Goal Weight - Feeling Confused.

PinkPixiexox

Hi every one :]

I am 5 ft 2 and I started at 157 lbs which put me in the 'overweight' category (boooo!). After almost 5 months of some real dedication and hard work, I am hitting 126 lbs and feeling a lot better for it too! I am also hitting a 'healthy' weight for my height although I could still lose a few more pounds.

I originally set my 'goal weight' as 120 lbs which to me seemed like a solid, decent number to aim for although admittedly, it's the inch loss that really matters. Having said that, I came across a thread on here aimed at 5 ft 2 women and the discussion was about 'desired goal weights' based on that particular height. After reading that post, I was really bought to earth with a thud as it seems most women my height consider 120 lbs to be at the higher end of their 'comfortable weight range'. Every one is different and I get that, but I can't help feeling a bit down in the dumps to read that medically, I'd be better going even lower. The vast majority were going with 110 lbs or thereabouts and the sheer thought of having to lose another 16 lbs just disheartens me when I only had around 7 or so to go until I could start maintaining.

Of course it's up to me how low I go and of course I'll focus on the inch loss too but am I being unreasonable in feeling upset that my weight is in fact considered high to the majority? To lose these 30 lbs has been challenging yet rewarding - I think I've done really well with it but I feel I'm definitely hitting my "Ok, lets ease it up a little" point. I've set my calories so I'm losing 0.5 per week but if I truly have 16 more to lose, the sheer thought of having to consume 1200 calories again is awful!

I guess I wanted to moan and feel sorry for myself. I really just don't know how 'good' I'd personally look at 110 pounds. I have curves and I squat heavy and lift weights - I fear 110 on me would look a bit waif like. Not sure how to approach these next few weeks.. Any tips?

SO sorry if this was a massive ramble!

20yearsyounger

I'm going to key on this key statement I am hitting 126 lbs and feeling a lot better for it too! I am also hitting a 'healthy' weight for my height although I could still lose a few more pounds This is really a personal decision regarding how you want to feel and look. Forget other 5ft 2 women.

newyorkcitymom

I'm taller so it's hard for me to comment a lot, but I think if you feel good and happy at 120, then that's fine. I would slow your weight loss rate way down (1/2 lb or even less sounds right) and focus on your lifting, developing sustainable, healthy habits you can live with and figuring out what close to maintenance feels like. When you get to 120, see how you feel. It's also about what you are willing to maintain at over the long haul. I would rather have 5 or 10 extra pounds and be able to maintain at a higher calorie level than feel like I'm dieting forever. Whatever you do, don't go down to 1,200 cals - no one can do that forever!

PinkPixiexox

newyorkcitymom wrote: »

I'm taller so it's hard for me to comment a lot, but I think if you feel good and happy at 120, then that's fine. I would slow your weight loss rate way down (1/2 lb or even less sounds right) and focus on your lifting, developing sustainable, healthy habits you can live with and figuring out what close to maintenance feels like. When you get to 120, see how you feel. It's also about what you are willing to maintain at over the long haul. I would rather have 5 or 10 extra pounds and be able to maintain at a higher calorie level than feel like I'm dieting forever. Whatever you do, don't go down to 1,200 cals - no one can do that forever!

Thank you - this was helpful. I definitely don't intend to go to 1200, I really think i'd rather drag this process out a few months longer than have that level of deprivation - all for the sake of a number. I think I'll get to 120 as you suggested and then re-evaluate how I feel then.

rybo

The only thing you truly need to meet is the goal you want for the way you feel and look that makes you the most happy. No other goal related to any 5-2 girl that isn't you, doesn't matter at all.

WBB55

I'm taller than you, but I wanted to give you some perspective on the potential difference from one person to the next.

At 5'6" I got down to 139 lbs a few years ago. But according to measurements, I had only about 89 lbs of lean mass. Meaning I had 50 lbs of fat still. At 139 I was not "happy" with my body. The belly fat, arm fat, fat on my calves... *shudder*. At that amount of lean mass, I would have had to get down to about 115 lbs before my BF% was in the 22% range -- that's when most women start looking quite fit.

I don't recommend the injuries and such I've gone through in the past 4 years building up my lean mass, however I now have about 108 lbs of lean mass. Which means at that same 22%BF, I now would weigh 138 lbs.

