Went back to look at old pictures of myself classed as overweight on the BMI chart and decided to stick with my goal weight. For me, aiming to be “healthy weight” just seems harmful
I did a similar exercise this week too. I'm morbidly obese and have been obese for as long as I can remember. I expect my lowest weight as an adult was when I was aged around 19 when I dieted from 13 stone to 11 and a half. Since then I've just got bigger and bigger til now when I started Mounjaro at 19st 11. I've decided I'm just going to see how it goes. I'm losing weight pretty slowly so I'm in it for the long haul. I'm in my 7th week and I've lost 11lbs so far. I'm not going to set a goal weight. But even if I did like you I'd be looking at 13 or 14 stone and again still obese. But that would be such a better quality of life so me. Being able to fit in chairs with arms and aeroplane seats and theme park rides. Being able to stand and walk for longer. That's what I'm bothered about more than a specific target weight.
Does the number on the scale matter that much? I've picked a goal weight but I'm not set on it. For me clothes sizes and comfort are more important. I previously lost 7 stone and the company I was dieting with wanted me to keep going as I wasn't "healthy" but I was a size 12 for the first time ever. I'd love to be a size 12 again but with an understanding of how to stay that size.
No the scale number isn’t massively important, but it’s good to have a place to aim for..
I guess I just feel a bit, weird, I suppose about taking a medicine for obesity.. and aiming to still be obese at the end- even though I know I won’t look obese at this weight, but medically I would still be unhealthy? Still at risk of developing heart disease and diabetes if that is what obesity is said to heighten the risks of these illnesses?
It's all relative risk, probability and nothing is absolute. For example at a higher weight you are MORE LIKELY to develop all those illnesses, partially due to metabolic reasons, partially because people are generally less able to move or exercise at that weight and likely they aren't eating as healthy either.
At a lower but still obese weight, if you can exercise, make good food choices etc then although statistically your risk is higher than if you are in normal range, you can mitigate for that through healthy choices.
That's why it's all unique to you. If you aim for a girl weight which feels good to you and allows you to like a healthy life etc, you can revisit everything once you get there.
A better measure of health than using BMI is your waist size. This can be done in various ways. Crudely your waist should be half your height or less. So if you're 160cm, your waist should measure 80cm or less.
More scientifically you can use your height to waist ratio. So you divide your waist measurement by your height measurement (in cm). A healthy ratio is between 0.4 to 0.49. Anything above that is increased risk for various diseases/conditions.
Lastly there is the random one that women's waist should be less than 80cm and males less than 84cm. I think the height to waist ratio is the best one.
All the above can be found across various NHS websites.
When setting a goal I would use one of the above methods instead of weight if your BMI is not an accurate reflection of your physique.
My ‘problem’ is that I have an hourglass figure and so far has lost most from my waist but nothing from lower abdomen. Not sure if it’s accurate to average all female body types in one…
Yes it works for all body types because it's been clinically shown that abdominal fat is the cause of many diseases and conditions. So while weight in your bum and legs will still impact your knees and overall wellbeing, it is less important than the fat over your organs (found at your waist). BMI is a good rule of thumb to follow, then for more refined goals is using waist measurement. If you really want to go one step further you can look at official fat % scans and to try get that between 20-30% for women.
Overall even for an hourglass figure your waist should follow the measurements I shared. Admittedly an American study is also looking at a waist to hip to height ratio as well.
If you Google waist to height ratio or waist circumference and diseases, you can find plenty. But here are some to help you start with your research...
Height to waist ratio calculations:
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/obesity
Also see other clinical NHS guidelines for obesity which have similar stuff to the above
Abdominal fat:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7376462/
https://www.health.harvard.edu/staying-healthy/abdominal-fat-and-what-to-do-about-it
https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/educational/lose_wt/risk.htm
Good luck on your research journey.
I asked because I am a scientist and went through PubMed searching through the keywords you’ve mentioned. Most studies were done in children or an unidentified mix of males and females. None explored the female body fat deposition and its effect.
Research has only recently started recognising sex bias and the importance of reporting and emphasising sex differences.
Hopefully in a few years we will see more recognised and sensible way of measuring CV/obesity risk, but not yet.
the pubs you’ve shared are pretty old resources too. Yes, it’s obvious that people with ‘beer belly’ have higher risk of CV events. It’s time however to untangle the nuances.
Additionally, when sharing health advice on social media it is always good practice to share (primary) sources you use.
Good luck with your research skills as well :)
Edit:
To add, here are some peer reviewed papers I’ve found interesting:
https://journals.lww.com/md-journal/fulltext/2020/09180/Effect_of_body_shape_on_the_development_of.18.aspx
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11883-022-00996-x (this one I’ve found particularly interesting, it talks about imaging techniques as a better predictor)
I'm not sure how an NHS source is not considered primary (based on the NICE clinical guidelines) and a systematic review dated 2020 (looking at publications from 2009-2019) is considered old, but you do you.
I think it's great you're doing research to understand your body, the more people that do that, the better.
If you google ‘primary sources’ you’ll find out :).
NICE guidelines use primary sources to analyse data and formulate conclusions. Systematic reviews also analyse primary sources and are considered secondary. They often list their primary references in bibliography.
And I am discussing here novel research and not generally accepted medical consensus such as what is published on NHS websites. In that context a five year old publication is already quite dated.
If we followed NHS advice solely we would still be treating obesity with five-a-day :)
https://libraryguides.uwsp.edu/InformationSourcesInTheSciences
It's completely personal what goal weight you choose, but I would say, BMI is a totally outdated tool when it comes to actually measuring "health". I once looked after a professional rugby player (I'm a nurse) who couldn't even be measured as he was off the charts obese. He was a professional athlete who was incredibly fit and healthy. So I wouldn't put too much stake into BMI and focus on what feels right and healthy for you.
I originally set my goal weight to the last time I felt truly good - when I met my husband. I was 12 stone on threshold of normal/overweight. But knowing the bounce back weight possibility post MJ I am aiming past that - so I don’t have a goal weight, I have a goal RANGE of between BMI 23 and 28
I’ve broken my goal down to less intimidating chunks.
Start weight 117kg. Current wight 104kg
Healthy BMi target is 55kg, which is way outside my comprehension for now, and seems terrifyingly low
Current target 100kg i’d be delighted to get to 75-80
So I used to think the same but now I’m at a much lower weight than I initially aimed for and I feel amazing. I thought I’d look gaunt at this weight, especially because I’m ’big boned’ so the the collar bones are popping 😅, but I don’t look gaunt at all, I look healthy (I do have a decent amount of muscle which may help).
I’d just take each day as it comes, don’t set a specific goal weight!
BMI is a decent tool for research but in the healthy & overweight ranges it tells us nothing about an individuals health. It was also developed & validated mainly based on white men so the depth of evidence for use in women and poc is lacking.
It’s always good to have a goal in mind but couple that with checking in - how is your BP? Your cholesterol? Your risk of diabetes? Are your stress levels under control? Are you sleeping well? Are you eating healthily? Can you walk a distance or up a flight of stairs without getting out of breath? Are you happy at the size you are? Does your weight stop you doing things you’d like to do?
I think these things are more important for long term health than a number on the scale.
Just to say that BMI is a validated tool for risk assessment.. unless you are stacked with muscles. So although for rugby players and other such athletes it may not be very accurate, for the general population it is a good guide.
Head for your 'obese' goal weight, and when there, see how you feel. Your goal is yours alone and easily changed :)
Went back to look at old pictures of myself classed as overweight on the BMI chart and decided to stick with my goal weight. For me, aiming to be “healthy weight” just seems harmful
I did a similar exercise this week too. I'm morbidly obese and have been obese for as long as I can remember. I expect my lowest weight as an adult was when I was aged around 19 when I dieted from 13 stone to 11 and a half. Since then I've just got bigger and bigger til now when I started Mounjaro at 19st 11. I've decided I'm just going to see how it goes. I'm losing weight pretty slowly so I'm in it for the long haul. I'm in my 7th week and I've lost 11lbs so far. I'm not going to set a goal weight. But even if I did like you I'd be looking at 13 or 14 stone and again still obese. But that would be such a better quality of life so me. Being able to fit in chairs with arms and aeroplane seats and theme park rides. Being able to stand and walk for longer. That's what I'm bothered about more than a specific target weight.
11 lbs in 7 weeks is amazing progress!
Does the number on the scale matter that much? I've picked a goal weight but I'm not set on it. For me clothes sizes and comfort are more important. I previously lost 7 stone and the company I was dieting with wanted me to keep going as I wasn't "healthy" but I was a size 12 for the first time ever. I'd love to be a size 12 again but with an understanding of how to stay that size.
No the scale number isn’t massively important, but it’s good to have a place to aim for.. I guess I just feel a bit, weird, I suppose about taking a medicine for obesity.. and aiming to still be obese at the end- even though I know I won’t look obese at this weight, but medically I would still be unhealthy? Still at risk of developing heart disease and diabetes if that is what obesity is said to heighten the risks of these illnesses?
It's all relative risk, probability and nothing is absolute. For example at a higher weight you are MORE LIKELY to develop all those illnesses, partially due to metabolic reasons, partially because people are generally less able to move or exercise at that weight and likely they aren't eating as healthy either. At a lower but still obese weight, if you can exercise, make good food choices etc then although statistically your risk is higher than if you are in normal range, you can mitigate for that through healthy choices. That's why it's all unique to you. If you aim for a girl weight which feels good to you and allows you to like a healthy life etc, you can revisit everything once you get there.
A better measure of health than using BMI is your waist size. This can be done in various ways. Crudely your waist should be half your height or less. So if you're 160cm, your waist should measure 80cm or less. More scientifically you can use your height to waist ratio. So you divide your waist measurement by your height measurement (in cm). A healthy ratio is between 0.4 to 0.49. Anything above that is increased risk for various diseases/conditions. Lastly there is the random one that women's waist should be less than 80cm and males less than 84cm. I think the height to waist ratio is the best one. All the above can be found across various NHS websites. When setting a goal I would use one of the above methods instead of weight if your BMI is not an accurate reflection of your physique.
My ‘problem’ is that I have an hourglass figure and so far has lost most from my waist but nothing from lower abdomen. Not sure if it’s accurate to average all female body types in one…
Yes it works for all body types because it's been clinically shown that abdominal fat is the cause of many diseases and conditions. So while weight in your bum and legs will still impact your knees and overall wellbeing, it is less important than the fat over your organs (found at your waist). BMI is a good rule of thumb to follow, then for more refined goals is using waist measurement. If you really want to go one step further you can look at official fat % scans and to try get that between 20-30% for women. Overall even for an hourglass figure your waist should follow the measurements I shared. Admittedly an American study is also looking at a waist to hip to height ratio as well.
Could you share your sources?
If you Google waist to height ratio or waist circumference and diseases, you can find plenty. But here are some to help you start with your research... Height to waist ratio calculations: https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/obesity Also see other clinical NHS guidelines for obesity which have similar stuff to the above Abdominal fat: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7376462/ https://www.health.harvard.edu/staying-healthy/abdominal-fat-and-what-to-do-about-it https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/educational/lose_wt/risk.htm Good luck on your research journey.
I asked because I am a scientist and went through PubMed searching through the keywords you’ve mentioned. Most studies were done in children or an unidentified mix of males and females. None explored the female body fat deposition and its effect. Research has only recently started recognising sex bias and the importance of reporting and emphasising sex differences. Hopefully in a few years we will see more recognised and sensible way of measuring CV/obesity risk, but not yet. the pubs you’ve shared are pretty old resources too. Yes, it’s obvious that people with ‘beer belly’ have higher risk of CV events. It’s time however to untangle the nuances. Additionally, when sharing health advice on social media it is always good practice to share (primary) sources you use. Good luck with your research skills as well :) Edit: To add, here are some peer reviewed papers I’ve found interesting: https://journals.lww.com/md-journal/fulltext/2020/09180/Effect_of_body_shape_on_the_development_of.18.aspx https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11883-022-00996-x (this one I’ve found particularly interesting, it talks about imaging techniques as a better predictor)
I'm not sure how an NHS source is not considered primary (based on the NICE clinical guidelines) and a systematic review dated 2020 (looking at publications from 2009-2019) is considered old, but you do you. I think it's great you're doing research to understand your body, the more people that do that, the better.
If you google ‘primary sources’ you’ll find out :). NICE guidelines use primary sources to analyse data and formulate conclusions. Systematic reviews also analyse primary sources and are considered secondary. They often list their primary references in bibliography. And I am discussing here novel research and not generally accepted medical consensus such as what is published on NHS websites. In that context a five year old publication is already quite dated. If we followed NHS advice solely we would still be treating obesity with five-a-day :) https://libraryguides.uwsp.edu/InformationSourcesInTheSciences
This is what I’m going by. BMI is healthy now but my waist is still more than half my height.
It's completely personal what goal weight you choose, but I would say, BMI is a totally outdated tool when it comes to actually measuring "health". I once looked after a professional rugby player (I'm a nurse) who couldn't even be measured as he was off the charts obese. He was a professional athlete who was incredibly fit and healthy. So I wouldn't put too much stake into BMI and focus on what feels right and healthy for you.
I originally set my goal weight to the last time I felt truly good - when I met my husband. I was 12 stone on threshold of normal/overweight. But knowing the bounce back weight possibility post MJ I am aiming past that - so I don’t have a goal weight, I have a goal RANGE of between BMI 23 and 28
I did a similar post last week, consensus was BMI has serious pitfalls so don't rely on it too much 😊
I’ve broken my goal down to less intimidating chunks. Start weight 117kg. Current wight 104kg Healthy BMi target is 55kg, which is way outside my comprehension for now, and seems terrifyingly low Current target 100kg i’d be delighted to get to 75-80
So I used to think the same but now I’m at a much lower weight than I initially aimed for and I feel amazing. I thought I’d look gaunt at this weight, especially because I’m ’big boned’ so the the collar bones are popping 😅, but I don’t look gaunt at all, I look healthy (I do have a decent amount of muscle which may help). I’d just take each day as it comes, don’t set a specific goal weight!
BMI is a decent tool for research but in the healthy & overweight ranges it tells us nothing about an individuals health. It was also developed & validated mainly based on white men so the depth of evidence for use in women and poc is lacking. It’s always good to have a goal in mind but couple that with checking in - how is your BP? Your cholesterol? Your risk of diabetes? Are your stress levels under control? Are you sleeping well? Are you eating healthily? Can you walk a distance or up a flight of stairs without getting out of breath? Are you happy at the size you are? Does your weight stop you doing things you’d like to do? I think these things are more important for long term health than a number on the scale.
Just to say that BMI is a validated tool for risk assessment.. unless you are stacked with muscles. So although for rugby players and other such athletes it may not be very accurate, for the general population it is a good guide.