Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Im 5’5 and I can’t imagine being back down to 120. That would be a 20lb weight loss which seems like a lot for this height and current weight. I’m not sure it’s doable. When I was 120, I was a “kid” and super skinny. No muscles and I walked for exercise. Even then, though, I always thought I was fat. I always had bigger thighs and butt and I have had a decades long struggle with body image issues.

My legs and butt continue to be bigger and my pregnancies changed my body shape so much. My rib cage is bigger, my hips wider. I just don’t know that I can get 120 on this frame anymore.

This is me as well except my stomach is big and my butt is not. I really wish my style wasn’t baggy and grunge as a teen bc I was 115 and 5’5, but pictures don’t look it. With my now much more muscular frame, I think 135 is about as low as I can go. It also was my easily maintained pre-pregnancy weight.

Now in my late 40s, there is no easily maintained weight and the scale only moves down very slowly with a restricted diet and exercise. It moves up very easily! My goal is 141, 151 is more realistic and would still be a significant loss from my high of 191.

At 141 you’d have a flat stomach with no fat?

I’m surprised by how many American women think they are thin at a certain weight but still have a large roll of fat. You’re not thin if you can pinch a lot of fat/skin on your waist.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:5’4”. 122 pounds.

Same weight as I was 27 years ago when I got married.

I have always worked out. I really have to limit calories to lose any weight. The lowest I’ve been was 116, but that is not sustainable for me.

+1

I'd say most comfortable: 125 (can maintain this with zero effort)
Most attractive: 118.

I'm currently 122 also and want to be 118 but it's SO HARD in my 40s to get there and sustain it. I've always worked out and my lowest was about 110 (too skinny for my muscular frame).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For 5'4'' - 115-120 is where you want to be.

I’d look very sickly at 115. Haven’t been that weight since college when I was going through a hugely stressful period.

Doubt it. You’re just used to being bigger since you’re an American.

If you were that weight in college, you likely should be that weight now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For 5'4'' - 115-120 is where you want to be.

I’d look very sickly at 115. Haven’t been that weight since college when I was going through a hugely stressful period.

Anonymous wrote:For 5'4'' - 115-120 is where you want to be.

Anonymous wrote:5’4”. 122 pounds.

Same weight as I was 27 years ago when I got married.

I have always worked out. I really have to limit calories to lose any weight. The lowest I’ve been was 116, but that is not sustainable for me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Im 5’5 and I can’t imagine being back down to 120. That would be a 20lb weight loss which seems like a lot for this height and current weight. I’m not sure it’s doable. When I was 120, I was a “kid” and super skinny. No muscles and I walked for exercise. Even then, though, I always thought I was fat. I always had bigger thighs and butt and I have had a decades long struggle with body image issues.

My legs and butt continue to be bigger and my pregnancies changed my body shape so much. My rib cage is bigger, my hips wider. I just don’t know that I can get 120 on this frame anymore.

This is me as well except my stomach is big and my butt is not. I really wish my style wasn’t baggy and grunge as a teen bc I was 115 and 5’5, but pictures don’t look it. With my now much more muscular frame, I think 135 is about as low as I can go. It also was my easily maintained pre-pregnancy weight.

Now in my late 40s, there is no easily maintained weight and the scale only moves down very slowly with a restricted diet and exercise. It moves up very easily! My goal is 141, 151 is more realistic and would still be a significant loss from my high of 191.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:5’3 here. 2 kids/ mid 40’s. My best weight is 145- when I’m not hardcore restricting and also weightlifting. I can’t run due to injuries.

When I was younger I would’ve said 130. I’ve always been muscular/ stout. At my skinniest I was 120 and that was in my teens (I was a multi sport athlete).

Right now I’m eating whatever I want and I’m about 150. Sometimes life is too short to pass up the ice cream.

I think you and I are twins!
I build muscle weirdly fast. I would be emaciated at 115, which was my weight at age 13. Now I'm lifting a lot and circuit training and 135ish would probably be ideal but without restricting my diet very much, I'm around 150. I'm stronger than I've ever been and my cholesterol, blood sugar, resting heart rate, etc are better than ever.

Anonymous wrote:5’3 here. 2 kids/ mid 40’s. My best weight is 145- when I’m not hardcore restricting and also weightlifting. I can’t run due to injuries.

When I was younger I would’ve said 130. I’ve always been muscular/ stout. At my skinniest I was 120 and that was in my teens (I was a multi sport athlete).

Right now I’m eating whatever I want and I’m about 150. Sometimes life is too short to pass up the ice cream.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:5’5” and 120 pounds. I am pretty small chested (34B) and I swear that makes a difference in appearance. Late 60’s. I haven’t always been this lean. I don’t drink alcohol regularly anymore (messes with my sleep) and am in a constant struggle to avoid sugar and simple carbs. Unfortunately, crackers are my favorite food group 😀

Agree. Being small chested goes a long way in making you appear younger and thinner