Harder for Short Women?

I'm a shorty, too....*sigh*....

I think it has to do with height playing into BMR. I get less calories at maintenance then neighbor who is 11 inches taller but similar shape/fitness etc...but portions sizes at restaraunts etc are not determined by height...ie...short lady gets 12 fries and tall lady gets 16 fries...etc...we all get our maintenance cals and yes short women will get less

Haha, nope, I'm def a shorty. My profile picture has me in 4" heels at a wedding, hahaha. But I've lowered my body fat 5 quite a bit in the last 6 months, so I've got quite a bit of muscle. Which actually helps speed up your metabolism.

And don't be afraid to eat more. I've been eating more (maybe averaging 1500 or 1600 a day) and I've been doing much better in the last week.

It's harder because we have less body to maintain, so require less calories to do so. A 5' woman will have to eat considerably less to maintain her weight than a 5' 9" one, as a 5'9" woman should weigh more.

Unfortunately our hunger doesn't seem to be attached to our height.

http://www.burnthefat.com/how_to_fix_slow_female_fat_loss.html

It's tougher for women than men.
+
It's tougher for shorter people than tall people.
=
It's a pain in the tookus for shorter women.

I think it's because we need less calories than taller women, but we're accustomed to the same serving sizes as taller women. Even though there's really not a huge difference in BMR, a little bit adds up.

Height doesn't matter, as far as I'm aware. We all have roughly the same size organs, muscle requires the same amount of calories to act, etc.

What matters is lean body mass.

For example, a 175lb woman at 30% bodyfat has a total energy expenditure (TEE) of roughly 1880 calories per day (based on a desk job). A 175lb woman at 12% bodyfat, on the other hand, has a TEE of roughly 2250 per day with the same desk job. While both women weigh the same, they will look completely different. Height be darned.

Based on your pics alone (i.e. educated guess - only calipers or bioimpedence would tell the actual number) you're roughly 40% bodyfat. At 167 you only require 1600 calories a day to maintain that weight. To lose weight, then, you need to drop down beneath that - though healthily so as in not 1100 but maybe 1300. That would be a ~300cal/day deficit, or 1lb of fat loss every 10 days.


Heavy lifting, either by yourself, with a friend, or with the help of a personal trainer, along with proper eating will get your lean body mass up which means it slowly but steadily gets easier to lose weight. If you get down to 30% bodyfat, suddenly that 1300 moves up to 1500 so you get to eat a little more while still steadily losing weight, or stick with 1300 and have a 500cal/day deficit which is 1lb/week.

I have always blamed it on gravity.... closer to gravitational pull S L O W S D O W N my metabolism :^o

I'm going with her theory! Short, female and over 50 makes it EVEN HARDER to lose weight - gravitational pull has had more years to work.

Thanks for posting this! I've always wondered the same thing! My husband & I basically have the same diet. He is 5'9 & 130 pounds, I am 5'1 and 157 pounds - metabolism must play a part in this! I know I need to exercise more & drink more water! If you find another trick please share with us shorties!!!

The other thing you might look at is your portions. If you're eating similar sized portions, you're getting similar amounts of calories - but you might have very different caloric needs. I need a full 500 calories a day more than my wife does, all other things being equal.

I put on weight matching what my husband ate. He is 5'11", I am 5'5". When we ate the same, we weighed the same, which meant he was a fine weight for his height, and I was podgy! Smaller ideal weight = smaller calorie requirement (before exercise).