how my boobs are going to react
Replies
-
Breasts consist of fatty tissue and glands. How much of which is different for everyone. If you happen to have more flatty tissue your breasts will likely get smaller, if mostly glad tissue then not. So nobody can tell. Me: Apparently quite a bit of fatty tissue. I like it if my breasts fit into a small hand and are light. That's more convenient in summer, when working out, etc. Btw, I'm 45, and there's not much sagginess going on. I guess the risk of that is bigger with bigger breasts to start with.2
-
Everyone is different, but you could use handweights and do some exercises for your pectoral muscles. That will help with what you do have regardless of if you decrease in size. (Pushups are great too)2
-
tinkerbellang83 wrote: »maureenseel1984 wrote: »maureenseel1984 wrote: »So I weight 72 kgs (159 lbs), I am planning to lose about 15 kgs (33 lbs) and I wonder if my breasts will sagg afterwards? Note that my cup size is 34B (US) which is not big at all, my breasts aren't that perky to begin with and I am 18 yo (I don't mind them getting smaller). Actually I heard a doctor say that weight loss can actually cause breasts to look perkier
How tall are you?
That aside, I went from 142 to 123 lb back in 2016 (eating disorder much)....and my boobs basically just vanished and I looked like a teenage boy so...there's that.
I am pretty tall 1.73 m (approximately 5'8")
I am not sure anyone is actually looking at this.
You're 5'8"-according to "ideal weight" estimates (100 lb at 5' even, then 5 lb for every inch above that), your "ideal" weight would be 140.
The weight you are aiming for is 126 lb...
This is not necessarily a healthy weight...not sure anybody is taking this into consideration.
When I lost a bunch of weight (BMI was 19.0 so I told myself I "wasn't underweight"), my boobs basically vanished which made both me and my husband sad.
I don't think what you're doing is healthy.
Well to be fair for the OP's height the BMI "Healthy" range for 5'8" is 125-160lbs, aiming for the lower end doesn't necessarily mean that's not a healthy weight for the OP, so yes I had looked at it when I was responding to the post.
Not everyone is suited to the middle of the range, some people may be at one end or the other. You cannot slap an"ideal" weight on someone's height that's why it's a range.
I am the same height and I agree that I would look positively skeletal at that weight but that's because I have wide shoulders, wide hips and a lot of muscle.
I have no hips and small bones. I'm currently at 146 (I'm 5'8") and look much better in the low 130s. I'm really short waisted - basically all legs & arms. Your body composition has a lot to do with it. 155 is super heavy for me, my face gets round and I look terrible.2 -
maureenseel1984 wrote: »maureenseel1984 wrote: »So I weight 72 kgs (159 lbs), I am planning to lose about 15 kgs (33 lbs) and I wonder if my breasts will sagg afterwards? Note that my cup size is 34B (US) which is not big at all, my breasts aren't that perky to begin with and I am 18 yo (I don't mind them getting smaller). Actually I heard a doctor say that weight loss can actually cause breasts to look perkier
How tall are you?
That aside, I went from 142 to 123 lb back in 2016 (eating disorder much)....and my boobs basically just vanished and I looked like a teenage boy so...there's that.
I am pretty tall 1.73 m (approximately 5'8")
I am not sure anyone is actually looking at this.
You're 5'8"-according to "ideal weight" estimates (100 lb at 5' even, then 5 lb for every inch above that), your "ideal" weight would be 140.
The weight you are aiming for is 126 lb...
This is not necessarily a healthy weight...not sure anybody is taking this into consideration.
When I lost a bunch of weight (BMI was 19.0 so I told myself I "wasn't underweight"), my boobs basically vanished which made both me and my husband sad.
I don't think what you're doing is healthy.
She chose a weight within the healthy BMI range. While some may be happy with a higher weight, it is hard to argue that the lower end of the healthy weight range isn't healthy for OP specifically, only her or her doctor could really tell her that. My BMI is currently 19.4 and I am healthier than I have ever been, and I have a couple of lbs left to lose, although I have no rush to lose them.
OP, I went from a 34 C to a 32 A. While my breasts aren't as perky as they were prior to me having kids, I would not at all consider them saggy. I actually prefer not having larger breasts - I just feel more comfortable with them being smaller, it is easier for me to run and work out, and my husband actually prefers them smaller also (which actually shocked me).
You should choose what weight works for you, just because others didn't feel healthy or didn't like their shape at a certain weight doesn't mean that weight isn't good or healthy for you. Just keep in mind the scale is only one way to measure progress. And just because you make a goal, doesn't mean that goal can't change - if you get to 135 and feel great, don't feel obligated to lose to your goal weight just because you set that as a goal.3 -
She chose a weight within the healthy BMI range. While some may be happy with a higher weight, it is hard to argue that the lower end of the healthy weight range isn't healthy for OP specifically, only her or her doctor could really tell her that. My BMI is currently 19.4 and I am healthier than I have ever been, and I have a couple of lbs left to lose, although I have no rush to lose them.
OP, I went from a 34 C to a 32 A. While my breasts aren't as perky as they were prior to me having kids, I would not at all consider them saggy. I actually prefer not having larger breasts - I just feel more comfortable with them being smaller, it is easier for me to run and work out, and my husband actually prefers them smaller also (which actually shocked me).
You should choose what weight works for you, just because others didn't feel healthy or didn't like their shape at a certain weight doesn't mean that weight isn't good or healthy for you. Just keep in mind the scale is only one way to measure progress. And just because you make a goal, doesn't mean that goal can't change - if you get to 135 and feel great, don't feel obligated to lose to your goal weight just because you set that as a goal.
Yes but I did specifically say "I don't think". I'm entitled to an opinion.
People losing weight simply to achieve a number I think are missing out on the idea of living a healthy life. Eating healthy, exercising regularly without it becoming obsessive and allowing yourself to eat whatever you want in moderation...if your set point is a higher weight...it will take some really unhealthy interventions to achieve a goal weight not within that range. It's also important to look at what the body wants versus what we want for our bodies (the weight we want, the BF% we want, the abs we want, the thigh gap we want, the bubble butt, the chiseled look...and on and on it goes).5 -
maureenseel1984 wrote: »
She chose a weight within the healthy BMI range. While some may be happy with a higher weight, it is hard to argue that the lower end of the healthy weight range isn't healthy for OP specifically, only her or her doctor could really tell her that. My BMI is currently 19.4 and I am healthier than I have ever been, and I have a couple of lbs left to lose, although I have no rush to lose them.
OP, I went from a 34 C to a 32 A. While my breasts aren't as perky as they were prior to me having kids, I would not at all consider them saggy. I actually prefer not having larger breasts - I just feel more comfortable with them being smaller, it is easier for me to run and work out, and my husband actually prefers them smaller also (which actually shocked me).
You should choose what weight works for you, just because others didn't feel healthy or didn't like their shape at a certain weight doesn't mean that weight isn't good or healthy for you. Just keep in mind the scale is only one way to measure progress. And just because you make a goal, doesn't mean that goal can't change - if you get to 135 and feel great, don't feel obligated to lose to your goal weight just because you set that as a goal.
Yes but I did specifically say "I don't think". I'm entitled to an opinion.
People losing weight simply to achieve a number I think are missing out on the idea of living a healthy life. Eating healthy, exercising regularly without it becoming obsessive and allowing yourself to eat whatever you want in moderation...if your set point is a higher weight...it will take some really unhealthy interventions to achieve a goal weight not within that range. It's also important to look at what the body wants versus what we want for our bodies (the weight we want, the BF% we want, the abs we want, the thigh gap we want, the bubble butt, the chiseled look...and on and on it goes).
You are entitled to an opinion just as much as I am. We both agree that there are many things to focus on besides the number on the scale, but everyone who maintains at the low end of healthy does not obsess over exercising or their weight. My point is that having (or achieving) a goal weight at the lower end of the healthy range does not intrinsically make it unhealthy. While I'm at the low end of healthy, I am active (currently training for a half marathon) and while I eat healthy most of the time, I also indulge when I want to - yesterday I had a 450 calorie cupcake that was amazing.
