Belly roll, but doctor said to stop losing weight? Help!
Options
Replies
-
I don't see how health implications can be set aside even theoretically, and in this case surely shouldn't, given OP's PCP is interested in that side of things.
It's different for men bc men 's *weight* isn't as consequential for their overall & reproductive health. All those conditions have been linked to low BMI, with fat % effectively unimportant (given typical samples, with a normal distribution) - ie it's accounted for by variance. BMI is exactly what matters for risk.
I am sure that studies of normal weight obesity will show other things. But OP isn't in that category.0 -
OP wants to lose more weight for the sole purpose of getting rid of belly fat.
Doc said no, most likely because she is at the bottom end of her ideal weight.
She is "freaked out" about gaining weight.
She is, as far as I can tell, physically healthy.
She needs to learn how using protein, carbs, and fat, and strength training to build muscle at maintenance will help her chew up that remaining belly fat.
Punto.0 -
BMI is weight & height based without regard to body composition (scale weight (how much you eat)).
5'7" is 67". If your waist measurement is <= 33.5" your waist to height ratio is<= 0.5. That seems more like a goal for you than BMI since you are concerned with your belly (a composition rather than weight goal).
Exercise addresses body composition. How is your overall strength? You can't spot reduce by exercising your abs, but if your abs are out of shape your belly shape will be "out". Can you hold a plank position? I think you are getting good advice to listen to your doctor about loosing weight. Exercise is harder than starving, but healthier.0 -
I don't see how health implications can be set aside even theoretically, and in this case surely shouldn't, given OP's PCP is interested in that side of things.
It's different for men bc men 's *weight* isn't as consequential for their overall & reproductive health. All those conditions have been linked to low BMI, with fat % effectively unimportant (given typical samples, with a normal distribution) - ie it's accounted for by variance. BMI is exactly what matters for risk.
I am sure that studies of normal weight obesity will show other things. But OP isn't in that category.
I (briefly--working a 12-hour day today) looked over the studies you linked to and I think you are drawing more definite conclusions than are supported by the evidence. The only real longitudinal study specifically stated that:
"In conclusion, there is little evidence that BMI influences age at menopause in a way that is clinically relevant for later disease risk. Low BMI at all ages and underweight trajectory (20–36 years) were related to earlier age at start of HT, which may be a proxy measure for age at menopause. In order to understand the postmenopausal health implications for underweight women, further studies need to assess whether the association is due to an earlier menopause among underweight women or due to behavioural characteristics which mean that they start HT early, independent of menopausal status. "
And that is the challenge of all research--determining what is actually influencing the numbers. I am still staying with the idea that BMI is of extremely limited value when used to assess an individual, and one BMI number does not justify the alarmist response that is so often applied to women. FWIW, here is a link that describes the BMI's shortcomings in more detail, although the focus is on overweight rather than underweight individuals.
http://www.todaysdietitian.com/newarchives/010614p30.shtml
Again, I'll repeat for I believe the third time, I am not recommending that the OP use calorie restriction to lose fat or scale weight. (Although, hypothetically, we are talking about a loss of 6 pounds and a reduction of body fat % from 27 to 24---numbers that are not unhealthy by any definition).
I am trying to put this in perspective, however, in a real-life context. I see 10-12 women every year who fall into this category--normal BMI, but unexpectedly high levels of body fat. I have never advised any of them to "lose fat". I have always told them that they don't have a fat problem, they have a (lack of) muscle "problem". For their long-term health, I always emphasize the importance of resistance training first. But I also help them to understand the makeup of their bodies, so they don't draw the same conclusion as OP. Most of these women feel "fatter" than they look (and not because of body image issues). But they don't feel like they can verbalize their feelings because of the lecturing and negative comments they receive from their peers. I also explain the idea of inherited fat storage distribution patterns, so they have realistic expectations about what they can achieve.
0 -
5'6" and I had a belly at 114. Seems like it would be a lot easier to just recomp than to lose who-even-knows how many pounds.0
-
Doctors make suggestions, but I am the boss when deciding my goals.
Baring any medical reason for the suggestion, ignore your doctor and set and reach your own goals.
And as mentioned above, look into body recomposition.
Good Luck!
0 -
At 5'4" and 105 pounds, I still have my belly. No idea what my body fat % is. Standing up straight definitely helps it look better but it's still always there.0
-
ghartleroad1 wrote: »Thanks for the quick reply @DavPul! Why still in deficit? Two things:
1. As I stated I'm still striving for a temporary achievement of 18.4 BMI.
2. I'm mentally freaked out about gaining weight.
A few weeks ago when I reduced my cardio to add weightlifting I gained a pound over two weeks (& I highly doubt it was muscle since I'd just started). Then last week I was on vacation during which I pretty much ate whatever I wanted (including piles of ice cream), didn't workout, but somehow maintained my weight exactly. I'm very confused about what's going on! Thoughts?
Dont doubt it! I was a weak noodle arm girl and my weight hasn't moved but in a couple of weeks I got way way stronger and was only lifting 3 hours a week. So I feel it was fat burning and muscle biilding to keep me in the same spot. With not a ton of fat left to burn you likely were just building muscle. But thats just a guess coupled with my own personal experience.0 -
As a general rule I agree with @adzak in that BMI isn't all that and I regularly go against my doc's advice all the time (but I never recommend to others that they should).
Except here in this case, there's no reason for the OP to continue losing weight. Everyone with experience here knows that losing 7 or whatever more pounds isn't going to solve her belly fat problem nor her BF% problem. She's just going to add being underweight to her current issues.
Increase the protein, get serious about resistance training. Eat at maintenance. The bodyfat% and belly roll issues will be improved with increased LBM that may involve a higher goal weight than the OP suspects.0 -
Yep. Eat at maintenance. Fuel heavy lifting. Build muscle.0
-
I'm 5'3" and 98 lbs and no doctor has commented on my weight lol. People get so freaked out and think BMI all of sudden is perfect at the low end though constantly state it's a bad tool if you are over the range. I'm not sure what "underweight problems" I'm supposed to magically be plagued with once I dropped below a BMI of 18.5, but I can't really think of any. I've been to the doctor multiple times at this weight for annual check ups and it's never been brought up as an issue because shockingly you can have a low body weight and be healthy.
And if you think you magically develop an eating disorder, why not share that same concern with the far more numerous eating disordered individuals that over eat here. Maybe op has a problem maybe she doesn't. Regardless it sounds like her goals aren't so much weightloss related but would be better achieved through lifting and recomp anyways.0 -
I don't see how health implications can be set aside even theoretically, and in this case surely shouldn't, given OP's PCP is interested in that side of things.
It's different for men bc men 's *weight* isn't as consequential for their overall & reproductive health. All those conditions have been linked to low BMI, with fat % effectively unimportant (given typical samples, with a normal distribution) - ie it's accounted for by variance. BMI is exactly what matters for risk.
I am sure that studies of normal weight obesity will show other things. But OP isn't in that category.
I (briefly--working a 12-hour day today) looked over the studies you linked to and I think you are drawing more definite conclusions than are supported by the evidence. The only real longitudinal study specifically stated that:
"In conclusion, there is little evidence that BMI influences age at menopause in a way that is clinically relevant for later disease risk. Low BMI at all ages and underweight trajectory (20–36 years) were related to earlier age at start of HT, which may be a proxy measure for age at menopause. In order to understand the postmenopausal health implications for underweight women, further studies need to assess whether the association is due to an earlier menopause among underweight women or due to behavioural characteristics which mean that they start HT early, independent of menopausal status. "
And that is the challenge of all research--determining what is actually influencing the numbers. I am still staying with the idea that BMI is of extremely limited value when used to assess an individual, and one BMI number does not justify the alarmist response that is so often applied to women. FWIW, here is a link that describes the BMI's shortcomings in more detail, although the focus is on overweight rather than underweight individuals.
http://www.todaysdietitian.com/newarchives/010614p30.shtml
Again, I'll repeat for I believe the third time, I am not recommending that the OP use calorie restriction to lose fat or scale weight. (Although, hypothetically, we are talking about a loss of 6 pounds and a reduction of body fat % from 27 to 24---numbers that are not unhealthy by any definition).
I am trying to put this in perspective, however, in a real-life context. I see 10-12 women every year who fall into this category--normal BMI, but unexpectedly high levels of body fat. I have never advised any of them to "lose fat". I have always told them that they don't have a fat problem, they have a (lack of) muscle "problem". For their long-term health, I always emphasize the importance of resistance training first. But I also help them to understand the makeup of their bodies, so they don't draw the same conclusion as OP. Most of these women feel "fatter" than they look (and not because of body image issues). But they don't feel like they can verbalize their feelings because of the lecturing and negative comments they receive from their peers. I also explain the idea of inherited fat storage distribution patterns, so they have realistic expectations about what they can achieve.
The BMI isn't the be all / end all, of course not. Yes, it is a population measure. Yes, it doesn't account for body fat. However, with regard to the health risks I described above - which are well known to medical people, it's not just those studies I plucked out of a Google search - those are associated with low BMI. (18.5 and below is regarded as "extreme" low BMI in at least one of those studies). That's the association that has been found over multiple studies. (See also "female athlete triad".)
So BMI, even though it's imperfect, is a perfectly appropriate tool for a physician to use to evaluate those risks in a given individual, after examining that individual. Which is what happened with the OP.
Another thing with women is that because our society basically sets us up for body dysmorphia almost no matter what we look like, and because we have heard thousands of times over most of our lives that the way to handle body dissatisfaction is to lose weight, I am really not supportive of any message that even suggests that as a solution in a situation like the OP's.
Is she allowed to express body dissatisfaction? Sure. I completely (and directly) understand her complaints. There's nothing wrong with wanting to look a certain way, as long as it doesn't risk a person's health. There is just a lot of room for slippage between those old messages to "lose weight" and "be thin" and the new messages to "cut and bulk". Her MO until now has been to cardio her way down, so I feel like it's valuable for her to hear unambiguously that strength training while maintaining her current weight is the solution to her (valid) complaints. Which it unquestionably is.0 -
I don't see how health implications can be set aside even theoretically, and in this case surely shouldn't, given OP's PCP is interested in that side of things.
It's different for men bc men 's *weight* isn't as consequential for their overall & reproductive health. All those conditions have been linked to low BMI, with fat % effectively unimportant (given typical samples, with a normal distribution) - ie it's accounted for by variance. BMI is exactly what matters for risk.
I am sure that studies of normal weight obesity will show other things. But OP isn't in that category.
I (briefly--working a 12-hour day today) looked over the studies you linked to and I think you are drawing more definite conclusions than are supported by the evidence. The only real longitudinal study specifically stated that:
"In conclusion, there is little evidence that BMI influences age at menopause in a way that is clinically relevant for later disease risk. Low BMI at all ages and underweight trajectory (20–36 years) were related to earlier age at start of HT, which may be a proxy measure for age at menopause. In order to understand the postmenopausal health implications for underweight women, further studies need to assess whether the association is due to an earlier menopause among underweight women or due to behavioural characteristics which mean that they start HT early, independent of menopausal status. "
And that is the challenge of all research--determining what is actually influencing the numbers. I am still staying with the idea that BMI is of extremely limited value when used to assess an individual, and one BMI number does not justify the alarmist response that is so often applied to women. FWIW, here is a link that describes the BMI's shortcomings in more detail, although the focus is on overweight rather than underweight individuals.
http://www.todaysdietitian.com/newarchives/010614p30.shtml
Again, I'll repeat for I believe the third time, I am not recommending that the OP use calorie restriction to lose fat or scale weight. (Although, hypothetically, we are talking about a loss of 6 pounds and a reduction of body fat % from 27 to 24---numbers that are not unhealthy by any definition).
I am trying to put this in perspective, however, in a real-life context. I see 10-12 women every year who fall into this category--normal BMI, but unexpectedly high levels of body fat. I have never advised any of them to "lose fat". I have always told them that they don't have a fat problem, they have a (lack of) muscle "problem". For their long-term health, I always emphasize the importance of resistance training first. But I also help them to understand the makeup of their bodies, so they don't draw the same conclusion as OP. Most of these women feel "fatter" than they look (and not because of body image issues). But they don't feel like they can verbalize their feelings because of the lecturing and negative comments they receive from their peers. I also explain the idea of inherited fat storage distribution patterns, so they have realistic expectations about what they can achieve.
The BMI isn't the be all / end all, of course not. Yes, it is a population measure. Yes, it doesn't account for body fat. However, with regard to the health risks I described above - which are well known to medical people, it's not just those studies I plucked out of a Google search - those are associated with low BMI. (18.5 and below is regarded as "extreme" low BMI in at least one of those studies). That's the association that has been found over multiple studies. (See also "female athlete triad".)
So BMI, even though it's imperfect, is a perfectly appropriate tool for a physician to use to evaluate those risks in a given individual, after examining that individual. Which is what happened with the OP.
Another thing with women is that because our society basically sets us up for body dysmorphia almost no matter what we look like, and because we have heard thousands of times over most of our lives that the way to handle body dissatisfaction is to lose weight, I am really not supportive of any message that even suggests that as a solution in a situation like the OP's.
Is she allowed to express body dissatisfaction? Sure. I completely (and directly) understand her complaints. There's nothing wrong with wanting to look a certain way, as long as it doesn't risk a person's health. There is just a lot of room for slippage between those old messages to "lose weight" and "be thin" and the new messages to "cut and bulk". Her MO until now has been to cardio her way down, so I feel like it's valuable for her to hear unambiguously that strength training while maintaining her current weight is the solution to her (valid) complaints. Which it unquestionably is.
*fist bump*0 -
I don't see how health implications can be set aside even theoretically, and in this case surely shouldn't, given OP's PCP is interested in that side of things.
It's different for men bc men 's *weight* isn't as consequential for their overall & reproductive health. All those conditions have been linked to low BMI, with fat % effectively unimportant (given typical samples, with a normal distribution) - ie it's accounted for by variance. BMI is exactly what matters for risk.
I am sure that studies of normal weight obesity will show other things. But OP isn't in that category.
I (briefly--working a 12-hour day today) looked over the studies you linked to and I think you are drawing more definite conclusions than are supported by the evidence. The only real longitudinal study specifically stated that:
"In conclusion, there is little evidence that BMI influences age at menopause in a way that is clinically relevant for later disease risk. Low BMI at all ages and underweight trajectory (20–36 years) were related to earlier age at start of HT, which may be a proxy measure for age at menopause. In order to understand the postmenopausal health implications for underweight women, further studies need to assess whether the association is due to an earlier menopause among underweight women or due to behavioural characteristics which mean that they start HT early, independent of menopausal status. "
And that is the challenge of all research--determining what is actually influencing the numbers. I am still staying with the idea that BMI is of extremely limited value when used to assess an individual, and one BMI number does not justify the alarmist response that is so often applied to women. FWIW, here is a link that describes the BMI's shortcomings in more detail, although the focus is on overweight rather than underweight individuals.
http://www.todaysdietitian.com/newarchives/010614p30.shtml
Again, I'll repeat for I believe the third time, I am not recommending that the OP use calorie restriction to lose fat or scale weight. (Although, hypothetically, we are talking about a loss of 6 pounds and a reduction of body fat % from 27 to 24---numbers that are not unhealthy by any definition).
I am trying to put this in perspective, however, in a real-life context. I see 10-12 women every year who fall into this category--normal BMI, but unexpectedly high levels of body fat. I have never advised any of them to "lose fat". I have always told them that they don't have a fat problem, they have a (lack of) muscle "problem". For their long-term health, I always emphasize the importance of resistance training first. But I also help them to understand the makeup of their bodies, so they don't draw the same conclusion as OP. Most of these women feel "fatter" than they look (and not because of body image issues). But they don't feel like they can verbalize their feelings because of the lecturing and negative comments they receive from their peers. I also explain the idea of inherited fat storage distribution patterns, so they have realistic expectations about what they can achieve.
The BMI isn't the be all / end all, of course not. Yes, it is a population measure. Yes, it doesn't account for body fat. However, with regard to the health risks I described above - which are well known to medical people, it's not just those studies I plucked out of a Google search - those are associated with low BMI. (18.5 and below is regarded as "extreme" low BMI in at least one of those studies). That's the association that has been found over multiple studies. (See also "female athlete triad".)
So BMI, even though it's imperfect, is a perfectly appropriate tool for a physician to use to evaluate those risks in a given individual, after examining that individual. Which is what happened with the OP.
Another thing with women is that because our society basically sets us up for body dysmorphia almost no matter what we look like, and because we have heard thousands of times over most of our lives that the way to handle body dissatisfaction is to lose weight, I am really not supportive of any message that even suggests that as a solution in a situation like the OP's.
Is she allowed to express body dissatisfaction? Sure. I completely (and directly) understand her complaints. There's nothing wrong with wanting to look a certain way, as long as it doesn't risk a person's health. There is just a lot of room for slippage between those old messages to "lose weight" and "be thin" and the new messages to "cut and bulk". Her MO until now has been to cardio her way down, so I feel like it's valuable for her to hear unambiguously that strength training while maintaining her current weight is the solution to her (valid) complaints. Which it unquestionably is.
*fist bump* 0 -
As a general rule I agree with @adzak in that BMI isn't all that and I regularly go against my doc's advice all the time (but I never recommend to others that they should).
Except here in this case, there's no reason for the OP to continue losing weight. Everyone with experience here knows that losing 7 or whatever more pounds isn't going to solve her belly fat problem nor her BF% problem. She's just going to add being underweight to her current issues.
Increase the protein, get serious about resistance training. Eat at maintenance. The bodyfat% and belly roll issues will be improved with increased LBM that may involve a higher goal weight than the OP suspects.
I don't think we are in disagreement at all in our advice to the OP or anyone else in this situation. As I said before, I have worked with dozens of women who fit the OP's profile, and what I tell them is pretty much what you described.
My expanded remarks (and yes this is a soapbox of mine--we all have them) address larger issues:
1. Inappropriateness of using BMI to judge the OPs physical condition, "health risks" and goals.
2. The need to consider body composition before jumping to (wrong) conclusions.
3. The need to emphasize that, misguided as OPs strategy was (i.e. continued dieting to lose fat), there was nothing inherently harmful if she did so and her desire to lose more fat did not automatically indicate any psychological/body image problems. It merely represented a lack of knowledge about her body composition and the appropriate strategy to achieve her goal.
4. The need to counter the alarmist tone of some of the comments that appear in these situations.
0 -
That's fair0
-
"health risks"? why the quotation marks? those are real things that happen to people
0 -
OP here! I've taken the time to read every single one of your comments and links. Not a single one offended me, rather I intrigued by the "passionate" responses. Pretty much every single post I ever saw on MFP regarding my issue had the same responses - just lose more weight. Now, that doesn't seem to be the case.
Now for a few updates/responses:
- I do take a multivitamin every morning
- My doctor's comment about stop losing weight was based in her 1) fear of what might happen if I randomly get the flu or something and inevitably lose more weight along with 2) hormone/reproductive health/not going into early menopause. Nothing else.
- My weightlifter student has never made any comments about losing more weight or taking on a "cut/bulk" strategy (a strategy I don't even understand what it is).
- I have worked to up my protein, but I *think* it's still bad? I don't even know what it should be? Something like .8g per kilogram of weight? So if I weight 124 that's roughly 56kg. That times .8 = 44.8g. Did I get that right? It was just last month I spoke with our nutritionist (someone I've seem 3 times over the year) and it was the first time I brought up the issue of "macros" as referenced by a couple of my students. In looking back at MFP, I previous had daily protein averages in the 30s. Since then in focusing on it, I'm up in the 50s & 60s.
- Yes, both my parents are/were "apple" shaped (genetics) and my mom used to be pretty darn thin back in the day too.
- I've already cut out a lot out of my diet: vast majority of bread, all sodas & juices, alcohol (I'm not a drinker). I've fallen in love with my protein bars & Fairlife milk (as my post-workout snack). However, I'm horrible with fruits & veggies as well as having a massive "sweet tooth" (that I try to limit to the weekend).
- Our university fitness class schedule was just released and as fate would have it, my favorite cardio classes are either not offered at times that work for me or are not offered at all. The classes that best fit my schedule are Total Body Tone (with weights) and Hardcore, both of which I've taken in the past. One of my frustrations this summer has been the students in one of our weight rooms, but I remembered faculty/staff-only hours will begin again on Monday.
- Yes, I have been doing weightlifting "splits" because I have to go to the gym for lower body, but can do all upper body at home. Plus upper takes me twice as long as lower because 1) I have twice as many exercises and 2) my upper is notably weaker than lower.
- My "belly" measurement is roughly 32-33" while my hips are only 37".
A final note:
Might I have a touch of body image issues? Perhaps. I took note of this in attending a Jazzercize class with my BFF. It was strange to see "real women" vs co-eds around me. Also, I'm the one who pulled one of my students into my office last year to voice my concern about her weight loss, which resulted in her confession of an eating disorder. Luckily she is now in recovery.
Overall I'm (now) really more focused on the "look" of my body rather than the scale; I'm just not yet educated enough on these topics to know what to "do next".
So after reading through everything, maybe some of you have some good ideas about my remaining questions:
- What difference does it make between splits vs total body weightlifting?
- What difference does it make in weightlifting if I'm eating at deficit vs maintenance? I've already noticed some muscle definition in deficit and fear going to maintenance will result in bulk.
- Should I do heavier weights/less reps or lighter weights/more reps? (As an example I'm now squatting 4 sets of 8reps with 15-20lb. There was a girl that looked similar to me right after me doing the same, but with 50lb! I don't understand how she isn't "bulky"!)
Thanks for sticking with this thread!0 -
Basics:
Female, 5'7", 124lbs (down from 154)
BMI: 19.4
Body fat %: 27.3
Eating at deficit: 1250 cal/day
Protein: Worked to increase it from 30g to 50-60g/day (I don't know how to increase this more without adding total calories.)
Workouts: Recently new to weightlifting while still keeping some running/HIIT/cardio
You are a little taller but the same weight as my girlfriend. Here are her macros.
Protein 150 grams * 4 calories 600
Carbs 125 grams * 4 calories 500
Fats 25 grams * 9 calories 225
Total calories 1325
Take a look at Mike Matthews site musclesforlife.com. You should start lifting heavy and you will gain muscle and still loose body fat %. These calories are based on about a 20-25% deficit from the daily burn. I'm doing the same thing although I'm at 200lbs. We have both lost fat, added muscle and feel great. If you decide to stop losing weight and just add muscle (bulking up) you can up your calories.
0 -
OP's original question:
2. How exactly does weightlifting impact abs since I seems to be working all the muscle groups except the abs?!
I may have missed it but I don't think anyone's addressed this - it strikes me as a good question, and I'd like to know the answer too. Is this just the case of the core muscles getting an incidental workout due to the balancing and reinforcement involved in lifting?
I am sure I've read that abs are not the only muscle involved in creating a flat stomach - as far as I've gathered, all the core muscles are involved, and the transverse especially (big flat muscle that runs round like a girdle). Is this part of the problem with people who have reached a good weight but still have a "belly roll"? How much would weightlifting help with this?
Also, aren't "visible abs" only visible when you actively flex them? And less visible on women than men?0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.8K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 396 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 967 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions