Should i eat less..!!!
got7markira
Posts: 3 Member
I'm 19 years old and I'm 63 kg and 1.68 m but I want to weigh at least 53kg... The app gave me 1200 calories to consume but I'm always trying to consume less however recently it became really hard to burn fat... I don't know why...
5
Replies
-
You are 5'6" and 138, which puts you at a great weight for your height. Your goal is 116, which is underweight.
What you should do is build healthy eating and fitness habits for the long haul and not aim to be frail and weak.
Eat at maintenance, which is likely around 2000-2200, and do resistance exercise such as lifting weights or TRX or calisthenics or a combination.
Too many young women fritter away their perfect starting points by focusing on being smaller instead of being stronger. Don't let that be you.25 -
To stay within a healthy BMI range, your absolute bottom number should be 54 kg. 53 puts you into "underweight."
Your BMR is 1389. This is how much your body needs to survive and be properly fueled, even if you literally laid in bed all day. Don't go below this amount. Unfortunately MFP doesn't take these limits into account when calculating your "magic number."
Your TDEE is AT LEAST 1665, and that is if you are sedentary. If you walk around a little throughout your day, it could be even higher.
Since you don't really have much to lose, you really shouldn't opt for anything faster than 0.5 lbs/week. So, my recommendation is to eat 1450 net calories (this is your TDEE - 250) and eat back at least part of exercise calories as well. You don't need to eat any less than that, so don't deprive yourself.
Again, you are at healthy weight currently, and the goal you have in mind would make you underweight. If you are unhappy with your body composition, you might consider doing recomp instead. Essentially, building lean muscle and toning up.
5 -
Wait. I'm not advocating what the OP is wanting, but when I run those numbers -- 5'6, 116 (or even the metric version), it comes to a BMI of 18.7.
In what universe is that underweight? Underweight BMI starts at 18.5.1 -
collectingblues wrote: »Wait. I'm not advocating what the OP is wanting, but when I run those numbers -- 5'6, 116 (or even the metric version), it comes to a BMI of 18.7.
In what universe is that underweight? Underweight BMI starts at 18.5.
IDGAF what the BMI says. I've been 5'6" and 115, which is one pound from 116. It's underweight, weak, and frail. It's not a goal I would support for any woman. I don't support women aiming to be as small as possible, putting themselves at the risk of serious long term health problems such as osteoporosis.13 -
collectingblues wrote: »Wait. I'm not advocating what the OP is wanting, but when I run those numbers -- 5'6, 116 (or even the metric version), it comes to a BMI of 18.7.
In what universe is that underweight? Underweight BMI starts at 18.5.
IDGAF what the BMI says. I've been 5'6" and 115, which is one pound from 116. It's underweight, weak, and frail. It's not a goal I would support for any woman. I don't support women aiming to be as small as possible, putting themselves at the risk of serious long term health problems such as osteoporosis.
But that's your perception. That's not the science or the literature. BMI has a range for good reasons.2 -
It's just sad that young woman always chose the very bottom of normal bmi as their goal.5
-
collectingblues wrote: »Wait. I'm not advocating what the OP is wanting, but when I run those numbers -- 5'6, 116 (or even the metric version), it comes to a BMI of 18.7.
In what universe is that underweight?Underweight BMI starts at 18.5.
Love the hyperbole.
When 5'6" at 115# is underweight & 116# is normal (according to BMI), it's reasonable to call it out as a questionable goal, in any universe.
11 -
Does the at least mean that you want to at least get down to that weight and possibly lower or does it mean that's the lowest you want to get down to?0
-
@singingflutelady I think that 53 is my ideal weight but I would like it if I can get any bit lower.2
-
BMI is a simple index of weight v height and does not take into account shape or composition.
@got7markira my bet is that you would be much happier with your shape than your weight. Don't lose lean body mass chasing a scale number! You're in a healthy weight range now. If you want shed some fat, do it with extremely small deficits and use strength training to get the shape you want.2 -
got7markira wrote: »I think that 53 is my ideal weight
Why do you think this? Do you have something to base this on?
2 -
@Silentpadna I did a BMI test for my height with 53 kg and it showed that it's within the heathy weight range.1
-
collectingblues wrote: »Wait. I'm not advocating what the OP is wanting, but when I run those numbers -- 5'6, 116 (or even the metric version), it comes to a BMI of 18.7.
In what universe is that underweight?Underweight BMI starts at 18.5.
Love the hyperbole.
When 5'6" at 115# is underweight & 116# is normal (according to BMI), it's reasonable to call it out as a questionable goal, in any universe.
Sure, call it out as a questionable goal, but it's not underweight. I said I didn't advocate what she wants -- but it doesn't boost your arguments when you start creating new facts.0 -
No. You should not eat less than 1200 calories.3
-
got7markira wrote: »@Silentpadna I did a BMI test for my height with 53 kg and it showed that it's within the heathy weight range.
Again, BMI is an index that covers average people. Think the middle of a bell curve. You may find that 'fit' people have a higher BMI than you would think because muscle is more dense than fat. (It's not heavier, it means that for the same volume it has more mass - i.e. more weight). On the other hand, someone who is "skinny-fat" may have a low BMI, but higher body fat percentage.
Which would you rather be?
To show this in the extreme, body builders with extremely low body fat can be overweight or obese, by BMI standards, when they are clearly not. You don't have to be a body builder. But you will be much better off working on body fat than trying to simply weigh less.
[ETA] Oh, and don't eat less than 1200 calories.1 -
collectingblues wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »Wait. I'm not advocating what the OP is wanting, but when I run those numbers -- 5'6, 116 (or even the metric version), it comes to a BMI of 18.7.
In what universe is that underweight?Underweight BMI starts at 18.5.
Love the hyperbole.
When 5'6" at 115# is underweight & 116# is normal (according to BMI), it's reasonable to call it out as a questionable goal, in any universe.
Sure, call it out as a questionable goal, but it's not underweight. I said I didn't advocate what she wants -- but it doesn't boost your arguments when you start creating new facts.
Underweight as a descriptor meaning having an unhealthy low weight existed long before BMI and any assertion that it can only be used when a person hits 18.5 is silly.6 -
collectingblues wrote: »collectingblues wrote: »Wait. I'm not advocating what the OP is wanting, but when I run those numbers -- 5'6, 116 (or even the metric version), it comes to a BMI of 18.7.
In what universe is that underweight?Underweight BMI starts at 18.5.
Love the hyperbole.
When 5'6" at 115# is underweight & 116# is normal (according to BMI), it's reasonable to call it out as a questionable goal, in any universe.
Sure, call it out as a questionable goal, but it's not underweight. I said I didn't advocate what she wants -- but it doesn't boost your arguments when you start creating new facts.
Underweight as a descriptor meaning having an unhealthy low weight existed long before BMI and any assertion that it can only be used when a person hits 18.5 is silly.
Exactly. But even with BMI considered it's still splitting hairs over one pound.
If a 5'6" woman had lost a bunch of weight and posted on MFP how proud she was to hit 155# because she's finally at a healthy weight, would it be appropriate to comment to her and say, "Umm, no, actually you're not. 154 is healthy for your height. Sorry, you're still overweight."?
It's more about the context. In this case, OP is a 19 year old woman at a healthy weight with a goal weight of at least the minimum weight in her BMI range, if not lower, who is consuming 1200 calories a day (or less) and wants to know if she should consume even less. I'm all for accuracy and facts, but really? Given the context, is that one pound distinction so important?6
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 432 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.9K MyFitnessPal Information
- 15 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.7K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions