- Blog
- Bios
- Boards
- Classifieds
- DIY
- Gallery
- Vendor Reviews
- Shop Weddingbee
Weddingbee boards
@mmm - hey, we're height/weight twins! Haha. I know, I was 120 when I was still "growing" in high school. My ideal weight would be 130-135... I gained a lot of weight in college and then more with a very stressful job the year before last, and it hasn't come off yet, but I'm working on being healthier.
I think there are definitely skewed #'s. I mean, my size 6 jeans are big on me - yet according to my BMI I am over-weight - how does that make sense?
I did gain 20 pounds after starting a desk job so I know how I look at 125-130 and it was definitely thin - a little more curves couldnt hurt - but now I have them and am worried how I will look in my dress!
I feel ya. When I was in hs I was 5'3" and 126 and I was really thin. I'm 5'6" now, and I think 140-150 would be perfect for me.
I truly don't think "weight" matters...I think that if you're working out and eating healthily most of the time, you will weight a healthy weight automatically! (most times! :) I'm 5'5" and 125, but not everyone is made the same! Some people are bigger boned, some are smaller. It just depends! :)
I get what you are saying. Society is so obsessed with weight and being a "perfect" weight in society is soooo different from what is healthy. My best friend is obsessed with her weight and determined that she is too "fat" she's about 5'7 and 125llbs, and she's sooo skinny. It's because she does some modeling, so society (and the modeling sub-culture) says she should be thinner, but in reality she could stand to put on a few pounds.
I just went to a trainer and I told him I wanted to go down to 135 (I'm 5'10'') because everyone around me makes me feel so much bigger. He told me absolutely not to loose any weight, I should focus on trading in 7llbs of fat for 7llbs of muscle if I want to look more toned.
Im actually at the other end of this spectrum...I am 5'9 and i currently weigh 130. My ideal weight for my height is 150. I have really small bones and everything about me is just really long and narrow...and no one tells me I look unhealthy by any means. I think that they just dont take in consideration peoples genetic makeup, bone structure, etc. I think that you know what weight you need to be at and that is healthy for you...a lot more than the people that create the "ideal weight" guidelines.
I do think the "healthy weight" recommendations are weird... they don't account for body type, build, or whatever. I'm 5'8" and weigh +/- 115-120. My "healthy weight" is 145. I absolutely disagree. I feel healthiest and at my best at 118 or so. I have a very small frame, so even 145 on me would be heavy.
I'm 5'1" and 138 pounds. A few months ago, I made it down to 130, and my fiance was alarmed by how skinny I looked. Nevermind that 130 is *just barely* within the normal weight range for my height based on BMI. At 130, I was wearing a size 4. To be right smack within the normal range, I would need to get down to 115. Based on my bone structure, I would look emaciated if my weight got that low. I used to be in the Army, and at my absolute lowest adult body weight, I was 120. I would never want to weigh less than that. The BMI scale can bite me.
Hello, personal trainer/nutritional consultant here!
BMI scales are bunk, they don't account for muscle/lean mass vs fat.
Body fat measurements are the real indicator.
I think I heard that the healthy weight calculations were based on men, not women so they aren't right for a woman. Especially since women are supposed to carry a bit more in fat stores than men for childbearing etc.
Redherring, you sound like me! I also used to be in the Army, but my lowest weight was 123 haha. Even then, I didn't look "thin" at all, though I was pretty well toned. I am just built... thick, I guess? I am 5'2 (and a half!!!), and currently 145ish. I did put weight on this year that I am trying to take off, but when I was 135, I was a size 4, and I had to buy small or x-small shirts already! I realize that this is partly due to "vanity sizing," but what next? I do know that I need to lose weight and get more toned presently because it is mostly fat weight and not muscle weight, and I have a huge looming family history of heart disease.
Yeah, I used to weigh that. Then I gained muscle weight - clothes still fit the same, but I'm a a pair of boots away from "overweight." Which, um... yeah, at my size? Being anywhere in the lower half of the weight range would mean muscle/bone (!!!) loss. I can see how that total weight is healthy for other people, but for me it would mean serious erosion of lean mass and health issues. FWIW, I don't have an ideal weight. I try not to weight myself, because of prior eating issues and also because it's hard to keep straight that with goals of being able to do 100 push-ups or a few pull-ups in a row, weight gain often means muscle gain means good things.
Those numbers are based on a mathematician's estimate of how weight and height develop together in the average person. They actually have no bearing on diagnosis and it SAYS SO in the definition. There are LOTS of people - especially active ones, people with large frames, large chests, etc etc etc - for whom they're pretty irrelevant.
I think it's probably frustrating on either side of the BMI lines. I have a fast metabolism and a very small frame (as did my mom). I've gotten 3-4 comments from women in their 50's or 60's lately about how I'll just blow away, or doubting that I eat. I truly do not have an eating disorder, I just have a small frame. I wish people would keep their comments to themselves. Just because we all don't look alike doesn't mean we're not healthy.
