"I want to lose weight, but I don't want to get too skinny!"

meganjcallaghan wrote: »

well for someone who is starting at a very high weight they can expect to have high excess skin poundage as part of the package. This could very well mean that in order to be healthy they'd have to stay at the higher end of their "healthy" weight range because while the skin contributes to the numbers on the scale it doesn't actually contribute anything to the function and health of the body. If, for example, I were to get down to 130 pounds I would still be 12 pounds above what would be considered "underweight" according to the BMI. That's plenty healthy, right? Except at 130 pounds I will have approximately 18 pounds of excess skin based on amount of weight lost. This isn't lean mass, organs, muscle, skeletal system, essential fat. It's just extra, useless junk hanging off me like skin drapes. So saying I'm a good and healthy weight at 130 pounds would be like taking a 112 pound 5'7" individual, putting them on the scale, saying "you're underweight. let's fix that" and then draping 18 pounds of skin over their arms to boost the numbers and calling it a day. For someone who has been quite obese, staying at the higher end of their healthy range (or possibly even lower end of "overweight" depending on how much skin they are carrying) might actually be the best option even if it's not ideal. At least until they can get the skin removed.

That is such an interesting comment. It's amazing all of the intimate details and spectrum that so many of us don't consider in another persons journey.

Iwishyouwell wrote: »

OK, this has always intrigued me because I've seen in on just about every weight loss or fitness board I've ever even cursorily passed through.

Overweight and obese people setting goals that are still pretty high, or are right at the high end of the "normal" scale, with a disclaimer of "I don't want to be skinny!!!".

Why do you think that is? What's with this apparent fear of becoming too low in body fat and/or weight? Many of the weights I see where people believe they will, or did, look too skinny/thin/emaciated use to be commonplace, average and normal a few decades ago (or in parts of the world today). Yet there seems to be this apparent backlash these days about conceptualizing a body that's relatively lean or light.

What do you think is the root of the big thin scare?

I think it is just hard for many obese people to imagine themselves with a low BMI. Therefore they have a hard time setting a goal weight lower than they can picture themselves.

To me a BMI of 25 would be huge and would certainly negatively impact my running performance. For certain football players, a BMI of 25 might be way too small. It all depends on individual circumstances.

I don't think goals are "good" or "bad" without more context

MsHarryWinston wrote: »

meganjcallaghan wrote: »

well for someone who is starting at a very high weight they can expect to have high excess skin poundage as part of the package. This could very well mean that in order to be healthy they'd have to stay at the higher end of their "healthy" weight range because while the skin contributes to the numbers on the scale it doesn't actually contribute anything to the function and health of the body. If, for example, I were to get down to 130 pounds I would still be 12 pounds above what would be considered "underweight" according to the BMI. That's plenty healthy, right? Except at 130 pounds I will have approximately 18 pounds of excess skin based on amount of weight lost. This isn't lean mass, organs, muscle, skeletal system, essential fat. It's just extra, useless junk hanging off me like skin drapes. So saying I'm a good and healthy weight at 130 pounds would be like taking a 112 pound 5'7" individual, putting them on the scale, saying "you're underweight. let's fix that" and then draping 18 pounds of skin over their arms to boost the numbers and calling it a day. For someone who has been quite obese, staying at the higher end of their healthy range (or possibly even lower end of "overweight" depending on how much skin they are carrying) might actually be the best option even if it's not ideal. At least until they can get the skin removed.

That is such an interesting comment. It's amazing all of the intimate details and spectrum that so many of us don't consider in another persons journey.

I am 5'9". I was 375, now 273ish. I already have loose skin problems, with almost 120lbs to go. I imagine I may have over 20lbs of excess skin when all is said and done. Awesomeness.

Iwishyouwell wrote: »

FitFroglet wrote: »

For me 'I don't want to be too skinny' wasn't anything to do with a specific look or weight, but more to do with 'I want to be healthy but I still want to be me'.

"I still want to be me".

That's one of the most fascinating insights I've seen on this topic.

It's so rooted in self perception. If you've been fat long enough, even if you hated being fat, there is a sense of the unknown on the other end. If I'm not this thing, which I've struggled against for so long, which partially defined me, for the bad and good, who am I?

Absolutely - something that should always have been 'just a number' somehow becomes a large part of your identity. You also build up all these false perceptions about the magical people who manage to be slim ('they only eat lettuce' for example and 'they don't get hunger cues' are amongst the rubbish things I've told myself in the past).

Luckily I'm finding that as I get smaller, my weight wasn't as big a part of me as I thought it was, and I'm absolutely able to redefine myself.

At the beginning I couldn't picture being a UK size 14 (US 10), now I reckon that a 10 (US 6) will probably be about right for my frame.

It's all a learning exercise!

At 5'1 and 102 lb I am at the low end of the BMI scale:19.27 and to me I am at the perfect weight but a little skinny-fat.
(BF according to an online US Marine Corps site 20.10).

My highest weight was the top of the normal BMI range 128-130 lb and I felt incredibly huge because I had spent most of my life around the 102-107 weight range.

This just goes to show that it is really down to a persons perception of their body - someone starting at 230 would find 130 more acceptable than I coming from the opposite direction.

I also agree with the bigger the loss the more extra skin has to be carried around so a low BMI would be the wrong thing to aim for. 10-20 lb of extra skin can really skew a BMI.

middlehaitch wrote: »

I also agree with the bigger the loss the more extra skin has to be carried around so a low BMI would be the wrong thing to aim for. 10-20 lb of extra skin can really skew a BMI.

True story. Everyone who ever tries to guess my weight puts me at around the 120 -125 range, even one nurse I know who weighs people on a daily basis and is apparently always nearly dead on with her guesses. I'm actually about 15 pounds over that, but it's all skin. it's thin enough that if you fold and pack it well enough nobody would know it's there. Though I do have to wear pants that are at least a size or 2 too big to fit it in >:(

Iwishyouwell wrote: »

peachyfuzzle wrote: »

When I got down to 190 I looked like I was about a week away from death.

Let me ask you a question; have you almost always been big?

190 is a pretty high weight for the majority of men. When you say that you looked "about a week away from death" do you think part of that was you being unused to seeing yourself in a much smaller body?

If you happened upon a nearly 200 lbs man who looked like you did, do you think he's look to you like he was severely emaciated?

Those of us who have been big sometimes don't have the same criteria for others as we do for ourselves. And that's can even be the case for people who know us. Which explains the family, friends and co-workers who implore you to stop losing weight, because you're looking "too skinny", even though you're still technically overweight or obese. Yet the thought would never cross their mind if they met you at that weight from day one.

Yep, I have been a fatty mcfatfat my whole life. I am generally very honest about my body, and try as hard as I can to see it for what it is; although, I do realize that is just about an impossibility.

The thing is, even looking back at pictures of me from that time, I still don't think I looked healthy at all. I'm on the lower end of tall at 6'1", so until I started to get over 285-300lbs, I wore the weight pretty well. One of the main reasons why I felt that I looked sickly is because I could actually see my ribs at that weight, and the effect only magnified when lying on my back. There are pictures of me where I look just like skin and bones.

It could have also been an effect of "skinnyfat" as I didn't do any weight training while I was losing that weight. It was all cardio, so while I lost nearly all of my fat, I lost a whole bunch of muscle as well.

I would like to believe that if I didn't know me, and just saw myself walking down the street at 190lbs back then, I would have offered to by myself a sandwich. lol

I am 5'7" and in my profile was 147. At the mid or low end of my bmi (anywhere below 135) I don't have my period, breasts, and lose my overall strength. to me, losing my femininity or athleticism is "too skinny" no matter what the scal or society says.

lorib642 wrote: »

Have things really changed? I don't know. I know when I was younger and fitter my mother was concerned I wasn't eating enough and was getting too thin and that was 30 years ago.

I don't remember anything being called pro Ana then. There was no internet. Eating disorders were a real concern like now, but even less understood.

I think it's always been a debate. Most models and actresses now are considered medically underweight. This wasn't always so. Also, with the Internet and all other technologies.. people are having celebrity news and photos shoved into view. More and more kids think smaller and smaller weights are fat because of this.

The idea body type has fluctuated between women who look like Marilyn Monroe and Jennifer Lopez to women who look like Twiggy and Kate Moss. However, models are getting smaller and smaller. The sizes considered for plus sized models keep shrinking. I think they're size 6-12 now..which is ridiculous because something like half of American women wear a size 14.

The experience is different for everyone. I remember in college, my ecology professor commented on my weight. He asked if I had been eating. I was 125 lbs at 5'3".. Granted, I had dropped 35 lbs over the summer alone (insulin fluctuations cause my weight to fluctuate) ..but I was still on the high side of a healthy weight. My boyfriend at the time considered me to be overweight.

Another thing about the Internet and weight..has anyone else seen all of the pro Ana sites around? There are girls posting pictures on instagram pretty much enabling each other's eating disorders. They post body checks, things that say they'll fast one hour for every like they get, etc. It's like Ana support.. That wasn't around when I was young. It's unnerving..especially since I have a daughter.

What I think the 'too skinny' thing boils down to is aesthetic preference. I prefer Jennifer Lopez' body to Kate Moss'. I would rather keep my butt and the little breasts I have than burn them all away in order to weigh less.

My personal goal is to land in the higher part of the normal BMI range. Here's why:

-My primary goal is to be healthy. I'm about 20 pounds overweight now, but I've already reversed all the medical issues I was having because of my weight (and the lifestyle that got me there) such as high blood pressure, high cholesterol, GERD. Now I'm working on prevention efforts, reducing my future health risks by getting out of the overweight range. It isn't a health risk to be high in the normal BMI range, so it isn't a high priority to get lower than that.
--Aesthetically it isn't important to me to be that much lower. I have a larger frame and hourglass figure. In my college years I was low-normal BMI and was pretty lean. With some more pounds on me, I have a DD chest and round hips/butt. I like this "curvy" look on me, as long as I don't accumulate too much body fat in the waist/belly (as I did while obese). Am I perfect? No... I have some areas I might like to reduce and will gradually work on those things, but I don't feel an urgency to address them. My self esteem is not based on looking any particular way, but on the kind of person I am.
--When I hit the top of my normal BMI range, I will have lost 120 pounds from my all-time high. I'm worried that I will have a lot of loose skin if I go too far down. I'll have to wait and see.
--Also worried about the fact that a low-normal BMI will be harder to maintain and will set me up for another massive re-gain (this ain't my first rodeo). I love food, love to cook, have a hearty appetite. When I read posts by people who can't figure out how to eat enough calories I am mystified, I just don't get it. But everyone has his/her own struggle and mine is that I am always wanting to eat whether I'm hungry or not and am prone to binging. So I need to be realistic about what I can actually pull off, given my history and tendencies.
--Finally, I worry about not looking like myself. I guess my mental image of myself is someone a bit "large and in charge". I've literally been large... and at work, in charge... for some time, plus my personality is a bit large too. I don't want to be all WISPY and in charge ha ha. If I drop some body fat after hitting goal, it will be because I want to rock a more strong and muscular look. I might like that. But small or "skinny" would make me feel like tiny and weak.... doesn't match my mental image of myself. I can totally understand why another woman might have a self image as a slim and athletic person, or enjoy being petite and cute, or feel more sexy and feminine with less size or muscle definition ... Those are all perfectly good looks, they just wouldn't feel like "me". And I don't want a new me, just a healthier and more attractive version of me.

Aviva92 wrote: »

you look good in that pic. I also think that boob size and where you hold your weight matters a lot. I have tiny boobs at pretty much every weight and I am extreme pear shaped which is a bad look at a high bmi for me. I also had a double chin at 24.9 bmi and was bordering on a size 14. I really looked fat at 24.9 bmi. I didn't look like you at all. I also don't have muscles naturally which makes it worse. probably should lift.

Ack, me too. When I was at my highest weight, at an obese BMI, I achieved a full B cup. But normally I'm an A, and my weight gain seemed to show on my stomach and thighs, with a healthy dose on my face. I don't look good at a higher BMI like some people (including several on this thread) do.

That said, I picked a goal of 130 which isn't a bad weight for 5'3.5" but it's higher than I might choose if I was basing it on looks alone. I have a GI disease that, if it flares, can cause rapid weight loss. It's happened once to me and it was scary. I do want some fat reserves for that, being underweight is not something I want to risk.

At 5'9", the lowest my weight has ever been was 152 lbs. This put my BMI at 22.4, mid to high normal. I aspired to be 145 but never got there, and I don't think I could have maintained it very long if I had, as I was already doing twice-daily workouts to train for triathlons, plus doing P90X, which got my body fat down around 20%, again, my lowest ever. The lowest healthy weight for my height is 125 lbs according to BMI. My LBM now is more than 125 lbs. Thus, do I think 125, or even 135, would ever be a good, or practical, weight for me? No. Plus, I thought I looked damn good at 155 lbs, and a lot of people seemed to agree.
My goal is to get back to 155, but I'm aiming for 160 first. I'd more like a body fat % of 18 or so.