How do you pick your target weight?

Options
124

Replies

  • tigersword
    tigersword Posts: 8,059 Member
    Options

    laughs insanely at the thought of being 131lb - at 5'9" ...I am now 12 stone - or 168lbs. If I get much thinner I will look like a carthorse that has been starved... not a look I think is very attractive

    Seems a little harsh and judgmental. Other people's goals, and the way they want to look is up to them, as long - as they're in the healthy range there's really no need to be critical.

    And you wouldn't have to starve to get to that weight, that's just incorrect. You could eat really well and eat whatever you like and get there.

    Who are you to say what's attractive.
    That's a huge assumption that's pretty much wrong. I would have to starve to reach the silly, arbitrary number Fuhrman's "formula" tells me I should weigh, which is 140 pounds. I currently have 160 pounds of lean body mass, so to reach the number he thinks I should weigh, I would have to drop to 0% body fat (which is fatal) and then lose an additional 20 pounds. That would be physically impossible to do without starvation.

    Also, to the person who first brought this up and decided to compare Americans to Chinese, there's a huge difference from a physical standpoint between the body structures of the two countries. Body structure varies considerably between nations. There is no one size fits all answer.
  • action_figure
    action_figure Posts: 511 Member
    Options
    Hi,

    As the topic suggests, I'm having trouble selecting a target weight. Having a target is important to me for motivation purposes - as well as a time limit. I really need deadlines and targets.

    Anyway, I'm currently 69kg or 151 pounds. I was originally thinking of a target of 65kg, however when I input my height and target weight into BMI calculators, that puts me on the very upper edge of normal.

    58kg (127 pounds) puts me roughly in the middle of the normal weight range however that just seems so tiny.

    The last time I was around 58kg was when I was in high school and still had some growing to do.

    So what does everyone think?

    Current stats:

    Height: 163cm - 5 foot 3
    Age: 28
    Current :69kg or 151 pounds

    I'm 6 months post partem if that makes a difference.

    Figure out your body fat percentage. Then figure out what body fat percentage you want. Devise a plan to maintain (or increase) the lean body mass you have right now. Then do the math and figure out where that puts you. Currently I'm at 207 lbs with 43 percent body fat. I want a body fat percentage of 20%. That puts me at a goal weight of 147 lbs.
  • pavrg
    pavrg Posts: 277 Member
    Options
    lol... 180 lbs??? this book expects me to be 180 lbs?!?!?
    He jacked up the thumbrule number. A male body on average can hold ~7 lbs more lean body mass per inch of height, not 5, and I say approximately because it's not really linear. So the further you get away from the 5'0" baseline or the more you do strength training, the more it's going to be jacked up. So it works for me at 5'9": 150 lbs @ 10-15% bodyfat. I would have to do a weight training routine to build more lbm than that, which I think he assumes you won't do. At taller heights it gets way off, though.

    E.g., if you added 7 to each inch if you do any sort of sports activity or strength training, it would be a more accurate number (105 + 15*7 = 210 lbs, which is in the normal range for a 6'3" man). The 5 lb thumbrule only works at 6'3" if you are a completely unathletic person or your chosen sport is something like track where you develop a lot of lean muscle, because it would mean your LBM at 6'3" is only 150 lbs and change, which is 40 lbs short of your approximate genetic potential at that height. He should've given a range, using the 5 if you're mostly sedentary and the 7 if you've done strength training.

    I'm not sure how the female body puts on mass compared to a man's body, so I don't know if his thumbrule for women holds.

    As for 'frame', what people are talking about is distribution of weight throughout the body and how much lean body mass they have. Some people put all the weight in one spot, others distribute it more evenly. It's just genetics. That's not really a 'frame,' it's just how well you carry extra weight thanks to your body's preferred location to store fat. People of the same height have remarkably low variance for potential to carry lean body mass and low variance for bone structure.

    So, to repeat, the best method is to measure you current bf %, set your goal bf %, and use the calculator I posted before to find out how much weight you have to lose. Just be warned it can be surprising sometimes.
  • action_figure
    action_figure Posts: 511 Member
    Options
    107 for me, Female, 5' 3"
    I am using Dr. Joel Fuhrman's guide for my ideal height. He does emphasize being on the leaner end of your weight range vs. in the middle.

    Here is his formula from his book, "Eat to Live":

    For Men: 105 lb for the first 5 ft; 5 lb for each inch over 5 ft

    For Women: 95 lb for the first 5 ft; 4 lb for each inch over 5 ft

    I have always hovered around 125+ with enough to spare so I am excited as I am working my way to the lean version of me.

    OMZ! I would weigh 101 lbs. I have 120 lbs of lean body mass currently! That would SUCK!
  • pavrg
    pavrg Posts: 277 Member
    Options
    That's a huge assumption that's pretty much wrong. I would have to starve to reach the silly, arbitrary number Fuhrman's "formula" tells me I should weigh, which is 140 pounds. I currently have 160 pounds of lean body mass, so to reach the number he thinks I should weigh, I would have to drop to 0% body fat (which is fatal) and then lose an additional 20 pounds. That would be physically impossible to do without starvation.