It just seems a little unfair to assume her goal is unhealthy based off your own perceptions when we don't know her or her medical history, and her goal is within the healthy range per BMI.5 -
It just seems a little unfair to assume her goal is unhealthy based off your own perceptions when we don't know her or her medical history, and her goal is within the healthy range per BMI.
Isn't it also worth noting OP hasn't said anything since the initial post? No background whatsoever so...maybe if she gave us more info, it would help with that end.
And yes-having a goal weight that is outside of your set point weight and forcing your body to lose weight to achieve that number...it is actually unhealthy. If your body naturally wanted to be at 145 lb and you restrict and work out a lot in order to reach 120...not healthy.9 -
maureenseel1984 wrote: »
It just seems a little unfair to assume her goal is unhealthy based off your own perceptions when we don't know her or her medical history, and her goal is within the healthy range per BMI.
Isn't it also worth noting OP hasn't said anything since the initial post? No background whatsoever so...maybe if she gave us more info, it would help with that end.
And yes-having a goal weight that is outside of your set point weight and forcing your body to lose weight to achieve that number...it is actually unhealthy. If your body naturally wanted to be at 145 lb and you restrict and work out a lot in order to reach 120...not healthy.
Many people are here, on this app, because their "set point weight" is 100s of lbs over a healthy weight. I don't believe in the whole "set point weight." Your body weight is a reflection of CICO. If I ate everything I wanted everyday I would be overweight.3 -
Pricklypineapple422 wrote: »maureenseel1984 wrote: »
It just seems a little unfair to assume her goal is unhealthy based off your own perceptions when we don't know her or her medical history, and her goal is within the healthy range per BMI.
Isn't it also worth noting OP hasn't said anything since the initial post? No background whatsoever so...maybe if she gave us more info, it would help with that end.
And yes-having a goal weight that is outside of your set point weight and forcing your body to lose weight to achieve that number...it is actually unhealthy. If your body naturally wanted to be at 145 lb and you restrict and work out a lot in order to reach 120...not healthy.
Many people are here, on this app, because their "set point weight" is 100s of lbs over a healthy weight. I don't believe in the whole "set point weight." Your body weight is a reflection of CICO. If I ate everything I wanted everyday I would be overweight.
There is a difference between set point and "ate everything I wanted".
Set point means that there is a weight where our body runs most efficiently and is most comfortable. A lot of times it isn't the weight we want. I'd LOVE if my set point weight was 120 lb....but it isn't. It's more like 140-145 lb. In order to get lower than that, I have to do some serious restriction and a lot of exercise (beyond moderate).
Set point is the weight (range, mind you) that your body is when you eat healthfully most of the time, treats sometimes and exercise in moderation. In other words....living a healthy lifestyle. This is barring medical conditions such as thyroid problems, issues that cause hypermetabolism such as active AIDS or cancer, etc.9 -
maureenseel1984 wrote: »Pricklypineapple422 wrote: »maureenseel1984 wrote: »
It just seems a little unfair to assume her goal is unhealthy based off your own perceptions when we don't know her or her medical history, and her goal is within the healthy range per BMI.
Isn't it also worth noting OP hasn't said anything since the initial post? No background whatsoever so...maybe if she gave us more info, it would help with that end.
And yes-having a goal weight that is outside of your set point weight and forcing your body to lose weight to achieve that number...it is actually unhealthy. If your body naturally wanted to be at 145 lb and you restrict and work out a lot in order to reach 120...not healthy.
Many people are here, on this app, because their "set point weight" is 100s of lbs over a healthy weight. I don't believe in the whole "set point weight." Your body weight is a reflection of CICO. If I ate everything I wanted everyday I would be overweight.
There is a difference between set point and "ate everything I wanted".
Set point means that there is a weight where our body runs most efficiently and is most comfortable. A lot of times it isn't the weight we want. I'd LOVE if my set point weight was 120 lb....but it isn't. It's more like 140-145 lb. In order to get lower than that, I have to do some serious restriction and a lot of exercise (beyond moderate).
Set point is the weight (range, mind you) that your body is when you eat healthfully most of the time, treats sometimes and exercise in moderation. In other words....living a healthy lifestyle. This is barring medical conditions such as thyroid problems, issues that cause hypermetabolism such as active AIDS or cancer, etc.
