Ideal body weight??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always figure 100 pounds for 5' and then 5 pounds for each additional inch, or at least that's a good average for a medium frame.

I am 5’6” and that would be 130 for me. I am currently 145 and my lean mass is about 113 pounds of that (22% bodyfat). If I managed to keep all of it dieting down to 130, I would be only 13% bodyfat which is extremely low and unhealthy for a female. People call me skinny when I am at 140. So it all depends on your frame size and how much muscle you carry. 130 could be fine for some but definitely not for me.
My advice for OP would be to focus on bodyfat percentage rather than weight. 20-25% is a good target for a female.

Sounds good in theory, but there isn’t a way to accurately know your body fat percentage that is simple, easy, free. Or is there?

DEXA is the preferred method, it is not free though. I would also not waste time and money on the bodyfat measuring scales. They are extremely inaccurate. You can also estimate bodyfat through measurements of waist vs. other body parts. It wont be as accurate as DEXA though which is quite accessible in the DMV. The cheapest I found was at the Bodymass gym in Arlington.

I don’t think a DEXA scan is a realistic for most people to be getting on a semi-regular basis to track body fat. Be real

Dp. Seriously. Just take an objective look at yourself, naked, in front of a mirror. I'm 5'7, currently 145, fighting weight (where I look and feel my best) is 135. When I look at my body, I see my stomach is doughy, I have love handles/muffin top and my arms, legs and butt are jiggly. I've been doing as others at dcum have preached: living with extra weight so that I can enjoy the pleasure of eating crap and a lot of it. Problem is, I don't like what I see in the mirror, especially because I know how great I look and feel 10 pounds lighter. Team bmi, team goal weight, team you don't need dexa to tell you to clean up your diet and exercise more.

I was not claiming you NEED DEXA. I was just answering what is the most accurate way to obtain your bodyfat percentage if you care enough to know. Looking in the mirror is fine but many skinny looking people would be surprised that their BF percentage is actually fairly high as they carry close to no muscle. Target body weight, which I actually also have, is easier to determine when you know what your starting body composition actually is.

But you (or someone) said ideal body weight should be based on body fat percentage. Given this is only accurately resulted through a DEXA scan, I don’t think this is very helpful. Im not in DC, but I’m in a decent size city, and as far as I know, the only DEXA scans being done are ordered by Drs for bone density. Probably bigger cities have them like you said, but still, it is something you have to make an appointment for, pay for, and drive to. Maybe OP can do this. But if not, just look in the mirror. Do you have good
muscle tone, definition, mass? How soft are you? BMI? That is just as good for the general purpose of average people

I agree with the visual assessment but that by itself won’t help you determine what a good goal weight is. Which is why I would not focus on it. You can just continue with visual assessments and measurements once you have determined what it is that you need to do, I.e. gain muscle, lose fat or both. I would still claim though that DEXA is an excellent tool if you have access to it to assess true progress because sometimes you just need a reality check. For example I was trying to gain muscle for 6 months last year. I did a DEXA at the beginning and at the end. I was busting my behind in the gym, all my lifts went up, I thought I was seeing new muscle. And you know what my DEXA told me? That my entire almost 10lbs increase in weight was fat. I am just quite lucky that my fat distributes fairly evenly and I was still able to wear the same clothes. Sometimes we just refuse to see the reality in the mirror. That is why I prefer hard reliable data. But of course I understand that it is not feasible for everyone, and in that case measurements, scale weight and visual assessment can work as a second best.

Funny that this is your conclusion as opposed to, say, maybe the DEXA was inaccurate or poorly calibrated. Monitoring your body like that is not normal behavior and is certainly not necessary for health.

DP. I’m sorry if you’ve suffered from eating disorders - they seem to be really tough.

However, you should consider that not everyone does. Lots of people don’t have particularly strong feelings about their weight and don’t strongly identify their self worth or value with their weight. For us, it’s fun to see what our bodies can do, since the human body is such an amazing machine. In my case, I wanted to see if in my late 40s I could get my 5K under what it was when I ran JV track in high school, and so I got it down to the high 18:00s. That was fun to do, and it involved a fair amount of weight loss as a side effect of running a lot - 200 down to 175 as a 6’2” man. When my knees started acting up, I decided to see if I could get stronger than I was in college. So, I’ve been doing that for a few years. My weight has fluctuated between 190 and 220 depending on whether I’m bulking or cutting or busy and not working out, and my lifts are much, much higher than they were in college (although not impressive at all by powerlifting standards). I get DEXA scans to help me decide how to periodize my training and nutrition. For me this is fun and motivates me to stay active.

You should avoid projecting your own struggles with weight and body image onto other people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always figure 100 pounds for 5' and then 5 pounds for each additional inch, or at least that's a good average for a medium frame.

I am 5’6” and that would be 130 for me. I am currently 145 and my lean mass is about 113 pounds of that (22% bodyfat). If I managed to keep all of it dieting down to 130, I would be only 13% bodyfat which is extremely low and unhealthy for a female. People call me skinny when I am at 140. So it all depends on your frame size and how much muscle you carry. 130 could be fine for some but definitely not for me.
My advice for OP would be to focus on bodyfat percentage rather than weight. 20-25% is a good target for a female.

Sounds good in theory, but there isn’t a way to accurately know your body fat percentage that is simple, easy, free. Or is there?

DEXA is the preferred method, it is not free though. I would also not waste time and money on the bodyfat measuring scales. They are extremely inaccurate. You can also estimate bodyfat through measurements of waist vs. other body parts. It wont be as accurate as DEXA though which is quite accessible in the DMV. The cheapest I found was at the Bodymass gym in Arlington.

I don’t think a DEXA scan is a realistic for most people to be getting on a semi-regular basis to track body fat. Be real

Dp. Seriously. Just take an objective look at yourself, naked, in front of a mirror. I'm 5'7, currently 145, fighting weight (where I look and feel my best) is 135. When I look at my body, I see my stomach is doughy, I have love handles/muffin top and my arms, legs and butt are jiggly. I've been doing as others at dcum have preached: living with extra weight so that I can enjoy the pleasure of eating crap and a lot of it. Problem is, I don't like what I see in the mirror, especially because I know how great I look and feel 10 pounds lighter. Team bmi, team goal weight, team you don't need dexa to tell you to clean up your diet and exercise more.

I was not claiming you NEED DEXA. I was just answering what is the most accurate way to obtain your bodyfat percentage if you care enough to know. Looking in the mirror is fine but many skinny looking people would be surprised that their BF percentage is actually fairly high as they carry close to no muscle. Target body weight, which I actually also have, is easier to determine when you know what your starting body composition actually is.

