kind of a stupid question...but how low is too low?
I have seen the "how low should my goal weight" question a million times and it always seemed kinda silly to me.
My answer was, as low as you can while comfortable and healthy! Or as low as your dr seems to think is smart. Actually - the question usually seemed to take the form of...is x low enough or do I have to lose more.
I am now facing a really similar question that feels totally different to me for some odd reason.
How does one know how low their bodyweight and/or bodyfat% should be?
The research I have found gives very little personal guidance....
- 10-13% is min essential fat for women (ok great, but with a margin of error of several % on most affordable calcs this isnt that great of a measure)
- dont lose more body fat than you need to maintain energy and hormonal function (ok, common sense..Im not going to lose my period or feel less than optimal energy)
I am questioning this because I still seem able to lose fat with a diet of 1200-1300 cals. I eat great foods, have a ton of energy for work and workouts...but I dipped down to 122 recently and I was surprised (being below 130 is new for me in general). At 130 I was 19% body fat.
I did up my cals to 1500 and buyoed back to 124...but I guess it just made me wonder how does a person know how low their weight can safely be.
Is there a good reason I shouldnt eat 1200-1300 and continue to lose a few more lbs as long as my energy levels are good and hormonal function is proper? Are there better measures?
XTY, I've wondered the same myself.
Here's what I've come up with. Once you hit a healthy weight (not a "perfectly-ideal-and-I'm-100%-satisfied weight, but a good one), pick a calorie range and an exercise level you can keep for the rest of your life.
And then do it.
Body weight, according to the more recent research, is your genetics expressed in a certain environment ("environment" referring to diet and exercise, mostly). Pick a great, healthy, maintainable environment and then let your body express its unique self as it wants to. It will give you signals (like the lack of energy and hormone imbalance and others) if its not happy with the environment you picked. Keep tweaking until you find what works best for your particular body.
On another note, 1200-1300 calories is not enough for most women in maintenance. Unless you are actively looking to lose, you're probably actually making your body shift into conservation mode, using energy-providing nutrients in the most efficient, conservative way it can. If you are active, you will need at least 1500 to keep your body satisfied.
Good question. I don't think there's a set answer, for a couple of reasons. First, what's aesthetically pleasing for one person might not be for another. Case in point: some people look at my "avatar" pic on the left and say, "wow"! Others say, "ick"! That was taken at about 12% BF, measured with calipers. (I'm not there anymore, BTW.)
In addition to the aesthetic question, there's a question of your personal commitment to a given lifestyle. How hard are you willing to work to maintain low BF OR low weight? Even bodybuilders have an "off season" in which their BF% increases to something close to normal levels (for athletes), partly because it is nearly impossible to build muscle in an extreme caloric deficit necessary for "cutting" and partly for their mental health.
I know you're not talking about getting down to bodybuilder levels of BF%, but the same general principle applies: eventually, you'll get to a BF% or weight that's too difficult to maintain & still have a normal life. The trick is to bounce back up to something that is sustainable *and stop there.* This is harder than it seems, because we tend to beat ourselves up with every little gain or allow our weight or BF% to creep up past where we actually want to settle.
The third answer is that barring an eating disorder, you won't fade away until nothing. But, if you're happy with how you look and feel, you may be at the point where you want to shift into maintenance mode instead of "loss" mode. Or, maybe you want to shift to thinking about BF% instead of weight. Most gyms offer an inexpensive caliper test, which in skilled and consistent hands -- same tester every time -- can be a reasonably accurate way to assess progress, unlike the Tanita scales.
These are very interesting posts. I am still very far from switching over from loss to maintenance, but reading your opinions on how to determine which may be the best body weight helps a lot.
oneoftwelve and kaw - thanks for the thoughtful replies. Really helped put things into a bit of perspective.
My training is at a sustainable/enjoyable level, I dont have an eating disorder, and I will eat 1200-1500 cals to make sure I have enough energy + hormone levels and see how the weight works out...not really super attached to being a little higher or a little lower.
btw - my Tanita says 9% bodyfat, hah! My dr's Tanita ($3k vs $30) shows 18%....with a super cool breakdown by trunk, r arm, l arm, r leg, l leg. I want one of those!
kind of a stupid question...but how low is too low?