I guess we don't know what OPs "set point weight" is though.1 -
Pricklypineapple422 wrote: »maureenseel1984 wrote: »Pricklypineapple422 wrote: »maureenseel1984 wrote: »
It just seems a little unfair to assume her goal is unhealthy based off your own perceptions when we don't know her or her medical history, and her goal is within the healthy range per BMI.
Isn't it also worth noting OP hasn't said anything since the initial post? No background whatsoever so...maybe if she gave us more info, it would help with that end.
And yes-having a goal weight that is outside of your set point weight and forcing your body to lose weight to achieve that number...it is actually unhealthy. If your body naturally wanted to be at 145 lb and you restrict and work out a lot in order to reach 120...not healthy.
Many people are here, on this app, because their "set point weight" is 100s of lbs over a healthy weight. I don't believe in the whole "set point weight." Your body weight is a reflection of CICO. If I ate everything I wanted everyday I would be overweight.
There is a difference between set point and "ate everything I wanted".
Set point means that there is a weight where our body runs most efficiently and is most comfortable. A lot of times it isn't the weight we want. I'd LOVE if my set point weight was 120 lb....but it isn't. It's more like 140-145 lb. In order to get lower than that, I have to do some serious restriction and a lot of exercise (beyond moderate).
Set point is the weight (range, mind you) that your body is when you eat healthfully most of the time, treats sometimes and exercise in moderation. In other words....living a healthy lifestyle. This is barring medical conditions such as thyroid problems, issues that cause hypermetabolism such as active AIDS or cancer, etc.
I guess we don't know what OPs "set point weight" is though.
That's my point though. We have minimal information about the OP.
From the picture (granted it shows shoulders up) she does not appear to be overweight...It is all fine and well to wish to have a smaller body (granted, this is typically driven by society and the media's standards of beauty-which has changed many many many times over the ages), but the means by which we achieve it and whether or not we're working against what our body naturally needs or wants, that is the issue. Working out to burn off x amount of calories and not eating foods in order to achieve a goal amount of calories when our body is perfectly healthy already...why? Aesthetics.3 -
maureenseel1984 wrote: »Pricklypineapple422 wrote: »maureenseel1984 wrote: »Pricklypineapple422 wrote: »maureenseel1984 wrote: »
It just seems a little unfair to assume her goal is unhealthy based off your own perceptions when we don't know her or her medical history, and her goal is within the healthy range per BMI.
Isn't it also worth noting OP hasn't said anything since the initial post? No background whatsoever so...maybe if she gave us more info, it would help with that end.
And yes-having a goal weight that is outside of your set point weight and forcing your body to lose weight to achieve that number...it is actually unhealthy. If your body naturally wanted to be at 145 lb and you restrict and work out a lot in order to reach 120...not healthy.
Many people are here, on this app, because their "set point weight" is 100s of lbs over a healthy weight. I don't believe in the whole "set point weight." Your body weight is a reflection of CICO. If I ate everything I wanted everyday I would be overweight.
There is a difference between set point and "ate everything I wanted".
Set point means that there is a weight where our body runs most efficiently and is most comfortable. A lot of times it isn't the weight we want. I'd LOVE if my set point weight was 120 lb....but it isn't. It's more like 140-145 lb. In order to get lower than that, I have to do some serious restriction and a lot of exercise (beyond moderate).
Set point is the weight (range, mind you) that your body is when you eat healthfully most of the time, treats sometimes and exercise in moderation. In other words....living a healthy lifestyle. This is barring medical conditions such as thyroid problems, issues that cause hypermetabolism such as active AIDS or cancer, etc.
I guess we don't know what OPs "set point weight" is though.
That's my point though. We have minimal information about the OP.
From the picture (granted it shows shoulders up) she does not appear to be overweight...It is all fine and well to wish to have a smaller body (granted, this is typically driven by society and the media's standards of beauty-which has changed many many many times over the ages), but the means by which we achieve it and whether or not we're working against what our body naturally needs or wants, that is the issue. Working out to burn off x amount of calories and not eating foods in order to achieve a goal amount of calories when our body is perfectly healthy already...why? Aesthetics.