But you (or someone) said ideal body weight should be based on body fat percentage. Given this is only accurately resulted through a DEXA scan, I don’t think this is very helpful. Im not in DC, but I’m in a decent size city, and as far as I know, the only DEXA scans being done are ordered by Drs for bone density. Probably bigger cities have them like you said, but still, it is something you have to make an appointment for, pay for, and drive to. Maybe OP can do this. But if not, just look in the mirror. Do you have good
muscle tone, definition, mass? How soft are you? BMI? That is just as good for the general purpose of average people

I agree with the visual assessment but that by itself won’t help you determine what a good goal weight is. Which is why I would not focus on it. You can just continue with visual assessments and measurements once you have determined what it is that you need to do, I.e. gain muscle, lose fat or both. I would still claim though that DEXA is an excellent tool if you have access to it to assess true progress because sometimes you just need a reality check. For example I was trying to gain muscle for 6 months last year. I did a DEXA at the beginning and at the end. I was busting my behind in the gym, all my lifts went up, I thought I was seeing new muscle. And you know what my DEXA told me? That my entire almost 10lbs increase in weight was fat. I am just quite lucky that my fat distributes fairly evenly and I was still able to wear the same clothes. Sometimes we just refuse to see the reality in the mirror. That is why I prefer hard reliable data. But of course I understand that it is not feasible for everyone, and in that case measurements, scale weight and visual assessment can work as a second best.

Funny that this is your conclusion as opposed to, say, maybe the DEXA was inaccurate or poorly calibrated. Monitoring your body like that is not normal behavior and is certainly not necessary for health.

Define normal. Fitness is my main hobby, not only doing it, but mainly learning about fat loss and muscle building and I like data so I am doing DEXA scans every now and then. There is a lot of misinformation in the fitness industry and working through some actual data helps me understand what works and what does not. I have done several DEXA scans with the same person on the same machine prior to those two so I am not really doubting the results. I have been also continuing with the scans throughout my cut implemented to shave those extra 10lbs off and the results are again consistent with what I am doing, so I do believe the majority of my gain during the bulk was fat. Strength in the gym can be gained without any muscle gain, as it is to a large part driven through neural adaptations, so getting significantly stronger is not inconsistent with my results either. I am a fairly advanced lifter, so I suspect my lack of muscle gain was mostly due to me already being very close to my genetic muscular potential.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is NO such thing as “ideal bodyweight.” It’s an absolutely fake notion. If anything it would be technically overweight, since the healthiest BMI (in terms of death) is overweight.

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/underweight-people-at-greater-risk-of-death-than-obese-040314#Overweight-Less-Risky-than-Obesity?

Right there in the article you posted is the statement that the meta analysis is flawed because they didn’t separate out people who were underweight due to illness.

Very, very many of these studies are also done on populations like nursing home residents, so they suffer from enormous selection bias —- healthy, active older people are excluded by definition.

OK then let’s see the study that shows that the overweight BMI (OP’s range) leads to higher mortality.

Have a look at the the Global BMI Mortality Collaboration, which found exactly that direct relationship in looking at data for 10.6 million people from 239 large studies.

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/press-releases/overweight-obesity-mortality-risk/

“ The results showed that participants with BMI of 22.5-<25 kg/m2 (considered a healthy weight range) had the lowest mortality risk during the time they were followed. The risk of mortality increased significantly throughout the overweight range: a BMI of 25-<27.5 kg/m2 was associated with a 7% higher risk of mortality; a BMI of 27.5-<30 kg/m2 was associated with a 20% higher risk; a BMI of 30.0-<35.0 kg/m2 was associated with a 45% higher risk; a BMI of 35.0-<40.0 kg/m2 was associated with a 94% higher risk; and a BMI of 40.0-<60.0 kg/m2 was associated with a nearly three-fold risk. Every 5 units higher BMI above 25 kg/m2 was associated with about 31% higher risk of premature death.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always figure 100 pounds for 5' and then 5 pounds for each additional inch, or at least that's a good average for a medium frame.

I am 5’6” and that would be 130 for me. I am currently 145 and my lean mass is about 113 pounds of that (22% bodyfat). If I managed to keep all of it dieting down to 130, I would be only 13% bodyfat which is extremely low and unhealthy for a female. People call me skinny when I am at 140. So it all depends on your frame size and how much muscle you carry. 130 could be fine for some but definitely not for me.
My advice for OP would be to focus on bodyfat percentage rather than weight. 20-25% is a good target for a female.

Sounds good in theory, but there isn’t a way to accurately know your body fat percentage that is simple, easy, free. Or is there?

DEXA is the preferred method, it is not free though. I would also not waste time and money on the bodyfat measuring scales. They are extremely inaccurate. You can also estimate bodyfat through measurements of waist vs. other body parts. It wont be as accurate as DEXA though which is quite accessible in the DMV. The cheapest I found was at the Bodymass gym in Arlington.

I don’t think a DEXA scan is a realistic for most people to be getting on a semi-regular basis to track body fat. Be real

Dp. Seriously. Just take an objective look at yourself, naked, in front of a mirror. I'm 5'7, currently 145, fighting weight (where I look and feel my best) is 135. When I look at my body, I see my stomach is doughy, I have love handles/muffin top and my arms, legs and butt are jiggly. I've been doing as others at dcum have preached: living with extra weight so that I can enjoy the pleasure of eating crap and a lot of it. Problem is, I don't like what I see in the mirror, especially because I know how great I look and feel 10 pounds lighter. Team bmi, team goal weight, team you don't need dexa to tell you to clean up your diet and exercise more.

I was not claiming you NEED DEXA. I was just answering what is the most accurate way to obtain your bodyfat percentage if you care enough to know. Looking in the mirror is fine but many skinny looking people would be surprised that their BF percentage is actually fairly high as they carry close to no muscle. Target body weight, which I actually also have, is easier to determine when you know what your starting body composition actually is.

But you (or someone) said ideal body weight should be based on body fat percentage. Given this is only accurately resulted through a DEXA scan, I don’t think this is very helpful. Im not in DC, but I’m in a decent size city, and as far as I know, the only DEXA scans being done are ordered by Drs for bone density. Probably bigger cities have them like you said, but still, it is something you have to make an appointment for, pay for, and drive to. Maybe OP can do this. But if not, just look in the mirror. Do you have good
muscle tone, definition, mass? How soft are you? BMI? That is just as good for the general purpose of average people

In DC, you can get a DEXA scan at CompositionID for $125.

https://www.compositionid.com/locations/washington-dc/book-now/

One reason that getting a DEXA scan is useful is that most people — including famous athletes — are terrible at objectively assessing their body fat. Also, most people wildly overestimate the amount of visible fat that goes with any given body fat percentage. On the weightlifting forum I frequent, guys who look like they have 25% or higher body fat will post pictures of themselves saying things like “currently at 14% BF, should I cut or bulk?”

