Now it's my turn to plateau!

Options
2»

Replies

  • Jthanmyfitnesspal
    Jthanmyfitnesspal Posts: 3,522 Member
    edited April 2023
    Options
    SuzanneC1l9zz wrote: »
    Normal BMI range is 18.5 to 24.9. 20 is comfortably within that, but I wouldn't call it "on the high end." Just don't want people unfamiliar with BMI to get the wrong idea 🙂

    @SuzanneC1l9zz : Sht, you're entirely right, and I meant that I'm shooting for a BMI of 25, which is on the high end of "normal." Thanks for that correction. (My point is that I'm not shooting for anything particularly slim. And, I think the recommended ranges are pretty much BS. I know lots of very healthy people that have a BMI well over 25.)

    @J72FIT : Not much with weights! Sometimes I work with bodyweight and bands. Mostly, I swim, ride, run. I've been pretty constant with my eating and workouts, so the little pause I had is curious.

    @PAV8888 : Thanks for giving me the benefit of the doubt!

    @tomcustombuilder : I agree that BMI is a very crude metric (weight in kg divided by height in meters squared). You can't read too much into it, except that it has been used in a lot of epidemiological studies. I'm an average build, so the guideline is pretty good for me. I like to think I have some extra muscle from working out regularly, so I'm shooting for the top of the "normal" range.

    @AnnPT77 : Always good comments.

    Thanks for the comments!
  • tomcustombuilder
    tomcustombuilder Posts: 1,850 Member
    Options
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    tomcustombuilder wrote: »
    Ideal body weight doesn’t take into consideration body composition, so it can be very misleading

    Some ways of suggesting good/ideal body weight do. The ones I mentioned above don't. Clearly, body fat percent makes a different, a huge difference - or relative muscularity, to put the same thing in different terms.

    IMU, that's the main "why" behind differences in suggested ideal weights for men vs. women, in the formulas that don't make the fat/lean distinction explicit. On average, men have more muscle mass than women at the same weight. On average. Not universally.

    As with other statistical kinds of things, these recommended-weights things tend to be semi-reasonable for average people, not so reasonable for non-average ones. For example, I'm aware of a woman here about my height who is tens of pounds heavier than I am, and many percent lower in body fat: She's muscular well beyond the statistical averages for our height range, and she's sometimes above the normal BMI range, but clearly not overfat at that weight. She's statistically unusual, not "wrong" or "non-ideal". With my current body composition, I was overfat at her body weight. There are also women I see here who are around my weight, but clearly lower in muscle mass, even though I'm not massively muscular. Individuals vary.

    Quite a few people have no clue what their body fat percentage is. There are ways of estimating that, too, but they're also statistical in nature, and can mislead.

    If I were making general recommendations, I'd be suggesting multiple modes for considering goal weight or evaluating current weight, including body fat percent estimation, waist/hip ratio, blah blah blah. (Those kinds of things, and personal aesthetic preference, cultural context, etc.) That wasn't the thread of conversation in this case.
    lol, I’m right on the edge of being overweight at 6-0 and 182. by the calculator I just checked withw3ytvsiawfp2.jpeg


  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 32,851 Member
    Options
    tomcustombuilder wrote: »
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    tomcustombuilder wrote: »
    Ideal body weight doesn’t take into consideration body composition, so it can be very misleading

    Some ways of suggesting good/ideal body weight do. The ones I mentioned above don't. Clearly, body fat percent makes a different, a huge difference - or relative muscularity, to put the same thing in different terms.

    IMU, that's the main "why" behind differences in suggested ideal weights for men vs. women, in the formulas that don't make the fat/lean distinction explicit. On average, men have more muscle mass than women at the same weight. On average. Not universally.

    As with other statistical kinds of things, these recommended-weights things tend to be semi-reasonable for average people, not so reasonable for non-average ones. For example, I'm aware of a woman here about my height who is tens of pounds heavier than I am, and many percent lower in body fat: She's muscular well beyond the statistical averages for our height range, and she's sometimes above the normal BMI range, but clearly not overfat at that weight. She's statistically unusual, not "wrong" or "non-ideal". With my current body composition, I was overfat at her body weight. There are also women I see here who are around my weight, but clearly lower in muscle mass, even though I'm not massively muscular. Individuals vary.

    Quite a few people have no clue what their body fat percentage is. There are ways of estimating that, too, but they're also statistical in nature, and can mislead.