I guess I relate to OP because I lost weight in the upper half of my body before my lower. My reasoning for weight loss is purely sports performance, hopefully OP will give some more information. I could be healthy at 20 lbs heavier, but for me, I feel 100 times better at this lower weight. My running distance and speed have both drastically improved since losing the weight. I have more energy and am stronger than I have ever been. At this point, we can't say if losing weight is unhealthy for OP. That has been my point.1 -
.
I guess I relate to OP because I lost weight in the upper half of my body before my lower. My reasoning for weight loss is purely sports performance, hopefully OP will give some more information. I could be healthy at 20 lbs heavier, but for me, I feel 100 times better at this lower weight. My running distance and speed have both drastically improved since losing the weight. I have more energy and am stronger than I have ever been. At this point, we can't say if losing weight is unhealthy for OP. That has been my point. [/quote]
I had thought my running was better when I was thinner...runners are notorious for wanting to be thin for performance reasons...however, also at high risk for the female athlete triad. I found being at 142 was just fine for me as far as weight goes...I built up muscle and my performance was still great.3 -
maureenseel1984 wrote: ».
I guess I relate to OP because I lost weight in the upper half of my body before my lower. My reasoning for weight loss is purely sports performance, hopefully OP will give some more information. I could be healthy at 20 lbs heavier, but for me, I feel 100 times better at this lower weight. My running distance and speed have both drastically improved since losing the weight. I have more energy and am stronger than I have ever been. At this point, we can't say if losing weight is unhealthy for OP. That has been my point.
I had thought my running was better when I was thinner...runners are notorious for wanting to be thin for performance reasons...however, also at high risk for the female athlete triad. I found being at 142 was just fine for me as far as weight goes...I built up muscle and my performance was still great.[/quote]
I'm glad we both found what works for us. Everyone's different for sure!0 -
Pricklypineapple422 wrote: »maureenseel1984 wrote: ».
I guess I relate to OP because I lost weight in the upper half of my body before my lower. My reasoning for weight loss is purely sports performance, hopefully OP will give some more information. I could be healthy at 20 lbs heavier, but for me, I feel 100 times better at this lower weight. My running distance and speed have both drastically improved since losing the weight. I have more energy and am stronger than I have ever been. At this point, we can't say if losing weight is unhealthy for OP. That has been my point.
I had thought my running was better when I was thinner...runners are notorious for wanting to be thin for performance reasons...however, also at high risk for the female athlete triad. I found being at 142 was just fine for me as far as weight goes...I built up muscle and my performance was still great.
I'm glad we both found what works for us. Everyone's different for sure! [/quote]
Agreed. I am just wary I suppose. I have four sisters (all, like me, had eating disorders...and all but one were runners)
. 2 -
You are young, they are small, do some chest exercises, rowing, some light weights, etc.0
-
maureenseel1984 wrote: »
It just seems a little unfair to assume her goal is unhealthy based off your own perceptions when we don't know her or her medical history, and her goal is within the healthy range per BMI.
Isn't it also worth noting OP hasn't said anything since the initial post? No background whatsoever so...maybe if she gave us more info, it would help with that end.
And yes-having a goal weight that is outside of your set point weight and forcing your body to lose weight to achieve that number...it is actually unhealthy. If your body naturally wanted to be at 145 lb and you restrict and work out a lot in order to reach 120...not healthy.
I don't think my goal is too much bc I feel heavy and not healthy at all. I do have large bones in my lower body but I wouldn't say so about my upper one, after losing about 23 lbs in the past three years I assumed that I have 30 more to lose based on how I looked and how much I lost, needless to say that I'll stop losing weight right after reaching my desired results bc a number on the scale doesn't have that much of importance to me. Right now, some people would tell me I'm fat and others tell me that I'm normal. Also sorry for not being here I was on a trip.3 -
Pricklypineapple422 wrote: »maureenseel1984 wrote: »Pricklypineapple422 wrote: »maureenseel1984 wrote: »
It just seems a little unfair to assume her goal is unhealthy based off your own perceptions when we don't know her or her medical history, and her goal is within the healthy range per BMI.