This reference is useful:

At Bodymass you can get a package of four for 200. And I agree with the self assessments. People usually grossly underestimate their bodyfat. I am also quite amused by many of the booty transformations posted all over TikTok and weightlifting groups. In majority of cases it is mostly just lucky fat distribution while the muscle added through lifting is minimal.

Frequent DEXA scanning is a symptom of disordered eating.

I do about 4 scans a year on average. Not sure if that is more disordered than standing on the scale every day which many would consider normal. And my average calories never drop below 2100 and that is when I am cutting.. If that means being disordered, I am cool with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a 34 yr old female, 5 ft, and 130 lbs. I believe I have a medium-large frame. The highest I've ever weighed (besides pregnancy) was 155 lbs Feb. 2022 and I've finally gotten a good weight loss plan for my body and it's been working really well for me. I have a spoon body shape.

I went from a size 14 pants (a little snug) and medium-large top to xs-small tops and size mostly size 6 jeans (though I can squeeze into my size 4 old navy shorts but they feel a touch snug for my comfort).

I'm thinking through my 2023 goal and I'd at least like to get down to 125 lbs so I'm a few lbs under the limit for what's considered overweight but I've looked at some ideal body weight calculators and there's such a range!!

Several calculator's recommend 100-110 lbs but that feels VERY low for my body. I've not been THAT thin since I was a young teen (I think I was around 105-110 lbs when I was 18-19 yrs old). Another one said 116-120 and that seems more realistic.

What do you all use? I want to be healthy and realistic Either way, I'm not real far from any goal.

I’d say you’re perfect the way you are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always figure 100 pounds for 5' and then 5 pounds for each additional inch, or at least that's a good average for a medium frame.

I am 5’6” and that would be 130 for me. I am currently 145 and my lean mass is about 113 pounds of that (22% bodyfat). If I managed to keep all of it dieting down to 130, I would be only 13% bodyfat which is extremely low and unhealthy for a female. People call me skinny when I am at 140. So it all depends on your frame size and how much muscle you carry. 130 could be fine for some but definitely not for me.
My advice for OP would be to focus on bodyfat percentage rather than weight. 20-25% is a good target for a female.

Sounds good in theory, but there isn’t a way to accurately know your body fat percentage that is simple, easy, free. Or is there?

DEXA is the preferred method, it is not free though. I would also not waste time and money on the bodyfat measuring scales. They are extremely inaccurate. You can also estimate bodyfat through measurements of waist vs. other body parts. It wont be as accurate as DEXA though which is quite accessible in the DMV. The cheapest I found was at the Bodymass gym in Arlington.

I don’t think a DEXA scan is a realistic for most people to be getting on a semi-regular basis to track body fat. Be real

Dp. Seriously. Just take an objective look at yourself, naked, in front of a mirror. I'm 5'7, currently 145, fighting weight (where I look and feel my best) is 135. When I look at my body, I see my stomach is doughy, I have love handles/muffin top and my arms, legs and butt are jiggly. I've been doing as others at dcum have preached: living with extra weight so that I can enjoy the pleasure of eating crap and a lot of it. Problem is, I don't like what I see in the mirror, especially because I know how great I look and feel 10 pounds lighter. Team bmi, team goal weight, team you don't need dexa to tell you to clean up your diet and exercise more.

I was not claiming you NEED DEXA. I was just answering what is the most accurate way to obtain your bodyfat percentage if you care enough to know. Looking in the mirror is fine but many skinny looking people would be surprised that their BF percentage is actually fairly high as they carry close to no muscle. Target body weight, which I actually also have, is easier to determine when you know what your starting body composition actually is.

But you (or someone) said ideal body weight should be based on body fat percentage. Given this is only accurately resulted through a DEXA scan, I don’t think this is very helpful. Im not in DC, but I’m in a decent size city, and as far as I know, the only DEXA scans being done are ordered by Drs for bone density. Probably bigger cities have them like you said, but still, it is something you have to make an appointment for, pay for, and drive to. Maybe OP can do this. But if not, just look in the mirror. Do you have good
muscle tone, definition, mass? How soft are you? BMI? That is just as good for the general purpose of average people

I agree with the visual assessment but that by itself won’t help you determine what a good goal weight is. Which is why I would not focus on it. You can just continue with visual assessments and measurements once you have determined what it is that you need to do, I.e. gain muscle, lose fat or both. I would still claim though that DEXA is an excellent tool if you have access to it to assess true progress because sometimes you just need a reality check. For example I was trying to gain muscle for 6 months last year. I did a DEXA at the beginning and at the end. I was busting my behind in the gym, all my lifts went up, I thought I was seeing new muscle. And you know what my DEXA told me? That my entire almost 10lbs increase in weight was fat. I am just quite lucky that my fat distributes fairly evenly and I was still able to wear the same clothes. Sometimes we just refuse to see the reality in the mirror. That is why I prefer hard reliable data. But of course I understand that it is not feasible for everyone, and in that case measurements, scale weight and visual assessment can work as a second best.

Funny that this is your conclusion as opposed to, say, maybe the DEXA was inaccurate or poorly calibrated. Monitoring your body like that is not normal behavior and is certainly not necessary for health.

DP. I’m sorry if you’ve suffered from eating disorders - they seem to be really tough.

However, you should consider that not everyone does. Lots of people don’t have particularly strong feelings about their weight and don’t strongly identify their self worth or value with their weight. For us, it’s fun to see what our bodies can do, since the human body is such an amazing machine. In my case, I wanted to see if in my late 40s I could get my 5K under what it was when I ran JV track in high school, and so I got it down to the high 18:00s. That was fun to do, and it involved a fair amount of weight loss as a side effect of running a lot - 200 down to 175 as a 6’2” man. When my knees started acting up, I decided to see if I could get stronger than I was in college. So, I’ve been doing that for a few years. My weight has fluctuated between 190 and 220 depending on whether I’m bulking or cutting or busy and not working out, and my lifts are much, much higher than they were in college (although not impressive at all by powerlifting standards). I get DEXA scans to help me decide how to periodize my training and nutrition. For me this is fun and motivates me to stay active.

You should avoid projecting your own struggles with weight and body image onto other people.

Dp. You are full of it. It is not a common "fun" activity to obsess over your body fat %. Why not spend that money on some hiking boots and hit the trails.? Or buy organic veggies? Or donate money to feed the needy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always figure 100 pounds for 5' and then 5 pounds for each additional inch, or at least that's a good average for a medium frame.