    Also, to the person who first brought this up and decided to compare Americans to Chinese, there's a huge difference from a physical standpoint between the body structures of the two countries. Body structure varies considerably between nations. There is no one size fits all answer.
    If you are 5'7" then you do not have 160 lbs of lbm. Any method you use to attempt to measure your LBM at 200+ lbs is going to be way off. And despite the fact that you think you have 160 lbs of lbm, you have your weight loss goal set to 175 lbs which is 8% bodyfat. It is really, really hard for men to go under 10% bodyfat and I can guarantee you won't hit it at 175 lbs -- that's pro body builder territory. I'm not trying to stomp on your goals, but they're not realistic.

    Source: http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/whats-my-genetic-muscular-potential.html
  • sinistras
    sinistras Posts: 244 Member
    Options
    [/quote]
    "Also, to the person who first brought this up and decided to compare Americans to Chinese, there's a huge difference from a physical standpoint between the body structures of the two countries. Body structure varies considerably between nations. There is no one size fits all answer."
    [/quote]

    Have you been to China? What parts? Just to be clear, there are as many body structure types in China as there are Chinese, and likewise the same is true in the US. On a whole, however, the Chinese version of a "healthy" target weight is probably always towards lower end of what Americans consider an ideal healthy range. My point is that many average-framed Chinese illustrate you can be healthy at the "low weight" of your "ideal" range. On paper it might sound "too skinny" or impossible to achieve, but fleshed out on a person, it isn't.

    As I have also said many-a-time and for the last time--OP has to evaluate for herself what is *her* ideal. This isn't a one-size answer but an answer. She is just asking others to put their targets out for reference. Mine just happens to be getting the most flack as it is the lowest. Each to her own.

    And yes, I still have a womanly form. My husband wouldn't have it otherwise. :-D
  • serenere
    serenere Posts: 70 Member
    Options
    I actually have a % of body fat as a real goal but something that might be very helpful for you is look for a friend or someone you know that is the same height as you and has the body that you want. Then ask her how much she weight! :) but consider that you might add a couple of kilos to that if that person is not sporty and active because muscles weight more than fat.
  • pavrg
    pavrg Posts: 277 Member
    Options
    Have you been to China? What parts? Just to be clear, there are as many body structure types in China as there are Chinese, and likewise the same is true in the US. On a whole, however, the Chinese version of a "healthy" target weight is probably always towards lower end of what Americans consider an ideal healthy range. My point is that many average-framed Chinese illustrate you can be healthy at the "low weight" of your "ideal" range. On paper it might sound "too skinny" or impossible to achieve, but fleshed out on a person, it isn't.

    As I have also said many-a-time and for the last time--OP has to evaluate for herself what is *her* ideal. This isn't a one-size answer but an answer. She is just asking others to put their targets out for reference. Mine just happens to be getting the most flack as it is the lowest. Each to her own.

    And yes, I still have a womanly form. My husband wouldn't have it otherwise. :-D
    If by huge difference, you mean a slight differences in weight that is mostly accounted for by differences in median heights between the two populations of humans, then sure.

    You don't need to go to China to make this observation, just read some studies on the matter. Lean body mass potential is strongly correlated to height. The 0.1% genetic difference that makes you look different on the outside doesn't make you look any different on the inside.
  • vikidenn
    vikidenn Posts: 20
    Options
    Aim for 135 lbs and practice maintaining that for several months. If you find yourself on the odd side of your preferred size of clothes then lose a little more, then maintain. You need a little muscle to take care of your new angel and that adds some weight! Focus on health, energy, and of course, love!
  • tallgrl212
    tallgrl212 Posts: 14
    Options
    At 6'3" I'm pretty sure I would look emaciated at 155 pounds. I'm not sure this equation works for people who are taller people.
  • sinistras
    sinistras Posts: 244 Member
    Options
    "[/quote] You don't need to go to China to make this observation, just read some studies on the matter. Lean body mass potential is strongly correlated to height. The 0.1% genetic difference that makes you look different on the outside doesn't make you look any different on the inside."
    [/quote]

    Seeing is believing. I still think a lot of people are assuming all Chinese are short and fine boned. I am in Hangzhou, there are plenty of women my height (5' 3"ish) and average framed but easily weigh closer to 110s and below than 125-135, the median ideal weight often suggested for women of my frame/height.

    No one is going just to read "studies" on the matter...I am sure you didn't. :tongue: I am providing for example only, that, while we might assume an ideal target is too low, there are plenty of people walking this earth that are our height/frame style and prove that weight to be perfectly fine.
  • sinistras
    sinistras Posts: 244 Member
    Options
    At 6'3" I'm pretty sure I would look emaciated at 155 pounds. I'm not sure this equation works for people who are taller people.

    And it is just that, a guide, not the end all of equations. Everyone is different. It just happens to be the right ideal for me.
    **who is same height and sex as OP.
  • Iron_Feline
    Iron_Feline Posts: 10,750 Member
    Options
    107 for me, Female, 5' 3"
    I am using Dr. Joel Fuhrman's guide for my ideal height. He does emphasize being on the leaner end of your weight range vs. in the middle.

