Your ideal weight might make you look ill ?

MinnieInMaine

I hate those height/weight/BMR charts - so bogus, especially for anyone who's more athletic. One of my best friends has a great body, hardly any fat, she's super fit and eats clean 90% of the time but if she were to gain 5 pounds, she be considered overweight. And for guys it's even worse because you just naturally have more muscle mass and if you workout, you gain more. According to BMI, George Clooney, Brad Pitt, Matt Damon are considered overweight - do they look overweight to you?

For those of us who are more concerned with getting fit and healthy, rather than skinny, body fat % is a better indication of health. Although I'm using the high end of the BMR as a target weight, as soon as I lose the next 5 pounds, I'm investing in one of those handheld body fat % monitors (or maybe I'll ask for it for Christmas). I want to make sure I'm losing the rest of the weight in the right way.

bazfitness

Was sort of thinking same kind of thing. I'm almost at my original goal of 175. To the man/woman in the street I think I look regular or even slim now, but I know there's still remnants of love handles and belly fat and defo can shift more fat off my arms and legs too. Think I'd need to get down to 160-165 a weight I haven't been since i was perhaps 17 to hit a real healthy weight.

At that sort of weight I will definitely look skinny in comparison to these days standards. I'm already getting comments from my wife how my face is looking TOO thin. One I hit 175 I'm actually going to ease off weight loss for a while as don't want to appear skinny at my friend's wedding in a month's time but after that I will try to shred remaining excess fat and when that's done I aim to put back on weight and try to build muscle with a calorie surplus. As the end game is to have low body fat but look strong, not skinny!

LuizH

At 5"2, the mid-range for my ideal weight according to the charts is 120lbs ish. When I was 16 I was 125lbs, I've never gone that low again in nearly 20 years. About 5-6 years ago I lost a fair amount of weight, going down from 200lbs to 139lbs. I wasn't skinny, but I looked scrawny - there were bones sticking out where they shouldn't be, and people started to tell me I looked ill.

SInce then I have put on weight, but if I calculate my body fat percentage it is clear that the only way I could get back down to 120lbs would be to lose a shed-load of muscle along with ALL of my body fat (not going to happen!). Now I'm aiming for a far more sensible (and hopefully more sustainable) 147lbs, even though that puts me bang in the middle of the 'overweight' category according to the charts.

Arexxx

I'd rather have curves and be healthy. Even if that means being "overweight" by a few pounds.

dry61ed

I aim to be in middle of the minimum and maximum weight range suggested for my age and height.

SomeoneSomeplace

First of all I haven no idea what 145-155 (we whatever you weight range is, sorry I forgot) looks like on a guy. But I can say as a women that overly skinny isn't particularly attractive on a guy. Of course this should not discourage you from being healthy and is obviously just my opinion but I feel like at the lower end of your range or "ideal weight" you would lose a lot of muscle and just be rather thin, which isn't really the best thing, I wouldn't focus so much on the "ideal weight" or the numbers in general but focus on how your body looks and what looks best on you.

As for my "Ideal Weight" I'm not sure what that is. I'm 5'2 and 116 give or take a few depending on when I weigh myself and my ideal is something like 99- 124 so I'm right in the middle.

tlo23

Good post! I said the same thing lol
I've been heavy for so long, people who haven't seen me in awhile may think something is wrong if I were to get down to 169 - 174 for example which is a normal weight for my 5'10" height as a female. I think I'll be fine anywhere from 176 - 181.

Amryfal

I've never been near my so-called 'ideal' weight, according to the BMI, but I do know that my mother, with whom I share an unusually large build, was extremely skinny in her late teens and twenties, and still weighed 20-30lbs more than her so called 'ideal'. Looking at the photos from that period, she looks frail and too thin for her frame. BMI is meant to measure populations, not individuals. It deals in averages. Anyone who is outside those averages is unlikely to fit neatly into the box.

same here. my mother got down close to "normal" BMI and she had to put on weight because she was too thin. i've never been near my goal weight, but i'm assuming i'll be the same because i never look as heavy as i am, thanks to the way it distributes and my large frame. i'm wary of going too low and will stop when i feel healthy. i like my curves

amberecochran

I have a goal weigh here on MFP but in reality I have a size goal. My size goal is a 7/8. If my weight is more than my goal weight, so be it. The reason I say this is because I love strength training and I know that muscle weighs more than fat. Saying that, I would be completly content at a size 7/8 and weighing 150 or 155. Does that make sence?

bazfitness

For those of us who are more concerned with getting fit and healthy, rather than skinny, body fat % is a better indication of health. Although I'm using the high end of the BMR as a target weight, as soon as I lose the next 5 pounds, I'm investing in one of those handheld body fat % monitors (or maybe I'll ask for it for Christmas). I want to make sure I'm losing the rest of the weight in the right way.

yip body fat % is the way to go. However I heard those handheld devices are meant to be hopelessly inaccurate.I'm going to get in iDxa (think it's same as DEXA) scan in September to get a very accurate picture of my body fat%

grrrlface

I don't think anywhere in my 'ideal' range of 107 - 139 I would look ill. I'm just under the 'ideal' top weight at 138 but I still look big and I don't like it.

I'd rather be slim, with toned muscles and no extra weight than have any health problem related to any extra weight I carry round with me like arthritis or diabetes.

I do think it''s kinda sad that 'overweight' is considered the norm (though not as much here in UK, it's still a big stigma to be overweight, especially where I live) now even if the health risks are laid out right there for people.

mfenton62

Ian, I am also 5'7 175 I think those charts are misleading! If your body fat is in the correct % range I think it is o.k . Even when I was 183 my body fat was 16% 25% is average for men. I've lost 8 lbs and need to get my body fat % measured again.

rileysowner

I agree that what people consider a healthy weight is much higher than it should be. I started at 255 pounds as a 5'10" male. When I got close to 200 pounds people started telling me to stop losing weight. My goal based on what I know of the lean mass I have and the fat mass I have is closer to 160-165 which is in my healthy range. That would give me, assuming I can hold onto my lean mass, and nice 10-12% body fat. I know at that weight and body fat percentage people will be saying I look unhealthy, but the reality is I will not be, so I really don't care what they see it as. Eventually they will get used to that look, and at that weight I won't be skin and bones either.

BTW, to the person who posted this http://www.halls.md/ideal-weight/body.htm that is a nice site. By it my goal of 160 is not out of line at all.

ashlinmarie

My healthy range goes from 123ish to 159. If I tried to get down to the bottom, I would be far too thin. I'm shooting for a nice healthy 140-150 range.

My husband is about 5'10" and is weighing about 150 right now and he does not look too thin at all. You could probably pull it off depending on your build, but if you find a place where you look good and are happy with it, I'd stay there. People tell me 150 is too heavy and I should aim to be thinner, but this is about me, not them and if I can be a size 6-8 and weigh 150, then I'm gonna do it!

Prahasaurus

I think women over 35 or so look better with a few extra pounds.

On the other hand, I like being thin (actually, "normal," from a BMI perspective), and I feel better when I'm thin. And it's healthier. Our bodies did not evolve to maintain our current calorie loads, especially the high sugar/carb rates.

But if it's purely about the aesthetic, then yes, overweight is the new normal.

--P

SammieGetsFit

I found this website -- and I think I agree with the medical recommendation - but the higher end of the medical recommendation.

http://www.halls.md/ideal-weight/body.htm

Seriously though, if muscle weighs more than fat, shouldn't we all (including the government regulations that will come into play now) be more concerned with the fat ratio instead?

I didn't see that anyone else had posted this link, but if so I apologize for being a repeater: http://www.fat2fitradio.com/tools/ibw/

That tool will calculate your goal weight by using your current weight/body fat % and your ideal body fat %. I think it's a great way to figure it out. It's not 100% accurate, but it's a good guide.

For me it's coming in around 160-167 for 18-21% body fat. (I'm 26 and 5'9".)

I haven't been that small in my adult life, but I imagine that people will say I look "too thin" and that I should "stop dieting" when I get there. When my physicals come back awesome and I'm able to lift and run circles around them, I won't really care. In fact, I'll probably just feel sad for them.

I think there's almost nothing we can't do if we work for it. And I intend to see what my body can do. Whatever weight that falls at...so be it.

Edited to say: At 21% body fat and an estimated 167 pounds, I'll have a BMI of 24.3 -- barely inside the upper limits of "Normal". At 18% body fat and an estimated 161 pounds (athletic women's bf%), I'll have a BMI of 23.4. The middle of Normal for my height is 21.7. To reach that I'd have to weigh 149, which is an estimated 10% body fat -- DANGEROUSLY LOW for women my age. The BMI is junk.

Vonwarr

Copying this from a post I made last night:

There is a much better way to calculate your "ideal" weight than BMI - basically you take your lean body mass... then add a healthy percentage of fat.

Lean Body Mass/(1- Desired Body Fat Percentage)

For example, I have 150 lbs of lean body mass. According to the charts (linked below), as a male at my age (26), the middle of the "ideal" range is... around 13%. So... 150/(1-0.13) = 172.5. My ideal weight would be basically between 170-175.

That would put me into the "overweight" BMI category at 26.1... however, I have a high amount of lean mass for someone my height (5'8"). To reduce my weight into the "healthy" range according to BMI would mean going down to 164 to reach a BMI of 24.9. That would put me at 8.5% body fat and I would look pretty ripped just from the lack of BF.... but most often unless someone is working REALLY hard to maintain their muscle, they can drop muscle instead of (or as well as) fat. That's when you get that "sickly" look.

tl;dr - BMI is stupid, calculate your ideal weight


References:
http://www.builtlean.com/2010/05/04/ideal-body-weight-formula-how-to-calculate-your-ideal-weight/

How to find your desired fat percentage... scroll down to the rainbow charts:
http://www.builtlean.com/2010/08/03/ideal-body-fat-percentage-chart/

BioQueen

My range is 114-150. I've never even thought to shoot for 114, I would probably look horrible. I also know that 150 isn't too bad, but i would definitely like to keep losing from there. The range that i think is best for me is between 130 and 140.

castadiva

I think women over 35 or so look better with a few extra pounds.

On the other hand, I like being thin (actually, "normal," from a BMI perspective), and I feel better when I'm thin. And it's healthier. Our bodies did not evolve to maintain our current calorie loads, especially the high sugar/carb rates.

But if it's purely about the aesthetic, then yes, overweight is the new normal.

--P

But is 'overweight' a medical descriptor or a perspective-descriptor? The other thing that is rarely acknowledged by proponents of BMI is that those charts have been adjusted downwards several times as the World Health Organisation extended its' reach to populations with typically-smaller frames, often of Asian or Continental Indian ethnicity. Inevitably, that pushes more Caucasians and other typically-larger framed populations into the 'overweight' category... Seems to me there's little point in measuring 'say a Malaysian and a Norwegian against the same scale - the two typically have genetically very different frames and body-compositions, and the averages within those two populations as a whole are likely to reflect that.

lyndyedwards

At the end of the day its how you feel about yourself. I do think we have got used to people being bigger in general and I wouldn't take any notice of anyone telling you you are too thin if you feel good, are healthy and full of energy. There could always be a little voice of the green eyed monster involved!
I am 5'6'' and weighed 144lb,, at that weight I felt, not fat, but not happy! I had love handles, a big waist, and my arms were a bit plump. I have been trying to get down to around 134 lb for the last few years, it doesn't sound much to lose but I have found it very hard. But I am making a concerted effort now and working out at the Gym 5 days a week doing interval training and weights. It is paying off and although I have only lost 2 lb so far I can tell my body shape is changing for the better. I shall stop when I feel good about myself again and although I used to be about 120 lb I know I would look awful at that weight now I am in my fifties. I fit a UK size 12/14 and I want to be a 10. So use your common sense, I find thats the best judge!