Large Framed Ladies - 5'6" Goal Weight

1234568»

Replies

  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 27,897 Member
    hobbitses333 wrote: »
    Sure lets revive this thread!

    I have thick, dense bones confirmed by medical scans and apparently carry considerably more muscle mass than the average woman. I have always been much stronger than any other girl I know...I used to be put in with the boys in high school sports because of this lol!

    I think want to weigh 180. Right now aiming for 215...I wanna see what my high school weight looks like now lol!.

    Yes, I'd love to see my high school weights too!
  • QuinntessentiallyMe
    QuinntessentiallyMe Posts: 88 Member
    5'6", large German farming build. I lost 115 lbs, and because of my frame, excess skin, and goal to be thick and muscular and not thin, I am happy between 165-170. Looking to put on more muscle over time, so I may go up a bit. There's no ideal for any frame/height, and I feel bad for anyone who subscribes to ideals. Just do you, boo. If you're happy and healthy where you're at, thumbs up. Have some confidence in your satisfaction and choices. :-)
  • scarlett_k
    scarlett_k Posts: 812 Member
    What does the circumference of your wrist have to do with your build?
  • Gisel2015
    Gisel2015 Posts: 4,136 Member
    scarlett_k wrote: »
    What does the circumference of your wrist have to do with your build?

    Wrist Size and Frame Size
    Knowing your frame size allows you to estimate a healthy weight range for your body. Wrist circumference is often used for determining frame size, since people who with larger frames also have larger wrists.

    For example, a man over 5 foot 5 inches tall, and a wrist that measures 6.5 to 7.5 inches around, has a medium frame.
    A woman over 5 foot 5 inches tall, and a wrist that measures 6.25 to 6.5 inches around, has a medium frame.
    A woman under 5 foot 2 inches tall, and a wrist between 5.5 and 5.75 inches around has a medium frame.
    A woman between 5 foot 2 inches and 5 foot 5 inches, with a wrist that measures between 6 to 6.25 inches around, has a medium frame.

    https://www.livestrong.com/article/500795-how-to-determine-ideal-body-proportions-by-height-wrist-size/
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 27,897 Member
    apullum wrote: »
    scarlett_k wrote: »
    What does the circumference of your wrist have to do with your build?

    After losing 100 pounds, my wrist is smaller, just like the rest of me. Obviously it’s because I lost fat around my arms, as well as everywhere else.

    Take the “frame size” claim with a grain of salt. Your wrists are made of more than just bone.

    Sure, being 100 pounds overweight would pad the wrist measurement somewhat.

    As a baseline, I've had trouble getting bracelets and non-stretchy gloves that fit since I was a (skinny) teenager. I had to have links added to the bracelets I inherited from my grandmother.
  • Annie_01
    Annie_01 Posts: 3,096 Member
    Even at my thinnest(130lbs) I had trouble with watch bands fitting. I also have wide pelvic bones. When I was pregnant with both of my children at 9 months I looked more like I was 6 months. At a 130 which is about the middle of the healthy range for me I looked like skin and bones. Wasn't pretty.
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 32,030 Member
    msalicia07 wrote: »
    6efj2irs4vs5.gif

    Looks like there’s only about a 20ish lbs difference from small to large frame size, so not much (from lowest small to lowest large, etc).

    Looks like many people are comfortable being closer to the highest end of their Frame size, and considerably more. And also believe they look “sick” if they’re remotely close to the middle range of their frame size. Perspective is fascinating.

    They know what their bodies look like, we don't.
    They know what their doctors say, we don't.
    They know their personal and cultural preferences, we don't.

    Everyone can choose her right spot, and I'll support that. I'd encourage anyone to make their choice a healthy weight, but it seems like there's pretty decent evidence that - for women, at least - some weights into the overweight BMI range aren't statistically a super-big health risk.

    Personally, at 5'5", in terms of that chart, I'd prefer to be somewhere near the upper side of small frame, to mid-medium frame (I have sort of a mixed frame (wider shoulders, narrow hips, among other things), but feel and look better on the lighter side IMO, 125-ish or so. I shared photos (at goal weight) on another thread about this topic, and some folks felt that my upper chest looks too bony, and they wouldn't want to look that way. (I tend to hold the last pounds somewhere between ribcage and upper thighs, so IMO am over-fat at heavier weights, but it's all lower body). I'm not appearance driven, it's about how I feel and how my health responds.

