Am I too thin?

deksgrl wrote: »

Pam_1965 wrote: »

My BMI is smack in the middle and everything I read says 135 is ideal for my height. It is so hard to tell because I am droopy! Lol!

Droopy is a product of body fat %, not weight. A person weighing 160 with a lower body fat % than you might be less droopy than you. A person weighing 120 with a comparable body fat % than you or higher would still be droopy.

Droopy is also a product of loose skin.

They will get used to your new and smaller size soon.

Pam_1965 wrote: »

GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »

deksgrl wrote: »

Pam_1965 wrote: »

My BMI is smack in the middle and everything I read says 135 is ideal for my height. It is so hard to tell because I am droopy! Lol!

Droopy is a product of body fat %, not weight. A person weighing 160 with a lower body fat % than you might be less droopy than you. A person weighing 120 with a comparable body fat % than you or higher would still be droopy.

Droopy is also a product of loose skin.

My droopy is loose skin. I am pretty muscular. Just droopy belly and underside of my arms. Doctor has already confirmed it.

I've lost 92 pounds. I feel you! I even have it on the inside of my thighs.

Whether you are too thin is an issue between you, your doctor, and perhaps the few people closest to you that you trust to be honest and only have your best interests at heart. It has nothing to do with your pants size, but more with your general wellness (mental and physical) . I say this because sometimes people do see us more clearly than we see ourselves. A lot of folks ate giving a hard rap to any concern, but if it's someone whose judgement you value, it's be worth a consideration.

Everyone else can be given a smile and say "Thank you, I feel great.!" If they were genuinely concerned, it should mollify them. If they were being passive aggressively critical, it'll shut them down, and if they were trying to compliment you, they're acknowledged without embarrassment.

Pam_1965 wrote: »

My BMI is smack in the middle and everything I read says 135 is ideal for my height. It is so hard to tell because I am droopy! Lol!

Using BMI is not really helpful for you.
"Body Mass Index" is a artificial number that was meant to quickly trend large populations, not a single person.
It only measures your height compared to your weight.
BMI implies many bodybuilders are clinically obese, so clearly it is not "accurate" for any practical use when it comes to fitness.

If you want to determine if you are "too thin" then have your body fat checked.
140 lbs and 5'6" looks entirely different at 20% body fat and 40% body fat.
If you do not have any muscle mass then a lot of your weight is adipose and water, no matter how low that weight is.
When you "lose weight" about half of the weight is muscle if you are not lifting heavy enough to prevent it.
Just looking at your profile picture, it seems like you have avoided weight training.
Maybe because you were afraid you would get "bulky" and look less feminine?

Regardless, without added muscle to replace the fat you lost, droopy is what you often end up with.
Loose hanging skin is often the side effect of any rapid weight loss, especially surgery and cardio.
Your body eats it's own muscle for protein in these cases.
The skin has to regain it's shape and the older we get the less elastin our skin has to work with to do that job.
Not having enough muscle leaves a lot of old skin literally "hanging around."

To top it off, since you would have also lowered your muscle mass it will be harder to keep the weight off in the long run. No pun intended.

You probably need to cut back on the cardio a bit and hit the weight room instead.

I hope you had a great birthday.

cqbkaju wrote: »

Pam_1965 wrote: »

My BMI is smack in the middle and everything I read says 135 is ideal for my height. It is so hard to tell because I am droopy! Lol!

Using BMI is not really helpful for you.
"Body Mass Index" is a artificial number that was meant to quickly trend large populations, not a single person.
It only measures your height compared to your weight.
BMI implies many bodybuilders are clinically obese, so clearly it is not "accurate" for any practical use when it comes to fitness.

If you want to determine if you are "too thin" then have your body fat checked.
140 lbs and 5'6" looks entirely different at 20% body fat and 40% body fat.
If you do not have any muscle mass then a lot of your weight is adipose and water, no matter how low that weight is.
When you "lose weight" about half of the weight is muscle if you are not lifting heavy enough to prevent it.
Just looking at your profile picture, it seems like you have avoided weight training.
Maybe because you were afraid you would get "bulky" and look less feminine?

Regardless, without added muscle to replace the fat you lost, droopy is what you often end up with.
Loose hanging skin is often the side effect of any rapid weight loss, especially surgery and cardio.
Your body eats it's own muscle for protein in these cases.
The skin has to regain it's shape and the older we get the less elastin our skin has to work with to do that job.

To top it off, since you would have also lowered your muscle mass it will be harder to keep the weight off in the long run. No pun intended.

You probably need to cut back on the cardio a bit and hit the weight room instead.

I hope you had a great birthday.

@Pam_1965 I'm betting you don't strength train either. My 78 year old mother started last year and wished she'd started decades ago for her bone health. See also The New Rules of Lifting for Women: Lift Like a Man, Look Like a Goddess which was available through my library system, so perhaps yours as well.

Or this one: Thinner Leaner Stronger: The Simple Science of Building the Ultimate Female Body

As for body fat, a decent gym should have some calipers and someone trained to use them, or a hydrostatic tank truck might be in your area.

There are some pictures of women at different body fat levels here that might give you a general idea if how "thin" you may be:
http://www.builtlean.com/2012/09/24/body-fat-percentage-men-women/

20% is pretty low for a woman, it is about the same as 9% or 10% in a man.
At that level a guy might have a 4-pack for abs.

The key is that you must lift heavy. Heavy is relative to your strength, of course.
The lifts I recommend are the large compound ones: squats, deadlifts, overhead presses, bench, rows, chin-ups, dips, stuff like that.
You know: the hard stuff most of the guys in the gym try to avoid.
Most people do not have an Olympic bar or squat rack at home.

Dumbbells, resistance bands, etc. are not heavy enough in most cases for these exercises.
That is what your build gives me the impression of: the "Pink dumbbells" look.
The biggest exception to this is if you do dumbbell rows. Good stuff there - if it is heavy.

No offense intended and I could be entirely wrong.
You might have a full power rack and a trap bar at home; I do.
But if you DO then you are definitely not using it to YOUR full potential.

I do understand the exhaustion: I work 40 hours a week, teach an additional 10 - 12 hours each week and am in class myself on the weekends. Then I have to make time for my own workouts 4 days each week. Oh yeah, I have to fit in my wife and daughter too! LOL!

Hang in there! You are doing great!
And you are doing more than 90%+ of the population already!

Pam_1965 wrote: »

Thanks @cqbkaju. I have been contemplating joining our local gym. I just sent a message off to one of the personal trainers there. I guess I better get the ball rolling, or weights lifting!!

Ask about a progressive lifting program - you get best results when you progressively go up in weights.

cqbkaju wrote: »

kshama2001 wrote: »

Ask about a progressive lifting program - you get best results when you progressively go up in weights.

Absolutely. Make it clear you want to get stronger so they don't put you on another "pink dumbell" program.

You hear words like "toned" too often you may be heading for trouble.

Good catch @kshama2001

I wasted decades using low weights/high reps until I learned the error of my ways here and from a coworker

[Generalization: The Basics of Progressive Overload]
Heavy: If you can do more than 6 or 7 reps for each set of an exercise then you probably need to add at least 5 pounds, because it is not "heavy" relative to how strong you are.

Rep ("repetition") range: the minimum and maximum number of times you should try to lift a weight in a set.
Set: A lifting session where you try to lift a weight for your target Rep range
Rest: The time you take as a break between sets.

Two commonly accepted Repetition ranges for strength: 4 to 6 and 5 to 7
3 sets of 4 to 6 repetitions with 2 to 3 minutes rest between sets is common

If the Reps are much higher numbers (like you can do 10 reps easily, all 3 sets) then the weight is too light to focus on strength gains and will not build the muscle needed to fix your "droopy" concern.

So now you can determine right away if the equipment you have at home is "heavy enough".
Can you do more than 7 repetitions of a specific exercise with it?
If so then it is too light. You need more weight for that exercise.

Example using 3 sets in a 4 to 6 rep range.

Your deadlift at 135 lbs last Monday
Set x reps x weight
1 x 5 x 135#
2 x 4 x 135#
3 x 4 x 135#

This Monday
Set x reps x weight
1 x 6 x 135#
2 x 6 x 135#
3 x 6 x 135#

so NEXT Monday you increase the weight 5 lbs and will aim for at least:
Set x reps x weight
1 x 4 x 140#
2 x 4 x 140#
3 x 4 x 140#

Once you get 140# x6 reps x 3 sets you increase the weight AGAIN (145#) and start over, aiming for at least 4 reps per set.

That is the basics of "progressive overload" to gain strength.
You continue to "progress" by increasing the number of repetitions until you can increase the weight.
Then you start again.

There is ongoing debate on the "best" rep ranges for strength vs muscle size vs a balance of the two.

SusanMFindlay wrote: »

jrulo16 wrote: »

They are trying to make themselves feel better about their weight. Ignore them.

Unlikely.

Usually, they just have a mental image of "you" that is what they're used to. And "real you" doesn't match "mental image you" anymore. As you maintain the weight, they'll get more used to "real you" and the mental image will change. Also, I think we're wired to perceive fast weight loss as being due to poor health (since historically poor health would be the main reason for sudden weight loss). As you maintain the weight and people get used to seeing you at that weight, that subconscious worry gets allayed.

I agree with this completely. Well said.

GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »

I am not sure what cardio has to do with loose skin in the slightest. Cardio doesn't make you lose weight quickly. That point you made there, cqbkaju, was one I didn't quite get.

The point wasn't the *rate* of weight loss through cardio.
It is that about 1/2 of the weight you lose if you primarily do cardio can be lean body mass.
I see your point. That is poorly worded above. Sorry, I can no longer edit it for clarity.
"primarily do cardio" means more cardio (especially steady-state cardio) than heavy weight training.

Look at most marathon runners. Where is the muscle? They are often thin but the muscle is stringy at best.

Cardio and stress (like rapid weight loss through illness, recovery from surgery, etc.) often burns ("catabolizes") muscle for protein which creates a state for more skin to hang loose.
It has to do with the cortisol hormone and it's effects.
Combine this with the idea that we lose about ~ 5% of our muscle mass per decade starting at age 30 or so ("sarcopenia") and you can see we are heading for trouble.

If I am 50 and have not done enough heavy weight training then I have lost about 10% of my muscle mass just because I get a better rate on car insurance!
If I lost muscle but I am also heavier -or if I am even the same weight!- then that means my body fat has gone up...

We age so our metabolism slows and sarcopenia kicks in. A double-whammy! So we try more and more cardio, cutting even more calories to keep the weight off. But we don't realize that this stressing the body, releasing cortisol into the system. Cortisol is catabolic and eats muscle...
This additional muscle loss slows the metabolism even more, creating a vicious cycle.
It is biology. I wish I was 20 years younger and didn't have to worry about it as much but those are the breaks.

The way around this is to force the body to make MORE muscle in the first place.
That preserves muscle mass, increases your metabolism AND helps fill in the literal void created by the loss of body fat under the skin.
Filling the area in with muscle means less sagging skin when we age.

I also referenced the loss of elastin and it's effect on the skin, which is what I think you mean by genetics.

You look fine. Love yourself.