Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m OP’s goal weight. I have a small frame so at 135 I do look unfit and pudgy. Don’t assume she wants to be underweight. Everyone is built differently.

yes you get it! As 135 I have flabby upper arms and a tummy and need size 8 pants

If you are 5'7" 135 and have flabby upper arms and a tummy, then you likely have stick legs and no butt. Those are your biggest muscle groups! You need to build muscle and weight train, not lose weight. You are chasing the wrong goal

Everyone has different bone structure and holds their weight differently. I’m 135-140 and 5’8, and look pudgy in the stomach area. I work out and stay fit and do not have stick legs and and quite a large butt and hips. Women have different curves and come in many shapes and sizes. And by the way my BMI is right in the middle of the healthy range, so it’s possible to lose weight and still be considered healthy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m OP’s goal weight. I have a small frame so at 135 I do look unfit and pudgy. Don’t assume she wants to be underweight. Everyone is built differently.

Same height 115 lbs. I also have a small frame (can wrap thumb and index finger around wrist and still have space leftover. But I’m muscular and not bony at all. I exercise 1-2 hours a day and eat a lot of fruits and vegetables but don’t count calories or restrict any food groups. I tend to eat smaller portions.

You can wrap your thumb and index finger around your wrist because you are skinny, not small framed. If you weighed 150 you would be large framed. Small framed and large framed are b.s.

I’m 5’5” and 137ish and (gasp!) a size 8 and I can wrap my thumb and index finger around my wrist. I’m sure a lot of posters here would find me chubby. I think I look pretty great, and much healthier than I did at 125.

Another vote for weight training. I started about 7 months ago at 5’6” and 158 lbs. now I’m 157 lbs but I look so much better than before I started. Nothing is flabby and I love how strong and youthful I feel.

Anonymous wrote:I’m 5’8” and about 135. When I dropped to 125 after having my kids because of breastfeeding, I looked downright gaunt. People were asking me if I was ok. Maybe try 3-4lbs first and build some more muscle in there.

Same here. I went down to almost 120 while nursing, and my face looked horrible and sickly. I’m now 5’8 and in the low 130’s and look much healthier.

So, 5'7'' 140ish 40 year old here and I've been 110 in my early 20s (yikes, and yes I did have an ED), 125-130 where I looked amazing, feel great at my current weight, and I have still worn a size 4 in some sizes at 145. My bones are not big (I can also wrap my fingers around my wrist with room leftover) but I do have substantial, yet shapely, legs.

Anyway.

The biggest thing I've noticed as I age is that I look much better at 140 at 40 than I did at 140 in my teens. Way way better.

I also now have a slight horizontal neck line, so on Zoom or in photos I thought I had a double chin for a year or so before I realized, oh, crap, now I know what Nora Ephron was talking about!

My cycle now is also weirder, so when I am bloated I am BLOATED. But at least half the month my body returns to a pretty tight, lean mass. I love that.

So I don't know. Do what you want. But fixating on a goal # from 15 years ago is not the way. And flabby arms at your age are likely skin. It is what it is.

Consuming fewer calories than you burn is the way to lose weight. Eating is easier than exercise. The question is: is it worth it, and how difficult is it at your age? Which isn't old, but it's different than it was before.

I hear you. I’m 5’6” and 130. My best weight is 115-118. I have very small bones. I’d like to get to 125. I love to eat crap and haven’t really ever had to work out, but I think that lifting would help plus eating extremely healthy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m OP’s goal weight. I have a small frame so at 135 I do look unfit and pudgy. Don’t assume she wants to be underweight. Everyone is built differently.

yes you get it! As 135 I have flabby upper arms and a tummy and need size 8 pants

At 5'7?

yep at 5'7"
Not a big tummy, its just that I am very flat chested (AA), and any tummy will be noticeable

Boob job. Done.

Anonymous wrote:i recommend training for a running race or something similar but with a goal of getting stronger/faster/healthier/more confident (not necessarily thinner). more sustainable. i spent some of my 20s trying to be as thin as possible and it was overall a waste of time and psychological energy that would have been much better spent focused elsewhere.

This can backfire though. Cardio can make you hungrier. Easy to overindulge if you’re not tracking calories.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m OP’s goal weight. I have a small frame so at 135 I do look unfit and pudgy. Don’t assume she wants to be underweight. Everyone is built differently.

yes you get it! As 135 I have flabby upper arms and a tummy and need size 8 pants

At 5'7?

yep at 5'7"
Not a big tummy, its just that I am very flat chested (AA), and any tummy will be noticeable

i recommend training for a running race or something similar but with a goal of getting stronger/faster/healthier/more confident (not necessarily thinner). more sustainable. i spent some of my 20s trying to be as thin as possible and it was overall a waste of time and psychological energy that would have been much better spent focused elsewhere.

Weights and core?

Cutting down on alcohol if you're drinking a glass of wine or so every night.

Anonymous wrote:OP, I'm 5'6" and 125 and agree that I look better at 125 than 135. don't listen to the haters.

I agree with everyone here that you should start building muscle mass --- you will look better, and muscle will burn the fat. It's probably not a food issue. I do yoga (and walk at least 3 miles) every day and that works for me.

NP I would say it more likely *is* a food issue. That is the key to losing fat (and lifting heavy weights). Exercise doesn't burn as many calories as people think & you can't outrun a bad diet.

I would suggest tracking your calories and macros - aim for 40% carbs/30% fat/30% protein. If you can do that and add some weight lifting you should definitely see a difference in a month.

I'm 5'7" and currently 155 (had a baby two months ago though some of it is definitely COVID weight lol), I look best at 135, and I think people should lay off OP if she wants to be 125. Someone with a small frame could look great at that weight, though I'm sure OP looks great now too. For me, the easiest thing is to cut sugar and alcohol and to move more, but it's a slow process at 38! I've given myself until my baby's first birthday as a goal.

OP, I'm 5'6" and 125 and agree that I look better at 125 than 135. don't listen to the haters.

I agree with everyone here that you should start building muscle mass --- you will look better, and muscle will burn the fat. It's probably not a food issue. I do yoga (and walk at least 3 miles) every day and that works for me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m OP’s goal weight. I have a small frame so at 135 I do look unfit and pudgy. Don’t assume she wants to be underweight. Everyone is built differently.

yes you get it! As 135 I have flabby upper arms and a tummy and need size 8 pants

At 5'7?