    I don't really care what others think; my doctor's OK with my being on the lighter side, and so am I. And I'm far from sickly. (I'd add that I'm not worried about long-term consequences much, either: I'm already 63 and doing fine so far. ;) ).

    When these threads start moving from "I'd look sick at XYZ low weight" to "a woman my height would look sick at XYZ low weight" (as sometimes happens), or similar things in the reverse direction (i.e. higher preferred weights) I feel like we're heading toward a judgemental line we don't need to cross. While I consider myself overfat at 150, even 140, I don't assume that applies to the rest of the world. I have the overall build of a 14-year-old boy, wide shoulders and narrow hips, no breasts; many other women are more hourglass shaped, with wider hips and large breasts.
  • axsxmxa
    axsxmxa Posts: 15 Member
    5'6, no clue what my frame is. Currently at 138 lbs, aiming for 130 first then reassessing from there - I like the idea of being 120 lbs but I don't know what my body's going to look like, particularly as I'd like to build some muscle eventually. So essentially 120 is my goal, but it's dependent on how I feel about how I look.
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 27,897 Member
    msalicia07 wrote: »
    6efj2irs4vs5.gif

    Looks like there’s only about a 20ish lbs difference from small to large frame size, so not much (from lowest small to lowest large, etc).

    Looks like many people are comfortable being closer to the highest end of their Frame size, and considerably more. And also believe they look “sick” if they’re remotely close to the middle range of their frame size. Perspective is fascinating.

    Due to the title, you're not going to get a representative sampling of women in this thread - it's going to attract the outliers.

    I've gone through the first two pages and I don't "many people" wanting to be "considerably more" than the highest end of the range, which is 159 in your chart. I see lots of 130s and 140s, several women mention 160, and one "in the 160s". The women who said 200 was referring to bench pressing. One woman in the later pages had incremental goals and didn't seem to be set on a final goal.

    I don't have the patience to go through the whole thread today, but if you push back, do tally all the responses and see if your "many people" wanting to be "considerably more" is actually accurate. While I don't have a fixed idea of the cut off, I wouldn't consider anything in the 160s to be "considerably more" than 159.
  • Bedazzled35
    Bedazzled35 Posts: 51 Member
    I'm 5 foot 7, my wrist measures 7 inches if people think that is reIevant. I set my goal weight at 145 (mainly because it's exactly 100 pounds from my starting weight) as I've never been that light since I was a child I'm prepared to readjust according to how I look/feel when I get closer.
    Last time I lost considerable weight I got to 165 and overall looked good although I still had pockets of fat I wanted to get rid of but people were constantly telling me I'd gone far enough.
  • threewins
    threewins Posts: 1,455 Member
    msalicia07 wrote: »
    6efj2irs4vs5.gif

    According to this table, I have a micro sized frame.
  • SCoil123
    SCoil123 Posts: 2,108 Member
    I’m between 5’7”-5’8” and have a larger frame. I let my doctor set my goal weight range when I started out. She gave me a 20lb range of what she would consider healthy for me of 145-165. This puts me at the upper end of a healthy BMI for my height but within range. I’m maintaining in that range now towards the upper end and focusing more on fitness goals than weight at this point.
  • midlomel1971
    midlomel1971 Posts: 1,283 Member
    I have a large frame, but I'm taller than you at 5'8". My goal is 150. At my age, I don't think I could go any lower than that honestly. Plus, I want to enjoy food...specifically cheese and wine.
  • noel2fit
    noel2fit Posts: 235 Member
    I'm 5'6" and pretty medium framed I think, and I agree with the chart there. I easily maintain at 145lbs while enjoying junky treats and sporadic exercise, but when I'm fit and trim and on my game 135 is my happy weight.
  • Taytaylynn92
    Taytaylynn92 Posts: 230 Member
    I don’t know if I would consider myself a large frame. I am 5’5” and want to get down to about 118.
  • Anya_000
    Anya_000 Posts: 723 Member
    I'm 5'6 with a small frame, 5.5 wrist. In the 140lb's, I just look like a bigger boned woman than I really am. I carry the fat all over. But after losing weight, I realized that I'm actually a much smaller person. I feel best at 132-133 lbs. Even though I'm small framed, I look sick at less than 130.

Categories