That's 23 lbs heavier of a goal than before on the same height of woman.

Or, put it another way, right now at 156 lbs I'm wearing the same clothes I was wearing at 145 lbs 4 years ago. That 19 extra lbs of lean mass I now have means I'm the same size now that I was 11 lbs lighter. That's the kind of difference one person can have depending on their lean mass. Don't compare yourself to other women. Honestly were I you, I'd move towards recomp right now. Or at least stop stepping on the scale as often and simply aim for lowering your BF% now. That's my advice.

MommyL2015

I am 5'1", started at 170, now down to 130, which is at the very tippy-top of the ideal range for my height. My ultimate goal is 120 but my stomach, hips and abs area in general is still really squishy, so if it doesn't go away by the time I hit 120, I may try going to 115 or 110. I cannot remember the last time I weighed less than 125, so that would sure be something. I might feel way too skinny.

I really would like to get rid of my belly but I also don't want to look too skinny. I do have hand weights that I have been using regularly for my arms, and I walk on an incline so my legs really look good and I'm satisfied there. I've started to do crunches and squats and stuff to work on my abs but until the belly goes away, I don't think I'll be 100% satisfied. I have always, as long as I can remember--even as a kid, had a squishy belly, so maybe that's just the way I am and it won't ever be as flat as I'd like it to be.

soapsandropes

You need to be happy with yourself and your goals. Since you lift you might carry around a little extra weight in muscle mass and that is ok. Don't compare yourself to others, that way leads to constant disappointment. You can always re-evaluate when you get to your goal but I wouldn't change the plan now.

callsitlikeiseeit

if i wanted to be the same size as (it seems) most 5'1 women want to be... id be 100 pounds.

no thanks.

aiming for 130 and will reevaluate from there, MAYBE.

PinkPixiexox

WBB55 wrote: »

I'm taller than you, but I wanted to give you some perspective on the potential difference from one person to the next.

At 5'6" I got down to 139 lbs a few years ago. But according to measurements, I had only about 89 lbs of lean mass. Meaning I had 50 lbs of fat still. At 139 I was not "happy" with my body. The belly fat, arm fat, fat on my calves... *shudder*. At that amount of lean mass, I would have had to get down to about 115 lbs before my BF% was in the 22% range -- that's when most women start looking quite fit.

I don't recommend the injuries and such I've gone through in the past 4 years building up my lean mass, however I now have about 108 lbs of lean mass. Which means at that same 22%BF, I now would weigh 138 lbs.

That's 23 lbs heavier of a goal than before on the same height of woman.

Or, put it another way, right now at 156 lbs I'm wearing the same clothes I was wearing at 145 lbs 4 years ago. That 19 extra lbs of lean mass I now have means I'm the same size now that I was 11 lbs lighter. That's the kind of difference one person can have depending on their lean mass. Don't compare yourself to other women. Honestly were I you, I'd move towards recomp right now. Or at least stop stepping on the scale as often and simply aim for lowering your BF% now. That's my advice.

Thank you so much for this ^^

Some fantastic advice. Having read that, I have absolutely no idea of my body fat percentage (which I probably really should know). How would I go about finding that out? Is reducing body fat all about the deficit? What exactly is recomp? Apologies for the 50,000 questions! When it comes to weight loss, I totally get the basics but when it starts getting technical, my mind explodes!

PinkPixiexox

callsitlikeiseeit wrote: »

if i wanted to be the same size as (it seems) most 5'1 women want to be... id be 100 pounds.

no thanks.

aiming for 130 and will reevaluate from there, MAYBE.

Yes! This! Thank you.
I must stop the comparisons.. It's not a good move.

WBB55

PinkPixiexox wrote: »

WBB55 wrote: »

I'm taller than you, but I wanted to give you some perspective on the potential difference from one person to the next.

At 5'6" I got down to 139 lbs a few years ago. But according to measurements, I had only about 89 lbs of lean mass. Meaning I had 50 lbs of fat still. At 139 I was not "happy" with my body. The belly fat, arm fat, fat on my calves... *shudder*. At that amount of lean mass, I would have had to get down to about 115 lbs before my BF% was in the 22% range -- that's when most women start looking quite fit.

I don't recommend the injuries and such I've gone through in the past 4 years building up my lean mass, however I now have about 108 lbs of lean mass. Which means at that same 22%BF, I now would weigh 138 lbs.

That's 23 lbs heavier of a goal than before on the same height of woman.

Or, put it another way, right now at 156 lbs I'm wearing the same clothes I was wearing at 145 lbs 4 years ago. That 19 extra lbs of lean mass I now have means I'm the same size now that I was 11 lbs lighter. That's the kind of difference one person can have depending on their lean mass. Don't compare yourself to other women. Honestly were I you, I'd move towards recomp right now. Or at least stop stepping on the scale as often and simply aim for lowering your BF% now. That's my advice.

Thank you so much for this ^^

Some fantastic advice. Having read that, I have absolutely no idea of my body fat percentage (which I probably really should know). How would I go about finding that out? Is reducing body fat all about the deficit? What exactly is recomp? Apologies for the 50,000 questions! When it comes to weight loss, I totally get the basics but when it starts getting technical, my mind explodes!

I use heybale's spreadsheet (make sure to save yourself a copy on your own google drive). His profile is here, if you have questions.

SLLRunner

PinkPixiexox wrote: »

Hi every one :]

I am 5 ft 2 and I started at 157 lbs which put me in the 'overweight' category (boooo!). After almost 5 months of some real dedication and hard work, I am hitting 126 lbs and feeling a lot better for it too! I am also hitting a 'healthy' weight for my height although I could still lose a few more pounds.

I originally set my 'goal weight' as 120 lbs which to me seemed like a solid, decent number to aim for although admittedly, it's the inch loss that really matters. Having said that, I came across a thread on here aimed at 5 ft 2 women and the discussion was about 'desired goal weights' based on that particular height. After reading that post, I was really bought to earth with a thud as it seems most women my height consider 120 lbs to be at the higher end of their 'comfortable weight range'. Every one is different and I get that, but I can't help feeling a bit down in the dumps to read that medically, I'd be better going even lower. The vast majority were going with 110 lbs or thereabouts and the sheer thought of having to lose another 16 lbs just disheartens me when I only had around 7 or so to go until I could start maintaining.

Of course it's up to me how low I go and of course I'll focus on the inch loss too but am I being unreasonable in feeling upset that my weight is in fact considered high to the majority? To lose these 30 lbs has been challenging yet rewarding - I think I've done really well with it but I feel I'm definitely hitting my "Ok, lets ease it up a little" point. I've set my calories so I'm losing 0.5 per week but if I truly have 16 more to lose, the sheer thought of having to consume 1200 calories again is awful!

I guess I wanted to moan and feel sorry for myself. I really just don't know how 'good' I'd personally look at 110 pounds. I have curves and I squat heavy and lift weights - I fear 110 on me would look a bit waif like. Not sure how to approach these next few weeks.. Any tips?

SO sorry if this was a massive ramble!

Pink, congrats on your weight loss. Job well done!

If you are in a healthy BMI range, then you need to keep your weight where you are comfortable and not compare yourself with other people. What feels most comfortable for you is what matters. You sound like you have a healthy mindset about weight management so I have no doubt you'll intuitively know when you've reached your goal weight.

PinkPixiexox

SLLRunner wrote: »

PinkPixiexox wrote: »

Hi every one :]

I am 5 ft 2 and I started at 157 lbs which put me in the 'overweight' category (boooo!). After almost 5 months of some real dedication and hard work, I am hitting 126 lbs and feeling a lot better for it too! I am also hitting a 'healthy' weight for my height although I could still lose a few more pounds.

I originally set my 'goal weight' as 120 lbs which to me seemed like a solid, decent number to aim for although admittedly, it's the inch loss that really matters. Having said that, I came across a thread on here aimed at 5 ft 2 women and the discussion was about 'desired goal weights' based on that particular height. After reading that post, I was really bought to earth with a thud as it seems most women my height consider 120 lbs to be at the higher end of their 'comfortable weight range'. Every one is different and I get that, but I can't help feeling a bit down in the dumps to read that medically, I'd be better going even lower. The vast majority were going with 110 lbs or thereabouts and the sheer thought of having to lose another 16 lbs just disheartens me when I only had around 7 or so to go until I could start maintaining.

Of course it's up to me how low I go and of course I'll focus on the inch loss too but am I being unreasonable in feeling upset that my weight is in fact considered high to the majority? To lose these 30 lbs has been challenging yet rewarding - I think I've done really well with it but I feel I'm definitely hitting my "Ok, lets ease it up a little" point. I've set my calories so I'm losing 0.5 per week but if I truly have 16 more to lose, the sheer thought of having to consume 1200 calories again is awful!

I guess I wanted to moan and feel sorry for myself. I really just don't know how 'good' I'd personally look at 110 pounds. I have curves and I squat heavy and lift weights - I fear 110 on me would look a bit waif like. Not sure how to approach these next few weeks.. Any tips?

SO sorry if this was a massive ramble!

Pink, congrats on your weight loss. Job well done!

If you are in a healthy BMI range, then you need to keep your weight where you are comfortable and not compare yourself with other people. What feels most comfortable for you is what matters. You sound like you have a healthy mindset about weight management so I have no doubt you'll intuitively know when you've reached your goal weight.

Ah thank you for this!

You're absolutely right, I need to have strong words with myself sometimes! I'm very inwardly competitive so if I see room for improvement, I tend to jump for it with both hands which is definitely not always a good thing! I think I will try and take this one pound at a time from now on (it's going to be a very slow process from here on anyway!). I spend so much time writing comments to people explaining that the number on the scale isn't the defining factor of success yet here I am ranting and raving! Let's see what 120 brings!

maidentl

I guess I am in a good position as I have been a normal weight in the past. My lowest weight was about 119 and I looked fine then. I was like a size 2, I don't think I could have gone much smaller. That said, it took a lot of work to get there. I easily maintained 136 for years before getting down to that and now that I am older, if I can just get back to 136, I will be happy. Not to say I won't re-evaluate, but that's my initial long-term goal.

newyorkcitymom

Oh wait! I didn't realize this was you. I've said this before, but you look amazing. I'm pretty sure you have a lot of lean muscle mass, which will help you with maintenance and helps you look good. I think if you very slowly lost 6 more pounds (over several months) while lifting heavy, you will look fantastic. Do you lift heavy? I loved new rules of lifting for women. I would try to shift from weight loss goals to performance goals - it will be good for you psychologically and the body will follow along.

PinkPixiexox

newyorkcitymom wrote: »

Oh wait! I didn't realize this was you. I've said this before, but you look amazing. I'm pretty sure you have a lot of lean muscle mass, which will help you with maintenance and helps you look good. I think if you very slowly lost 6 more pounds (over several months) while lifting heavy, you will look fantastic. Do you lift heavy? I loved new rules of lifting for women. I would try to shift from weight loss goals to performance goals - it will be good for you psychologically and the body will follow along.

It's meeee!

Oh thank you so, so much. You are so kind and that's so nice to hear! I'm lifting heavy and incorporating cardio (The cardio mainly because it makes me feel good!) in to my work outs. I think you are absolutely spot on with what you are saying and I will check out the new rules of lifting for women. Thank you again, I will now go to the gym blushing!

preeJAY

There is no need to compare with other people and other bodies Stop at whichever weight you feel happy with and can comfortably maintain.

I personally do not understand why we focus on a specific number when we all have different bodies and look different at different weights. Also, when younger, I looked much slimmer at my SW of 130lbs; unfortunately, after years of yo-yo dieting and losing lots of muscle each time, I was looking like a puffy fluffy jello. 130lbs with more muscles looks nothing like 130lbs and 30% bf.

Currently, I go entirely by the fit of clothes and photos, and know the process is working. I actually have NO IDEA what my weight is right now; just that I'm fitting comfortably back into size 2, whereas previously things were bulging out everywhere, AND I am loving all the muscular definition showing up where none ever did. In fact, I don't intend to find out either, until I can easily fit into this one size 2 suede skirt I have, that has NO STRETCH whatsoever but I doubt it'll be a superlow scale number.

Regarding next steps: If the thought of going back to 1200 is too much, then DON'T DO IT! Stay with 0.5 lbs/week; you'll still lose anyway, and you can adjust up and down, and see how you feel about things as you go. As we get to within 10-20 lbs of healthy weight, even 5 lbs make a huge difference in appearance~

jkal1979

Comparison is the thief of joy.

I think it's been mentioned already, but I'm willing to bet that these women are not taking their body composition or bf % into consideration when choosing a goal. Keep doing what you are doing and you can always reevaluate your goals once you get to your current goal weight and don't worry about what other people think is "ideal".

RoxieDawn

I am 5'4" and what my weight is now compared to others my height will never be the same. And I had a time in my life where I felt and looked the best, so I used this as bench mark, but I am no where what that number was and I aimed for 8 to 10 pounds heavier than that weight..

So you can create a goal, but it can change daily or even weekly especially as each pounds creeps off...

Patience is your friend...

cbnorris

If you are comfortable with 120, then stick to 120! It's YOUR goal weight. You've been doing this long enough to have reasonable goals and expectations, don't let other's goals deter yours or let you get down. Also - I think that often times goals when you first start can certainly shift. These same people who had goals of 110, may also edit their once they get closer to their weight. Regardless, you look phenomenal!

TracyeS4

You may remember me from the 5'2" discussion. I truly feel like I would look ill if I got down to 110, 120, or even 130. 140 is probably as low as I will get. Everyone has different frames, even if they are the same height. Go until you feel comfortable with your body.

wkwebby

I can absolutely guarantee that the other women thinking that they were going to 110 were not lifting. There is only so far you can go down if you are lifting and actually have muscles to show for it. My original goal weight was 135 or 130 thinking that this is where I was 15 years ago (when I wasn't lifting). Now that I lift, my trainer thinks that I would look skeletal if I got down that low (or at least lose my strength). The lowest he suggested was 140 and now at 147, I'm kind of stalling, but I can fit into clothing that I couldn't for the last few years. It's all relative and genetics. Don't compare with others. Nobody wins.

mrssabre113

If you are happy with where you are and going at the pace you are, stick to it.

I'm pretty much where you are. I'm 5'0, starting weight was 156, current weight is 130, goal weight is 125. 125 is probably a little on the "heavy" side for my height, but I am feeling good. My clothes are fitting more comfortably, people are noticing my weight loss, and most importantly I am feeling way better. I too have curves and I think anything under 120 would be too skinny for me.

You got to do what feels right for you, not what others are aimed at.

Congrats on your weight loss and keep it up.

cwolfman13

PinkPixiexox wrote: »

Hi every one :]

I am 5 ft 2 and I started at 157 lbs which put me in the 'overweight' category (boooo!). After almost 5 months of some real dedication and hard work, I am hitting 126 lbs and feeling a lot better for it too! I am also hitting a 'healthy' weight for my height although I could still lose a few more pounds.

I originally set my 'goal weight' as 120 lbs which to me seemed like a solid, decent number to aim for although admittedly, it's the inch loss that really matters. Having said that, I came across a thread on here aimed at 5 ft 2 women and the discussion was about 'desired goal weights' based on that particular height. After reading that post, I was really bought to earth with a thud as it seems most women my height consider 120 lbs to be at the higher end of their 'comfortable weight range'. Every one is different and I get that, but I can't help feeling a bit down in the dumps to read that medically, I'd be better going even lower. The vast majority were going with 110 lbs or thereabouts and the sheer thought of having to lose another 16 lbs just disheartens me when I only had around 7 or so to go until I could start maintaining.

Of course it's up to me how low I go and of course I'll focus on the inch loss too but am I being unreasonable in feeling upset that my weight is in fact considered high to the majority? To lose these 30 lbs has been challenging yet rewarding - I think I've done really well with it but I feel I'm definitely hitting my "Ok, lets ease it up a little" point. I've set my calories so I'm losing 0.5 per week but if I truly have 16 more to lose, the sheer thought of having to consume 1200 calories again is awful!

I guess I wanted to moan and feel sorry for myself. I really just don't know how 'good' I'd personally look at 110 pounds. I have curves and I squat heavy and lift weights - I fear 110 on me would look a bit waif like. Not sure how to approach these next few weeks.. Any tips?

SO sorry if this was a massive ramble!

how so? if you are at a healthy BMI for your stats then there is really not going to be any additional medical benefit to going lower.

also...just an observation, but it seems to me that many of the female persuasion are simply obsessed with a number and having that number be at the lowest possible range of BMI...many have no clear understanding of BMI or why BMI provides for a range...I know women who have torched muscle mass (not just fat) because they were so obsessed with getting to the bottom of the range...and frankly, the person I'm talking about used to have a very attractive and athletic build...she looks skeletal and frankly like *kitten* at her current weight...she doesn't see it though...she just knows she hit her magic number as if that number actually matters.

michelle7673

I agree with all of the comments above
You look great, and you're building a curvy/strong figure, not a teeny willowy one -- both are great but they are different. Other people's expectations have NOTHING to do with what is legitimately healthy for YOU.
I would recommend that you take a fresh look at where you are shape-wise and maybe body fat percentage wise, and think about where you really want to go. "Recomping" is really "changing your shape and body fat percentage at the same weight". And no, it's not all about the deficit. It's about adding lean body mass too, and there are all kinds of ways to do that. But as my career coach once told me "you can't figure out how to get where you want to go unless you know where that is"...
120 sounds like a great goal weight, truly. IF that. But some more metrics might help you refine your strategy.

PinkPixiexox

You are all amazing - thank you SO much for helping me out

kdz526

My husband would freak if I got down to 110. He was actually worried when I said 135 (his words, please don't lose your butt). I think some of it has to do with the frame size too. A small frame person can do 110 but a larger frame person would not look the same. I personally have 6.5 inch wrists which indicates a large frame. The adjusted weight range for that is like 126 to 142. 135 would be great for me, if you go by that. I don't strive for the low bf% either, I personally think around 25% looks good. Its what works for YOU, not for that chick over there.

jdleanna

I was down to 108 ages ago. I think I looked like a stick. :-) I know some women look great at that weight. I didn't. I'm aiming for 125, maybe 120. Mainly aiming for strong, lean, fit. Everyone is different and the number on the scale translates differently on each person. You seem like healthy and fit is more important than as skinny as possible anyway!

bendyourkneekatie

kdz526 wrote: »

My husband would freak if I got down to 110. He was actually worried when I said 135 (his words, please don't lose your butt). I think some of it has to do with the frame size too. A small frame person can do 110 but a larger frame person would not look the same. I personally have 6.5 inch wrists which indicates a large frame. The adjusted weight range for that is like 126 to 142. 135 would be great for me, if you go by that. I don't strive for the low bf% either, I personally think around 25% looks good. Its what works for YOU, not for that chick over there.

Lol, I recently measured my wrists and I have a small frame :( And so the internet tells me my ideal weight is 117-132. I used to think my ideal was 140! I'm currently at 132, and thinking I may be aiming for the lower 120s.

Two things, OP. No three: you've done brilliantly and you look great!
Two things: Frame, body shape, all sorts of things can impact how weight carried looks and feels, and its health impacts. For me, pre kid # 2 I carried my weight on my hips and boobs, so could afford a few extra pounds without health or aesthetic downside. Now I carry my weight on my belly and I'm determined to get rid of that as it's both unhealthy and unattractive.
Also, you won't know how you feel until you get there, and there's no rush to make a decision. You can get to your goal, maintain there for months, years, whatever, see how you feel about it, and if at any point you're not happy, you know exactly what to do!

Everyone keeps telling me how skinny I look, some to the level of the whole annoying "you're too skinny, you need to eat blah blah blah" level, and some of those people are women smaller than me. People are rubbish at telling how much others weigh, your numbers are no one's business but your own.

pooks1976

kdz526 wrote: »

My husband would freak if I got down to 110. He was actually worried when I said 135 (his words, please don't lose your butt). I think some of it has to do with the frame size too. A small frame person can do 110 but a larger frame person would not look the same. I personally have 6.5 inch wrists which indicates a large frame. The adjusted weight range for that is like 126 to 142. 135 would be great for me, if you go by that. I don't strive for the low bf% either, I personally think around 25% looks good. Its what works for YOU, not for that chick over there.

Frame and body type really impact what your ideal weight will be. I am 5'2" and my wrist measures slightly less than 5", so I have a small frame. Add in being narrow overall, short torso, and small busted and I can't carry any extra weight at all without losing any impression of a waist. Just pick where you feel best and don't worry about what works for someone else.