Does anyone else need to see pictures to *believe* they did it
Replies
-
tacolover10231989 wrote: »tacolover10231989 wrote: »Great job, but why stop there? You look SO great now (and I am not trying to belittle your amazing progress) but I am sure still in the overweight range. What made you stop and want to stay there?
I lift heavy and carry a lot of muscle. I think perhaps you may be seeing fat on my face and breasts and assuming a lot, which I understand as I do have a found face . I measure at 27.5 inch waist 36.5 bust and just went up to 36 hip.
I am 5'9 and stay around 155-165. I don't really believe in weight as a deciding factor health. In fact I was smaller weight wise for awhile but my measurements were actually bigger and I didn't feel nearly as good.
As for stopping I mean I didn't say I was stopping anything. I haven't stopped a thing my goals are more strength focused at this time.
But, yes as pointed out above I am a size 2/4 down form a 14/16. I have lost around 100lbs.
Your comments are what makes it hard for women who are strong not *skinny* accept themselves. I would be careful with that.
Sorry, I was wrong then if you aren't overweight. Just by the photo you still look overweight. Fit and strong and muscular, yes, but like BMI 25+. Must just be the photo then. I was wrong if you aren't overweight nothing I said matters and was wrong.
BMI 25+ (a bit) is not necessarily an unhealthy point, even among women, especially women who are muscular. Yes, most people (men or women) have *a* healthy weight somewhere within the normal BMI range, but not everyone's *only* healthy weights are there. Some relevant variables in women are pelvic width, shoulder width, breast size, and for sure muscularity. The right consultation on that issue is a person's doctor, who knows their whole health history, not us random people on the internet.
I've been criticized here on other threads for being too thin, when around BMI 20 (120 pounds at 5'5") and not totally devoid of muscle, because my upper body gets quite thin (ribs show), while lower body carries the remaining fat. Right now, a bit above that (125ish, BMI on the 20/21 cusp), I'm comfortably in US size 6, a little loose - maybe could fit size 4, without my Winter long johns, but haven't tried. (Upper torso, realistically, looking kind of gaunt, despite OK-ish back/shoulder/arm muscle, and strong legs.) Size 2/4 at 5'9" is pretty narrow, IME. But, like I said, not my call: It's OP's, and her doctor's.5 -
tacolover10231989 wrote: »tacolover10231989 wrote: »Great job, but why stop there? You look SO great now (and I am not trying to belittle your amazing progress) but I am sure still in the overweight range. What made you stop and want to stay there?
I lift heavy and carry a lot of muscle. I think perhaps you may be seeing fat on my face and breasts and assuming a lot, which I understand as I do have a found face . I measure at 27.5 inch waist 36.5 bust and just went up to 36 hip.
I am 5'9 and stay around 155-165. I don't really believe in weight as a deciding factor health. In fact I was smaller weight wise for awhile but my measurements were actually bigger and I didn't feel nearly as good.
As for stopping I mean I didn't say I was stopping anything. I haven't stopped a thing my goals are more strength focused at this time.
But, yes as pointed out above I am a size 2/4 down form a 14/16. I have lost around 100lbs.
Your comments are what makes it hard for women who are strong not *skinny* accept themselves. I would be careful with that.
Sorry, I was wrong then if you aren't overweight. Just by the photo you still look overweight. Fit and strong and muscular, yes, but like BMI 25+. Must just be the photo then. I was wrong if you aren't overweight nothing I said matters and was wrong.
I've been criticized here on other threads for being too thin, when around BMI 20 (120 pounds at 5'5") and not totally devoid of muscle, because my upper body gets quite thin (ribs show), while lower body carries the remaining fat. Right now, a bit above that (125ish, BMI on the 20/21 cusp), I'm comfortably in US size 6, a little loose - maybe could fit size 4, without my Winter long johns, but haven't tried. (Upper torso, realistically, looking kind of gaunt, despite OK-ish back/shoulder/arm muscle, and strong legs.) Size 2/4 at 5'9" is pretty narrow, IME. But, like I said, not my call: It's OP's, and her doctor's.
I am sorry you too, have been criticised. I am unsure if Canadian sizes differ from the U.S. I have very thick legs but had to work very hard to gain any sort of *kitten* and even after two kids don't have much for hips. While I do go up in size for tops/dresses more comfortably a 6/8 where as my pants are smaller. I feel strong and healthy and my dr has no issues rn. So I feel good about that. ☺️5 -
I understand what you are saying itbis a shocker when I don't see the heavy me anymore!
