Could someone be healthy even if overweight

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. Eventually it takes a toll.

So does running, weight lifting, being underweight, eating high protein diet.

If you run ultras multiple times a year, strong man build or body build to huge amounts of weight lifting, are extremely underweight or are somehow dumb enough to eat a massive amount of the wrong type of protein intake for you body, yes those are a problem.

Meanwhile, being overweight consistently throughout your life for the run of the mill average person means 1) carrying the visceral fat that usually comes with that, 2) lack of cardio fitness, 3) poor body composition, and a whole other host of things. All of these are known to be bad for health span and longevity. The science and studies show you that. People just don’t like the data so they come up with “running is bad for the knees” among other nonsense.

I’m 5-5, 153 lbs, technically “overweight.” My BP and bloodwork are perfect and I lift 2-3x/week and do cardio including running. There’s zero evidence that losing 10lb to put me in “normal BMI” range would improve my health and lifespan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. Eventually it takes a toll.

So does running, weight lifting, being underweight, eating high protein diet.

If you run ultras multiple times a year, strong man build or body build to huge amounts of weight lifting, are extremely underweight or are somehow dumb enough to eat a massive amount of the wrong type of protein intake for you body, yes those are a problem.

Meanwhile, being overweight consistently throughout your life for the run of the mill average person means 1) carrying the visceral fat that usually comes with that, 2) lack of cardio fitness, 3) poor body composition, and a whole other host of things. All of these are known to be bad for health span and longevity. The science and studies show you that. People just don’t like the data so they come up with “running is bad for the knees” among other nonsense.

I’m 5-5, 153 lbs, technically “overweight.” My BP and bloodwork are perfect and I lift 2-3x/week and do cardio including running. There’s zero evidence that losing 10lb to put me in “normal BMI” range would improve my health and lifespan.

Can you read? I guess you, like everybody else here, is not the run of the mill average person. Those are the words I used. Interesting how everybody here is the exception.

And there is lots of evidence. The bottom number for VO2max is body weight. Noodle on that for awhile

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. Eventually it takes a toll.

So does running, weight lifting, being underweight, eating high protein diet.

If you run ultras multiple times a year, strong man build or body build to huge amounts of weight lifting, are extremely underweight or are somehow dumb enough to eat a massive amount of the wrong type of protein intake for you body, yes those are a problem.

Meanwhile, being overweight consistently throughout your life for the run of the mill average person means 1) carrying the visceral fat that usually comes with that, 2) lack of cardio fitness, 3) poor body composition, and a whole other host of things. All of these are known to be bad for health span and longevity. The science and studies show you that. People just don’t like the data so they come up with “running is bad for the knees” among other nonsense.

I’m 5-5, 153 lbs, technically “overweight.” My BP and bloodwork are perfect and I lift 2-3x/week and do cardio including running. There’s zero evidence that losing 10lb to put me in “normal BMI” range would improve my health and lifespan.

More like 15 pounds you would need to lose.
5’5” and 138 even is not something to be bikini worthy though.

[Anonymous]

DCUM is so first world.
Most people would assume morbid obesity not 10 pounds.
Get perspective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you are overweight by medical standards due to muscle mass yes, you can be “overweight” and healthy.
Just carrying extra fat, no. Not one upside to carry too much fat.

I don’t think someone with “too much fat” is any less healthy at bmi of 26, 27, 28… than someone with low muscle mass at bmi of 21.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DCUM is so first world.
Most people would assume morbid obesity not 10 pounds.
Get perspective.

This thread is specifically about “overweight “…. See subject line.

Start one about morbidly obese

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. Eventually it takes a toll.

So does running, weight lifting, being underweight, eating high protein diet.

If you run ultras multiple times a year, strong man build or body build to huge amounts of weight lifting, are extremely underweight or are somehow dumb enough to eat a massive amount of the wrong type of protein intake for you body, yes those are a problem.

Meanwhile, being overweight consistently throughout your life for the run of the mill average person means 1) carrying the visceral fat that usually comes with that, 2) lack of cardio fitness, 3) poor body composition, and a whole other host of things. All of these are known to be bad for health span and longevity. The science and studies show you that. People just don’t like the data so they come up with “running is bad for the knees” among other nonsense.

I’m 5-5, 153 lbs, technically “overweight.” My BP and bloodwork are perfect and I lift 2-3x/week and do cardio including running. There’s zero evidence that losing 10lb to put me in “normal BMI” range would improve my health and lifespan.

Can you read? I guess you, like everybody else here, is not the run of the mill average person. Those are the words I used. Interesting how everybody here is the exception.

And there is lots of evidence. The bottom number for VO2max is body weight. Noodle on that for awhile

Noodle on what exactly?? My VO2 is fine?

Most people who are active and 10lbs overweight are perfectly healthy - BMI 26/27 in fact is the healthiest BMI for older women per some research.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. Eventually it takes a toll.

So does running, weight lifting, being underweight, eating high protein diet.

If you run ultras multiple times a year, strong man build or body build to huge amounts of weight lifting, are extremely underweight or are somehow dumb enough to eat a massive amount of the wrong type of protein intake for you body, yes those are a problem.

