estimates of body fat are that I'm around 15-18%, so I'm not skinny fat. You don't have to have ginormous muscles to be strong. I have zero interest in being 140 lbs even if my body fat is very low and that's technically in a healthy range. Not the look I am aiming for 
You can have a low body-fat percentage just because you are underweight. It does mean that you are strong/muscular/not skinny fat.
Yeah I'm just absolutely weak despite the fact I have zero issues lifting my self upside down, and helping move and lift 300 lb patients at work (Eyeroll). Yep completely weak and helpless! I think I probably have a better idea of my body, composition, and strength than you do.
Yeah, not sure why you're being attacked for this. I've taken exactly one pole class and I know it's not possible to be good at it without some major muscle.
PSA: While it's okay to be strong and muscular near the top of healthy BMI (or even at "overweight" if your bodyfat is in a healthy range), it is also okay to be light with proportionally smaller amounts of muscle and low bodyfat near or below the bottom of a healthy BMI. A lot of it depends on frame and preferred aesthetic and I really wish people who prefer to be on the lighter end wouldn't constantly get crapped on on these boards. Not all thinner people are "skinnyfat" or whatever, I promise you.
My husband is six feet tall and rarely exceeds 155 pounds, yet he lifts heavy, has about 10% body fat, and has visible musculature. He's not skinnyfat but he's light for a guy. Just wiry and has a slight build. I'm 5'4", prefer to stay around 115 pounds, and generally have just under 20% bodyfat. I'm not skinnyfat either but I'm closer to the low end of healthy than the higher because I have a smallish frame and prefer the way I look when I'm lower. We're both perfectly healthy and fit, we just don't have the kind of frames to support heavier weights without making the gym our jobs.
That's why there's a range. We don't all need to be at the top of it. And a couple pounds over OR under is sometimes suitable for certain people, like bodybuilders (on the top end) or small-framed athletic women (from the looks of it, @hekla90 is an example.)
Thank you lol. Smaller people do tend to get picked on here, everyone is all gung ho about bmi being less than perfect judging being over weight but apparently it's 100% for underweight. The second you drop under everyone seems to think you are about to drop dead or something lol. I understand some people have eating issues and I am not one of them. I simply prefer how I look at this weight and have lots of energy and eat healthily and hit macros and nutrients without any issues.0 -
This thread made me curious. My BMI for my current weight is a tad under the highest level for "overweight" and my goal weight is a tad under "normal weight"
I used http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/educational/lose_wt/BMI/bmicalc.htm as it was the first one on my google search.0 -
azulvioleta6 wrote: »nordlead2005 wrote: »I've never been overweight so my goal was purely vanity based. I'm slightly below bmi and I'm honestly pretty happy here. I gained a few pounds back and maintaining 98-100, but I have energy, I get to eat a ton, and I'm satisfied with how I look as I'm pretty lean at the moment. I had a friend in a college just a tad taller than me who was about 115 pounds of what looked like pure muscle And she looked awesome so once I heal from an injury I'm certainly open to gaining a bit in more in the since of muscle mass with lifting. But I'm a pretty vain person and personally I wouldn't be comfortable or satisfied in a higher bmi because I know I could do better. I also feel like higher weights would hinder activities I enjoy to some degree.
underweight BMI for vanity isn't a good goal. Once you get into the "healthy" range of BMI, BF% would be a better indicator. Also, muscle mass almost never interferes with activities you enjoy unless you have to be lightweight (like someone has to lift you). In almost every activity more muscle benefits you. Even with pole (as in your profile photo), more muscle means an easier time lifting yourself.
What I am saying is that in the range of healthy weights, for vanity reasons I choose the lower end of that range. Being 1 or 2 lbs underweight is no worse than being a few lbs overweight. I have no problems pulling myself up in pole as it is and actually being heavier would make that more difficult because you'd have to lift more weight. Since I've lost 10 pounds I find it's easier to invert myself in pole not harder. My best estimates of body fat are that I'm around 15-18%, so I'm not skinny fat. You don't have to have ginormous muscles to be strong. I have zero interest in being 140 lbs even if my body fat is very low and that's technically in a healthy range. Not the look I am aiming for
You can have a low body-fat percentage just because you are underweight. It does mean that you are strong/muscular/not skinny fat.
Yeah I'm just absolutely weak despite the fact I have zero issues lifting my self upside down, and helping move and lift 300 lb patients at work (Eyeroll). Yep completely weak and helpless! I think I probably have a better idea of my body, composition, and strength than you do.
Yeah, not sure why you're being attacked for this. I've taken exactly one pole class and I know it's not possible to be good at it without some major muscle.
PSA: While it's okay to be strong and muscular near the top of healthy BMI (or even at "overweight" if your bodyfat is in a healthy range), it is also okay to be light with proportionally smaller amounts of muscle and low bodyfat near or below the bottom of a healthy BMI. A lot of it depends on frame and preferred aesthetic and I really wish people who prefer to be on the lighter end wouldn't constantly get crapped on on these boards. Not all thinner people are "skinnyfat" or whatever, I promise you.