You get critized for being fat you get critized for baby pudge then you get critized for a size 4 😲 opinions are like armpits everyone has them and they all stink 😄 keep trucking along you are doing great!
LORD JESUS bless you and yours 💟5 -
tacolover10231989 wrote: »Great job, but why stop there? You look SO great now (and I am not trying to belittle your amazing progress) but I am sure still in the overweight range. What made you stop and want to stay there?
Your comment makes you one even though Skylar, pictured above, was born with the label.4 -
tacolover10231989 wrote: »tacolover10231989 wrote: »Great job, but why stop there? You look SO great now (and I am not trying to belittle your amazing progress) but I am sure still in the overweight range. What made you stop and want to stay there?
I lift heavy and carry a lot of muscle. I think perhaps you may be seeing fat on my face and breasts and assuming a lot, which I understand as I do have a found face . I measure at 27.5 inch waist 36.5 bust and just went up to 36 hip.
I am 5'9 and stay around 155-165. I don't really believe in weight as a deciding factor health. In fact I was smaller weight wise for awhile but my measurements were actually bigger and I didn't feel nearly as good.
As for stopping I mean I didn't say I was stopping anything. I haven't stopped a thing my goals are more strength focused at this time.
But, yes as pointed out above I am a size 2/4 down form a 14/16. I have lost around 100lbs.
Your comments are what makes it hard for women who are strong not *skinny* accept themselves. I would be careful with that.
Sorry, I was wrong then if you aren't overweight. Just by the photo you still look overweight. Fit and strong and muscular, yes, but like BMI 25+. Must just be the photo then. I was wrong if you aren't overweight nothing I said matters and was wrong.
I've been criticized here on other threads for being too thin, when around BMI 20 (120 pounds at 5'5") and not totally devoid of muscle, because my upper body gets quite thin (ribs show), while lower body carries the remaining fat. Right now, a bit above that (125ish, BMI on the 20/21 cusp), I'm comfortably in US size 6, a little loose - maybe could fit size 4, without my Winter long johns, but haven't tried. (Upper torso, realistically, looking kind of gaunt, despite OK-ish back/shoulder/arm muscle, and strong legs.) Size 2/4 at 5'9" is pretty narrow, IME. But, like I said, not my call: It's OP's, and her doctor's.
I am sorry you too, have been criticised. I am unsure if Canadian sizes differ from the U.S. I have very thick legs but had to work very hard to gain any sort of *kitten* and even after two kids don't have much for hips. While I do go up in size for tops/dresses more comfortably a 6/8 where as my pants are smaller. I feel strong and healthy and my dr has no issues rn. So I feel good about that. ☺️
Ohhhhh, another Canadian 🇨🇦😍🇨🇦 My guess is somewhere in the Prairie provinces (or you grew up there)?! I'm in Montreal.
Been reading the thread and love the premise, despite it needing to take a course correction here and there.
Your progress is your own to cherish and it's a privilege that you - and others - chose to share with us. Thank you!2 -
tacolover10231989 wrote: »tacolover10231989 wrote: »Great job, but why stop there? You look SO great now (and I am not trying to belittle your amazing progress) but I am sure still in the overweight range. What made you stop and want to stay there?
I lift heavy and carry a lot of muscle. I think perhaps you may be seeing fat on my face and breasts and assuming a lot, which I understand as I do have a found face . I measure at 27.5 inch waist 36.5 bust and just went up to 36 hip.
I am 5'9 and stay around 155-165. I don't really believe in weight as a deciding factor health. In fact I was smaller weight wise for awhile but my measurements were actually bigger and I didn't feel nearly as good.
As for stopping I mean I didn't say I was stopping anything. I haven't stopped a thing my goals are more strength focused at this time.
But, yes as pointed out above I am a size 2/4 down form a 14/16. I have lost around 100lbs.
Your comments are what makes it hard for women who are strong not *skinny* accept themselves. I would be careful with that.
Sorry, I was wrong then if you aren't overweight. Just by the photo you still look overweight. Fit and strong and muscular, yes, but like BMI 25+. Must just be the photo then. I was wrong if you aren't overweight nothing I said matters and was wrong.