I am 5’6” and that would be 130 for me. I am currently 145 and my lean mass is about 113 pounds of that (22% bodyfat). If I managed to keep all of it dieting down to 130, I would be only 13% bodyfat which is extremely low and unhealthy for a female. People call me skinny when I am at 140. So it all depends on your frame size and how much muscle you carry. 130 could be fine for some but definitely not for me.
My advice for OP would be to focus on bodyfat percentage rather than weight. 20-25% is a good target for a female.

Sounds good in theory, but there isn’t a way to accurately know your body fat percentage that is simple, easy, free. Or is there?

DEXA is the preferred method, it is not free though. I would also not waste time and money on the bodyfat measuring scales. They are extremely inaccurate. You can also estimate bodyfat through measurements of waist vs. other body parts. It wont be as accurate as DEXA though which is quite accessible in the DMV. The cheapest I found was at the Bodymass gym in Arlington.

I don’t think a DEXA scan is a realistic for most people to be getting on a semi-regular basis to track body fat. Be real

Dp. Seriously. Just take an objective look at yourself, naked, in front of a mirror. I'm 5'7, currently 145, fighting weight (where I look and feel my best) is 135. When I look at my body, I see my stomach is doughy, I have love handles/muffin top and my arms, legs and butt are jiggly. I've been doing as others at dcum have preached: living with extra weight so that I can enjoy the pleasure of eating crap and a lot of it. Problem is, I don't like what I see in the mirror, especially because I know how great I look and feel 10 pounds lighter. Team bmi, team goal weight, team you don't need dexa to tell you to clean up your diet and exercise more.

I was not claiming you NEED DEXA. I was just answering what is the most accurate way to obtain your bodyfat percentage if you care enough to know. Looking in the mirror is fine but many skinny looking people would be surprised that their BF percentage is actually fairly high as they carry close to no muscle. Target body weight, which I actually also have, is easier to determine when you know what your starting body composition actually is.

But you (or someone) said ideal body weight should be based on body fat percentage. Given this is only accurately resulted through a DEXA scan, I don’t think this is very helpful. Im not in DC, but I’m in a decent size city, and as far as I know, the only DEXA scans being done are ordered by Drs for bone density. Probably bigger cities have them like you said, but still, it is something you have to make an appointment for, pay for, and drive to. Maybe OP can do this. But if not, just look in the mirror. Do you have good
muscle tone, definition, mass? How soft are you? BMI? That is just as good for the general purpose of average people

I agree with the visual assessment but that by itself won’t help you determine what a good goal weight is. Which is why I would not focus on it. You can just continue with visual assessments and measurements once you have determined what it is that you need to do, I.e. gain muscle, lose fat or both. I would still claim though that DEXA is an excellent tool if you have access to it to assess true progress because sometimes you just need a reality check. For example I was trying to gain muscle for 6 months last year. I did a DEXA at the beginning and at the end. I was busting my behind in the gym, all my lifts went up, I thought I was seeing new muscle. And you know what my DEXA told me? That my entire almost 10lbs increase in weight was fat. I am just quite lucky that my fat distributes fairly evenly and I was still able to wear the same clothes. Sometimes we just refuse to see the reality in the mirror. That is why I prefer hard reliable data. But of course I understand that it is not feasible for everyone, and in that case measurements, scale weight and visual assessment can work as a second best.

Funny that this is your conclusion as opposed to, say, maybe the DEXA was inaccurate or poorly calibrated. Monitoring your body like that is not normal behavior and is certainly not necessary for health.

DP. I’m sorry if you’ve suffered from eating disorders - they seem to be really tough.

However, you should consider that not everyone does. Lots of people don’t have particularly strong feelings about their weight and don’t strongly identify their self worth or value with their weight. For us, it’s fun to see what our bodies can do, since the human body is such an amazing machine. In my case, I wanted to see if in my late 40s I could get my 5K under what it was when I ran JV track in high school, and so I got it down to the high 18:00s. That was fun to do, and it involved a fair amount of weight loss as a side effect of running a lot - 200 down to 175 as a 6’2” man. When my knees started acting up, I decided to see if I could get stronger than I was in college. So, I’ve been doing that for a few years. My weight has fluctuated between 190 and 220 depending on whether I’m bulking or cutting or busy and not working out, and my lifts are much, much higher than they were in college (although not impressive at all by powerlifting standards). I get DEXA scans to help me decide how to periodize my training and nutrition. For me this is fun and motivates me to stay active.

You should avoid projecting your own struggles with weight and body image onto other people.

Dp. You are full of it. It is not a common "fun" activity to obsess over your body fat %. Why not spend that money on some hiking boots and hit the trails.? Or buy organic veggies? Or donate money to feed the needy?

You are in the DMV, PP. I do all those things AND I do the DEXA scans. Let people spend their money the way they want.
You should also accept that people might have different interests than you. Maybe you could reflect on how to be less judgmental while hitting those trails?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always figure 100 pounds for 5' and then 5 pounds for each additional inch, or at least that's a good average for a medium frame.

I am 5’6” and that would be 130 for me. I am currently 145 and my lean mass is about 113 pounds of that (22% bodyfat). If I managed to keep all of it dieting down to 130, I would be only 13% bodyfat which is extremely low and unhealthy for a female. People call me skinny when I am at 140. So it all depends on your frame size and how much muscle you carry. 130 could be fine for some but definitely not for me.
My advice for OP would be to focus on bodyfat percentage rather than weight. 20-25% is a good target for a female.

Sounds good in theory, but there isn’t a way to accurately know your body fat percentage that is simple, easy, free. Or is there?

DEXA is the preferred method, it is not free though. I would also not waste time and money on the bodyfat measuring scales. They are extremely inaccurate. You can also estimate bodyfat through measurements of waist vs. other body parts. It wont be as accurate as DEXA though which is quite accessible in the DMV. The cheapest I found was at the Bodymass gym in Arlington.

I don’t think a DEXA scan is a realistic for most people to be getting on a semi-regular basis to track body fat. Be real

Dp. Seriously. Just take an objective look at yourself, naked, in front of a mirror. I'm 5'7, currently 145, fighting weight (where I look and feel my best) is 135. When I look at my body, I see my stomach is doughy, I have love handles/muffin top and my arms, legs and butt are jiggly. I've been doing as others at dcum have preached: living with extra weight so that I can enjoy the pleasure of eating crap and a lot of it. Problem is, I don't like what I see in the mirror, especially because I know how great I look and feel 10 pounds lighter. Team bmi, team goal weight, team you don't need dexa to tell you to clean up your diet and exercise more.