My husband is six feet tall and rarely exceeds 155 pounds, yet he lifts heavy, has about 10% body fat, and has visible musculature. He's not skinnyfat but he's light for a guy. Just wiry and has a slight build. I'm 5'4", prefer to stay around 115 pounds, and generally have just under 20% bodyfat. I'm not skinnyfat either but I'm closer to the low end of healthy than the higher because I have a smallish frame and prefer the way I look when I'm lower. We're both perfectly healthy and fit, we just don't have the kind of frames to support heavier weights without making the gym our jobs.
That's why there's a range. We don't all need to be at the top of it. And a couple pounds over OR under is sometimes suitable for certain people, like bodybuilders (on the top end) or small-framed athletic women (from the looks of it, @hekla90 is an example.)
Thank you lol. Smaller people do tend to get picked on here, everyone is all gung ho about bmi being less than perfect judging being over weight but apparently it's 100% for underweight. The second you drop under everyone seems to think you are about to drop dead or something lol. I understand some people have eating issues and I am not one of them. I simply prefer how I look at this weight and have lots of energy and eat healthily and hit macros and nutrients without any issues.
@hekla90 I agree. I'm not skinny by any means but BMI is just a guideline. I can't see why being slightly below 'normal' would be more of a problem than being slightly above. Especially if you have the muscle and energy to exercise like you do. Obviously eating disorders are something very serious (two of my family members suffered from anorexia and I know what a destructive disease it is) but I'm surprised that people reacted so fiercely to your comment. Honestly aren't most of us here in part due to vanity? It's not my only reason for wanting to lose a few pounds but it's definitely part of it.0 -
I just knew i wanted to be a certain body fat level. As i started getting closer to that number i kept track of weight at each BF% level. I now what my weight should be for the BF%age level i want to be at.0
-
I looked at the BMI weight range for guys my height and picked the highest allowed weight, then added 10 pounds to account for muscle mass.
0 -
I chose the weight I was before kids - 135. I now weigh between 131 - 133 on any given day. Over the past year, I've decided I wanted to run at a more competitive level, so I've decided to slowly work my way down to 125-127. I'm in no rush. 0
-
camillemilton1 wrote: »azulvioleta6 wrote: »nordlead2005 wrote: »I've never been overweight so my goal was purely vanity based. I'm slightly below bmi and I'm honestly pretty happy here. I gained a few pounds back and maintaining 98-100, but I have energy, I get to eat a ton, and I'm satisfied with how I look as I'm pretty lean at the moment. I had a friend in a college just a tad taller than me who was about 115 pounds of what looked like pure muscle And she looked awesome so once I heal from an injury I'm certainly open to gaining a bit in more in the since of muscle mass with lifting. But I'm a pretty vain person and personally I wouldn't be comfortable or satisfied in a higher bmi because I know I could do better. I also feel like higher weights would hinder activities I enjoy to some degree.
underweight BMI for vanity isn't a good goal. Once you get into the "healthy" range of BMI, BF% would be a better indicator. Also, muscle mass almost never interferes with activities you enjoy unless you have to be lightweight (like someone has to lift you). In almost every activity more muscle benefits you. Even with pole (as in your profile photo), more muscle means an easier time lifting yourself.
What I am saying is that in the range of healthy weights, for vanity reasons I choose the lower end of that range. Being 1 or 2 lbs underweight is no worse than being a few lbs overweight. I have no problems pulling myself up in pole as it is and actually being heavier would make that more difficult because you'd have to lift more weight. Since I've lost 10 pounds I find it's easier to invert myself in pole not harder. My best estimates of body fat are that I'm around 15-18%, so I'm not skinny fat. You don't have to have ginormous muscles to be strong. I have zero interest in being 140 lbs even if my body fat is very low and that's technically in a healthy range. Not the look I am aiming for
You can have a low body-fat percentage just because you are underweight. It does mean that you are strong/muscular/not skinny fat.
Yeah I'm just absolutely weak despite the fact I have zero issues lifting my self upside down, and helping move and lift 300 lb patients at work (Eyeroll). Yep completely weak and helpless! I think I probably have a better idea of my body, composition, and strength than you do.
Yeah, not sure why you're being attacked for this. I've taken exactly one pole class and I know it's not possible to be good at it without some major muscle.
PSA: While it's okay to be strong and muscular near the top of healthy BMI (or even at "overweight" if your bodyfat is in a healthy range), it is also okay to be light with proportionally smaller amounts of muscle and low bodyfat near or below the bottom of a healthy BMI. A lot of it depends on frame and preferred aesthetic and I really wish people who prefer to be on the lighter end wouldn't constantly get crapped on on these boards. Not all thinner people are "skinnyfat" or whatever, I promise you.