    Here is his formula from his book, "Eat to Live":

    For Men: 105 lb for the first 5 ft; 5 lb for each inch over 5 ft

    For Women: 95 lb for the first 5 ft; 4 lb for each inch over 5 ft

    I have always hovered around 125+ with enough to spare so I am excited as I am working my way to the lean version of me.

    103lbs! Ha ha ha ha ha :laugh: :noway:

    I've got about 93lbs of lbm. I would look horrible at this weight and as for the comment of when you got your period. Utter ridiculous, I was under 100lbs with no hips, boobs and a few inches shorter.

    Op honestly I don't think it matters. I'm just planning to lose 10lbs then reasses. I don't care what my weight is I care about what I look like and what my body fat % is. I think that focusing too much on a number that really doesn't matter much in the grand scheme of things can be unhealthy. Pick a number you think might be ok but on the higher side, focus on how you look, feel and clothes fit :flowerforyou:
  • elyelyse
    elyelyse Posts: 1,454 Member
    Options
    For five foot three (which I am too) your ideal weight would be about 53 kg, which is 116lbs. It might seem like nothing but that's actually the healthiest you could be and it's attainable in time. Or just stop once you feel comfortable with yourself AND are within the healthy range.

    I'm 5ft3 and didn't even weight that little when I was 16 and in great shape. If I got down to 116 now, I'm quite sure my family would send me to a Dr and be very concerned about my health. I would look sick. That isn't to say that it's an unreasonable weight for some women! It just means we are all so different, our proportions, breast size, overall body composition...I just think its impossible to base your goal on someone else's perfect weight.

    As some others have suggested, your goal can, should change as you get closer to it. I choose a goal of about 170 because I started at 300 and wanted to be realistic with my expectations. Now that I'm down to 190, Im rethinking that and hope to reach 150-155 before I reasses again.

    You also mentioned having a goal as far as how long it would take. In my opinion, it's not necessarily bad to set a goal, but please, be patient with yourself. Let's say you "only" lose half the weight you want in the time you set for yourself. It will be so easy to feel like you have failed, instead of seeing the amazing success you've achieved. Weight loss is a challenge, and even getting halfway there is something to celebrate.
  • egrusy
    egrusy Posts: 196 Member
    Options
    This is repeating what others have said, but I choose a target where I know my clothes will fit comfortably without having to go up a size, and is a weight that is sustainable. It's not just about GETTING there, it's also about STAYING there :smile:
  • pamfm
    pamfm Posts: 93 Member
    Options
    OP, try this calculator to find what target weight to put in MFP, and as you get closer to your goal, adjust according to how you feel.

    http://www.self.com/calculatorsprograms/calculators/happyweight

    I chose the weight at which I felt most healthy and happy in between states of almost-underweight and almost-overweight. I also used this "happy weight" calculator, and it was within 3 lbs of that goal.Sometimes people don't have a reasonable point of reference like that because they have struggled with their weight since before adulthood, and I think this calculator is helpful in those situations. (and FWIW I'm 5'4" and am aiming for somewhere between 223-226 with 24% body fat.)

    Good luck!
  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,268 Member
    Options
    .

    As I have also said many-a-time and for the last time--OP has to evaluate for herself what is *her* ideal. This isn't a one-size answer but an answer. She is just asking others to put their targets out for reference. Mine just happens to be getting the most flack as it is the lowest. Each to her own.

    And yes, I still have a womanly form. My husband wouldn't have it otherwise. :-D

    At the lowest for a very smal framed woman of your height....that calculation is so off it's not funny. And you can't say the OP could attain this you have no idea what frame size she has or LBM just her height/sex.

    Putting that out there is setting unrealistic goals for people who could be easily influenced into an unhealthy lifestyle.

    And regardless of where you are from (take me for example) a woman who is 5 ft 7 and larged framed should not weigh 123 lbs period.
  • Hildy_J
    Hildy_J Posts: 1,050 Member
    Options
    You simply cannot sustain the weight you were at puberty, especially if you have spent the intervening years giving birth, overweight, sedentary etc.

    It would depend on your height and weight at puberty ie your age and if you were fully grown. In my case I had reached my current height and I was 2lb heavier then than I am now. I'm 47 with 2 kids. It can be done.

    Everyone's different, other people's goals shouldn't be ridiculed or criticised.

    If it's in the healthy range and the person plans on eating well - go for it!
  • harleygroomer
    harleygroomer Posts: 373 Member
    Options
    Your "normal" weight will be what you are comfortable with and are able to maintain. I used to weigh 100LBS in my "younger" days, but when I get done 125 will be my goal for maintenance .
  • jana823
    jana823 Posts: 1
    Options
    The Furhman calculation may not be right for everyone... according to it, my target weight would be 103 lbs. The lowest I've ever weighed was 108, and it was simply not enough on my frame. I suppose everyone's aesthetics are different, but I had several friends and family members telling me that I looked sick. I have a medium-to-large frame according to my wrist circumference, and a fairly muscular build, so that may be part of it. I need another 15lbs on top of that to look healthy.

Categories