Is it really all that bad to be slighly underweight?

70sthin

My doctor had told me that she wanted me to gain weight, which I did a few years ago and I haven't felt all that good about it since doing so. I was only 8 lbs underweight. I gained 15lbs and don't feel like exercising as much. I don't have as much energy as I did when I was lighter. I know that body image and eating disorder problems can happen when one tries to attain a thin figure, but I did like the way I looked 15lbs ago. I honestly don't think I looked too thin when I was slightly underweight. I'm short, so 15lbs looks really big on me.

CurvyEmmy

8 pounds underweight sounds really unhealthy to me.

How did you gain the weight? If you were eating poorly before and you are eating a healthy diet now, your current weight is certainly healthier than your previous weight.

To be 8 pounds underweight, you must not have had much muscle mass. That’s why you feel like you have less energy now. If you put on 15 pounds of fat without building any muscle, you will just feel tired out because you’re carrying extra weight without any additional strength.

You should focus on weight lifting to build muscle. Muscle is denser than fat, so gaining muscle will help you get your weight into the healthy range while keeping a thin figure if that’s what you want. It will also help you feel more energetic at the higher weight because you will have the additional strength you didn’t have before.

corinasue1143

8 pounds under what weight? 8 pounds under ideal? 8 pounds under healthy range bmi? 8 pounds under what you consider best?

ythannah

I really hesitate to post on threads like this because around here even the slightest suggestion that being underweight isn't a horrible, horrible thing gets conflated with "promoting anorexia" and turns into Big Drama. So the following is just my experience. YMMV.

I am a tall lanky beanpole and I've been underweight all of my almost 59 years. I get my physique from my tall lanky beanpole father who has also been underweight all his life (83). The only issues he currently has are gout and enlarged prostate so it hasn't had any negative impact on his health. We both have very small frames and struggle to build muscle. I am less underweight now than in my 20s so I've gradually been gaining about a half pound a year.

No doctor has never suggested that I gain weight. This is where you and I differ. Years ago, when they first went to electronic patient records and the program calculated BMI for her, my current GP did kind of mutter to herself "hmmm, your BMI might be a bit low" but that was the last I heard of it. My blood test results have always been excellent, I've enjoyed freakishly good health (haven't had flu since the mid 80s, very rarely catch colds), have plenty of energy. I also have hypertension (thanks, dad) and lymphedema, neither of which conditions would be improved by weight gain. Also now some hip joint problems and was told quite frankly (different doctor) that the issue would be worse if I weighed more.

Through my 20s and 30s my nutrition was much worse than it is now, I ate very high carb and low protein and way too much sugar. Back then there was no internet so you had to make quite an effort to seek out nutrition info to have any awareness that your chosen way of eating might not be the best. I was healthy so why change? Then I gradually started making improvements, starting with reducing sodium, decreasing sugar, increasing protein, fruit and veg. Along the way I also made the choice to stop eating meat which made the protein thing more challenging. Also took up strength training around 10 years ago.

I'm down in weight again as the result of having a complicated appendix rupture early last year, which kind of messed up my digestive system, plus some major life stress which always melts weight off me. So I've been in deliberate regain mode for over a year now, without much success. Note however that this is by my own choice and not based on my doctor's advice. I'm more worried about having lost/losing what little muscle I've managed to acquire than the number on the scale. My doc, on the other hand, initially tried to address the digestive stuff by sticking me on a low FODMAP diet which is super restrictive and resulted in even more loss, so she's really not concerned about my weight at all.

Bottom line is that my doctor is perfectly okay with my weight, based on other medical considerations, whereas yours doesn't seem to be happy with it. So I can't say whether it's "really all that bad" for you personally.

SuzySunshine99

I always think about my grandmother, who was underweight her whole life.

It didn't cause a problem until she got sick. An illness caused her to lose even more weight, she got dangerously low, and it greatly complicated her illness.

Since then, I always thought it's a good idea to not be close to the edge of an unhealthy weight. Not that everyone is thinking about the possibility of serious illness, but I think it's a good idea to have a little bit of "padding" just in case.

ythannah

SuzySunshine99 wrote: »

I always think about my grandmother, who was underweight her whole life.

It didn't cause a problem until she got sick. An illness caused her to lose even more weight, she got dangerously low, and it greatly complicated her illness.

Since then, I always thought it's a good idea to not be close to the edge of an unhealthy weight. Not that everyone is thinking about the possibility of serious illness, but I think it's a good idea to have a little bit of "padding" just in case.

That's exactly the worry that is always in the back of my mind, you may need a reservoir to draw upon. More so since my dad allowed himself to become extremely inactive, what little muscle he had evaporated and he ended up in chronic care for 5.5 months just to regain a minimum level of function. Mind you, he's done nothing to build anything beyond that minimum level in the past three years.

On the other hand, during the appendix debacle I managed to beat peritonitis quite well despite a fairly substantial drop in weight and appalling nutrition for the first week.

czmiles926

No one would bat an eyelid if someone was 8 lbs overweight, I don't understand why being 8 lbs underweight is a big deal. Everyone's different.

paperpudding

I think OP needs to answer the question posted upthread; 8lb underweight from what??

If it is from mid range BMI - probably fine.

If it is 8 lb under the lower limit of BMI - very unlikely - especially if OP is a shorter younger female.


Yes Ive heard the argument that older people can be better off carrying a LITTLE bit of extra padding - but I dont think that applies to OP, my guess is she is not in the over 75 age group

70sthin

Thank you all for the feed back. A healthy weight according to my doctor and the BMI calculator she used is something like a range of 98-132lbs for a 5'1" tall female I weighed 90lbs when she said I should gain weight. I weigh 105lbs now and felt better at 90lbs. I'm almost middle age (39) and had my weight ranges from 90-100lbs most of my adult life. I start feeling heavy and lethargic around 100lbs. Yes, I should be building muscle at this age and that was a very good suggestion. I have had little energy to exercise at all lately.

Xellercin

It's quite simple: no, it's not a big deal to be underweight if you are optimally healthy and maintaining that weight while eating plenty of nutritious food, exercising, and easily maintaining good strength and muscle mass. Especially if you are taller.

But in those cases, it's highly unlikely a doctor would bother telling you to gain weight.

My sister is quite underweight, but with her tall height and extremely slender bone structure, it's quite self-evident that that's a healthy weight for her. She doesn't even look underweight, she has a normal amount of belly fat, she's just built extremely narrow with super long narrow limbs.

It doesn't sound like this is you. So I would just listen to your doctor and focus on your health. Get to a state of being optimally, unquestionably healthy and then assess if your body can handle being that lean.

If I were you, I would really put my focus on building muscle.

BartBVanBockstaele

SuzySunshine99 wrote: »

Since then, I always thought it's a good idea to not be close to the edge of an unhealthy weight. Not that everyone is thinking about the possibility of serious illness, but I think it's a good idea to have a little bit of "padding" just in case.

And that is exactly what body fat is for. It is stored, just in case it is needed. While overweight and obesity are not good and detremintal in the long run, being right on the edge can be suicidal in the short term if something goes wrong, even if it may not be unhealthy and even quite healthy as long as everything is going great. Just a few kg go a very long way as an insurance policy against bad times. Unfortunately perhaps, biology is not unlike politics: most everything we do is a compromise.
We should also not forget that everything said here is a compromise in and of itself: we don't even know how to accurately measure body fat. While there are several methods, with some better than others, all of them are estimates, nothing more. There is still a lot of room for improvement in medicine.

paperpudding

70sthin wrote: »

Thank you all for the feed back. A healthy weight according to my doctor and the BMI calculator she used is something like a range of 98-132lbs for a 5'1" tall female I weighed 90lbs when she said I should gain weight. I weigh 105lbs now and felt better at 90lbs. I'm almost middle age (39) and had my weight ranges from 90-100lbs most of my adult life. I start feeling heavy and lethargic around 100lbs. Yes, I should be building muscle at this age and that was a very good suggestion. I have had little energy to exercise at all lately.

So, 8lb under the bottom limit of healthy BMI range

No, I dont think that is a good idea.

Aim to lose 5kg perhaps and that could be good for you at 100lb.

CurvyEmmy

czmiles926 wrote: »

No one would bat an eyelid if someone was 8 lbs overweight, I don't understand why being 8 lbs underweight is a big deal. Everyone's different.

The two are not the same.

8 pounds overweight is incredibly common, and honestly it’s perfectly normal. Science is showing that being slightly overweight is not unhealthy.

8 pounds underweight is very abnormal and a sign that something is wrong.

GoRun2

Hmm, I think you should listen to your doctor who has seen you vs. People on MFP that haven't seen you

czmiles926

CurvyEmmy wrote: »

czmiles926 wrote: »

No one would bat an eyelid if someone was 8 lbs overweight, I don't understand why being 8 lbs underweight is a big deal. Everyone's different.

The two are not the same.

8 pounds overweight is incredibly common, and honestly it’s perfectly normal. Science is showing that being slightly overweight is not unhealthy.

8 pounds underweight is very abnormal and a sign that something is wrong.

Being overweight has definitely been normalised in developed countries, but that doesn't mean it's inherently better than being a little underweight.

While it's true that having a few spare pounds can be useful in case of a serious illness, that also has to be balanced against the increased risk of heart disease and diabetes.

Some people just have very narrow frames and look and feel better a low BMI - which itself isn't an infallible metric.

paperpudding

I agree that some people are better at a lower BMI - thats why BMI is a range not an absolute number.

so for some people the bottom of the range is their ideal.

but 8lb lower than the lowest of the BMI range? - not likely to be healthy

AnnPT77

czmiles926 wrote: »

No one would bat an eyelid if someone was 8 lbs overweight, I don't understand why being 8 lbs underweight is a big deal. Everyone's different.

If OP's doctor was saying she's underweight, that's different than someone just not hitting some abstract metric. (Sure, doctors can be wrong, but . . . .)

There's some research suggesting that being somewhat clinically underweight is statistically associated with higher mortality rates than is being somewhat clinically overweight, even when study conditions control for depleting illnesses (cancer and whatnot), i.e., the studies have measures to exclude people who are thin because they're already en route to mortality. OP or you or I aren't statistics, so yes, individuals differ, and individual health is what counts (as Xellercin points out) . . . but again, this is OP's doctor telling her to gain weight.

OP, I'm inclined to agree with others saying that working on increasing muscle mass would be a route to weighing more, but feeling/looking better. It's not that you have to pursue a bodybuilder look if you don't like that, but there's quite a range of positive non-bodybuilder body composition considered attractive in most of the developed-world culture that's likely to put person above a riskily underweight zone.

BartBVanBockstaele

czmiles926 wrote: »

CurvyEmmy wrote: »

czmiles926 wrote: »

No one would bat an eyelid if someone was 8 lbs overweight, I don't understand why being 8 lbs underweight is a big deal. Everyone's different.

The two are not the same.

8 pounds overweight is incredibly common, and honestly it’s perfectly normal. Science is showing that being slightly overweight is not unhealthy.

8 pounds underweight is very abnormal and a sign that something is wrong.

Being overweight has definitely been normalised in developed countries, but that doesn't mean it's inherently better than being a little underweight.

While it's true that having a few spare pounds can be useful in case of a serious illness, that also has to be balanced against the increased risk of heart disease and diabetes.

Some people just have very narrow frames and look and feel better a low BMI - which itself isn't an infallible metric.

There is something to be said for that. As a Belgian, I have learned quite a bit about BMI, which I still learned as the "Quételet Index" for Adolphe Quételet who created the index to study populations. Despite its simplicity, it is surprisingly good for that, even now.

However, I find that using it on a personal level is essentially a perversion. It was never meant for that, and despite studies that have shown is not all that bad, I balk when I hear people who swear by it and people who revile it. I also giggle seeing that people almost only look at the upper limit, not the lower one, and then complain that some "athlete" is considered obese even though he or she is not. Let's be honest here: you really don't have to study medicine to see that the younger Arnold Schwarzenegger was not obese. Anyone who insists he was, just of because of the BMI is an idiot. Also, how many of those athletes do we really have? I don't see very many of them when I go out.

In addition, why not also look at the other side: an obese person who had her/his legs amputated and who, as a consequence, is now in the normal range despite being obese?

Furthermore, on the level of an individual patient, BMI is needlessly complicated. Just look at a weight chart. Unless something really tragic happens to you, your height will stay the same for most of your adult life. Calculating the BMI is a waste of time and energy.

I also noticed that MFP is going to retire it BMI calculator. I don't know why, the message did not say that, but it just might be a good idea.

benchstep

I am 5'2" and weigh 100 lbs. I have more energy now than I have had in years when I was overweight. I think you have to go by how you feel. I exercise daily and eat plenty of healthy foods.

paperpudding

benchstep wrote: »

I am 5'2" and weigh 100 lbs. I have more energy now than I have had in years when I was overweight. I think you have to go by how you feel. I exercise daily and eat plenty of healthy foods.

well, you are only just under the BMI range - adding just 1lb puts you within but at bottom of range.

not quite the same scenario as OP who is 8lb under the lower limit

paperpudding

Let's be honest here: you really don't have to study medicine to see that the younger Arnold Schwarzenegger was not obese. Anyone who insists he was, just of because of the BMI is an idiot. Also, how many of those athletes do we really have? I don't see very many of them when I go out.

In addition, why not also look at the other side: an obese person who had her/his legs amputated and who, as a consequence, is now in the normal range despite being obese?

Furthermore, on the level of an individual patient, BMI is needlessly complicated. Just look at a weight chart. Unless something really tragic happens to you, your height will stay the same for most of your adult life. Calculating the BMI is a waste of time and energy.

Seriously???

of course elite body builders and amputees are outliers - nobody here is disputing that at all.

and just looking at a weight chart without height is meaningless - obviously what is a healthy weight range for somebody 6 ft 10 in is not the same as somebody 4 ft 10 in even though both are within normal adult height range.