Isn't it also worth noting OP hasn't said anything since the initial post? No background whatsoever so...maybe if she gave us more info, it would help with that end.
And yes-having a goal weight that is outside of your set point weight and forcing your body to lose weight to achieve that number...it is actually unhealthy. If your body naturally wanted to be at 145 lb and you restrict and work out a lot in order to reach 120...not healthy.
Many people are here, on this app, because their "set point weight" is 100s of lbs over a healthy weight. I don't believe in the whole "set point weight." Your body weight is a reflection of CICO. If I ate everything I wanted everyday I would be overweight.
There is a difference between set point and "ate everything I wanted".
Set point means that there is a weight where our body runs most efficiently and is most comfortable. A lot of times it isn't the weight we want. I'd LOVE if my set point weight was 120 lb....but it isn't. It's more like 140-145 lb. In order to get lower than that, I have to do some serious restriction and a lot of exercise (beyond moderate).
Set point is the weight (range, mind you) that your body is when you eat healthfully most of the time, treats sometimes and exercise in moderation. In other words....living a healthy lifestyle. This is barring medical conditions such as thyroid problems, issues that cause hypermetabolism such as active AIDS or cancer, etc.
I guess we don't know what OPs "set point weight" is though.
Well I don't know either but what I know is that my set point is a lot lower than my current weight1 -
Pricklypineapple422 wrote: »maureenseel1984 wrote: »Pricklypineapple422 wrote: »maureenseel1984 wrote: »
It just seems a little unfair to assume her goal is unhealthy based off your own perceptions when we don't know her or her medical history, and her goal is within the healthy range per BMI.
Isn't it also worth noting OP hasn't said anything since the initial post? No background whatsoever so...maybe if she gave us more info, it would help with that end.
And yes-having a goal weight that is outside of your set point weight and forcing your body to lose weight to achieve that number...it is actually unhealthy. If your body naturally wanted to be at 145 lb and you restrict and work out a lot in order to reach 120...not healthy.
Many people are here, on this app, because their "set point weight" is 100s of lbs over a healthy weight. I don't believe in the whole "set point weight." Your body weight is a reflection of CICO. If I ate everything I wanted everyday I would be overweight.
There is a difference between set point and "ate everything I wanted".
Set point means that there is a weight where our body runs most efficiently and is most comfortable. A lot of times it isn't the weight we want. I'd LOVE if my set point weight was 120 lb....but it isn't. It's more like 140-145 lb. In order to get lower than that, I have to do some serious restriction and a lot of exercise (beyond moderate).
Set point is the weight (range, mind you) that your body is when you eat healthfully most of the time, treats sometimes and exercise in moderation. In other words....living a healthy lifestyle. This is barring medical conditions such as thyroid problems, issues that cause hypermetabolism such as active AIDS or cancer, etc.
I guess we don't know what OPs "set point weight" is though.
Well I don't know either but what I know is that my set point is a lot lower than my current weight
I completely support you and it sounds like you are being healthy which is obviously important. You got this! I feel a lot better after losing weight, hopefully you experience this as well
1 -
maureenseel1984 wrote: »Pricklypineapple422 wrote: »maureenseel1984 wrote: »Pricklypineapple422 wrote: »maureenseel1984 wrote: »
It just seems a little unfair to assume her goal is unhealthy based off your own perceptions when we don't know her or her medical history, and her goal is within the healthy range per BMI.
Isn't it also worth noting OP hasn't said anything since the initial post? No background whatsoever so...maybe if she gave us more info, it would help with that end.
And yes-having a goal weight that is outside of your set point weight and forcing your body to lose weight to achieve that number...it is actually unhealthy. If your body naturally wanted to be at 145 lb and you restrict and work out a lot in order to reach 120...not healthy.
Many people are here, on this app, because their "set point weight" is 100s of lbs over a healthy weight. I don't believe in the whole "set point weight." Your body weight is a reflection of CICO. If I ate everything I wanted everyday I would be overweight.
There is a difference between set point and "ate everything I wanted".
