Goal Weight- Calculate yours!!!

kmeekhof

This is actually "ideal body weight" and is typically only used when calculating ideal tidal volume when patients are ventilated. BMI is a more accurate measurement of the range of where your weight should be.

Actually BMI is not meant for individuals to gauge where they are. The tool got misused that way ages ago, but it is meant to compare groups of populations with other groups of populations, not individuals.

Thank you!!!! Although BMI is a useful tool, it is often wrong. Especially for somebody who has a lot of muscle and lean body mass.

ebgbjo

That thing would have me at around 90lbs (and that isn't even adding in the minus 10% for having a small frame).. no way accurate. I looked horribly underweight at 98lbs, no way I am going for something between 80-100lbs

darrenw74

Great, just when I started getting excited about finally getting into "modern fit" clothing, I realize that I'm still 20 lbs overweight :noway:

I'm just going to go by what feels right.

erickirb

That thing would have me at around 90lbs (and that isn't even adding in the minus 10% for having a small frame).. no way accurate. I looked horribly underweight at 98lbs, no way I am going for something between 80-100lbs

If that is the case you either have a lot of muscle mass or or not small framed.

kmeekhof

That thing would have me at around 90lbs (and that isn't even adding in the minus 10% for having a small frame).. no way accurate. I looked horribly underweight at 98lbs, no way I am going for something between 80-100lbs

Obviously you are under 5' ............ so no this formula would not be accurate for you. Sorry I do not know the formula for being under 5'.

gdunn55

It puts me at 181-201. I don't agree with it. It might be right, but I don't agree. I'm built like a deggum lumberjack. If I got down to 200 you'd see my ribs and be wanting to give me a sammich.

shreddingit

I like!!

brityn

This is a generic measurement. I'm a trim 130 lbs and this says i should be 10 lbs lighter. I'm in a size three pants but have a lot of muscle. I weight train for an hour 15 min 3 times a week and run around 15 miles a week. I consider myself to be in very good shape. If I lost 10 more lbs i'd be way too skinny.

You are correct. By volume muscle weighs more than fat. That being said the averagge person does not weight train or run like you do.

What does "average" mean?

katierg

You can also check this out: Its similar to that formula, but gives you the option of checking your bone structure.
Thanks for sharing!

http://www.healthcentral.com/diet-exercise/ideal-body-weight-3146-143.html

Using this calculator it says I should be 124 - 136.4 lbs which sounds pretty right. My mother is 2 inches shorter than me and at my age she was 122lbs. We have similar frames.

rybo

This fits me pretty accurately. I bounce between 168-170, very lean with some muscle mass.

Jaedynmoon

Goal weight according to that (I'm 5'9 so 100+45) is 145 AND that is my goal weight...well I have 150 as my goal for my weight loss tracker but I really am aiming for 145. Thanks for sharing!

Higglyjiggly64

Calculations came out for me as well. Said I should be 130, but I'm bigger boned, so I added 10%....143. My GW is 140, so I am spot on, yay! (If I happen to go down to 135 though, I won't complain)

Higglyjiggly64

This is a generic measurement. I'm a trim 130 lbs and this says i should be 10 lbs lighter. I'm in a size three pants but have a lot of muscle. I weight train for an hour 15 min 3 times a week and run around 15 miles a week. I consider myself to be in very good shape. If I lost 10 more lbs i'd be way too skinny.

You are correct. By volume muscle weighs more than fat. That being said the averagge person does not weight train or run like you do.

What does "average" mean?

It means most people don't weight train for an hour and 15 mins three times a week or run 15 miles a week. You are exceptionally fit, IMO. Nice work!

ebgbjo

That thing would have me at around 90lbs (and that isn't even adding in the minus 10% for having a small frame).. no way accurate. I looked horribly underweight at 98lbs, no way I am going for something between 80-100lbs

Obviously you are under 5' ............ so no this formula would not be accurate for you. Sorry I do not know the formula for being under 5'.

You are correct, I am under 5'

TrainingWithTonya

That formula came out to 130 for me, 143 if you add 10% for large frame, which I am not. (Frame size can be determined by wrist measurement. Mine is 6 inches around. 6 inches is medium, 5 1/2 or less is small, and 6 1/2 or more is large for women. Sorry guys, I don't have your scale memorized.) Based on my current weight and body composition I have more then the 143 in Lean Body Mass (Total weight minus fat mass) so there is no way I can ever get that low without losing muscle, which is completely undesirable. Since it has been proven body fat and not weight is a better indicator of health, my exercise physiology program uses a formula based on the current weight and body composition and the desired body composition. Here is how we figure it:

Fat Mass = Total Body Weight x % fat

Lean Body Weight = Total Body Weight - Fat Mass

Ideal Body Weight = Lean Body Weight / (1 - % desired)

% desired in the formula is in decimal form BTW.

So an example would be a 200 pound person who is 30% fat but wants to be 20% fat

Fat Mass = 200 x 0.3 = 60 pounds

Lean Body Mass = 200 - 60 = 140 pounds

Ideal Body Weight = 140 / (1 - 0.2) = 140 / 0.8 = 175 pounds

spatticus

Dead on for my goal!