    If I were making general recommendations, I'd be suggesting multiple modes for considering goal weight or evaluating current weight, including body fat percent estimation, waist/hip ratio, blah blah blah. (Those kinds of things, and personal aesthetic preference, cultural context, etc.) That wasn't the thread of conversation in this case.
    lol, I’m right on the edge of being overweight at 6-0 and 182. by the calculator I just checked withw3ytvsiawfp2.jpeg


    And your photos suggest you're more muscular than average, so NBD. Outliers don't invalidate the statistical generality, or wipe out utility of averages/statistics for more-average people.
  • tomcustombuilder
    tomcustombuilder Posts: 1,850 Member
    Options
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    tomcustombuilder wrote: »
    AnnPT77 wrote: »
    tomcustombuilder wrote: »
    Ideal body weight doesn’t take into consideration body composition, so it can be very misleading

    Some ways of suggesting good/ideal body weight do. The ones I mentioned above don't. Clearly, body fat percent makes a different, a huge difference - or relative muscularity, to put the same thing in different terms.

    IMU, that's the main "why" behind differences in suggested ideal weights for men vs. women, in the formulas that don't make the fat/lean distinction explicit. On average, men have more muscle mass than women at the same weight. On average. Not universally.

    As with other statistical kinds of things, these recommended-weights things tend to be semi-reasonable for average people, not so reasonable for non-average ones. For example, I'm aware of a woman here about my height who is tens of pounds heavier than I am, and many percent lower in body fat: She's muscular well beyond the statistical averages for our height range, and she's sometimes above the normal BMI range, but clearly not overfat at that weight. She's statistically unusual, not "wrong" or "non-ideal". With my current body composition, I was overfat at her body weight. There are also women I see here who are around my weight, but clearly lower in muscle mass, even though I'm not massively muscular. Individuals vary.

    Quite a few people have no clue what their body fat percentage is. There are ways of estimating that, too, but they're also statistical in nature, and can mislead.

    If I were making general recommendations, I'd be suggesting multiple modes for considering goal weight or evaluating current weight, including body fat percent estimation, waist/hip ratio, blah blah blah. (Those kinds of things, and personal aesthetic preference, cultural context, etc.) That wasn't the thread of conversation in this case.
    lol, I’m right on the edge of being overweight at 6-0 and 182. by the calculator I just checked withw3ytvsiawfp2.jpeg


    And your photos suggest you're more muscular than average, so NBD. Outliers don't invalidate the statistical generality, or wipe out utility of averages/statistics for more-average people.
    Correct….
  • Jthanmyfitnesspal
    Jthanmyfitnesspal Posts: 3,522 Member
    Options
    @tomcustombuilder : Keep on being you! Nothing wrong with it!

    I am 5'9.5" and I've been as high as ~205lbs in my life (about 25 years ago in my 30s). At that time, I was trying to learn how to race on windsurfing boards, where the extra weight and upper body strength was often very helpful! I did a lot of weightlifting and I was just plain burly. I was loving life!

    Now I'm 60y+ and my concern is more about staying active and healthy. I started my current cut at 189lbs on Jan 1. Being lighter is an advantage in swim, ride, and run, and a lot of other things. If I really cared about performance, I'd shoot for even lighter. But, god, no!
  • J72FIT
    J72FIT Posts: 5,951 Member
    Options
    I have a BMI of 25 as well. 5’10”, 182lbs and according to my scale a body fat % of 15. I suggested weights because we do change as we get older and muscle mass does become an issue. Your training seems cardio heavy and I just though maybe replacing a little bit of it with strength training might tip the balance towards muscle building just enough to goose you out of your plateau.
  • Jthanmyfitnesspal
    Jthanmyfitnesspal Posts: 3,522 Member
    Options
    @J72FIT : It's a reasonable suggestion, thanks!

    I'm really trying to push the swim-ride-run because I want to triathlon. (Not the long ones, just the short ones!) Also, I just plain like the training. The critique of cyclists and runners is that the neglect their upper bodies (on purpose). Adding swimming takes care of that nicely. Lately, I've added "paddle sets" to my swim workouts, which increases resistance. In any case, as I've lost weight, I've gotten faster in all of them!

    I sometimes "do weights," which really means a workout with bodyweight, dumbbells, and bands. But, I've been saving energy for my regular workouts lately.
  • J72FIT
    J72FIT Posts: 5,951 Member
    Options
    Jthanmyfitnesspal wrote: »
    @J72FIT : It's a reasonable suggestion, thanks!

    I'm really trying to push the swim-ride-run because I want to triathlon. (Not the long ones, just the short ones!) Also, I just plain like the training. The critique of cyclists and runners is that the neglect their upper bodies (on purpose). Adding swimming takes care of that nicely. Lately, I've added "paddle sets" to my swim workouts, which increases resistance. In any case, as I've lost weight, I've gotten faster in all of them!

    I sometimes "do weights," which really means a workout with bodyweight, dumbbells, and bands. But, I've been saving energy for my regular workouts lately.

    Totally understand, and respect.
  • Jthanmyfitnesspal
    Jthanmyfitnesspal Posts: 3,522 Member
    Options
    Wow. I've had some loss, but man it's getting harder! Best resolve to anyone else trying to wring out those last few pounds. It hard to maintain the focus when you get close to the goal, I find.

Categories