Meanwhile, being overweight consistently throughout your life for the run of the mill average person means 1) carrying the visceral fat that usually comes with that, 2) lack of cardio fitness, 3) poor body composition, and a whole other host of things. All of these are known to be bad for health span and longevity. The science and studies show you that. People just don’t like the data so they come up with “running is bad for the knees” among other nonsense.

I’m 5-5, 153 lbs, technically “overweight.” My BP and bloodwork are perfect and I lift 2-3x/week and do cardio including running. There’s zero evidence that losing 10lb to put me in “normal BMI” range would improve my health and lifespan.

Can you read? I guess you, like everybody else here, is not the run of the mill average person. Those are the words I used. Interesting how everybody here is the exception.

And there is lots of evidence. The bottom number for VO2max is body weight. Noodle on that for awhile

Actually people who have a normal BMI, their whole life that are about 10 pounds overweight after 50 but are never obese lice the longest

[Anonymous]

Live not lice

[Anonymous]

I think there is a balance between being fit and slim enough to keep our mobility, but also having a body that can survive sickness and disease if needed as we age. I have longevity in my family, and all of the women are active and slightly overweight. Older men in my family tend to be more slender though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. Eventually it takes a toll.

So does running, weight lifting, being underweight, eating high protein diet.

If you run ultras multiple times a year, strong man build or body build to huge amounts of weight lifting, are extremely underweight or are somehow dumb enough to eat a massive amount of the wrong type of protein intake for you body, yes those are a problem.

Meanwhile, being overweight consistently throughout your life for the run of the mill average person means 1) carrying the visceral fat that usually comes with that, 2) lack of cardio fitness, 3) poor body composition, and a whole other host of things. All of these are known to be bad for health span and longevity. The science and studies show you that. People just don’t like the data so they come up with “running is bad for the knees” among other nonsense.

I’m 5-5, 153 lbs, technically “overweight.” My BP and bloodwork are perfect and I lift 2-3x/week and do cardio including running. There’s zero evidence that losing 10lb to put me in “normal BMI” range would improve my health and lifespan.

More like 15 pounds you would need to lose.
5’5” and 138 even is not something to be bikini worthy though.

Oh thanks for that, helpful! FWIW 149 would put me in the “healthy BMI” range. And at 50 I’m not super interested in being “bikini worthy.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. Eventually it takes a toll.

So does running, weight lifting, being underweight, eating high protein diet.

If you run ultras multiple times a year, strong man build or body build to huge amounts of weight lifting, are extremely underweight or are somehow dumb enough to eat a massive amount of the wrong type of protein intake for you body, yes those are a problem.

Meanwhile, being overweight consistently throughout your life for the run of the mill average person means 1) carrying the visceral fat that usually comes with that, 2) lack of cardio fitness, 3) poor body composition, and a whole other host of things. All of these are known to be bad for health span and longevity. The science and studies show you that. People just don’t like the data so they come up with “running is bad for the knees” among other nonsense.

I’m 5-5, 153 lbs, technically “overweight.” My BP and bloodwork are perfect and I lift 2-3x/week and do cardio including running. There’s zero evidence that losing 10lb to put me in “normal BMI” range would improve my health and lifespan.

Can you read? I guess you, like everybody else here, is not the run of the mill average person. Those are the words I used. Interesting how everybody here is the exception.

And there is lots of evidence. The bottom number for VO2max is body weight. Noodle on that for awhile

Actually people who have a normal BMI, their whole life that are about 10 pounds overweight after 50 but are never obese lice the longest

+1. Vanity makes me want to lose the 10lbs (especially because they are due to medication) but it’s exercise, sleep and diet that are the main keys to keeping myself healthy in middle age, not lowering my BMI.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:BMI is just weird. It almost would make more sense to go by how a person looks to determine overweight v. not. My ds is basically the leanest, most in shape person you could think of, and he is "overweight" according to BMI.

I don’t think bmi is accurate for men. Women though, yes. There should be two different scales, one for men one for women

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BMI is just weird. It almost would make more sense to go by how a person looks to determine overweight v. not. My ds is basically the leanest, most in shape person you could think of, and he is "overweight" according to BMI.

I don’t think bmi is accurate for men. Women though, yes. There should be two different scales, one for men one for women

Even for women, adding waist size would matter. It is so imperfect on its own.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BMI is just weird. It almost would make more sense to go by how a person looks to determine overweight v. not. My ds is basically the leanest, most in shape person you could think of, and he is "overweight" according to BMI.

I don’t think bmi is accurate for men. Women though, yes. There should be two different scales, one for men one for women

Well that's horseshit idiocy, if not outright misogyny. BMI does not take into account breast size/density (breasts actually weigh pounds that add up on the scale), or muscle mass, bone density, or loose skin. BMI is horseshit.

Unfortunately it isn't good manners for a doctor to make an assessment just by looking at someone (which is truly the best way to figure out if someone is underweight, normal, overweight, or obese). For a numerical measurement, weight can provide an outline - but there are too many inaccuracies.

Technically, I'm slightly overweight with a BMI of 25.4. But I also lost a chunk of weight, and have some loose skin. I also have large breasts. I also strength train and regularly kick my ass in the gym, and have great muscle mass. BMI is a poor measure for both men AND women.