I was not claiming you NEED DEXA. I was just answering what is the most accurate way to obtain your bodyfat percentage if you care enough to know. Looking in the mirror is fine but many skinny looking people would be surprised that their BF percentage is actually fairly high as they carry close to no muscle. Target body weight, which I actually also have, is easier to determine when you know what your starting body composition actually is.

But you (or someone) said ideal body weight should be based on body fat percentage. Given this is only accurately resulted through a DEXA scan, I don’t think this is very helpful. Im not in DC, but I’m in a decent size city, and as far as I know, the only DEXA scans being done are ordered by Drs for bone density. Probably bigger cities have them like you said, but still, it is something you have to make an appointment for, pay for, and drive to. Maybe OP can do this. But if not, just look in the mirror. Do you have good
muscle tone, definition, mass? How soft are you? BMI? That is just as good for the general purpose of average people

I agree with the visual assessment but that by itself won’t help you determine what a good goal weight is. Which is why I would not focus on it. You can just continue with visual assessments and measurements once you have determined what it is that you need to do, I.e. gain muscle, lose fat or both. I would still claim though that DEXA is an excellent tool if you have access to it to assess true progress because sometimes you just need a reality check. For example I was trying to gain muscle for 6 months last year. I did a DEXA at the beginning and at the end. I was busting my behind in the gym, all my lifts went up, I thought I was seeing new muscle. And you know what my DEXA told me? That my entire almost 10lbs increase in weight was fat. I am just quite lucky that my fat distributes fairly evenly and I was still able to wear the same clothes. Sometimes we just refuse to see the reality in the mirror. That is why I prefer hard reliable data. But of course I understand that it is not feasible for everyone, and in that case measurements, scale weight and visual assessment can work as a second best.

Funny that this is your conclusion as opposed to, say, maybe the DEXA was inaccurate or poorly calibrated. Monitoring your body like that is not normal behavior and is certainly not necessary for health.

DP. I’m sorry if you’ve suffered from eating disorders - they seem to be really tough.

However, you should consider that not everyone does. Lots of people don’t have particularly strong feelings about their weight and don’t strongly identify their self worth or value with their weight. For us, it’s fun to see what our bodies can do, since the human body is such an amazing machine. In my case, I wanted to see if in my late 40s I could get my 5K under what it was when I ran JV track in high school, and so I got it down to the high 18:00s. That was fun to do, and it involved a fair amount of weight loss as a side effect of running a lot - 200 down to 175 as a 6’2” man. When my knees started acting up, I decided to see if I could get stronger than I was in college. So, I’ve been doing that for a few years. My weight has fluctuated between 190 and 220 depending on whether I’m bulking or cutting or busy and not working out, and my lifts are much, much higher than they were in college (although not impressive at all by powerlifting standards). I get DEXA scans to help me decide how to periodize my training and nutrition. For me this is fun and motivates me to stay active.

You should avoid projecting your own struggles with weight and body image onto other people.

if you don’t have strong feelings about your weight, why tf are you exposing yourself to radiation to measure your body fat percentage?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always figure 100 pounds for 5' and then 5 pounds for each additional inch, or at least that's a good average for a medium frame.

I am 5’6” and that would be 130 for me. I am currently 145 and my lean mass is about 113 pounds of that (22% bodyfat). If I managed to keep all of it dieting down to 130, I would be only 13% bodyfat which is extremely low and unhealthy for a female. People call me skinny when I am at 140. So it all depends on your frame size and how much muscle you carry. 130 could be fine for some but definitely not for me.
My advice for OP would be to focus on bodyfat percentage rather than weight. 20-25% is a good target for a female.

Sounds good in theory, but there isn’t a way to accurately know your body fat percentage that is simple, easy, free. Or is there?

DEXA is the preferred method, it is not free though. I would also not waste time and money on the bodyfat measuring scales. They are extremely inaccurate. You can also estimate bodyfat through measurements of waist vs. other body parts. It wont be as accurate as DEXA though which is quite accessible in the DMV. The cheapest I found was at the Bodymass gym in Arlington.

I don’t think a DEXA scan is a realistic for most people to be getting on a semi-regular basis to track body fat. Be real

Dp. Seriously. Just take an objective look at yourself, naked, in front of a mirror. I'm 5'7, currently 145, fighting weight (where I look and feel my best) is 135. When I look at my body, I see my stomach is doughy, I have love handles/muffin top and my arms, legs and butt are jiggly. I've been doing as others at dcum have preached: living with extra weight so that I can enjoy the pleasure of eating crap and a lot of it. Problem is, I don't like what I see in the mirror, especially because I know how great I look and feel 10 pounds lighter. Team bmi, team goal weight, team you don't need dexa to tell you to clean up your diet and exercise more.

I was not claiming you NEED DEXA. I was just answering what is the most accurate way to obtain your bodyfat percentage if you care enough to know. Looking in the mirror is fine but many skinny looking people would be surprised that their BF percentage is actually fairly high as they carry close to no muscle. Target body weight, which I actually also have, is easier to determine when you know what your starting body composition actually is.

But you (or someone) said ideal body weight should be based on body fat percentage. Given this is only accurately resulted through a DEXA scan, I don’t think this is very helpful. Im not in DC, but I’m in a decent size city, and as far as I know, the only DEXA scans being done are ordered by Drs for bone density. Probably bigger cities have them like you said, but still, it is something you have to make an appointment for, pay for, and drive to. Maybe OP can do this. But if not, just look in the mirror. Do you have good
muscle tone, definition, mass? How soft are you? BMI? That is just as good for the general purpose of average people

I agree with the visual assessment but that by itself won’t help you determine what a good goal weight is. Which is why I would not focus on it. You can just continue with visual assessments and measurements once you have determined what it is that you need to do, I.e. gain muscle, lose fat or both. I would still claim though that DEXA is an excellent tool if you have access to it to assess true progress because sometimes you just need a reality check. For example I was trying to gain muscle for 6 months last year. I did a DEXA at the beginning and at the end. I was busting my behind in the gym, all my lifts went up, I thought I was seeing new muscle. And you know what my DEXA told me? That my entire almost 10lbs increase in weight was fat. I am just quite lucky that my fat distributes fairly evenly and I was still able to wear the same clothes. Sometimes we just refuse to see the reality in the mirror. That is why I prefer hard reliable data. But of course I understand that it is not feasible for everyone, and in that case measurements, scale weight and visual assessment can work as a second best.

Funny that this is your conclusion as opposed to, say, maybe the DEXA was inaccurate or poorly calibrated. Monitoring your body like that is not normal behavior and is certainly not necessary for health.

Define normal. Fitness is my main hobby, not only doing it, but mainly learning about fat loss and muscle building and I like data so I am doing DEXA scans every now and then. There is a lot of misinformation in the fitness industry and working through some actual data helps me understand what works and what does not. I have done several DEXA scans with the same person on the same machine prior to those two so I am not really doubting the results. I have been also continuing with the scans throughout my cut implemented to shave those extra 10lbs off and the results are again consistent with what I am doing, so I do believe the majority of my gain during the bulk was fat. Strength in the gym can be gained without any muscle gain, as it is to a large part driven through neural adaptations, so getting significantly stronger is not inconsistent with my results either. I am a fairly advanced lifter, so I suspect my lack of muscle gain was mostly due to me already being very close to my genetic muscular potential.

enjoy your iatrogenic cancer from your “fitness hobby”! and maybe staff off weight loss threads since by your own admission you have no weight concerns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is NO such thing as “ideal bodyweight.” It’s an absolutely fake notion. If anything it would be technically overweight, since the healthiest BMI (in terms of death) is overweight.

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/underweight-people-at-greater-risk-of-death-than-obese-040314#Overweight-Less-Risky-than-Obesity?

Right there in the article you posted is the statement that the meta analysis is flawed because they didn’t separate out people who were underweight due to illness.

Very, very many of these studies are also done on populations like nursing home residents, so they suffer from enormous selection bias —- healthy, active older people are excluded by definition.

OK then let’s see the study that shows that the overweight BMI (OP’s range) leads to higher mortality.

Have a look at the the Global BMI Mortality Collaboration, which found exactly that direct relationship in looking at data for 10.6 million people from 239 large studies.

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/press-releases/overweight-obesity-mortality-risk/

“ The results showed that participants with BMI of 22.5-<25 kg/m2 (considered a healthy weight range) had the lowest mortality risk during the time they were followed. The risk of mortality increased significantly throughout the overweight range: a BMI of 25-<27.5 kg/m2 was associated with a 7% higher risk of mortality; a BMI of 27.5-<30 kg/m2 was associated with a 20% higher risk; a BMI of 30.0-<35.0 kg/m2 was associated with a 45% higher risk; a BMI of 35.0-<40.0 kg/m2 was associated with a 94% higher risk; and a BMI of 40.0-<60.0 kg/m2 was associated with a nearly three-fold risk. Every 5 units higher BMI above 25 kg/m2 was associated with about 31% higher risk of premature death.”

OP is right around 25. So as far as we can say, she’s ideal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always figure 100 pounds for 5' and then 5 pounds for each additional inch, or at least that's a good average for a medium frame.

I am 5’6” and that would be 130 for me. I am currently 145 and my lean mass is about 113 pounds of that (22% bodyfat). If I managed to keep all of it dieting down to 130, I would be only 13% bodyfat which is extremely low and unhealthy for a female. People call me skinny when I am at 140. So it all depends on your frame size and how much muscle you carry. 130 could be fine for some but definitely not for me.
My advice for OP would be to focus on bodyfat percentage rather than weight. 20-25% is a good target for a female.

Sounds good in theory, but there isn’t a way to accurately know your body fat percentage that is simple, easy, free. Or is there?

DEXA is the preferred method, it is not free though. I would also not waste time and money on the bodyfat measuring scales. They are extremely inaccurate. You can also estimate bodyfat through measurements of waist vs. other body parts. It wont be as accurate as DEXA though which is quite accessible in the DMV. The cheapest I found was at the Bodymass gym in Arlington.

I don’t think a DEXA scan is a realistic for most people to be getting on a semi-regular basis to track body fat. Be real

Dp. Seriously. Just take an objective look at yourself, naked, in front of a mirror. I'm 5'7, currently 145, fighting weight (where I look and feel my best) is 135. When I look at my body, I see my stomach is doughy, I have love handles/muffin top and my arms, legs and butt are jiggly. I've been doing as others at dcum have preached: living with extra weight so that I can enjoy the pleasure of eating crap and a lot of it. Problem is, I don't like what I see in the mirror, especially because I know how great I look and feel 10 pounds lighter. Team bmi, team goal weight, team you don't need dexa to tell you to clean up your diet and exercise more.

I was not claiming you NEED DEXA. I was just answering what is the most accurate way to obtain your bodyfat percentage if you care enough to know. Looking in the mirror is fine but many skinny looking people would be surprised that their BF percentage is actually fairly high as they carry close to no muscle. Target body weight, which I actually also have, is easier to determine when you know what your starting body composition actually is.

But you (or someone) said ideal body weight should be based on body fat percentage. Given this is only accurately resulted through a DEXA scan, I don’t think this is very helpful. Im not in DC, but I’m in a decent size city, and as far as I know, the only DEXA scans being done are ordered by Drs for bone density. Probably bigger cities have them like you said, but still, it is something you have to make an appointment for, pay for, and drive to. Maybe OP can do this. But if not, just look in the mirror. Do you have good
muscle tone, definition, mass? How soft are you? BMI? That is just as good for the general purpose of average people

I agree with the visual assessment but that by itself won’t help you determine what a good goal weight is. Which is why I would not focus on it. You can just continue with visual assessments and measurements once you have determined what it is that you need to do, I.e. gain muscle, lose fat or both. I would still claim though that DEXA is an excellent tool if you have access to it to assess true progress because sometimes you just need a reality check. For example I was trying to gain muscle for 6 months last year. I did a DEXA at the beginning and at the end. I was busting my behind in the gym, all my lifts went up, I thought I was seeing new muscle. And you know what my DEXA told me? That my entire almost 10lbs increase in weight was fat. I am just quite lucky that my fat distributes fairly evenly and I was still able to wear the same clothes. Sometimes we just refuse to see the reality in the mirror. That is why I prefer hard reliable data. But of course I understand that it is not feasible for everyone, and in that case measurements, scale weight and visual assessment can work as a second best.

Funny that this is your conclusion as opposed to, say, maybe the DEXA was inaccurate or poorly calibrated. Monitoring your body like that is not normal behavior and is certainly not necessary for health.

DP. I’m sorry if you’ve suffered from eating disorders - they seem to be really tough.

However, you should consider that not everyone does. Lots of people don’t have particularly strong feelings about their weight and don’t strongly identify their self worth or value with their weight. For us, it’s fun to see what our bodies can do, since the human body is such an amazing machine. In my case, I wanted to see if in my late 40s I could get my 5K under what it was when I ran JV track in high school, and so I got it down to the high 18:00s. That was fun to do, and it involved a fair amount of weight loss as a side effect of running a lot - 200 down to 175 as a 6’2” man. When my knees started acting up, I decided to see if I could get stronger than I was in college. So, I’ve been doing that for a few years. My weight has fluctuated between 190 and 220 depending on whether I’m bulking or cutting or busy and not working out, and my lifts are much, much higher than they were in college (although not impressive at all by powerlifting standards). I get DEXA scans to help me decide how to periodize my training and nutrition. For me this is fun and motivates me to stay active.

You should avoid projecting your own struggles with weight and body image onto other people.

Dp. You are full of it. It is not a common "fun" activity to obsess over your body fat %. Why not spend that money on some hiking boots and hit the trails.? Or buy organic veggies? Or donate money to feed the needy?

Again, I’m sorry for whatever negative experiences you’ve had that have caused you to be so triggered by this topic. In my case, I get DEXA scans less often than I go to the dentist, and obsess about my body fat % slightly less than I do about gum health. It’s useful when in a phase where I’m losing or gaining weight to know where I am so I know when to change course. This is more true for me as a person who does a lot of weightlifting, because at 203 today, I have much less body fat than I did at 195 when I first started lifting, so I need an objective measure more than I did before I started lifting.

BTW, one benefit of being strong and active is that I can really enjoy frequent long hikes with my dog.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always figure 100 pounds for 5' and then 5 pounds for each additional inch, or at least that's a good average for a medium frame.

I am 5’6” and that would be 130 for me. I am currently 145 and my lean mass is about 113 pounds of that (22% bodyfat). If I managed to keep all of it dieting down to 130, I would be only 13% bodyfat which is extremely low and unhealthy for a female. People call me skinny when I am at 140. So it all depends on your frame size and how much muscle you carry. 130 could be fine for some but definitely not for me.
My advice for OP would be to focus on bodyfat percentage rather than weight. 20-25% is a good target for a female.

Sounds good in theory, but there isn’t a way to accurately know your body fat percentage that is simple, easy, free. Or is there?

DEXA is the preferred method, it is not free though. I would also not waste time and money on the bodyfat measuring scales. They are extremely inaccurate. You can also estimate bodyfat through measurements of waist vs. other body parts. It wont be as accurate as DEXA though which is quite accessible in the DMV. The cheapest I found was at the Bodymass gym in Arlington.

I don’t think a DEXA scan is a realistic for most people to be getting on a semi-regular basis to track body fat. Be real

Dp. Seriously. Just take an objective look at yourself, naked, in front of a mirror. I'm 5'7, currently 145, fighting weight (where I look and feel my best) is 135. When I look at my body, I see my stomach is doughy, I have love handles/muffin top and my arms, legs and butt are jiggly. I've been doing as others at dcum have preached: living with extra weight so that I can enjoy the pleasure of eating crap and a lot of it. Problem is, I don't like what I see in the mirror, especially because I know how great I look and feel 10 pounds lighter. Team bmi, team goal weight, team you don't need dexa to tell you to clean up your diet and exercise more.

I was not claiming you NEED DEXA. I was just answering what is the most accurate way to obtain your bodyfat percentage if you care enough to know. Looking in the mirror is fine but many skinny looking people would be surprised that their BF percentage is actually fairly high as they carry close to no muscle. Target body weight, which I actually also have, is easier to determine when you know what your starting body composition actually is.

But you (or someone) said ideal body weight should be based on body fat percentage. Given this is only accurately resulted through a DEXA scan, I don’t think this is very helpful. Im not in DC, but I’m in a decent size city, and as far as I know, the only DEXA scans being done are ordered by Drs for bone density. Probably bigger cities have them like you said, but still, it is something you have to make an appointment for, pay for, and drive to. Maybe OP can do this. But if not, just look in the mirror. Do you have good
muscle tone, definition, mass? How soft are you? BMI? That is just as good for the general purpose of average people

I agree with the visual assessment but that by itself won’t help you determine what a good goal weight is. Which is why I would not focus on it. You can just continue with visual assessments and measurements once you have determined what it is that you need to do, I.e. gain muscle, lose fat or both. I would still claim though that DEXA is an excellent tool if you have access to it to assess true progress because sometimes you just need a reality check. For example I was trying to gain muscle for 6 months last year. I did a DEXA at the beginning and at the end. I was busting my behind in the gym, all my lifts went up, I thought I was seeing new muscle. And you know what my DEXA told me? That my entire almost 10lbs increase in weight was fat. I am just quite lucky that my fat distributes fairly evenly and I was still able to wear the same clothes. Sometimes we just refuse to see the reality in the mirror. That is why I prefer hard reliable data. But of course I understand that it is not feasible for everyone, and in that case measurements, scale weight and visual assessment can work as a second best.

Funny that this is your conclusion as opposed to, say, maybe the DEXA was inaccurate or poorly calibrated. Monitoring your body like that is not normal behavior and is certainly not necessary for health.

DP. I’m sorry if you’ve suffered from eating disorders - they seem to be really tough.

However, you should consider that not everyone does. Lots of people don’t have particularly strong feelings about their weight and don’t strongly identify their self worth or value with their weight. For us, it’s fun to see what our bodies can do, since the human body is such an amazing machine. In my case, I wanted to see if in my late 40s I could get my 5K under what it was when I ran JV track in high school, and so I got it down to the high 18:00s. That was fun to do, and it involved a fair amount of weight loss as a side effect of running a lot - 200 down to 175 as a 6’2” man. When my knees started acting up, I decided to see if I could get stronger than I was in college. So, I’ve been doing that for a few years. My weight has fluctuated between 190 and 220 depending on whether I’m bulking or cutting or busy and not working out, and my lifts are much, much higher than they were in college (although not impressive at all by powerlifting standards). I get DEXA scans to help me decide how to periodize my training and nutrition. For me this is fun and motivates me to stay active.

You should avoid projecting your own struggles with weight and body image onto other people.

Dp. You are full of it. It is not a common "fun" activity to obsess over your body fat %. Why not spend that money on some hiking boots and hit the trails.? Or buy organic veggies? Or donate money to feed the needy?

Again, I’m sorry for whatever negative experiences you’ve had that have caused you to be so triggered by this topic. In my case, I get DEXA scans less often than I go to the dentist, and obsess about my body fat % slightly less than I do about gum health. It’s useful when in a phase where I’m losing or gaining weight to know where I am so I know when to change course. This is more true for me as a person who does a lot of weightlifting, because at 203 today, I have much less body fat than I did at 195 when I first started lifting, so I need an objective measure more than I did before I started lifting.

BTW, one benefit of being strong and active is that I can really enjoy frequent long hikes with my dog.

Dude. Exposing yourself to full-body radiation four times a year with no medical indication is absolutely bonkers. I don’t know why you are bonkers, but you are fundamentally bonkers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always figure 100 pounds for 5' and then 5 pounds for each additional inch, or at least that's a good average for a medium frame.

I am 5’6” and that would be 130 for me. I am currently 145 and my lean mass is about 113 pounds of that (22% bodyfat). If I managed to keep all of it dieting down to 130, I would be only 13% bodyfat which is extremely low and unhealthy for a female. People call me skinny when I am at 140. So it all depends on your frame size and how much muscle you carry. 130 could be fine for some but definitely not for me.
My advice for OP would be to focus on bodyfat percentage rather than weight. 20-25% is a good target for a female.

Sounds good in theory, but there isn’t a way to accurately know your body fat percentage that is simple, easy, free. Or is there?

DEXA is the preferred method, it is not free though. I would also not waste time and money on the bodyfat measuring scales. They are extremely inaccurate. You can also estimate bodyfat through measurements of waist vs. other body parts. It wont be as accurate as DEXA though which is quite accessible in the DMV. The cheapest I found was at the Bodymass gym in Arlington.

I don’t think a DEXA scan is a realistic for most people to be getting on a semi-regular basis to track body fat. Be real

Dp. Seriously. Just take an objective look at yourself, naked, in front of a mirror. I'm 5'7, currently 145, fighting weight (where I look and feel my best) is 135. When I look at my body, I see my stomach is doughy, I have love handles/muffin top and my arms, legs and butt are jiggly. I've been doing as others at dcum have preached: living with extra weight so that I can enjoy the pleasure of eating crap and a lot of it. Problem is, I don't like what I see in the mirror, especially because I know how great I look and feel 10 pounds lighter. Team bmi, team goal weight, team you don't need dexa to tell you to clean up your diet and exercise more.

I was not claiming you NEED DEXA. I was just answering what is the most accurate way to obtain your bodyfat percentage if you care enough to know. Looking in the mirror is fine but many skinny looking people would be surprised that their BF percentage is actually fairly high as they carry close to no muscle. Target body weight, which I actually also have, is easier to determine when you know what your starting body composition actually is.

But you (or someone) said ideal body weight should be based on body fat percentage. Given this is only accurately resulted through a DEXA scan, I don’t think this is very helpful. Im not in DC, but I’m in a decent size city, and as far as I know, the only DEXA scans being done are ordered by Drs for bone density. Probably bigger cities have them like you said, but still, it is something you have to make an appointment for, pay for, and drive to. Maybe OP can do this. But if not, just look in the mirror. Do you have good
muscle tone, definition, mass? How soft are you? BMI? That is just as good for the general purpose of average people

I agree with the visual assessment but that by itself won’t help you determine what a good goal weight is. Which is why I would not focus on it. You can just continue with visual assessments and measurements once you have determined what it is that you need to do, I.e. gain muscle, lose fat or both. I would still claim though that DEXA is an excellent tool if you have access to it to assess true progress because sometimes you just need a reality check. For example I was trying to gain muscle for 6 months last year. I did a DEXA at the beginning and at the end. I was busting my behind in the gym, all my lifts went up, I thought I was seeing new muscle. And you know what my DEXA told me? That my entire almost 10lbs increase in weight was fat. I am just quite lucky that my fat distributes fairly evenly and I was still able to wear the same clothes. Sometimes we just refuse to see the reality in the mirror. That is why I prefer hard reliable data. But of course I understand that it is not feasible for everyone, and in that case measurements, scale weight and visual assessment can work as a second best.

Funny that this is your conclusion as opposed to, say, maybe the DEXA was inaccurate or poorly calibrated. Monitoring your body like that is not normal behavior and is certainly not necessary for health.

Define normal. Fitness is my main hobby, not only doing it, but mainly learning about fat loss and muscle building and I like data so I am doing DEXA scans every now and then. There is a lot of misinformation in the fitness industry and working through some actual data helps me understand what works and what does not. I have done several DEXA scans with the same person on the same machine prior to those two so I am not really doubting the results. I have been also continuing with the scans throughout my cut implemented to shave those extra 10lbs off and the results are again consistent with what I am doing, so I do believe the majority of my gain during the bulk was fat. Strength in the gym can be gained without any muscle gain, as it is to a large part driven through neural adaptations, so getting significantly stronger is not inconsistent with my results either. I am a fairly advanced lifter, so I suspect my lack of muscle gain was mostly due to me already being very close to my genetic muscular potential.

enjoy your iatrogenic cancer from your “fitness hobby”! and maybe staff off weight loss threads since by your own admission you have no weight concerns.

You sound pretty unhinged. High cortisol has been linked to some cancers too. You might want to watch it.

[Anonymous]

As a very fine-boned 5'4" Asian, my ideal weight used to be outside of the "normal" BMI range, and but now I'm in middle age, it's creeped up into the normal range. I'd say, 115lbs is ideal in my 40s. Pregnant now, but planning to return to 115lbs, if it makes sense and is still optimal for me. I sense what my ideal weight should be at any given time, and usually hover around it, give or take a few pounds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is NO such thing as “ideal bodyweight.” It’s an absolutely fake notion. If anything it would be technically overweight, since the healthiest BMI (in terms of death) is overweight.

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/underweight-people-at-greater-risk-of-death-than-obese-040314#Overweight-Less-Risky-than-Obesity?

Right there in the article you posted is the statement that the meta analysis is flawed because they didn’t separate out people who were underweight due to illness.

Very, very many of these studies are also done on populations like nursing home residents, so they suffer from enormous selection bias —- healthy, active older people are excluded by definition.

OK then let’s see the study that shows that the overweight BMI (OP’s range) leads to higher mortality.

Have a look at the the Global BMI Mortality Collaboration, which found exactly that direct relationship in looking at data for 10.6 million people from 239 large studies.

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/press-releases/overweight-obesity-mortality-risk/

“ The results showed that participants with BMI of 22.5-<25 kg/m2 (considered a healthy weight range) had the lowest mortality risk during the time they were followed. The risk of mortality increased significantly throughout the overweight range: a BMI of 25-<27.5 kg/m2 was associated with a 7% higher risk of mortality; a BMI of 27.5-<30 kg/m2 was associated with a 20% higher risk; a BMI of 30.0-<35.0 kg/m2 was associated with a 45% higher risk; a BMI of 35.0-<40.0 kg/m2 was associated with a 94% higher risk; and a BMI of 40.0-<60.0 kg/m2 was associated with a nearly three-fold risk. Every 5 units higher BMI above 25 kg/m2 was associated with about 31% higher risk of premature death.”

OP is right around 25. So as far as we can say, she’s ideal.

Actually slightly over 25, so in the 7% higher mortality risk category.