Weight target based on sitting height

kshama2001

ninerbuff wrote: »

Dazz123456789 wrote: »

It does not account for the full range. At my very fittest around 20 yo, with practically no body fat, I was about 170. Yes, some was muscle, but still.

I'm 5'7" and at 170lbs I'd still be around 12% body fat. I think you underestimate what no body fat looks like. When I competed at the same height, my competition weight was around 158lbs and that was at about 7% bodyfat.
Like others I think you're overthinking this. If you were around the 180lbs range, you'd be just fine.


A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

She may indeed be fine at 180, but at 5'7", that would give her an Overweight BMI of 28, which was kind of her point.

(Not sure you meant to say 180. In case not, an Overweight BMI starts at 160.)

SharpWellbeing

You could have the longest or shortest legs in the world and it would make no odds. Weight loss is individual, don't put such reliance on calculators and just play around with trial and error and find what works for you.

corinasue1143

This is very interesting. When I was a teenager, my dad, siblings and I were all about 19 on the BMI chart. None of us looked “skinny”, even though we were slim built. When I lost 10 pounds temporarily, I got lots of compliments on how nice I looked.
When I wore shirtwaist dresses, off the rack were fine. But all my pants had to be made at home to get them long enough, or I had to wear boys jeans.