What is a healthy but also slim weight for a girl who is around 5’9”

kellynd12

I’m 5’9.5.” Current weight is 144 lbs. I’ve brought my weight down from 156 lbs. I have a fairly slight build, and still have some fat I’d like to lose and muscle I’d like to build, so I’m working on recomp. Good luck to you!

Privatesandbank

Safari_Gal_ wrote: »

@mentallyinmaldives - lol! My watch is on its smallest setting - I can’t take any extra links out, I think my wedding ring is 4.5 or 5.
Ps - just got back from the Maldives not to long ago— it was breathtaking!

Ahhh!! Thanks for commenting and the request. Between your post and another post similar I looked into frame size based ideal weight. It seems for someone with a very small frame like me an ideal weight is anything from 129 to 149. 😊

magnusthenerd

FionaNiConnor wrote: »

seltzermint555 wrote: »

FionaNiConnor wrote: »

Well, I'm 5'9" myself and trying to pare down to 200lbs. That being said, I have a number of factors that play into that seemingly high goal weight. I have polycystic ovarian syndrome- this means my body produces more testosterone than a female without PCOS. That translates to, in my case, a very large skeletal structure and more bulk muscle versus lean muscle. So while the typical BMI chart says I should weigh 145lbs, I have been that weight and looked like I was going to keel over from starvation at any minute.
For example: I wear a size 12 shoe, an XL glove, I have very broad shoulders, and at my current weight of 303lbs I can feel most of my ribs and my illiac crests (hip bones); 145lbs is just too little for my very large frame.

I see you've received several "disagrees" but I can honestly imagine this being true about 145 lb being too small for your frame. I used to be around 300 lb but I had a size 5 ring, size 7 shoe, tiny wrists, etc. I'm not meant to weigh 200+ for sure. However, at 160 lb (my lowest) I still have wide, wide hips and pretty broad shoulders and I know I might look fashionable at 145 but I don't think I'd look my best, to be honest. I think the wonky blood work and low, low libido I had around 160-163 tells me a lot about my "happy weight" and right now at 170-173 I truly feel my best.

I feel like anyone who clicked the "disagree" tag should message me and tell me why they thought so. I weighed 145lbs at 5'7" as a freshman in high school and was clearly not at a good weight for my large frame. Now at 35 years old, more than twice that weight, and two inches taller I'm also clearly not at a good weight! But at my full height and frame, I'm broader in the shoulder than my 6'4" father. There's nothing "svelte," "petite," or "slim" about me! I'm just... big. There's really no two ways about it, honestly.
Thank you for chiming in on my post! I appreciate the support.

I don't tend to use the disagree button, but I'd say most people who clicked it probably did so not because of your frame size discussion but for this: "more bulk muscle versus lean muscle." There isn't really such a thing as lean muscle or not lean muscle. If I was being extremely generous in interpretation, there is intramuscular triglycerides (IMT) and technically if someone had a very unusual physiology that stored large amounts of IMT / IMTG, perhaps that could mean they don't have lean muscle. That's being generous with language use though - I don't think I've ever known someone that understands what IMT is to use the term "lean muscle". Not to mention, that's worse for your position: testosterone probably discourages IMT storage as women tend to have higher IMT muscle levels than men, which could be regulated by some other factor, but I would bet on androgens generally being the reason why. That would imply PCOS should be giving you "lean muscle" over "bulky muscle".

A bit off from that - I would also wonder if low libido, if relatively low for yourself rather than compared to others, is perhaps a healthy sign, given you have PCOS with high testosterone. If being 160 put you at a low testosterone, I would not be surprised for your libido to be low relative to what was the norm for you.

seltzermint555

^ I think maybe you're mixing people up a little bit because I'm the one who said I had low libido at 160 and I don't have PCOS. I am a really energetic person and have what I'd say is a normal interest in sex...but when I was at my lowest, I had dramatically less energy, less interest in anything really and didn't have hardly any libido at all. Although I didn't have any other perimenopausal symptoms I was worried about that...doc says nope. Not in peri.
My bloodwork was really wonky and totally resumed normal when I gained back about 6-7 lb. That was several years ago. Anyway! Just wanted to clarify.

corinasue1143

I am 5’10”. At 140, I only looked a little overweight, like 130 would probably be good. But I spent every moment I could lying down, resting, and I was always hungry, always thinking about food. I felt good, had more energy, and easily maintained my weight at 160. Now I weigh 220. If I could choose a weight and feeling based on my past, it would definitely be 160.

I think you can read all these posts to get ideas, but you really have to decide when you get there what’s best for you.

magnusthenerd

seltzermint555 wrote: »

^ I think maybe you're mixing people up a little bit because I'm the one who said I had low libido at 160 and I don't have PCOS. I am a really energetic person and have what I'd say is a normal interest in sex...but when I was at my lowest, I had dramatically less energy, less interest in anything really and didn't have hardly any libido at all. Although I didn't have any other perimenopausal symptoms I was worried about that...doc says nope. Not in peri.
My bloodwork was really wonky and totally resumed normal when I gained back about 6-7 lb. That was several years ago. Anyway! Just wanted to clarify.

Ah sorry. Hard to tell who's quoted in the layered quotes when replying.

kristen8000

YoureAWalnut wrote: »

I'm 5"10 and currently at 188 lbs. My goal is to get down to 150 lbs since that is normal BMI but after seeing some of these posts I'm starting to feel that may be too low. I was between 160-170 for multiple years after college and have only recently gained the 10-20 lbs that put me over 180.

I'm 5'11 and 150 is my "happy weight". I'm a size 8 (sometimes 6). I started at 193. After getting to 143 in 2013ish, I gained/lost a few times to realize 150 is where I feel/look best.

So I don't feel your goal is too low.

s131951

As others have stated, I think it depends on frame/build and how you feel.

AnnPT77

s131951 wrote: »

As others have stated, I think it depends on frame/build and how you feel.

Exactly this. And for someone who is reasonably sensible, without significant issues that distort one's body image, it will usually be pretty easy to tell when getting close to/at the right weight.

One thing people don't always realize, that I don't think I mentioned in my earlier post: The goal weight you put in MFP has absolutely no effect on the calorie goal it will estimate for you. (It's only used for some progress-related features and motivational messages.)

This frees us to put in a provisional goal weight to start, and adjust it as many times as we need, as things move along. (I adjusted mine a couple of times, mostly because when "everyone said older women should carry some extra pounds compared to when a younger adult", everyone was wrong. ).

It's even fine to stop losing for weeks/months/years at some reasonably healthy weight, see how maintaining there works, then either lose some more (or gain a bit) to adjust.

Regardless of goal weight, as long as it's less than current weight, the MFP calorie goal and process will be exactly the same.