Set point means that there is a weight where our body runs most efficiently and is most comfortable. A lot of times it isn't the weight we want. I'd LOVE if my set point weight was 120 lb....but it isn't. It's more like 140-145 lb. In order to get lower than that, I have to do some serious restriction and a lot of exercise (beyond moderate).
Set point is the weight (range, mind you) that your body is when you eat healthfully most of the time, treats sometimes and exercise in moderation. In other words....living a healthy lifestyle. This is barring medical conditions such as thyroid problems, issues that cause hypermetabolism such as active AIDS or cancer, etc.
I guess we don't know what OPs "set point weight" is though.
That's my point though. We have minimal information about the OP.
From the picture (granted it shows shoulders up) she does not appear to be overweight...It is all fine and well to wish to have a smaller body (granted, this is typically driven by society and the media's standards of beauty-which has changed many many many times over the ages), but the means by which we achieve it and whether or not we're working against what our body naturally needs or wants, that is the issue. Working out to burn off x amount of calories and not eating foods in order to achieve a goal amount of calories when our body is perfectly healthy already...why? Aesthetics.
as I said most fat is in my lower body and when I start losing weight most of it goes from my belly my neck and my face but few of it goes from were I actually store it, mum said that over these three years my bust size decreased as well but I'm not sure about that tbh, also my body is far far away from being healthy my hair my skin and my weight say lot about it.0 -
Pricklypineapple422 wrote: »maureenseel1984 wrote: »Pricklypineapple422 wrote: »maureenseel1984 wrote: »Pricklypineapple422 wrote: »maureenseel1984 wrote: »
It just seems a little unfair to assume her goal is unhealthy based off your own perceptions when we don't know her or her medical history, and her goal is within the healthy range per BMI.
Isn't it also worth noting OP hasn't said anything since the initial post? No background whatsoever so...maybe if she gave us more info, it would help with that end.
And yes-having a goal weight that is outside of your set point weight and forcing your body to lose weight to achieve that number...it is actually unhealthy. If your body naturally wanted to be at 145 lb and you restrict and work out a lot in order to reach 120...not healthy.
Many people are here, on this app, because their "set point weight" is 100s of lbs over a healthy weight. I don't believe in the whole "set point weight." Your body weight is a reflection of CICO. If I ate everything I wanted everyday I would be overweight.
There is a difference between set point and "ate everything I wanted".
Set point means that there is a weight where our body runs most efficiently and is most comfortable. A lot of times it isn't the weight we want. I'd LOVE if my set point weight was 120 lb....but it isn't. It's more like 140-145 lb. In order to get lower than that, I have to do some serious restriction and a lot of exercise (beyond moderate).
Set point is the weight (range, mind you) that your body is when you eat healthfully most of the time, treats sometimes and exercise in moderation. In other words....living a healthy lifestyle. This is barring medical conditions such as thyroid problems, issues that cause hypermetabolism such as active AIDS or cancer, etc.
I guess we don't know what OPs "set point weight" is though.
That's my point though. We have minimal information about the OP.
From the picture (granted it shows shoulders up) she does not appear to be overweight...It is all fine and well to wish to have a smaller body (granted, this is typically driven by society and the media's standards of beauty-which has changed many many many times over the ages), but the means by which we achieve it and whether or not we're working against what our body naturally needs or wants, that is the issue. Working out to burn off x amount of calories and not eating foods in order to achieve a goal amount of calories when our body is perfectly healthy already...why? Aesthetics.
I guess I relate to OP because I lost weight in the upper half of my body before my lower. My reasoning for weight loss is purely sports performance, hopefully OP will give some more information. I could be healthy at 20 lbs heavier, but for me, I feel 100 times better at this lower weight. My running distance and speed have both drastically improved since losing the weight. I have more energy and am stronger than I have ever been. At this point, we can't say if losing weight is unhealthy for OP. That has been my point.
I also want to lose weight to feel better because weight and lack of activity makes me sick and tired all the time, I feel weak, puberty was never the reason why I suddenly started gaining weight when I was younger, I went through rough times and ate a lot, before that I was always very active and thin, the food I was eating wasn't healthy since I don't eat vegetables at all (still not eating them tho) but it doesn't affect a child much as does when you grow older, I definitely was way thinner than now0 -
I don't eat vegetables at all (still not eating them tho) but it doesn't affect a child much as does when you grow older, I definitely was way thinner than now
Age?
