Ideal weight? crazy standards

McGruber03

We use ideal body weight for men at 106 lbs for 5' and 6 lbs per inch thereafter. So, your IBW would be 106+(6x13) = 184 lbs which puts your BMI at 24.3, which is in the normal range for BMI. You can also add or subtract 10% for small or large frame. So, your range could be 166-202 lbs. BMI, however, is not really accurate if you have a lot of muscle mass. For example, a body builder with 1% body fat would probably come in at an 'overweight' BMI, but we know he's not overweight, he just weighs a lot due to the muscle. So, don't just look at BMI or IBW, look also at your percentage body fat and waist measurement. Good luck!

valeriebpdx

You know, it really does depend on frame, though. That's why they have a range for a healthy weight. My husband is 6' and 140. He is obviously skinny but covered in lean muscle (bikes to work, plays soccer and hockey) and he looks perfect for his frame--if he gains weight it shows on his face and in his stomach only. I have known men six inches shorter that would have looked scrawny at 140. It totally depends on the guy. I am glad you know what will work for you and look good on you--go by that.

ChantalGG

200 and 6'1" is a great size, I dont like skinny men, but at the weight you will need to work on the body fat percentage so you are still healthy.

aj_rock

I'm just a bit taller than you mate, and hung around 190 for a while now. I consider myself out of danger range, but im also technically overweight.

Try measuring your belly circumference instead. if you're around 35", you're doing fine.

TS65

I would disagree with that, for women at least. I am 5'5" and the healthy weight range for me is 117-155. I spent a lot of my life at the 115-122 range, even with a muscular build, and now that I'm at 130 I think I look very chubby. I've always thought that doctors tend to give women a fairly heavy weight range. This may be different for men though.

It really, really depends on your bone and muscle structure. I'm 5'5 and at my lowest (118), I looked absolutely skeletal. At a muscular 135, I was a size 4.

Qarol

It's so true. And I've heard a lot of BMI calculators will not be accurate for some people, if they have more muscle mass and weigh more, thus making it LOOK like they're overweight, when really they're not. It's frustrating. We need to remember these are just guidelines for most people, not good recommendations for ALL people.

My husband is 6'2". If he reached his so-called ideal weight, he'd be way too skinny for my liking. I don't care for thin men.

want2walknotwaddle

i think it depends on what suits you and whether you feel healthy, i am 14 st 12 down from 20 st 1 in march, and obviously i feel much better than i did then... now i do still want to lose another 4 stone to be just under 11 stone although apparently for a woman my height would still be overweight by about 5lb but then i am also very curvy and have been slim before and looked ill so i will leave my goal where it is and once i am there concentrate on building some muscle and toning up

poseyj88

I really like what that Mayo website talks about.

I also think two things:

(a) Like everything else, one size does not fit all. The Mayo website talks about how BMI may over or under estimate body fat based on weight.

(b) Especially in the United States, I think people FORGET what healthy weight vs. overweight vs. obese look like. I had a patient the other day come in who I guessed was a little overweight.... yeah... her BMI was 33. I think we are so used to seeing individuals who are larger, that a normal healthy weight range starts looking really skinny to us. Again, this doesn't apply to everyone, but I know it's something I've come to realize.

Sublog

I am 6'1 male mid 30's and had my goal set at 200 as an arbitrary number I picked out. I started to think I should find a more realistic number of what a healthy weight should be. I was shocked to find that weight charts say a healthy weight for me would be 150 - 180! Wow when I was in great shape in the military the lowest I got down to was I think 187 but I never concentrated on really lowering my weight either at that time.

I think 180 is a realistic goal, but even 200 I would think would be realistic - I wonder about these height weight standards...

Not to sound all conspiratorial, but... - keeping the standards low allows the industry to say more people are overweight, thus fueling the exercise and weight-loss industries...

I am in the same boat as you. I am 5"11 and 29 years old. I believe it's better to look at body fat because the reality of it, those charts are for non athletic people. If you workout, the muscle growth alone will put you over the top.


Sublog, to let you know, I have 12% body fat and I look nothing like a body builder. I still have a slight gut (showing a small 4 pack). Where I make for my overall body fat is, I have liek 10% or less fat in my legs and my arms. The mid section is more around 18-19%.

Then honestly, you aren't 12%... lol (no disrespect meant)

Body fat measurements are notoriously easy to get wrong. I know it sucks. I am in the same boat. Overall body fat % is dictated by overall body fat measured across the body. If you have a gut, you aren't 12%, despite what your extremities look like.

Your body sounds a lot like mine. I genetically store most of weight in my waist.

Are you happy with your body right now? If you are not, you'll need to keep dropping fat, and then you can get a more accurate measurement of body fat when you get really lean. As you lean out, you will drop more fat free mass in the tune of about 20-40% per lb of weight loss. This is not necessarily muscle loss, this is supporting tissue for the excess fat.

Everyone has less muscle than they think they do and has more fat than they think they do. It's completely normal when you thin out.

bcattoes

I would disagree with that, for women at least. I am 5'5" and the healthy weight range for me is 117-155. I spent a lot of my life at the 115-122 range, even with a muscular build, and now that I'm at 130 I think I look very chubby. I've always thought that doctors tend to give women a fairly heavy weight range. This may be different for men though.

the range is so wide on most charts because there are many variables that influence what is "healthy". Given the exact same circumstances (diet, environment, exercise, ... everything) all women of the same height would not end up the same weight or the same size. But they could all still be very healthy. I am also 5'5" and never weighed more than 120 lbs until I had children but I was not at all muscular and did not exercise or eat a healthy diet. I could probably get back down to that size if I tried, but I'm sure I could never weigh that little and exercise because the muscle would make me weigh more.

btmadison

Great thoughts everyone! Good to hear from some with experience also close to my height - so based on all this I guess I will set up and shoot for a goal of about 190 for now so maybe psychologically achieving something will be good - and then at that point set a new goal to get into a real idea zone.

meggers123

I really don't think you can go by that number (160) without taking body type into account. The bf is 6'2 and now 180, after his doctor told him he *needed* to gain (he was about 160). He's still trying to gain about 10.