I've been criticized here on other threads for being too thin, when around BMI 20 (120 pounds at 5'5") and not totally devoid of muscle, because my upper body gets quite thin (ribs show), while lower body carries the remaining fat. Right now, a bit above that (125ish, BMI on the 20/21 cusp), I'm comfortably in US size 6, a little loose - maybe could fit size 4, without my Winter long johns, but haven't tried. (Upper torso, realistically, looking kind of gaunt, despite OK-ish back/shoulder/arm muscle, and strong legs.) Size 2/4 at 5'9" is pretty narrow, IME. But, like I said, not my call: It's OP's, and her doctor's.
I am sorry you too, have been criticised. I am unsure if Canadian sizes differ from the U.S. I have very thick legs but had to work very hard to gain any sort of *kitten* and even after two kids don't have much for hips. While I do go up in size for tops/dresses more comfortably a 6/8 where as my pants are smaller. I feel strong and healthy and my dr has no issues rn. So I feel good about that. ☺️
Ohhhhh, another Canadian 🇨🇦😍🇨🇦 My guess is somewhere in the Prairie provinces (or you grew up there)?! I'm in Montreal.
Been reading the thread and love the premise, despite it needing to take a course correction here and there.
Your progress is your own to cherish and it's a privilege that you - and others - chose to share with us. Thank you!
I am in Ontario. ☺️2 -
AshHeartsJesus wrote: »I understand what you are saying itbis a shocker when I don't see the heavy me anymore!
You get critized for being fat you get critized for baby pudge then you get critized for a size 4 😲 opinions are like armpits everyone has them and they all stink 😄 keep trucking along you are doing great!
LORD JESUS bless you and yours 💟
So true. What find interesting, is that just last week the comment on this same pic on my IG stories from someone, was that I was now "too thin"🤦♀️🤦♀️😂😂. You truly can't please everyone and you just have to be happy with yourself.
Most comments were positive TBf. Just like here.4 -
Pictures are great if you've achieved your weight goals, and want to show it to others. For me, my daily weighings on the scale is my ultimate scoring machine. If my weight goes up it proves that I ate too much the day before, and if my weight goes down, it validates my calorie counts on MFP, where I stayed below the goal.0
-
Pictures are great if you've achieved your weight goals, and want to show it to others. For me, my daily weighings on the scale is my ultimate scoring machine. If my weight goes up it proves that I ate too much the day before, and if my weight goes down, it validates my calorie counts on MFP, where I stayed below the goal.
Really? My scale weight goes up overnight sometimes for totally random reasons, even without over-eating. Something like eating a salty meal within calorie goal, or doing an extra tough workout, or coming down with a head cold/congestion - those can easily add a pound on the scale. (It's water weight my body needs, in those circumstances, not fat.)
On the rare occasions when I've eaten enough in one day to gain an actual pound of fat (3500 calories above maintenance calories in one day, about 5500 or so total calories in my case), it usually takes a couple of days for that food to get digested, metabolized, and clearly show up as fat. The scale gain before that (day after the over-eating) is often multi-pound, though - water retention and temporary digestive contents on their way to becoming waste. It's totally misleading.
My daily weights prove nothing, and I've proven it. (I'm in year 5+ of maintaining a healthy weight, after previous decades of obesity.) Weight trends over time (multi-week) matter, if you ask me, not daily weights. If I thought of my daily weight as a scorecard, I'd be unnecessarily distressed way too often. YMMV.3 -
Pictures are great if you've achieved your weight goals, and want to show it to others. For me, my daily weighings on the scale is my ultimate scoring machine. If my weight goes up it proves that I ate too much the day before, and if my weight goes down, it validates my calorie counts on MFP, where I stayed below the goal.
Really? My scale weight goes up overnight sometimes for totally random reasons, even without over-eating. Something like eating a salty meal within calorie goal, or doing an extra tough workout, or coming down with a head cold/congestion - those can easily add a pound on the scale. (It's water weight my body needs, in those circumstances, not fat.)
On the rare occasions when I've eaten enough in one day to gain an actual pound of fat (3500 calories above maintenance calories in one day, about 5500 or so total calories in my case), it usually takes a couple of days for that food to get digested, metabolized, and clearly show up as fat. The scale gain before that (day after the over-eating) is often multi-pound, though - water retention and temporary digestive contents on their way to becoming waste. It's totally misleading.
My daily weights prove nothing, and I've proven it. (I'm in year 5+ of maintaining a healthy weight, after previous decades of obesity.) Weight trends over time (multi-week) matter, if you ask me, not daily weights. If I thought of my daily weight as a scorecard, I'd be unnecessarily distressed way too often. YMMV.
0 -
Well there are several ways to look at daily weighings. I find that they are excellent "course corrections" for me, and the increases or decreases in weight usually correlate well with my calorie consumption from the day before. Perhaps other people's metabolism makes daily weighings unreliable.
I do agree that over a longer period of time (weeks) the scale should be giving you good feedback.1 -
Pictures are great if you've achieved your weight goals, and want to show it to others. For me, my daily weighings on the scale is my ultimate scoring machine. If my weight goes up it proves that I ate too much the day before, and if my weight goes down, it validates my calorie counts on MFP, where I stayed below the goal.
When you're maintaining, expecting to weigh less each day is not only unrealistic, but unhealthy.
Sometimes we're just going to weigh a bit more than other days, whether it's the food we're still processing, hormonal changes, intense activity, different levels of hydration, or other factors. It isn't a sign that something has gone wrong, it's just a thing that happens. The important thing to focus on is the long-term trend, not a daily weigh in.
Your body simply doesn't process energy and store it in the form of fat in just a few hours, so assuming your weight is a function of the calories processed the day before isn't realistic.6 -
Pictures are great if you've achieved your weight goals, and want to show it to others. For me, my daily weighings on the scale is my ultimate scoring machine. If my weight goes up it proves that I ate too much the day before, and if my weight goes down, it validates my calorie counts on MFP, where I stayed below the goal.
Hmmm I guess, we just differ (and that's Ok). I just don't love wieght as a dtermining factor for much at this point. I mean yeah I weigh myself every so often and there is a range I know I am most comfortable in but it's a range of 10lbs and could be more again, depending on how i feel.
Shockingly enough my weight doesn't change much between these pictures. Not even the 10 lbs but I prefer the last one. (It's post gym pump lol) and it isn't the last one where I weigh the most even though it may look like it. So I guess I like pictures for many reasons but mainly for me I can look very different at relatively the same weight. If that makes sense. And I don't want to get caught up on a number at this point.
But if scale weight works for you, that's great.
5 -
@WandRsmom, every time I see photos of your legs, like in those skinny jeans above, or the white ones you posted on another thread . . . yeah. Those calves! Those ankles! Those quads!
I get the appeal of having a strong body, of the strong upper body, all that goodness, I really do . . . but woman, *your legs*! 🤩4 -
I concur, you have fantabulous legs! I'm so jelly. But can we also talk about that adorable dimple?!
Photos have always been important to me because I can look VERY different at the same weight depending on the amount of muscle mass and body fat I have.2 -
@WandRsmom, every time I see photos of your legs, like in those skinny jeans above, or the white ones you posted on another thread . . . yeah. Those calves! Those ankles! Those quads!
I get the appeal of having a strong body, of the strong upper body, all that goodness, I really do . . . but woman, *your legs*! 🤩
Thank you! Tbh part of why I like the look of the last pic more is because (for me) my legs were kinda skinny in the skinny jean picture, just kinda . I havent gained much weight wise since then but my legs are larger and barely squeeze into those jeans, now. I like alll that muscle. So I don't mind gaining size, at all.
That's a fairly decent image.
And this is them not post workout.
.
I would love it if my upper body could catch up lol
8 -
mom23mangos wrote: »I concur, you have fantabulous legs! I'm so jelly. But can we also talk about that adorable dimple?!
Photos have always been important to me because I can look VERY different at the same weight depending on the amount of muscle mass and body fat I have.
Thank you! And agree. Pictures really bring it home1 -
Not to be a total bandwagoner, but your legs are amazing and I really like your sense of style.4
-
@WandRsmom, every time I see photos of your legs, like in those skinny jeans above, or the white ones you posted on another thread . . . yeah. Those calves! Those ankles! Those quads!
I get the appeal of having a strong body, of the strong upper body, all that goodness, I really do . . . but woman, *your legs*! 🤩
Thank you! Tbh part of why I like the look of the last pic more is because (for me) my legs were kinda skinny in the skinny jean picture, just kinda . I havent gained much weight wise since then but my legs are larger and barely squeeze into those jeans, now. I like alll that muscle. So I don't mind gaining size, at all.
That's a fairly decent image.
And this is them not post workout..
I would love it if my upper body could catch up lol
Even in that photo you don't like as much, the nice rise of your quads is visible *even through the jeans*. Yeah, the flex-y one above in the blue shorts really shows the definition through the full length of your legs. Nice!
I hear what you're saying about different zones of the body. I think some of it (generically, not now talking about you alone) is not just muscular development (recognizing that different people can respond differently even to the same stimulus, because bodies are weird). The patterns of fat distribution also matter, visually (and we do need some level of essential body fat, so I'm not stumping for "lean above all, for all").
I think I'm kind of the opposite of you, in some ways. My upper body (especially back) tends to look more defined, even at relatively low muscle mass, because my upper body subcutaneous fat layer depletes nearly completely, earlier, while things below my ribcage, certainly through hips, have substantial squishiness/fat, and maybe farther down still has a decent subcutaneous fat blanket, too. My quads are reasonably strong, but legs tend to just look study rather than muscular. (Do I care? No. Just an observation. Do I lift? Not much, and rarely, even though that's not going to help any of this definition/mass stuff, of course. The routine 1000+ reps/hour, of body weight plus boat weight, has some benefits for strength and muscle, but lifting is the more efficient path on those fronts, of course. Maybe I'd have lovely legs, if I were better about lifting, instead. 😉 )
You look *great*. OK, I'll stop gushing! 🤐😆2 -
@WandRsmom, every time I see photos of your legs, like in those skinny jeans above, or the white ones you posted on another thread . . . yeah. Those calves! Those ankles! Those quads!
I get the appeal of having a strong body, of the strong upper body, all that goodness, I really do . . . but woman, *your legs*! 🤩
Thank you! Tbh part of why I like the look of the last pic more is because (for me) my legs were kinda skinny in the skinny jean picture, just kinda . I havent gained much weight wise since then but my legs are larger and barely squeeze into those jeans, now. I like alll that muscle. So I don't mind gaining size, at all.
That's a fairly decent image.
And this is them not post workout..
I would love it if my upper body could catch up lol
Even in that photo you don't like as much, the nice rise of your quads is visible *even through the jeans*. Yeah, the flex-y one above in the blue shorts really shows the definition through the full length of your legs. Nice!
I hear what you're saying about different zones of the body. I think some of it (generically, not now talking about you alone) is not just muscular development (recognizing that different people can respond differently even to the same stimulus, because bodies are weird). The patterns of fat distribution also matter, visually (and we do need some level of essential body fat, so I'm not stumping for "lean above all, for all").
I think I'm kind of the opposite of you, in some ways. My upper body (especially back) tends to look more defined, even at relatively low muscle mass, because my upper body subcutaneous fat layer depletes nearly completely, earlier, while things below my ribcage, certainly through hips, have substantial squishiness/fat, and maybe farther down still has a decent subcutaneous fat blanket, too. My quads are reasonably strong, but legs tend to just look study rather than muscular. (Do I care? No. Just an observation. Do I lift? Not much, and rarely, even though that's not going to help any of this definition/mass stuff, of course. The routine 1000+ reps/hour, of body weight plus boat weight, has some benefits for strength and muscle, but lifting is the more efficient path on those fronts, of course. Maybe I'd have lovely legs, if I were better about lifting, instead. 😉 )
You look *great*. OK, I'll stop gushing! 🤐😆
Very true. I feel like my back just wants to hold onto fat 🤣🤣. Even when lean it's the most fatty part. Ah such is life.1 -
@WandRsmom, every time I see photos of your legs, like in those skinny jeans above, or the white ones you posted on another thread . . . yeah. Those calves! Those ankles! Those quads!
I get the appeal of having a strong body, of the strong upper body, all that goodness, I really do . . . but woman, *your legs*! 🤩
Thank you! Tbh part of why I like the look of the last pic more is because (for me) my legs were kinda skinny in the skinny jean picture, just kinda . I havent gained much weight wise since then but my legs are larger and barely squeeze into those jeans, now. I like alll that muscle. So I don't mind gaining size, at all.
That's a fairly decent image.
And this is them not post workout..
I would love it if my upper body could catch up lol
I'd love if my lower body would catch up to my upper body, lol! I even work my lower body/glutes more than upper body, but like people have said, I believe genetics have a large part of where we carry our fat (even when not really "fat").
Even in high school when I was pretty much starving myself, BMI of 18.5 and exercising how women mostly exercised back in the 90's (I did Kathy Smith and Cher's step aerobic videos--no joke!), my thighs and butt were still pretty "sturdy." My best friend (who was amply-endowed in the chest but had muscular legs) and I used to joke we'd like to trade body parts.3 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Not to be a total bandwagoner, but your legs are amazing and I really like your sense of style.
Thank you! And I work in a clothing store. So that helps with style. 😁😁3
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions