What do you think about the body's natural weight?

LadyTalulah

I think there will be a lot of conflicting opinions with this question.
Do you think that the body has a natural weight (or more body fat % rather than weight) that is determined by genetics and it tries hard to keep within that range?
It makes sense to me, considering that there are just people who are naturally thin and others who are naturally bigger.
I ask this because I'm starting to think that my body is EXTREMELY stubborn when it comes to it's desired weight. Let me clarify, I'm not by any means overweight and I'm not looking for an excuse as to why I "can't lose the last 5 pounds". I'm just realizing that when I start to drop in body fat %, my body rebels, I become so sensitive to blood sugar drops, I'm tired and cold all the time and I stop getting my period. Where as for some of my other friends, that same body fat % is natural to them. I always end up back at my regular weight, which is anywhere between 53 and 56 kg (I'm 165cm). So what I would call my "natural weight" is not at all big, in fact I'm quite small. It's just not lean with defined muscles.
I think I just feel like I'm striving to get that "perfect figure" and my body just won't adapt no matter how slowly I lose the fat or what nutritional plan I'm on!
Anyways, what are your opinions?

ultrahoon

53-56 is a slightly underweight to healthy weight range for a lady of your height. It sounds to me like you were pushing yourself to be too far underweight before.

Bacchants

How are you measuring your body fat %? As if you are using scales it could be out by quite a bit so though the scales are showing you and your friend as the same you could be out by quite margin.

If your body fat is low enough for your period to stop then that's a sign you're way too low!

Do you do heavy weightlifting? As that's how people look lean with defined muscles (and having bigger muscles can mean a heavier scale reading but still looking really lean).

DeguelloTex

No, I don't think it does have a natural weight.

Sued0nim

The body deals with being underweight by shutting down non vital processes yes

Do you think it's possible for you to learn something from this?

msf74

It's been a while since I considered the subject but I think there is a difference between a set point (no, I'm not talking about tennis but a genetic point where your body will fight and resist all attempts to move from it) and a settling point (the point where weight tends to plateau and people find hard to move from due to habitual behaviours which they find it hard to break rather than actual biology.)

I think most people will be dealing with a settling point rather than a set point unless they are particularly underweight or very lean.)

brianpperkins

Bodies do not have a "natural weight" but they do react negatively when one fails to provide them proper nutrition when starving for a "perfect figure" ... whatever that is.

Kalikel

Probably. Healthy bodies probably have a range where they're happy and want to remain.

Starve your body and it will fight you with hunger, weakness and dizziness. Eat too much (of healthy foods) and you'll feel uncomfortably stuffed and kind of sluggy.

I think they find a place they like and try to stay there.

It's really easy to pack the pounds on by eating junk food, though. You don't get the uncomfortably-stuffed feeling because you don't have to stuff yourself to take in so many calories. Even so, the pounds begin to pack on. Eventually, you have less energy.

If you're thin and your body is fighting you on weight loss, listen to it! Eat a little more. Don't starve yourself into a hospital bed, for Pete's sake. Tube Up The Nose isn't a good look.

LadyTalulah

Yes on the heavy weightlifting! 5x a week.
On the bioelectric impedance scales (which I know aren't the most accurate but the only bf measurement I have access to) I'm measured anywhere between 19-20% consistently. Which again I would like to clarify I KNOW I'm not overweight. But I'm just not as lean as many others who work out less and eat worse than me, and when I do get even a bit lower my body reacts badly.
Don't think it's all in my head or that I'm just looking for people to tell me "Eat something, you're too thin." Even my trainer said most others would be much l leaner if they followed my plan, considering my age, how much I work out and what I eat, yet my body just doesn't seem to want to adapt.
This question was more of a general one to be honest. I was using myself as an example but I'm more interested in your own experiences.


**Edited because of typo

Need2Exerc1se

No, I don't believe we have a natural weight determined by genetics. I do think we have a happy weight that is determined by lifestyle.

LadyTalulah

msf74 wrote: »

It's been a while since I considered the subject but I think there is a difference between a set point (no, I'm not talking about tennis but a genetic point where your body will fight and resist all attempts to move from it) and a settling point (the point where weight tends to plateau and people find hard to move from due to habitual behaviours which they find it hard to break rather than actual biology.)

Ahh really interesting point! I never thought of it like that.

msf74

LadyTalulah wrote: »

msf74 wrote: »

It's been a while since I considered the subject but I think there is a difference between a set point (no, I'm not talking about tennis but a genetic point where your body will fight and resist all attempts to move from it) and a settling point (the point where weight tends to plateau and people find hard to move from due to habitual behaviours which they find it hard to break rather than actual biology.)

Ahh really interesting point! I never thought of it like that.

You'll probably find the following article interesting:

Settling points and body weight regulation

For years I thought that I had a set point which I couldn't move from when in reality I was eating more and exercising less than I imagined. The issue was as much psychology as physiology.

brianpperkins

So we have comparison to others with a lot of assuming as to what they truly do when not with you, blind trust in a trainer (a group with limited, at best, nutritional training) who spoke in generalities, seeking the "perfect figure" ... all while ignoring that what your body is signalling is not a weight issue, it's a nutritional issue.

LadyTalulah

brianpperkins wrote: »

So we have comparison to others with a lot of assuming as to what they truly do when not with you, blind trust in a trainer (a group with limited, at best, nutritional training) who spoke in generalities, seeking the "perfect figure" ... all while ignoring that what your body is signalling is not a weight issue, it's a nutritional issue.

Did you use google translate or something? It's hard to make sense of what you're saying.

LadyTalulah

msf74 wrote: »

LadyTalulah wrote: »

msf74 wrote: »

It's been a while since I considered the subject but I think there is a difference between a set point (no, I'm not talking about tennis but a genetic point where your body will fight and resist all attempts to move from it) and a settling point (the point where weight tends to plateau and people find hard to move from due to habitual behaviours which they find it hard to break rather than actual biology.)

Ahh really interesting point! I never thought of it like that.

You'll probably find the following article interesting:

Settling points and body weight regulation

For years I thought that I had a set point which I couldn't move from when in reality I was eating more and exercising less than I imagined. The issue was as much psychology as physiology.

Awesome, thanks for the article! Will have to go over it

DeguelloTex

LadyTalulah wrote: »

brianpperkins wrote: »

So we have comparison to others with a lot of assuming as to what they truly do when not with you, blind trust in a trainer (a group with limited, at best, nutritional training) who spoke in generalities, seeking the "perfect figure" ... all while ignoring that what your body is signalling is not a weight issue, it's a nutritional issue.

Did you use google translate or something? It's hard to make sense of what you're saying.

I believe he's saying that you're getting a lot of conclusions based on shaky premises, trusting the opinion of a trainer who probably has scant nutritional training, and have potentially counterproductive goals.

accidentalpancake

I believe there is a set range for optimum performance. It's basic biology. Organisms try to maintain homeostasis, and the human body is no different. While highly adaptable, there is certainly a point at which the system as a whole functions best.

LadyTalulah

DeguelloTex wrote: »

LadyTalulah wrote: »

brianpperkins wrote: »

So we have comparison to others with a lot of assuming as to what they truly do when not with you, blind trust in a trainer (a group with limited, at best, nutritional training) who spoke in generalities, seeking the "perfect figure" ... all while ignoring that what your body is signalling is not a weight issue, it's a nutritional issue.

Did you use google translate or something? It's hard to make sense of what you're saying.

I believe he's saying that you're getting a lot of conclusions based on shaky premises, trusting the opinion of a trainer who probably has scant nutritional training, and have potentially counterproductive goals.

Ah, much clearer, thank you. Possibly, although I am more inclined to believe a trainer's opinion than my own. Especially because in my country, trainers have to go through a vigorous year long course and have many classes on nutrition and basic biology before they are legally allowed to practice. I've heard that in North America though it's basically just a class on the weekend and then you're qualified. I would be more wary of their opinion, for sure.

lemurcat12

I think there's likely a body fat range that your body will try to maintain (not anywhere near overweight, of course) through symptoms like those you mentioned. Similarly, it's common for women to stop menstruating if they get too thin. There probably are some natural variations. I don't think -- and don't think you are suggesting -- that this explains why people get overweight, as some claim. I think that idea is essentially disproven by the dramatic variances in percentage overweight that we see within countries like the US over time. It's clearly not explained by natural weights.

TimothyFish

I think there are genetic factors that make it so that people required different amounts of calories and enjoy different types of foods, but I don't think that alone gives a person a "natural weight." The other piece of the puzzle is that we have habits when it comes to eating and exercise. We tend to eat the same amount of food all the time. Part of this is habit. A person who doesn't weigh and measure stuff gets up in the morning and fixes breakfast. One egg or two? It'll be the same answer every morning. A bowl of cereal? It'll be the same size bowl with about the same amount of milk. So, even though they don't know how many calories they're eating, it is a near constant number. For lunch, salad or hamburger and fries? Soda with that? Again, it'll be a similar answer every day. For supper, snack on stuff or fix a meal? Again, same answer every day and a near constant number of calories. By making similar choices every day, it makes it seem like our body has a weight that it wants to be, when it is actually that we just keep doing the same thing over and over.

Francl27

rabbitjb wrote: »

The body deals with being underweight by shutting down non vital processes yes

Do you think it's possible for you to learn something from this?

This.