You guys that are 5'8" - 5'11" and weigh less than 140 had better be models or something! I'm 5'9" and weigh 165, so I have some weight to lose..but I think the overall message here is that as long as you feel healthy, who gives a crap about what "society" thinks you should weigh. I find that listening to your friends and family about your looks is so much better than looking at your BMI, b/c each person is unique!
If you think about it...Arnold Schwartzenegger in his prime (steroids nonwithstanding) would have been declared obese by BMI measurements. Silliness.
While I think the "healthy" weight numbers are not ideal for everyone, I also think that people's conceptions of what is actually healthy are getting skewed as society gets fatter. I wear a size 8 and I had a coworker tell me I was UNDERWEIGHT. That's skewed because while I have some people comment that I'm overweight (the doctor for one says i need to be careful), i have someone telling me i'm underweight and myself telling me i'm toeing the line.
So I am "skinny" at 175 pounds, 5'11". That's not a small number. Now, is there still a good chunk of fat for me to grab off my stomach? Yes. Do i have a significant muffin top? YES. Should it be there? NO. Is it healthy to have abdominal fat? NO.So I can sit here and say "i'm healthy" all I want, but there is still more fat on my body than should be in places that are the most dangerous b/c it is unevenly distributed
They're guidelines, that's all. I know for 5'11" my ideal weight is 130-170, and I already have a body fat percentage of 23% (I keep telling myself my DD"s contribute lol). Hell, I only have 30 ACTUAL pounds of fat on my body (says my trainer). So, realisitcally, I CANNOT physically get down to that weight, so I do tend to ignore the "weight guidelines" and follow body fat % more. Even so, I think 18-25 is considered normal. And I'd really prefer to be smack in the middle.
They are guidelines, that's all.
I agree that society's perception of what is "normal" is skewing waay heavier these days. The BMI's can definitely be out of whack considering people's muscle mass/build/etc. But, they're not that far off. I live in NYC and 5'5 125 lbs is "normal" here - not skinny, not fat, just what most women weigh. Then again - people here walk a lot more and tend to work out a lot.
What websites are you looking at?? 125 would be a super low weight for your height. Not unhealthy necessarily (for some bone structures), but definitely super low. I'm striving for 125 and I'm 5'3", that's more or less in the middle of the range for me.
Here is a chart from the CDC showing healthy weight ranges:
http://www.win.niddk.nih.gov/publications/better_health/bmi.jpg
I am 5'5" and it says about 115 to 150 is normal for my height.
125 is the low end of normal for someone who is 5'11". I went to college with a girl about that weight and she was a dancer. She didn't look unhealthy at all. But she definitely had the structure for it and the slim muscles.
I don't think what you are referring to is "society," but, rather, the guidance that stipulates what the appropriate weight for your frame is. If you think that at 5'5", 125 lbs would be too low, then you most likely have a large frame. Large frame, means big bones, where when you put your thumb and first finger around your wrist, they don't go all the way around.
These guidelines don't take into account frame size. 125 on me at 5'6" actually looks heavy. I have an extremely small frame, not only can I wrap my thumb and first finger around my wrist and have room to spare, but I am wrap my thumb and first finger around my ankle and have them touch. At 125, I carry extra weight around my stomach area, which wouldn't be flat in a bikini... and this is because of my frame size.
I think that what "society" deems thin and what doctors deem an "appropriate weight" based on your height are completely separate issues.
I agree with frame being important. I'm 5' and have a really small frame (thumb and forefinger significantly overlap around my wrist) and so I wear a size 4 even when I have an obvious bit of stomach fat, am not in shape, etc. People always think I'm so small, but it's still not healthy if you have fat in those dangerous places!
yes, the frame thing isn't taken into account in those measurements....I was sick (gut sick) for 2 years, and the lowest I got was 162 @ 5'10". I consider that an "unhealthy baseline". I'm supposed to weigh up to 175, so I don't think this is accurate. When I ate 1200-1500 a day calories before the wedding and worked out 3 plus times a week for the wedding, I got down to 172. I also don't think that is sustainable. 1200-1500 calories to an athletic 5'10" woman just doesn't seem like a good long term goal.
I am much more muscular than most women, even having broader shoulders, etc. Go up against me at Pilates or soccer, and you will agree that I'm a healthy 185, hahaha. Plus, it helps that my hubby loves my curves. I'm strong, but I still have a "soccer booty" and DD's, so he doesn't want me to get skinny.
I am 5'1" with a small frame and according to my doctor a healthy weight is anywhere from 95lbs - 125lbs. I've been slightly over 100lbs most of my adult life, but when I started working I went up close to 130lbs. I definitely did not look or feel healthy at that weight and was pushing a size 10. I also had problems with high cholestorol and had no energy. I finally had enough and joined Jenny Craig and now I currently weigh 106 and wear a size 2/4. I've been at this weight for over 2 years now. I think that's healthy, but people don't describe me as thin really. I definitely still have curves. I think back in the 1950's I would be considered heavy at 106lbs and i'm sure my clothing size would be more like a 6/8, everything is so skewed nowadays as the average weight has gone waay up.
i have no idea about frame size etc. i have always been told that i was "big boned", but following the wrist and wrap thing, my fingers overlap my wrist so maybe i've always been fat :D... i think i probably have a more athletic build and had a pretty decent muscle to fat ratio. 132 was a great weight for me, but that was when i was pre-high school lol. i think i gained 18 lbs the summer before 8th grade and stayed at 150 throughout high school. first year of college i was 160 and i stayed there until like 2003 then the weight gain started again and I have been at my heaviest (200 lbs) and back down to about 169 or so over the last 7 years. I have no idea what a good weight is for me. i liked 160, 150 was decent and 132 would be like what i weighed at 12 (i haven't gotten any taller) so i thought that was like the perfect weight because my silhouette was stunning my muscles were ripped, etc.
The guidelines don't take into account bone density either. A woman properly consuming her calcium will have thicker bones, as will anyone who has broken a bone, it heals much thicker. Conversely, you could be within the normal BMI range and have brittle, vacuous bone structure. Also, as has been mentioned, there is such a thing as "big boned." There are three recognized frame sizes: small, medium, and large. Larger frames with denser bones generally do not fall in the normal range on the BMI scale, even when you have a healthy body fat percentage. I think it's most important to shoot for overall health, and only use weight as a guide. It's most useful when you're on a diet and want to see progress, but you can see the same progress measuring inches instead.
I'm more fond of the idea that your waist should measure no more than 30" to have a smaller risk of heart disease. Your waist is not affected by bone density, but is most affected by your body fat percentage. (Of course, having said that I have to point out that mine is not under 30", but it's a good goal to strive for!)
great point mighty sapphire. that waist measurement thingie could explain why i looked sickly thin at 160 (my waist was about 27 or 28 inches then) perhaps even less. it sure isn't that now though (ick)... sigh....
@ moderndaisy - I think we're a good example of how weight can be a really silly measure of things. We're about the same height - I'm 5'2". We're about the same size, too. I weigh WAY more than you. Bone density, muscle mass, frame size (my thumb and finger don't even come close to reaching around my wrist!). I don't think you'd be considered heavy back then - people's perception has changed at both ends. But, yeah, body composition has a lot to do with it. My lean mass weighs almost as much as you do - I would seriously be near death at your weight. The important thing is we're both healthy where we are and where we are healthy.
I think its super hard for large framed girls because of what society deems an appropriete weight. I am 5'6'' and a size zero and am 130 lbs. I actually stop menstrating at 125 and am trying to gain weight. Like my doctor says, bone weighs a lot! While my BMI isnt even close to being underweight, my body fat is about 16%, which is apparently too low for me. there are so many other factors that tell you more about your health that your weight!
What also bugs me, which has been an issue recently since I was shopping for undergarments for my bridal dress, are the scales and charts that say, "if you're bus size is _____, your waist should be _____ and your hips _____." I'm relatively slim 5'4 122 pounds, but I don't fit into the standard because I have a small bust and my hips are much bigger. I couldn't find a proper bustier because many don't make them in small bust sizes and my waist apparently isn't as small as it should be even though I am slim. It's such a pain. I said to my FI the other day, "if I'm made to feel bad about not fitting into a certain standard, then what about other women who have their own body issues?
I always think I weight a lot less than I look. I'm 5'7" and consistently weigh about 128. I've always worked out regularly and am healthy and in pretty good shape. However! I think I LOOK more like I weigh around 135-140. I could definitely stand to lose 10 or so pounds (was around 115-120 in college). Even at my very thinnest-didn't-get-my-period-for-a-year-hair-falling-out lowest weight in college (about 100 lbs), I still had rolls of fat on my stomach I could grab and fat wings on my upper arms. I worked out and danced every day, so I didn't just need to tone up. I just tend to look heavier than the number says.
You must log in to post.
| Visit our sister sites | eHarmony Online Dating |
eHarmony Advice Dating Advice |
Project Wedding Wedding Songs |
JustMommies Pregnancy Calendar |
Create the honeymoon of your dreams.
| User | Posts Today |
|---|---|
| rivierabridal | 6 |
| texasbee | 3 |
| MrsOliveBird | 2 |
 LauraFaye4411 |
2 |
| cbeyelia | 2 |
| julies1949 | 1 |
| Potatoes | 1 |
| Ree723 | 1 |
| Regina Phalange | 1 |
| KatNYC2011 | 1 |
Sorry, there are no users yet.
I get a bit frustrated with these websites and information boards that tell me that 125 if what I "should" weight. If I weighed 125 lbs, I'd look like a damn toothpick. Been there before, in like 9th grade. (Not saying there is anything wrong with weighing 125, I, personally, would just look unhealthy). I weigh 150 lbs and I am 5'5. I feel that I would be comfortable with losing about 10-15 lbs, but down to 125 is just not necessary. Anybody else get bothered about what society says you "should" weight? I just want to look and FEEL (and be :)) healthy!
What would be/is your ideal weight? Is it what "society" says you should weigh?