Is the idea that we should gain just a little as we age a fallacy?

Options
24

Replies

  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 32,058 Member
    Options
    I just had a thought - well, a couple of them. (It was hard work! ;) ).

    1. I had a good long think about all the people I know who are materially older than me (I'm 62, so people in 70s and 80s). Those whose current lifestyle I think I could enjoy are not significantly overweight (maybe 5-10 vanity pounds or thereabouts).

    Among those whose current lifestyle I could tolerate are some who are probably up around the overweight/obese line, but they're fairly active. Pretty much all of those who are definitely obese are in lives I wouldn't choose voluntarily (as to capabilities, independence, health). (I'm sure there are some out there who are obese, 70+, leading enviable lives, healthy lives, but I can't think of any among my acquaintance.)

    It's anecdotal, and a clearly biased sample, but it has influenced my thinking - how I'd place bets, if I were a betting woman.

    This was an interesting thought experiment. What do others see around them in their lives?

    2. I'm surprised to read so many people say they've never heard the theory that we should weigh a bit more as we age. I've heard it fairly frequently.

    I had a think about who I've heard it from, IRL (as opposed to blogs and such). Yes, it was from people I'd consider over-fat, i.e. mostly up around the overweight/obese border and beyond.

    Now, it makes sense that people who believe this would want to be a little heavier, for their health. But I don't think I've ever heard anyone who was thin and healthy say they'd like to gain a bit for the sake of their health (maybe some who were thin after illness). Again, why would they, if they think it's healthy to be thin.

    Still, food for thought about motivations.
  • MegaMooseEsq
    MegaMooseEsq Posts: 3,118 Member
    Options
    ryenday wrote: »
    Ann, I have heard fairly often that a few extra pounds in old age are better than being underweight. Like you, I can’t recall the source, EXCEPT for my friend the nurse.

    Her observation is also, obviously, anecdotal, but she believes the older folks who are carrying that ‘vanity’ weight (that is if she saw them outside the hospital she’d say they could lose a little weight but didn’t really need to) come through most of the hospital stays better than the overweight/obese or the people that are lower weight (the ones she would recommend To NOT lose any weight.). I asked her about lean folks with lots of muscle and she said most of the folks she sees in the hospital are NOT fit and working out so she has no opinion or relevant observation.

    I've also heard that datapoint about older people having better life expectancy when slightly overweight than at normal or low weights. I've generally assumed that this says more about the dangers of being underweight as you age (and the factors that might cause one to be underweight) than the "benefits" of being slightly overweight. I want to say that more recent studies have controlled for this factor and not found an advantage to being slightly overweight.
  • kimny72
    kimny72 Posts: 16,013 Member
    edited May 2018
    Options
    Also, if I could be pedantic for a moment though :smiley: isn't there a difference between vanity lbs and being overweight? And isn't there a difference between "it's bad to be underweight" and "it's good to be a bit overweight"?

    At 5'4 I have been maintaining at @ 125 which is right around the middle of the healthy weight range for my height. If I dropped all the way down to 110, that would be underweight and probably not the best place to be in my 70s if longevity is a goal. But I could gain 10 vanity lbs putting me at 135 and still not be "overweight".

    I'd also guess older folks who are in fact overweight would be more likely to take to heart the idea that the extra weight is protective, simply because it sounds better than "I never figured out how to lose it like I wanted to" :wink:
  • motivatedmartha
    motivatedmartha Posts: 1,108 Member
    Options
    The BMI calculator I use asks for your age and I had always assumed that it was taken into account when calculating a healthy BMI range. I do think that if I were to get down to the same weight I was at 18 I would look pretty wrinkly now.
  • CarvedTones
    CarvedTones Posts: 2,340 Member
    Options
    ryenday wrote: »
    Ann, I have heard fairly often that a few extra pounds in old age are better than being underweight. Like you, I can’t recall the source, EXCEPT for my friend the nurse.

    Her observation is also, obviously, anecdotal, but she believes the older folks who are carrying that ‘vanity’ weight (that is if she saw them outside the hospital she’d say they could lose a little weight but didn’t really need to) come through most of the hospital stays better than the overweight/obese or the people that are lower weight (the ones she would recommend To NOT lose any weight.). I asked her about lean folks with lots of muscle and she said most of the folks she sees in the hospital are NOT fit and working out so she has no opinion or relevant observation.

    I've also heard that datapoint about older people having better life expectancy when slightly overweight than at normal or low weights. I've generally assumed that this says more about the dangers of being underweight as you age (and the factors that might cause one to be underweight) than the "benefits" of being slightly overweight. I want to say that more recent studies have controlled for this factor and not found an advantage to being slightly overweight.

    I read that overweight but not obese was better than underweight but healthy was best. That was in a study in the news maybe a couple of months ago. I don't find that surprising at all. I know several people who are in great shape at a BMI of 25 to 27 and know of lots more (pro athletes and whatnot); I don't know anyone at 18.5 or below that seems all that healthy. Yeah, that's anecdotal, but with lots of examples of the healthy "overweight" and none for the underweight. I think it is an indictment of the BMI range more than anything. Few people below 20 are very healthy. Lots of people 25-27 are healthy, though many aren't.
  • stanmann571
    stanmann571 Posts: 5,728 Member
    Options
    ryenday wrote: »
    Ann, I have heard fairly often that a few extra pounds in old age are better than being underweight. Like you, I can’t recall the source, EXCEPT for my friend the nurse.

    Her observation is also, obviously, anecdotal, but she believes the older folks who are carrying that ‘vanity’ weight (that is if she saw them outside the hospital she’d say they could lose a little weight but didn’t really need to) come through most of the hospital stays better than the overweight/obese or the people that are lower weight (the ones she would recommend To NOT lose any weight.). I asked her about lean folks with lots of muscle and she said most of the folks she sees in the hospital are NOT fit and working out so she has no opinion or relevant observation.

    I've also heard that datapoint about older people having better life expectancy when slightly overweight than at normal or low weights. I've generally assumed that this says more about the dangers of being underweight as you age (and the factors that might cause one to be underweight) than the "benefits" of being slightly overweight. I want to say that more recent studies have controlled for this factor and not found an advantage to being slightly overweight.

    I read that overweight but not obese was better than underweight but healthy was best. That was in a study in the news maybe a couple of months ago. I don't find that surprising at all. I know several people who are in great shape at a BMI of 25 to 27 and know of lots more (pro athletes and whatnot); I don't know anyone at 18.5 or below that seems all that healthy. Yeah, that's anecdotal, but with lots of examples of the healthy "overweight" and none for the underweight. I think it is an indictment of the BMI range more than anything. Few people below 20 are very healthy. Lots of people 25-27 are healthy, though many aren't.

    That is a fair indictment of the BMI range in that there is a "healthy range" Which spans "normal" and "overweight" but isn't actually identified clearly anywhere.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,876 Member
    Options
    kimny72 wrote: »
    Also, if I could be pedantic for a moment though :smiley: isn't there a difference between vanity lbs and being overweight? And isn't there a difference between "it's bad to be underweight" and "it's good to be a bit overweight"?

    At 5'4 I have been maintaining at @ 125 which is right around the middle of the healthy weight range for my height. If I dropped all the way down to 110, that would be underweight and probably not the best place to be in my 70s if longevity is a goal. But I could gain 10 vanity lbs putting me at 135 and still not be "overweight".

    I'd also guess older folks who are in fact overweight would be more likely to take to heart the idea that the extra weight is protective, simply because it sounds better than "I never figured out how to lose it like I wanted to" :wink:

    Most of the stuff that I've read addresses BF% rather than weight with higher levels of BF% being ideal as we age, but they're all still in the healthy BF% range and not overly fat.

    Here's the chart that was created using the research done by Jackson and Pollock...

    Ideal-Body-Fat-Percentage-Chart3.jpg
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 32,058 Member
    Options
    This link was posted earlier in the thread:

    http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/older-adults-build-muscle-and-271651

    I'm kind of wondering how many people read it.

    The lead paragraph says:

    "New UCLA research suggests that the more muscle mass older Americans have, the less likely they are to die prematurely. The findings add to the growing evidence that overall body composition — and not the widely used body mass index, or BMI — is a better predictor of all-cause mortality."

    The study abstract conclusion statement is:

    "This study demonstrates the survival predication ability of relative muscle mass and highlights the need to look beyond total body mass in assessing the health of older adults."
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 32,058 Member
    Options
    ryenday wrote: »
    Ann, I have heard fairly often that a few extra pounds in old age are better than being underweight. Like you, I can’t recall the source, EXCEPT for my friend the nurse.

    Her observation is also, obviously, anecdotal, but she believes the older folks who are carrying that ‘vanity’ weight (that is if she saw them outside the hospital she’d say they could lose a little weight but didn’t really need to) come through most of the hospital stays better than the overweight/obese or the people that are lower weight (the ones she would recommend To NOT lose any weight.). I asked her about lean folks with lots of muscle and she said most of the folks she sees in the hospital are NOT fit and working out so she has no opinion or relevant observation.

    Your source (your nurse friend) is certainly more informed/insightful anecdotally than anything I might notice. I do wonder what the effect is of being older, fit and working out, since that is the non-visible segment.

    I'm sure part of it is that that group is statistically fairly small. But, again, only based subjectively on looking at people around me, I suspect that older/fit people spend less time in the hospital, relatively speaking, for two reasons: (1) fewer procedures needed, and (2) shorter stays for any given behavior.

    Sample of my anecdata ( ;) ):

    One of the fittest older guys I know is 72, quite thin but very strong. As a lifelong athlete, he's starting to have some joint issues despite being thin. After a morning knee replacement surgery last Fall, they took him to PT in the afternoon, and told him "when you can get up these steps, you can go home". He said "like this?", went up the steps, and they sent him home that day: Effectively, he had knee replacement as an outpatient surgery. In February, he unfortunately contracted sepsis consequent to a respiratory infection. His doctors told his wife that if he were not so fit, he would have died. A couple of weeks ago, still much thinner than he'd prefer post-sepsis, he had to have a hip joint re-replaced (it had popped out 4 times over the year since it was put in, and this time they couldn't get it back in). They sent him straight from the doctor's office in the morning to surgery that same day, and he was back at home the following day. He's recovering well at home, starting to get around pretty well and return to routine activities, though not yet back to athletic pursuits.

    An obese friend of mine (I'd guess close to 300 pounds at around 5'8", age 65) had hip replacement a year or so ago. She was in the hospital for several days, then in a rehab facility for a couple of weeks, and struggled with daily life for some time after that. She's been through other surgeries in the last year or so, too, including some for conditions more likely when obese; all of them had difficult recoveries; one had an abdominal incision that infected then failed to heal for several months.

    Now, I'd rather have none of those problems, but, watching both of them, the guy definitely has spent less time in the hospital, and was back to normal faster.

    Ryen, this is not intended to dispute anything you're saying: I think what you're saying is insightful and useful. I'm just continuing the thread conversation by talking about a couple of the people I've observed in my own life that have led me to be where I am as I think about what weight I want to be as I age, how much value I should put on working out, etc. But it's just anecdotes.
  • LivingtheLeanDream
    LivingtheLeanDream Posts: 13,345 Member
    Options
    WinoGelato wrote: »
    I used to believe that’s just what happens as you get older, have kids, etc. I used it as a convenient excuse for 10+ years as to why my weight was creeping up and why it wasn’t worth trying to lose weight, I figured it would be a futile exercise.

    Then I found MFP, decided to give weight loss a serious go, learned about CICO, NEAT and my TDEE, figured out that not only could I lose weight I could do so while becoming more fit and active, so that I actually eat more now that I’ve lost weight than I did 30 lbs ago because I’m so much more active.

    So now at 43 I weigh less than I did when I was 23, and I’m in better shape than I was at any point post college (I was a competitive gymnast and cheerleader in high school and college so I don’t actually aspire to that as a weight/body type).

    So yes I think it’s a bit of a fallacy and a bit of a convenient excuse for why women in particular put on weight as they get older. There are plenty of badass women in their 40s, 50s and 60s on this site who are fit and active and have achieved these goals later in life, some like @AnnPT77 and @GottaBurnEmAll already posting here but also @middlehaitch and @LivingtheLeanDream also come to mind.

    @winogelato and you could/should have quoted yourself too there :smiley: because you rock :smile: Thanks btw, I have a huge grin plastered on my face currently. You have made my day :smile:

    OP I was a bit like @winogelato too, thought being a bit older it was par for the course to let myself slip into that middle aged spread sort of thinking. I'm so glad I found MFP in 2012, (I ended up being fed up trying to hide a muffin top and having chubby cheeks and chubby everythin!) I haven't looked back since. :smiley:

    I think its probably best [for me] not to get too thin. My aim is to keep as much muscle mass and retain bone density as best I can and to do that means lifting heavy things :smile:

    Ruth

  • SaunaSuit
    SaunaSuit Posts: 96 Member
    Options
    a mistaken belief, especially one based on unsound argument. I think it has a lot to do with this site, Only because as we get older many people have made commits over the years about us and how we should look, or feel.

    After my husband was no longer in my life, I got to become "ME". As you can see in my Picture I just posted, This was me in 2008 one year out of cancer! just weeks away from getting my teeth pulled all 18 of them. Cancer can destroy the body. From this size 5# at 46yrs old, my world turned up side down. Every year after i just kept gaining weight. I didn't see a need to care any more, I was never going to get married, or date anyone, I changed and not for the best. I lost a lot of hair, no teeth, not really a image someone wants to date~ I understood my role in life.

    I am sorry for your Breast Cancer, I had a wonderful neighbor growing up in the early 70 who babysitted me and she had it also. I am also sorry about your husband. Mine could not deal with what was happening to my body changing, we didn't know 10yrs prior the outcome of all those medical bills and dr vistis why I was sick for so long.

    I don't want to go to Heaven FAT~ So I want to lose weight, I don't know how long I have with Alzhimers but I can say their is no cure and most only have 3 to 7yrs some are lucky they get 10.

    So at 57 on Thursday, I don't know if I will see 67yrs old. All I get is $147.00 for S.s. so not really looking forward to thouse Great YEARS! That does not even pay for food for a month. I have to live with my daughter to survive.

    This is a lot of stress and in stress weight gain sits at the devils table waiting for me to slip up. This week my daugther bought Bom Boms and put it on my side of the freezer. It took all I had to remove them and put them in the deep freezer so am not tempeted. Bom Boms was what my husband gave me for my birthday every year.

    I think everything, everythought, every emotion or fealings have to do with gaining weight. If we loved ourselves and we were "HAPPY" we would not be here. We are all trying to find a cure because the Doctors have not found one for us or our thinking, or actions.
  • CarvedTones
    CarvedTones Posts: 2,340 Member
    Options
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    kimny72 wrote: »
    Also, if I could be pedantic for a moment though :smiley: isn't there a difference between vanity lbs and being overweight? And isn't there a difference between "it's bad to be underweight" and "it's good to be a bit overweight"?

    At 5'4 I have been maintaining at @ 125 which is right around the middle of the healthy weight range for my height. If I dropped all the way down to 110, that would be underweight and probably not the best place to be in my 70s if longevity is a goal. But I could gain 10 vanity lbs putting me at 135 and still not be "overweight".

    I'd also guess older folks who are in fact overweight would be more likely to take to heart the idea that the extra weight is protective, simply because it sounds better than "I never figured out how to lose it like I wanted to" :wink:

    Most of the stuff that I've read addresses BF% rather than weight with higher levels of BF% being ideal as we age, but they're all still in the healthy BF% range and not overly fat.

    Here's the chart that was created using the research done by Jackson and Pollock...

    Ideal-Body-Fat-Percentage-Chart3.jpg

    Love the chart; love, love, love! I am 59 and the admittedly suspect handheld device said I am 20.5%. I am planning to drop another 5 from my current weight, which I have been maintaining at and one reason is to get under 20%. The chart isn't convincing me not to do that though; thee is also a small amount of fat hangin around just above the beltline that I hope is affected (I know I can't spot reduce, but it is the last really obvious spot).