Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low-Carb Support Focus Groups > Emotional Issues & Body Image
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   ^
Old Wed, Oct-14-15, 23:34
Weezer160's Avatar
Weezer160 Weezer160 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 216
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 261.4/160/155 Male 66 inches
BF:
Progress: 95%
Location: Wisconsin
Default Ideal weight according to my doctor

Hi everyone. I'm sure this has been discussed, but don't have time to comb through the threads at the moment.

I recently visited my primary care physician, and asked what my idea weight should be. I reminded him that I am 5'6", and since he knew I had just lost close to 80 lbs, he immediately referred to the BMI chart on the wall. His response after considering my height alone was that I only need to lose a few more pounds to get into the "overweight" zone (~185 lbs). He deemed any further weight loss might not be healthy. I am kind of amazed about his thinking there. Shouldn't I have been encourage to achieve a BMI of, say, 27.5 (171 lbs). I'm aware there are problems with the BMI scale, and that I shouldn't live and die by it.

Arguments to go for 170-175 lb range: (1) have extra long arms (2" each arm = 4" more than my height from finger tip to finger tip), (2) I might have gained some muscle since I've done resistance training and started soccer. (I'm not trying to bulk up, though)

Arguments for why I need to go to the 155-160 range (not "overweight"): I still have a gut, love handles, and a reasonable amount of fat on top of my muscles (legs, especially). Mind you, this clearly isn't just skin. I was also 155 lbs during high school after losing weight where I *still* had a little gut + love handles.

My question is: should I stick with my doctors advice and that I only need to lose 5-7 lbs (180-ish), or should I disregard this and get down to my original goal (155 lbs)? I had thought I was in this for the long haul, i.e. -116 lbs total.

Sorry for the long lost, but I thought I'd ask for some advice. Thanks guys+girls!
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Thu, Oct-15-15, 04:38
Mandra's Avatar
Mandra Mandra is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,153
 
Plan: General Low Carb
Stats: 240/233.6/140 Female 5'2"
BF:Really/effing/high
Progress: 6%
Location: Eastford, CT
Default

Weight is less important than condition. Go by how you look and feel rather than an arbitrary number.
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Thu, Oct-15-15, 04:42
cotonpal's Avatar
cotonpal cotonpal is offline
Posts: 2,985
 
Plan: very low carb real food
Stats: 245/122/135 Female 62
BF:
Progress: 112%
Location: Vermont
Default

There was recently a long discussion about the topic of "ideal" weight.

http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=470177

Jean
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Thu, Oct-15-15, 06:12
MPrufrock MPrufrock is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 100
 
Plan: Low carb, low gi
Stats: 210/152/154 Female 68.5 inches
BF:35%/22%/22%
Progress: 104%
Location: FL
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Weezer160

My question is: should I stick with my doctors advice and that I only need to lose 5-7 lbs (180-ish), or should I disregard this and get down to my original goal (155 lbs)? I had thought I was in this for the long haul, i.e. -116 lbs total.

Sorry for the long lost, but I thought I'd ask for some advice. Thanks guys+girls!


So I'm going to go ahead and say you should just wait and watch what happens. You never know what weight your body will want to settle at, especially if you are strength training. You might end up heavier than 155 but smaller and fitter. Or lower than 155 and feeling too thin in which case you might like to adjust your carbs a bit (adding lentils etc). Don't be obsessed with the numbers, think about how you feel.

The good news is, I think you will definitely make the goal your doctor has set for you. I am pretty suspicious of BMI charts as an indicator of health, but its not a bad broad metric to keep in mind.
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Thu, Oct-15-15, 13:19
MickiSue MickiSue is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 8,006
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 189/148.6/145 Female 5' 5"
BF:36%/28%/25%
Progress: 92%
Location: Twin Cities, MN
Default

There is no ideal weight for groups, there is only the place where you feel and look your best. And that is highly individual.

I'd say, go for what your doctor says as an upper limit, and then see how you feel from there.
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Thu, Oct-15-15, 18:33
Weezer160's Avatar
Weezer160 Weezer160 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 216
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 261.4/160/155 Male 66 inches
BF:
Progress: 95%
Location: Wisconsin
Default

Thanks, everyone. I am definitely in better shape and feel better about everything. I know I often feel like I am still that overweight person I was before, and my shyness still reflects this (wasted energy, otherwise, so I thought, trying to communicate) as well as my questionable sense of balance - I have a different center of balance now. I have an upcoming vacation to Germany where it'll be hard to resist certain indulgences (beer), but might be able to stave off any gains through rye breads (my favorite), and lots of walking. I'd be happy if I just didn't gain anything while there. I'll be shooting for 170 as a short range goal and then maybe focus on gaining some muscle from there. I definitely could use some meat on my spaghetti arms.
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Wed, Oct-21-15, 09:52
synger synger is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 146
 
Plan: IR Diet framework, LC
Stats: 310/288/150 Female 64 inches
BF:
Progress: 14%
Default

BMI is a VERY general measurement. It's only height/weight, and that weight is not just fat, but muscle and bone as well. BMI was developed not for individuals, but to show population trends overall. A lean but well-muscled individual might show up as "overweight" or even "obese" according to BMI, while a less well-muscled and more fat-laden person can be "normal weight" according to BMI.

Much better measurements are either waist/height ratio or waist/hip ratio. That is much more likely to show overweight, AND it's showing the intra-abdominal fat that is most likely to bring health issues.
Reply With Quote
  #8   ^
Old Wed, Oct-21-15, 12:25
Merpig's Avatar
Merpig Merpig is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,090
 
Plan: IF/Fung IDM/Potato Hack?
Stats: 375/274.0/175 Female 66 inches
BF:
Progress: 51%
Location: NE Florida
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by synger
BMI is a VERY general measurement. It's only height/weight, and that weight is not just fat, but muscle and bone as well. BMI was developed not for individuals, but to show population trends overall. A lean but well-muscled individual might show up as "overweight" or even "obese" according to BMI, while a less well-muscled and more fat-laden person can be "normal weight" according to BMI.
An example is my son - pictured here on his wedding day, when his BMI put him in the "overweight, borderline obese" category:
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 23:52.


Copyright © 2000-2017 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.