5'1'', 92 lbs, still look fat?

So I've never been explicitly overweight, my heaviest being 5'1'' and ~125 lbs, but I didn't carry it well--arm fat storage is the absolute worst, everything is unflattering. Recently lost about 20 - 25 pounds, and now I'm fluctuating safely between about 90 - 93 lbs.

The visual impact is significant and apparent, and people have definitely commented on my weight loss, but naked in the mirror I still don't like the way I look. I realize that 90lbs is actually underweight for my height, but I still have some underarm fat, bulky thighs, and a bit of stomach pudge.

I feel like it might be dangerous for me to continue losing weight at the rate I've been going, but how can I target these areas? Obviously spot reducing is not possible, but would toning exercises help? Isn't stomach fat more about diet? Or should I just keep losing weight?

Thanks for any help, please let me know if anyone's been in this situation!

Replies

  • pinkraynedropjacki
    pinkraynedropjacki Posts: 3,027 Member
    You are going to take a while to 'see' yourself as thinner. On some days I think WOW I'm really only 128, other days I think I'm back at 210. Your mind takes a while to catch up. Give it time.
  • jmayerovitch
    jmayerovitch Posts: 71 Member
    You would probably benefit from strength training. Not "toning" but actual lifting with barbells and heavier weights. What you're seeing is probably not excess fat at your weight, but just a lack of muscle definition. My suggestion would be to pick up a copy of Starting Strength by Mark Rippetoe.
  • yogacat13
    yogacat13 Posts: 124 Member
    I'm also 5'1" and haven't been 92 pounds since I was in middle school and was several inches shorter. My ideal weight is somewhere around 115-120, and if I was down at 92 pounds people would be commneting as well, and not for the good "you look great" reasons, but because they would be worried about me. I'm concerned that your perception of yourself indicates disordered thinking, and you need some help to see yourself a bit more clearly. By all means look into some weight training and toning, but you are really heading down a dark road if you continue to see yourself with "pudge" at 92 pounds.
  • So I've never been explicitly overweight, my heaviest being 5'1'' and ~125 lbs, but I didn't carry it well--arm fat storage is the absolute worst, everything is unflattering. Recently lost about 20 - 25 pounds, and now I'm fluctuating safely between about 90 - 93 lbs.

    The visual impact is significant and apparent, and people have definitely commented on my weight loss, but naked in the mirror I still don't like the way I look. I realize that 90lbs is actually underweight for my height, but I still have some underarm fat, bulky thighs, and a bit of stomach pudge.

    I feel like it might be dangerous for me to continue losing weight at the rate I've been going, but how can I target these areas? Obviously spot reducing is not possible, but would toning exercises help? Isn't stomach fat more about diet? Or should I just keep losing weight?

    Thanks for any help, please let me know if anyone's been in this situation!
    There is no way you have any excess fat at that weight (quite the opposite). You're just unfit/out of shape. Get thee to the gym and get working out asap. (And you need to eat more too please - I'm making an assumption but I bet you've been on some semi-starvation sub-1200 calorie diet).
    I would advise a combo of HIIT cardio, weights and eating at maintenance/slight surplus so you can put some decent weight on (muscle AND fat). If your genetics favour it you'll look really slim and toned in no time. Otherwise you'll still look a lot better even with some extra pounds on.
  • I suggest gaining more muscle, and toning up your body.
  • boredeating
    boredeating Posts: 8 Member
    It's true- you're out of shape. Make sure you aren't eating things like carbs and salt, eat them in moderation. And strength training is important. This is coming from someone just like you but bad posture and literally zero exercise has caused "fat rolls" on my stomach. Loosing weight doesn't fix this kind of thing, exercise and building up the muscle does. I'm not quite there yet but it's something I need to work on too. Most people like to call it "skinny fat". In the end exercise is always necessary no matter how healthily you eat. Running might be a good habit to pick up- start small of course.
  • @tjthegreatone I've been on a 1000 calorie diet change, but my TDEE is a little over 1300 calories. What constitutes a "starvation diet" isn't the same for everyone. I see what you're saying, but if the jiggly bits aren't excess fat, what are they? Thanks for the tips.

    @boredeating haha, "skinny fat" is probably the best way to put it. I do run a bit, and from the suggestions here some weight training would be a good idea too. Thanks for the help!
  • gigglesinthesun
    gigglesinthesun Posts: 860 Member
    I am still very new here, but this topic hits close to home.

    Think about this question please:

    How much more weight do you want to lose or better even how much more weight do you need to lose before you are satisfied with yourself?