But really? 160 for a guy over 6 foot? No way. I think 180+ with a normal/healthy build. Go by how healthy you feel.

runner328

I would disagree with that, for women at least. I am 5'5" and the healthy weight range for me is 117-155. I spent a lot of my life at the 115-122 range, even with a muscular build, and now that I'm at 130 I think I look very chubby. I've always thought that doctors tend to give women a fairly heavy weight range. This may be different for men though.

I am 5"6 & 130 & I feel chubby also. I went to the doctor''s today & she told me not to lose any more weight. I want to be @ 125lbs

hbrittingham

I would disagree with that, for women at least. I am 5'5" and the healthy weight range for me is 117-155. I spent a lot of my life at the 115-122 range, even with a muscular build, and now that I'm at 130 I think I look very chubby. I've always thought that doctors tend to give women a fairly heavy weight range. This may be different for men though.

It really, really depends on your bone and muscle structure. I'm 5'5 and at my lowest (118), I looked absolutely skeletal. At a muscular 135, I was a size 4.

That is so true for me, too. When I went through a divorce when I was 23, I just lost my appetite and dropped back down to my high school weight of around 120. I am 5' 5" (for some reason I thought I was 5'6", wishful thinking I guess) and I looked very unhealthy at that weight.

I originally set my goal for 155 and then found out that would still keep me in the overweight category, so I set it for 150. Now that I am getting closer to my original goal, I think I am going to shoot for 145. I don't need to be any thinner than that and I will be in the healthy weight category. I have never worn less than a size 10, even at my skinniest. I'm just not built to wear anything smaller.

PalmettoparkGuy

I think it depends on what you want. When I started this my goal was 185. When I got there I felt I could do more and I changed my goal weight to 170. If you're looking for a lean build it's going to be less, more for muscles. Our bodies change as we age (I'm almost 40, male). My physique/weight in my 20's is completely different than it is now. It's hard to forcast how you'll feel when you get to that weight. I think there is a lot of validity to the calculators.

hill2302

I'm 6 ft tall and in my late 30's. I'm down to 185 which was like my 3rd goal weight. I kept lowering my goals as I reached them since I wasn't really happy with the amount of fat I saw. I really don't know what weight I will stop trying to lose. I'm more concerned with getting an acceptable amount of fat off my body and them building up more muscle mass. I think that may eventually see me high than I am now, but I'll be fine with that if I'm happy with the way my body feels and looks. I agree that the arificial guidelines are just that, guidelines. Tailor your goals to meet your body.

Sublog

I'm 6 ft tall and in my late 30's. I'm down to 185 which was like my 3rd goal weight. I kept lowering my goals as I reached them since I wasn't really happy with the amount of fat I saw. I really don't know what weight I will stop trying to lose. I'm more concerned with getting an acceptable amount of fat off my body and them building up more muscle mass. I think that may eventually see me high than I am now, but I'll be fine with that if I'm happy with the way my body feels and looks. I agree that the arificial guidelines are just that, guidelines. Tailor your goals to meet your body.

This is my exact point.

Disregard scale weight. Keep cutting down body fat until you see what you like in the mirror, you're very likely to be 10-20% off on estimates of what you think your ideal weight is.

Lift heavy
Eat protein
reduce calories to lose body fat
Keep going until you see the level of leanness you desire.

psuLemon

Then honestly, you aren't 12%... lol (no disrespect meant)

Body fat measurements are notoriously easy to get wrong. I know it sucks. I am in the same boat. Overall body fat % is dictated by overall body fat measured across the body. If you have a gut, you aren't 12%, despite what your extremities look like.

Your body sounds a lot like mine. I genetically store most of weight in my waist.

Are you happy with your body right now? If you are not, you'll need to keep dropping fat, and then you can get a more accurate measurement of body fat when you get really lean. As you lean out, you will drop more fat free mass in the tune of about 20-40% per lb of weight loss. This is not necessarily muscle loss, this is supporting tissue for the excess fat.

Everyone has less muscle than they think they do and has more fat than they think they do. It's completely normal when you thin out.

No disrespect taken. Using the link below, I have inputed my measurements in several of the equations. You are right, I am not 12% fat, I am 11.75%, lol. And to answer your question, I am happy but not content. My 90 day goal is 9% body fat. Long term is 6-8%. Hoping by the end of the year to reach that. Now I am working on further improving my diet but we will see how things go. I workout 6 days a week and on the 7th I play golf usually. I eat 2800-3000 calories and I am feeling stronger almost every day.


here are measurements if you would like to take a gander

Chest: 10%
Upper Arm (left) - 12%
Upper Arm (right) - 12%
waist - 18%
hips - 10%
abductor - 10%
Thigh Right - 11%
Thigh left - 11%
superalliac - 10%
Midaxillary- 10%


http://www.linear-software.com/online.html

voluptas63

My weight "should be" between 135-150. I just want to be at 160. I look really good at 160. I'm made to be bigger and thicker with curves. I don't look healthy below that.

songbyrdsweet

I am 5'0 and 28.7% BF at 137lbs (1 lb ago lol). I need to reach 126 lbs to reach my goal of 20% body fat. If I were to reach my recommended ~100 lbs, I'd have to do something crazy, like die and begin decomposing. :laugh: