Healthy weight: My definition or theirs

The charts are generic, you are unique. My broad shoulders, ribs and wide pelvis will not be seeing the other side of 150, ever. My head alone is super big!

Don't set an ultimate weight goal; it's too overwhelming. Go 10 lbs at a time and when you start to see how things are shaping up, you'll get a better idea of where you may want to stop.

But for now, just keep going and see what happens.

I'm 5'7" and fairly muscular for a woman with a broader frame. My doctor gave me a healthy range based on my personal stats of 145-165. My original goal was to get and stay in that range. I've done that. The higher end of that weight range puts me just outside the healthy BMI for my height but only by about 5lb or so.

I don't think BMI is outdated for most people and even those who fall outside the range still being healthy don't usually fall very far outside the BMI range.

Now I'm personally focused on body fat percentage for my own goals.

My goal is based on what weight I felt my best at and the healthy bmi range for my height. It happens that I felt my best around the middle of that range in the past. I would be okay toward the high end of that range as well.

kamarismom wrote: »

SafioraLinnea wrote: »

My goal is to look and feel healthy and to be a lot stronger. I don't yet fit any of those. I'm 5'3.5" and 172lbs right now. Bmi gives me a range in the 112-136 range (or something like that). I do want to be in the normal range but I don't mind if it's high end. I just want to be smaller, fitter, and feel healthier.

Frankly, you do you. I agree with several of the previous posters who said that your goal is still very much too heavy and will potentially have health consequences but if you choose to be happy there then power on to your goal.

What if you looked and felt healthier 160 and were stronger would you not be happy until fit into category set for you. Not being rude or mean, I truly want to know.

I already said I want to be in the normal category. I quantify a portion of my health by being in a normal bmi because I know the health consequences of not being at a healthy weight. I know I won't be done at 160. I'm not at all unique or special and my suggested BMI range is very realistic for me and will help me on my way.

The point is, I'm not caught up in the specific number once I'm in that range. I've already lost 55 pounds. 40 or so more pounds is very attainable.

My goals are intentionally subjective so I can always have something to reach for. I get to choose where that happens.

The subjectivity is part of the point I was trying to make. If you want to stop at the number you choose then do it. It isn't recommended by the doctor but it is a choice only the you can make.

I worked out my goal based on what weight I have felt good at in the past and by paying attention to how my body looks and feels as I age, but I realize that if you have been overweight through most of your adult life, you might not have that benchmark to refer to (I don't know in your case OP).

What often helps is looking at the shape of other people and asking yourself if that is what you are aiming for - does the person look too thick, or to thin, for your taste, at that weight? Use that as a barometer to give yourself an idea of where you would like to end up.

Here is one example of 140 - I am 5'7 and am 140 in my profile picture. I still have some to lose, as I still have a belly (thats a top that holds stuff in, it's giving a false impression). My goal is anything between 120 and 130. I prefer a leaner look, like a strong dancer - thats where I want to end up (Robin Wright is my height and close to my age and is a role-model).

I am taller than you of course, so my same look at 5'5, would weigh less than I do.

Seems as you are struggling with a number. The number means nothing in the long run. You'll know when you feel and look your best, then you stop losing. My Mom is 5'4 and struggles to get below 150 (she's a size 6 then). To be in normal BMI range they say she should be 143. I think that's silly, especially for someone who's 64 and it perfectly healthy otherwise.

Now, me. I'm 5'11, starting losing at 193 in 2011 and managed to get to 142. And even though I wasn't a "walking corpse", I was thin (size 4, almost 2) and everyone encouraged me to gain a little. Over the years I've put on a few pounds and tend to be HAPPY at 150-155. So, oddly enough my 5'4 Mom and I tend to look our best at the same weight, even though I'm 7" taller. It's all in how you carry your body weight.

So. Why don't you focus less on the end number and focus on how you feel when you get to where you think you should be? The great thing with weight loss that you get to where you want to go and you hate it, you either gain/lose more to get to where you love...

My goal is set to a bmi of 25 (73kg) I started at 107.5 kg so morbidly obese, as I am 3.6kg away from goal I'm actually thinking of lowering my goal to 70kg as I can still see there is room for improvement. I think whatever goal you start with at the beginning is bound to change, maybe once I get to 70kg it may change again who knows? The main reason for picking a goal based on bmi? I'm at increased risk of developing high blood pressure (both parents have it and my grandmother had it even when only slightly overweight) and type 2 diabetes, I rather work at maintaining a healthy weight than add more medication to the arsenal of tablets I already take for chronic conditions.

Stick to your goal for now, reach it and reassess there are very few people that don't change their goals at some point during their weightloss.

I started at 260lbs at 5'4.5".

My first goal was just to not be considered obese by BMI standards which for my height is 172 lbs if I remember correctly. I had an ultimate goal of 130 lbs. Around the time I hit the 172 lb point, I shifted my focus to bf%. I want my bf% to be around 20%. Currently at 132.4 lbs, I have a rough estimate of 25.4% BF. I am hoping to be able to cut my BF a bit more before next fall and hopefully have my scheduled sorted to do a proper bulk cycle at that point.

savithny wrote: »

I think very often in weight discussions, 'The perfect is the enemy of the good.'

You start experiencing notable health benefits at just a 10% weight loss. For you, that was 37 pounds. There are continued benefits as you lose, no matter how much more you lose (unless you lose too much, but that's not what we're talking about here).

So many people start, and successfully lose that 10%, and we should celebrate it! And instead the world says "Dude, you're still a fatty McFatso! What, do you hate yourself? Death death die die death!" And people get discouraged, and think they've done "nothing," when they've really done a lot of hard work and improved their health outlook demonstrably. And they give up.

Honestly, the difference between 370 and 220, in terms of health, is SO MUCH bigger than the difference between 220 and 180, or 180 and 160. Work from where you are, celebrate what you've already done, keep doing as much as you can, and never let anyone make you think you aren't doing "enough."

Really nice post, and I think it's right on, OP. Also this:

cwolfman13 wrote: »

My $.02 is that at the moment, you're putting the cart before the horse. Target smaller goals and it will help make things a bit less daunting.

If 220 feels like a good goal for now, that's great. Doesn't mean it has to be the final goal -- once there you will likely have different ideas about where you want to be and be able to reassess.

Personally, I go for small goals. When I started a few years ago, at 108kg, my first goal was to stop gaining and start losing. Then it was 105kg. The first time I went below 105, goal was changed to "double digits". First time ever I got below 100, it was "stay below 100 for two weeks" - Then it changed to 95 and finally now the current goal: Get below 90. (This one has caused me certain challenges).

My point is that, at least to me, it gives me motivation to actually reach my goals. If I had started by saying "I must be at 75kg" back when I was 108, I'm pretty sure I would've given up. Also, I wouldn't have felt the same sense of achievement when I passed the various milestones.

So yeah, slow and steady, celebrate the small wins too.

I am the same height as you and I am a long way from the normal BMI- I don't have a ultimate goal weight at the moment, it is hard because I actually didn't really weigh myself in high school (I was an athlete, I didn't really care too much). So I don't really know how much I weighed back then- which makes the ultimate goal a little harder. I am doing the route others have taken (including you) where I am setting a number of small goals and plan on re-evaluating at each major milestone goal.

Keep up the awesome work- and good luck.

savithny wrote: »

I think very often in weight discussions, 'The perfect is the enemy of the good.'

You start experiencing notable health benefits at just a 10% weight loss. For you, that was 37 pounds. There are continued benefits as you lose, no matter how much more you lose (unless you lose too much, but that's not what we're talking about here).

So many people start, and successfully lose that 10%, and we should celebrate it! And instead the world says "Dude, you're still a fatty McFatso! What, do you hate yourself? Death death die die death!" And people get discouraged, and think they've done "nothing," when they've really done a lot of hard work and improved their health outlook demonstrably. And they give up.

Honestly, the difference between 370 and 220, in terms of health, is SO MUCH bigger than the difference between 220 and 180, or 180 and 160. Work from where you are, celebrate what you've already done, keep doing as much as you can, and never let anyone make you think you aren't doing "enough."

QFMFT.