    Your BMI puts you as underweight, in fact you would need to gain 6 pounds to get to a normal BMI. The reason I mention this is because being underweight carries it's own health risk factors. Perhaps strength training would be a good start, but you also need to learn to accept your body. This is not fat acceptance, because YOU ARE NOT FAT, it is having healthy self-image :-)
  • yogacat13
    yogacat13 Posts: 124 Member
    "but my TDEE is a little over 1300 calories"

    I just ran the numbers on http://www.fitnessfrog.com/calculators/tdee-calculator.html, and even with little or no exercise (sedentary) your TDEE is at least 1500. I think you might be confusing BMR with TDEE. I mention this only because it will be really hard for you to tone up with weight training unless you eat a bit more.
  • michellemybelll
    michellemybelll Posts: 2,228 Member
    i'm your height, definitely weigh more, but the only sort of strength training i participate in is hot power yoga. i love what it does for my upper body and core.

    may not be for everyone, but that's what has worked for me.
  • @gigglesinthes hi, welcome! I'm pretty new myself too. Anyway, it's less about weight for me as it is about the aesthetics. If I follow some of these peoples' advice and bulk/tone and end up weighing more than I do now, but looking more proportionate, I'd be perfectly happy with that. And I definitely love my body, but I think you can accept your body while still trying to improve upon it. Thank you though. (:

    @yogacat http://iifym.com/tdee-calculator/ female, 5'1'', 18 years old, 90 lbs, 1352 TDEE. Fitness frog doesn't state which formula they use so I'm less inclined to believe them, erring on the side of caution if you will. Even at a 1500 TDEE, a 500 calorie deficit is still standard and a 1000 calorie diet is still not a "starvation diet".
  • TavistockToad
    TavistockToad Posts: 35,719 Member
    @yogacat http://iifym.com/tdee-calculator/ female, 5'1'', 18 years old, 90 lbs, 1352 TDEE. Fitness frog doesn't state which formula they use so I'm less inclined to believe them, erring on the side of caution if you will. Even at a 1500 TDEE, a 500 calorie deficit is still standard and a 1000 calorie diet is still not a "starvation diet".

    Given your stats you shouldn't be going for a 500 cal deficit in the first place.
  • EmilyTwist1
    EmilyTwist1 Posts: 206 Member
    @tjthegreatone I've been on a 1000 calorie diet change, but my TDEE is a little over 1300 calories. What constitutes a "starvation diet" isn't the same for everyone. I see what you're saying, but if the jiggly bits aren't excess fat, what are they? Thanks for the tips.

    I think you may be confusing BMR (basal metabolic rate, basically the amount of calories you'd burn if you did literally nothing but lay in bed) and TDEE (total daily energy expenditure, ie, BMR plus all the moving around you do). I plugged your stats into several BMR and TDEE calculators, and pretty consistently got BMR of about 1300 and TDEE of about 1700.

    I would advise against losing anymore weight. What you describe sounds like what's often called "skinny fat," meaning that you're BMI is normal or underweight, but you have a higher body fat percentage than you want. Most likely when you lost that 20-25 lbs, a lot of it was muscle rather than fat. I've noticed this tends to happen when someone has a large calorie deficit and isn't lifting weights. Muscle is a use it or lose it kind of thing.

    If I were you, I'd eat at my TDEE or with a very small deficit (say 100-250 cals), and lift weights. I'd also ditch the scale, and measure progress with pics or body measurements (or, if possible, get my body fat percentage measured by my doctor).

    ETA: Someone else ran your stats and got 1500 TDEE. When I ran them I put activity as lightly active, as you mentioned that you run a bit.
  • @yogacat http://iifym.com/tdee-calculator/ female, 5'1'', 18 years old, 90 lbs, 1352 TDEE. Fitness frog doesn't state which formula they use so I'm less inclined to believe them, erring on the side of caution if you will. Even at a 1500 TDEE, a 500 calorie deficit is still standard and a 1000 calorie diet is still not a "starvation diet".

    Given your stats you shouldn't be going for a 500 cal deficit in the first place.
    Why not?

    @emilytwist1 Like I said earlier, using my stats and the iifym counter it comes out to 1351. A 1700 tdee would be wonderful, haha. I'll definitely try weight lifting, and getting my bfp measured sounds like a good idea also, thanks.
  • TavistockToad
    TavistockToad Posts: 35,719 Member
    @yogacat http://iifym.com/tdee-calculator/ female, 5'1'', 18 years old, 90 lbs, 1352 TDEE. Fitness frog doesn't state which formula they use so I'm less inclined to believe them, erring on the side of caution if you will. Even at a 1500 TDEE, a 500 calorie deficit is still standard and a 1000 calorie diet is still not a "starvation diet".

    Given your stats you shouldn't be going for a 500 cal deficit in the first place.
    Why not?