My husband is six feet tall and rarely exceeds 155 pounds, yet he lifts heavy, has about 10% body fat, and has visible musculature. He's not skinnyfat but he's light for a guy. Just wiry and has a slight build. I'm 5'4", prefer to stay around 115 pounds, and generally have just under 20% bodyfat. I'm not skinnyfat either but I'm closer to the low end of healthy than the higher because I have a smallish frame and prefer the way I look when I'm lower. We're both perfectly healthy and fit, we just don't have the kind of frames to support heavier weights without making the gym our jobs.
That's why there's a range. We don't all need to be at the top of it. And a couple pounds over OR under is sometimes suitable for certain people, like bodybuilders (on the top end) or small-framed athletic women (from the looks of it, @hekla90 is an example.)
Thank you lol. Smaller people do tend to get picked on here, everyone is all gung ho about bmi being less than perfect judging being over weight but apparently it's 100% for underweight. The second you drop under everyone seems to think you are about to drop dead or something lol. I understand some people have eating issues and I am not one of them. I simply prefer how I look at this weight and have lots of energy and eat healthily and hit macros and nutrients without any issues.
@hekla90 I agree. I'm not skinny by any means but BMI is just a guideline. I can't see why being slightly below 'normal' would be more of a problem than being slightly above. Especially if you have the muscle and energy to exercise like you do. Obviously eating disorders are something very serious (two of my family members suffered from anorexia and I know what a destructive disease it is) but I'm surprised that people reacted so fiercely to your comment. Honestly aren't most of us here in part due to vanity? It's not my only reason for wanting to lose a few pounds but it's definitely part of it.
@camillemilton1
Maybe it was saying it was for vain reasons!? Idk op asked how we picked our goal weights and that's how I picked mine, purely vain reasons as I was already at healthy weight and just wanted to work on getting a body aesthetic I care for, I love my body and how I look more than ever before in my life- isn't that how you should feel at your goal weight?! Body recomp is a lot about vanity too and that's widely accepted... I guess as long as you can maintain Maximum muscle and be at the highest end of the bmi scale so you can rant about how inaccurate it is lol.0 -
Experience? Haha....for me, it's about getting back to a weight that I've already been and happy at.0
-
I used this spreadsheet made by an MFP community member
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Amt7QBR9-c6MdGVTbGswLUUzUHNVVUlNSW9wZWloeUE
I tried this. But I don't think the goal it gave me is near mine, so I either did it wrong or have a horrible goal lol. I am 5'6"-5'7" and (I think) a small build (I still have thin wrists) and am hourglass shaped and want to be 135-145 (plan to decide when I get in that range) I have been 136 and felt VERY skinny and hard to maintain. At 155 I wasn't in love with my shape but that was pre-baby. BMI tells me more like 120-130 (!) including this.0 -
I went with a number that would put me square in the middle of my healthy BMI range. Once I get close to it I'll start reevaluating my goals.0
-
I always weighed in the low 120s and if the scale started to creep up, I made small changes to adjust my weight back down. I never counted calories, I ate what I wanted, and I exercised a lot.
Having kids changed everything. After each baby, I lost the baby weight plus some. I got as low as 107 after my first baby. After my third (and last) I settled around 117 which I liked, but then my weight started creeping up. I got up to 123 and decided to join MFP and I started running again.
I hit my goal and decided to change it to 115. I hit that goal and decided to aim for 110. I'm fluctuating around 115 and I'm not sure if I'll ever reach my goal, but I'm going to keep trying.
0 -
I have not decided what mine will be.0
-
I'm aiming for about 10 lb under the top of the healthy BMI range for my height.
My doctors seem to think this is fine.
When I get there, I'll see how I feel & look.
Might want to go another 10-15 lb lower, but I really couldn't see myself lighter than that.
I'm built large (another gal here with size 11 feet).
(Being 20 under the top would put me in the middle of the healthy range.)
.
0 -
I weighed between 105 and 110 my entire adult life until I quit smoking in 2004. Then I somehow managed over the years to hit 169.8. My ultimate goal is 110, but I make mini-goals of "decades". Getting below 160. Getting below 150. Now I'm just three pounds away from getting under 140, yes! I accidentally saw a picture of myself today that one of my clients took of me a couple of years ago and can't believe I looked that awful. I'm not very photogenic anyway! Looking forward to 139 for now . . .0
-
My first goal is 150, which for me is in the middle of a healthy BMI range and a size 6/8 as well as the weight that I have been for most of my adult life, other than the 2 times I gained 20 lbs. I am happy with how I look and feel at this weight. My next goal is 145, which I was for about a year when I was 23 and LOVED how I looked. I would like to get to 145 and then I am fine with staying in the range of 145-150.0
-
Go with your high school weight and then add ten or twenty pounds to it.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 914 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions