Is the idea that we should gain just a little as we age a fallacy?

kristingjertsen

My doctor seems to think that muscle mass is a better indicator of being a healthy older adult. She commented once that she had recently seen a study that the amount of muscle in a woman's thighs at age 50 is a good indicator of just how healthy she will be in old age. She encouraged me to keep weight training, walking, biking, and eating a healthy diet with sensible portions and sensible splurges.

CarvedTones

VanVanDiane wrote: »

https://www.nhs.uk/news/obesity/bmi-and-survival-in-older-people/

An interesting response from the NHS here...

I have seen that. It is one reason my goal was to get into the normal BMI range but not way in. I want to stay below 25 but above 23. I am 24.2 right now.

psychod787

I have worked with the elderly off and on for years. It's kind of strange, but the over weigjt, not obese tend to do better. They maintain muscle mass and seem to have an easier time. The super slim and massively obese don't usually do to well.

mk2fit

@paperpudding Who needs a machine to lift someone who weighs 120#? I helped my mom get up and she weighed maybe 130#. No problem and no machines or cherry pickers.
@SummerSkier Woo Hoo!

Seriously folks, I am just shy of normal BMI and my doctor is ok with it. I am 59 and in pretty damn good health. I suppose if I were to be diagnosed with some weight-loss inducing disease tomorrow, I could out eat it as could most of us here.

90kgToNewMe

I'd say for the majority, men included, our bodies are less forgiving as we get older. We can't just feed our body endless empty calories and expect it to carry on like we are in our twenties. But, to answer the original question, that doesn't mean it isn't a problem if we gain weight. We can't take health for granted as we age. We need to work at it by trying to eat healthily and exercising.

For the record, when I was in my 20's I could eat whatever I wanted and had a BMI of underweight. By my late 20's I had a normal BMI and in my mid 30's I was overweight. By my early 40's I was obese. So underweight to very overweight in two decades! I'm now back to a normal weight through being careful about what I eat.

ryenday

I dropped almost 5 pounds last month. I was not trying to do so but: stomach flu ( or food poisoning- we never did determine) two 10 day courses of antibiotics, and traumatic dental work all happened that last month.

It got me thinking. My body has typically reacted to physical trauma by dropping weight. Surgeries, twisted ankles, broken finger, and even long airplane travel etc. typically mean I shed some pounds.

I do not assume this is true for anyone other than myself, but after thinking about how my body reacts to things - I think staying mid to high NORMAL BMI might be a good idea for me. (53 yo shorter woman currently at high end of normal BMI)

MissMaggieMuffin

JerSchmare wrote: »

I don’t know if I can express this in words well enough to make clear what I am trying to suggest, but I will try.

Many here are saying that one reason people gain as they age is because they become less active. But, as you age you become less active because you are aging. I’m talking about age 70+.

It sounds funny to me to blame it on the person, rather than the age.

At 53, I don’t feel the same level of energy I felt at age 20. I get tired. Working an 8 hour day 5 days a week is difficult, and I very much feel the toll on my body. At 25, I could go to work all day, go out after work and do a bunch of stuff, get home, sleep and do it again. Now, all I can do is work. After work, doing stuff is a grind. I need to relax for a while, catch my breathe, or chill. Doing things after a work day are pretty much out.

Maybe I misunderstood what some are saying here. But, just wanted to suggest that the aging process itself causes the inactivity, not the other way around. An active person will slow down with age. A power lifter might continue lifting into their 70’s but likely need much more rest time.

Somewhat to the point made by @JerSchmare, being active at 60 means something very different to me than it did at 30, 40 or even 50. At 40, I could and did run a 9 minute mile and regularly cycled 100k. Now, at 60, I am quite happy with an 11 minute mile and 50k bike rides. This is partially due to having less energy, but just as much my reluctance to spend the time it takes to maintain that level of fitness. While I am grateful that my health is such that I can continue to be active, at 60, I am much more selective about the way I spend precious time.

With regard to weight loss/maintaining weight, for many years I attributed a 30ish pound weight gain to age and menopause. It was only when I was brutally honest with myself about the food and beverages I was consuming regularly, did it become apparent that CI far exceeded CO. I was able to lose that weight - with about 5 or so vanity pounds to go. Those last 5 pounds are a challenge, but again, if I am honest with myself, my actually CI versus CO doesn't support weight loss.

CarvedTones

AnnPT77 wrote: »

VanVanDiane wrote: »

https://www.nhs.uk/news/obesity/bmi-and-survival-in-older-people/

An interesting response from the NHS here...

By looking at 70+, they've left out a bunch of people who've already died of things that are higher risk when overweight (CV events, cancer, complications of poorly-managed diabetes . . . ).

61 is the median age for cancer, 65 is the average age for men to have their first heart attack itf they ever have one. That doesn't mean they are non factors at 70+ but the herd has definitely been thinned.

I recently read an article on a long term study that had five factors - no tobacco, limited or no alcohol, regular exercise, good diet and normal BMI - which they found seemed to extend average life span dramatically. Men who had all 5 at age 50 had an average life span over 12 years longer than those who didn't. It was even bigger for women. The part I liked best was an opinion in a sidebar (Gupta, I think) that said it isn't too late if you achieve all those later if you have dodged the bullets so far. It's about decreased risk; there are no absolutes either way. You can put in the work and still drop dead from a heart attack and you can say screw it and sit around smoking and eating fatty junk food and still live independently to 100. But odds are that won't happen. I want the odds on my side, whether it plays out for me or not. The race is not always to the swift nor the battle to the strong but it's best to bet that way.

paperpudding

mk2fit wrote: »

@paperpudding Who needs a machine to lift someone who weighs 120#? I helped my mom get up and she weighed maybe 130#. No problem and no machines or cherry pickers.
@SummerSkier Woo Hoo!

Seriously folks, I am just shy of normal BMI and my doctor is ok with it. I am 59 and in pretty damn good health. I suppose if I were to be diagnosed with some weight-loss inducing disease tomorrow, I could out eat it as could most of us here.

Yes you could help your mum get up - that isnt the same as full lifting of someone who is a 'dead weight' because of major stroke or similar.

You also are not doing it repeatedly, like staff in nursing homes who lift many people and you do not have to adhere to OHS standards as staff do

So, yes, lifting machines are used on people who weigh 120lb. - certainly happens when I worked in nursing homes for over 20 years.