    @emilytwist1 Like I said earlier, using my stats and the iifym counter it comes out to 1351. A 1700 tdee would be wonderful, haha. I'll definitely try weight lifting, and getting my bfp measured sounds like a good idea also, thanks.

    Because a 500 cal deficit is used to try and lose 1lb per week, which is fine if you have more than 10- 15lbs to lose. When you are trying to lose the last few vanity pounds, or 'tone up' the most you should aim for is half a pound.

    As others have said, you don't need to lose, if anything you should try to gain some muscle so you don't look so flabby at such a low weight.
  • EmilyTwist1
    EmilyTwist1 Posts: 206 Member
    @yogacat http://iifym.com/tdee-calculator/ female, 5'1'', 18 years old, 90 lbs, 1352 TDEE. Fitness frog doesn't state which formula they use so I'm less inclined to believe them, erring on the side of caution if you will. Even at a 1500 TDEE, a 500 calorie deficit is still standard and a 1000 calorie diet is still not a "starvation diet".

    Given your stats you shouldn't be going for a 500 cal deficit in the first place.
    Why not?

    @emilytwist1 Like I said earlier, using my stats and the iifym counter it comes out to 1351. A 1700 tdee would be wonderful, haha. I'll definitely try weight lifting, and getting my bfp measured sounds like a good idea also, thanks.

    On the iifym calculator, using the Mifflin-St Jeor formula, you'd get 1351 if you put your activity level at "no exercise." If you do weight lifting, that will increase your activity and TDEE. If you go up to the next activity level (3 times per week), it gives you a TDEE of 1549. Always make sure you take activity levels into account when calculating TDEE.
  • A 500kcal deficit is too large if you are already underweight. It is also too large for people who want to lose a few 'vanity' pounds and predisposes them to putting the weight back on once the diet is over or they crack and start binging.

    I also find it hard to believe that at 18 your TDEE is only 1300. You do some exercise, people your age generally have higher metabolisms (you may still be developing) and most teenagers are not sedentary. Depending on the calculator used your TDEE is anywhere between 1500-1700 for lightly active (of course the only person who can know for definite is you - by trial and error).

    I will reiterate - eat more and workout more. If you workout more, the options are to recalculate your TDEE and consistently eat that, or record your exercise calories separately. If you eat at TDEE or just below you'll be more likely to preserve muscle mass and look better.

    But I will go one better and say if you can eat at a slight surplus you'll gain some muscle too, and my personal biased view is that you will look healthier and stronger too seeing as I don't think you have any business trying to lose more weight.

    To be honest, in practice I usually just say 'screw that' and I eat mostly intuitively, using the numbers as a guide. After all it's only food not kryptonite.
  • This content has been removed.
  • Iron_Feline
    Iron_Feline Posts: 10,750 Member
    Hi op

    You actually need to do a bulk, put on some muscle and fat, then a cut to lose the fat but maintain the muscle.

    Personally I would eat 1500 cals for 6 weeks and start lifting 3 x a week, do compound lifts (squats, dead lifts etc) and then reassess after 6 weeks. Take photos and measurements as well as weighing yourself. If you find your weight drops (could actually happen) up your calories by 100 a week until you start to gain around 1/2 lb a week.

    You will probably gain a few lbs when you start lifting but this will be water weight that your muscles are using to repair themselves. Don't panic it will sort itself out after a month. Oh and look at starting strengths or new rules of lifting for women as a guide to weights.

    You don't need to lose any more weight at the moment and I doubt that you have decent muscle mass to look they way I think you want if you even if you only lost fat not lbm. I also think that you might want to post some pictures to get an honest opinion from others. We can often be our own worst enemy.

    You might want to post on the eat train progress group as it is run by two very knowledgable people who can give you excellent advice.

    Edit. Oh and putting on some muscle means you'll be able to eat more. Win win :flowerforyou:
  • CoderGal
    CoderGal Posts: 6,800 Member
    I second the bulk (with heavy lifting) then cut (with heavy lifting) thing. I was stuck in the same situation and was a dancer girl not interested in weights (many misconceptions I fell for). I ended up 5'8, 118lbs, underweight, squishy gut. Heavy lifting can make all the difference in the world. I have comparison pics of me 10lbs up at the same weight. The first is from cardio, the last is from heavy lifting:
    photo.jpg+ higher exposure to see difference in bum = photo.jpg->photo.jpg

    Also for your TDEE to be 1300 calories, in general, you'd have to be a 2'0, 90 lbs, sedentary 18 year old by my math. The chances of you being shorter then 2 feet tall is unlikely. And chances are as a 18 year old hopefully you're not sedentary. I'm going to make the assumption you're at least taller then 2 feet. It seems to me you don't know how to calculate your TDEE or you don't know what it is. Unless you have a severe rare metabolic condition you're seeing your doctor about (which you didn't mention), it seems like you're mistaking the definition between BMR/RMR and TDEE. A BMR of 1300 is exactly in the ballpark for a slim 18 year old with your stats. You burn much more then that in a day, even if you are sedentary.
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    What type of exercise do you currently do and what is your weight doing on your current intake i.e.have you lost weight over say the last 4 weeks and what was your average intake over that time?
  • DizzieLittleLifter
    DizzieLittleLifter Posts: 1,020 Member
    I know what you mean. I'm 5'2 and spent a lot of my time in the upper 90's range.... until I realized that what I needed to do was build muscle. :). don't be afraid of weights and muscle.
  • DavPul
    DavPul Posts: 61,406 Member
    1. Stop losing weight.
    2. Start lifting weights
    3. Make sure you have a realistic self image and not one that is distorted by photoshopped images of celebrities and models
  • CoderGal
    CoderGal Posts: 6,800 Member
    1. Stop losing weight.
    2. Start lifting weights
    3. Make sure you have a realistic self image and not one that is distorted by photoshopped images of celebrities and models
    Seriously, this.

    A little bit of good lighting and the right camera/photographer can make us all feel better about ourselves lol.
  • FlaxMilk
    FlaxMilk Posts: 3,452 Member
    @tjthegreatone I've been on a 1000 calorie diet change, but my TDEE is a little over 1300 calories. What constitutes a "starvation diet" isn't the same for everyone. I see what you're saying, but if the jiggly bits aren't excess fat, what are they? Thanks for the tips.

    Remember that the body requires fat on it to be healthy. It's not something meant to be completely eradicated or something that only shows up when we've done something wrong. Your body fat has many functions. You sound as if you are willing to build lean body mass, which is great. To do that, you need to get enough to eat. Since you are underweight, you should not be eating at a maintenance amount anyway. This is the perfect time to build some lean body mass--when you've got to eat more anyway.
  • cadaverousbones
    cadaverousbones Posts: 421 Member
    I would suggest to do strength training to build muscle you will look more toned and be in better shape. You could have extra skin if you lost weight fast and have not been incorporating any kind of muscle building in your workout.
  • calpeachmfp
    calpeachmfp Posts: 57 Member
    Hi, genkiemi,
    Yup, I agree with a lot of posters . . . your weight is probably too low, you need to build some muscle, and you are probably that "skinny fat" thing they were referring to. No worries, though. Here's why:

    If you are scared of the "heavy weights" reference, there is an alternative, or at least a way to start a little more slowly, and it involves mostly just your body weight. It also gives you cardio benefits, without the running. More and more I am reading that running is NOT the way to go, and that there are lots of negatives to it. I am a certified personal trainer, by the way, so I do lots of studying up on this stuff. : )

    The program I am referring to is called: Turbulence Training. Craig Ballantyne, the creator, is amazing. He knows the science behind his programs, and they work. At 58 I have never been in better shape, and I am a life-long athlete! Here's the link to his 4 week workout, which might be just right for you. In it he gives you the exercises, a sheet to log your exercise, and pictures and descriptions of each one.

    http://woldfitness.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/4-week-bodyweight-workout.pdf

    Let me know if you have any questions! And make sure you stay on here to get support!
    My best,
    Lynne : )
  • supplemama
    supplemama Posts: 1,956 Member
    You would probably benefit from strength training. Not "toning" but actual lifting with barbells and heavier weights. What you're seeing is probably not excess fat at your weight, but just a lack of muscle definition. My suggestion would be to pick up a copy of Starting Strength by Mark Rippetoe.

    THIS
  • geekyjock76
    geekyjock76 Posts: 2,720 Member
    I really hope you are at least 18 because being on such a restrictive diet before your body reaches maturation can lead to a permanent inability to reach peak bone mass density. What that means is, although weight training and eating sufficient calories again can help increase bone mass density, you'll never regain what you've lost even with calcium supplements or estrogen therapy by restricting prior to the body fully developing.

    With that said, you're likely going to return to 120 to 125 again after eating normally long enough. If you were 125 lbs to begin with, your lean mass may have been around 90 to 95 lbs. Considering you presently weigh 90 lbs, one can reasonably assume an appreciable loss of lean mass occurred. Not to scare you, but even with heavy weight-training, most of the regain will likely come from fat and not lean mass. I wouldn't worry about that, though, since your priorities should be about returning to a healthy weight and restoring the loss of lean mass (muscle, connective tissue, bone, etc.) even if you end up at a higher body fat percentage than when you first started restricting.