Striving to be as thin as you were then is not necessarily realistic.
0 -
bobshuckleberry wrote: »You are young, they are small, do some chest exercises, rowing, some light weights, etc.
Not rowing, for front of the chest, if you mean boat/machine rowing. Rowing is all upper body pull, no push. Simplistically, you need upper body push for pecs and their near neighbors. But rowing can potentially help posture, which potentially can help how a woman's chest appears, by reducing slumping.1 -
I am 18, I started gaining weight when I was 14, my height hasn't increased much since then (I gained another inch), I wasn't super thin then but I felt good, I ate too many carbs but as I said I was super active so I never gained weight, I don't know anything about going back to where I was but I know that there is too much fat in my body (I can't tell how much) and NO MUSCLE MASS AT ALL, so even if the number could be my healthy weight (I'm sure it isn't) it's not healthy right now plus I loved feeling light and I'd give anything to have that back. I am not as weak as pushing myself to achieve a norm that is supposed to be beautiful and forcing myself to believe it is.maureenseel1984 wrote: »I don't eat vegetables at all (still not eating them tho) but it doesn't affect a child much as does when you grow older, I definitely was way thinner than now
Age?
Striving to be as thin as you were then is not necessarily realistic.
1 -
Every time I see the title of this thread, I imagine my boobs talking to each other, like Meerkats. “What do you think of the new bras?” “I dunno but did you hear what she said about butt in the mirror this morning? Hey, butt!...”.
3 -
springlering62 wrote: »Every time I see the title of this thread, I imagine my boobs talking to each other, like Meerkats. “What do you think of the new bras?” “I dunno but did you hear what she said about butt in the mirror this morning? Hey, butt!...”.
sorry just after posting it I noticed I overdid it, I kept looking for a word and I ended up writing the worst one I thought of... You do these things when you're not a native speaker, I cannot edit it can I?1 -
springlering62 wrote: »Every time I see the title of this thread, I imagine my boobs talking to each other, like Meerkats. “What do you think of the new bras?” “I dunno but did you hear what she said about butt in the mirror this morning? Hey, butt!...”.
sorry just after posting it I noticed I overdid it, I kept looking for a word and I ended up writing the worst one I thought of... You do these things when you're not a native speaker, I cannot edit it can I?
I think a native speaker might write the same thing, or something similar. It's more of a quirk of the English language, haha.3 -
Genetics play a role in this and as individuals we all react differently. Some women lose weight around the hips/tummy first and a little on the chest. Get a measuring tape, get someone to measure your thighs (mid point between knee and hip bone) chest (probably in-line with nipples going around the back, and waist (in line with your belly button) assess yourself every two weeks. Nutrition is key👍🏽1
-
@taessane Oh, no!!! I never guessed you weren’t a native speaker or I wouldn’t have said anything. The mental image tickled me, that’s all. Didn’t mean to sound like I was mocking you. 😘3
-
I am 18, I started gaining weight when I was 14, my height hasn't increased much since then (I gained another inch), I wasn't super thin then but I felt good, I ate too many carbs but as I said I was super active so I never gained weight, I don't know anything about going back to where I was but I know that there is too much fat in my body (I can't tell how much) and NO MUSCLE MASS AT ALL, so even if the number could be my healthy weight (I'm sure it isn't) it's not healthy right now plus I loved feeling light and I'd give anything to have that back. I am not as weak as pushing myself to achieve a norm that is supposed to be beautiful and forcing myself to believe it is.maureenseel1984 wrote: »I don't eat vegetables at all (still not eating them tho) but it doesn't affect a child much as does when you grow older, I definitely was way thinner than now
Age?
Striving to be as thin as you were then is not necessarily realistic.
All. Red. Flags.
You can build muscle and tone without dropping tons of weight. At eighteen I was heavier than I was at 14. It is normal. You are still growing/gaining height probably until early-mid 20's. All I am advising is a heavy dose of caution.
4
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions