3 Fat Chicks on a Diet Weight Loss Community  

Go Back   3 Fat Chicks on a Diet Weight Loss Community > Support Forum > Weight Loss Support

Weight Loss Support Give and get support here!

My husband's thoughts on my goal weight - food for thought...

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-23-2013, 05:07 PM   #16
drifting downward!
 
Desiderata's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 552

S/C/G: (HW 194) 162/156.4/140

Height: 5'5 1/2"

Default

I'm afraid that "true weight" thing seems like a giant gimmick to get you sign up for a costly program. It does work with throwaway fake contact info, so no need to get entangled with them in order to take a peek. I just tried it twice, changing my "realistic target weight" to two different "realistic" values for my height and voila, both times my "true weight" was X lbs above the value I set. It's doubtful there's anything but marketing going on there.

Melissa, to your original wonderment - your husband may be onto something. In the back of my mind I've settled on the idea of a 'final' maintenance range that's maybe slightly higher than ideal but much more realistic to maintain - but, like you, I'm struggling a lot with where that is. I've never weighed this much (this little) in my life, and I'm struggling too with the idea of what goal looks like. I look in the mirror and see a lot of progress, but I also see more work to do. How much more work is realistic, though?
__________________


Desiderata is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2013, 05:11 PM   #17
Melissa
 
berryblondeboys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 5,899

Height: 5'6.5"

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Desiderata View Post
I'm afraid that "true weight" thing seems like a giant gimmick to get you sign up for a costly program. It does work with throwaway fake contact info, so no need to get entangled with them in order to take a peek. I just tried it twice, changing my "realistic target weight" to two different "realistic" values for my height and voila, both times my "true weight" was X lbs above the value I set. It's doubtful there's anything but marketing going on there.

Melissa, to your original wonderment - your husband may be onto something. In the back of my mind I've settled on the idea of a 'final' maintenance range that's maybe slightly higher than ideal but much more realistic to maintain - but, like you, I'm struggling a lot with where that is. I've never weighed this much (this little) in my life, and I'm struggling too with the idea of what goal looks like. I look in the mirror and see a lot of progress, but I also see more work to do. How much more work is realistic, though?
I don't believe in any calculators with just numbers plugged in. We are all so individual and what is right for one is not right for another.

I struggle additionally as I have saggy/loose skin. it is so hard to know sometimes what is loose skin and what is fat as that loose skin will always be there. Now, I can see i have fat on my back and mid section and arms. I see it. At 165... nope, I saw a lean person in the mirror who had a saggy tummy and saggy arms, but lean everywhere else.
__________________
My journey to a healthier lifestyle blog: http://melissaslife42.blogspot.com/




Last edited by berryblondeboys : 01-23-2013 at 05:13 PM.
berryblondeboys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2013, 05:34 PM   #18
On a break with Baby #5
 
Arctic Mama's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Alaska
Posts: 3,763

S/C/G: 257 /ticker/ 160

Height: 5'3" - I got taller!

Default

We've used the Dukan calculator for years on another site I belong to, it's an excellent tool and you can easily unsubscribe the plan's emails. But it paints a more realistic picture for older women and those who have spent years obese as to what is actually maintainable. I found the range a bit on the high side for my goals when I did it (155-ish) because I had just dropped my goal from 160 down to 140. But truthfully, they aren't wrong that the weight would be both healthy on me and maintainable without a big struggle - I just think I can get lower and want to see.

Melissa, I'd suggest keeping your goal weight in the 170-175 range and correcting if you get outside of that. Then spend your time doing your classes and workouts, see if you like where you end up after 6-12 months of consistence maintenance there. You may find the exercise leans your body out and even pushes your weight lower. Who knows? But I agree it isn't a bad range for your body and your husband was wise to suggest it
__________________
Taryl - http://www.aurorafiberarts.com/weightloss

Weight loss since Oct 2008:
Arctic Mama is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2013, 08:42 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
Robin41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Northern California
Posts: 988

S/C/G: 292/144/145

Height: 5'10"

Default

I mistakenly put my weight in in kilograms instead of pounds and the calculator had no issue telling me that 144 kilos was my true weight. Apparently it's perfectly fine for a woman's true weight to be nearly 320 pounds at 5'10".

This just shows me that this calculator is not designed to even consider what is a healthy weight, it just seems designed to look at your past history. Not particularly useful. Just because we've been heavy in the past does not mean you need to be heavy now.
__________________
Robin41



Current Weight: 144 lbs.
Robin41 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2013, 08:58 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
lin43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,572

Default

Melissa, what an interesting question you pose! I tend to get philosophical about . . . well, almost everything, so as I read your post, I saw quite a bit of wisdom in your husband's comments. After all, putting it into perspective (i.e., with our entire lives), we all have to consider the sacrifice to benefits ratio. What is the benefit of losing those few extra pounds? Are those benefits worth all the extra effort, the sacrifice?

I think your question is one that many of use struggle with. It's as if we have our own personal goal in mind (created from who knows what), and we are loathe to change it.

As an objective reader of your post, I have to agree with your husband's point.

Good luck making your decision!
__________________
Clothes Sizes (not lbs):

Last edited by lin43 : 01-23-2013 at 08:59 PM.
lin43 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2013, 09:37 PM   #21
Heidi
 
newleaf123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,966

S/C/G: 204.5/149/153

Height: 5'7"

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin41 View Post
I mistakenly put my weight in in kilograms instead of pounds and the calculator had no issue telling me that 144 kilos was my true weight. Apparently it's perfectly fine for a woman's true weight to be nearly 320 pounds at 5'10".

This just shows me that this calculator is not designed to even consider what is a healthy weight, it just seems designed to look at your past history. Not particularly useful. Just because we've been heavy in the past does not mean you need to be heavy now.
LOL yeah, I totally agree.
__________________
Original Goal Met



Working on losing some bloat...





newleaf123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2013, 09:50 PM   #22
Melissa
 
berryblondeboys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 5,899

Height: 5'6.5"

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin41 View Post
I mistakenly put my weight in in kilograms instead of pounds and the calculator had no issue telling me that 144 kilos was my true weight. Apparently it's perfectly fine for a woman's true weight to be nearly 320 pounds at 5'10".

This just shows me that this calculator is not designed to even consider what is a healthy weight, it just seems designed to look at your past history. Not particularly useful. Just because we've been heavy in the past does not mean you need to be heavy now.
OK, to be fair, if you truly did weigh 640 pounds, how reasonable would it be to say that you would ever weigh 160 pounds? And as with all calculators, the outlyers (the super heavy and the super thin) will probably not fit. Just like my body frame doesn't fit nicely in the BMI range nor does my 7 year old son who is built like a tank.

It's a tool - one of many and I don't take stock in almost any such thing, but it does raise an interesting question/point. What is a REASONABLE weight. What is something we should be happy with - that would make us WORLDS healthier if we were at THAT weight versus the heavy weight we are now?

I think that's where we get caught up too - this all or nothing mentality - like me wanting to be 25% body fat when at 255 pounds - still 20 pounds under my highest weight, I was 50% body fat!

Even if I stayed where I am now at 190 and pretty fit I am WAYYYYY healthier than I was when I was heavier, but I want more to feel better (and look better).
__________________
My journey to a healthier lifestyle blog: http://melissaslife42.blogspot.com/



berryblondeboys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2013, 10:32 PM   #23
Designing my new physique
 
avalonmoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 521

S/C/G: 316

Height: 5'7.5

Default

Berryblondeboys, wow what a dilema. I think your hubby really cares about you.
Although his pov is completely logical, you will ultimately need to decide what
you truly want and what you 'feel' you can maintain for life. If it seems your body
prefers the higher number but you still want to lose some of it once again,
how about doing what Mozzy suggested and try a down the middle split..so you're
almost as low, just not all the way there, thus putting less stress on yourself not
just now but forever since that's what maintenance is...just my thought.
I think it is sweet your hubby cares enough to think of your feelings and he sees
how you struggle with your weight/life imprvements.
__________________






»»started@316««
avalonmoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 12:26 AM   #24
Embracing the suck
 
JohnP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: California - East Bay
Posts: 3,174

S/C/G: 300/234/abs

Height: 6'9"

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by berryblondeboys View Post
OK, to be fair, if you truly did weigh 640 pounds, how reasonable would it be to say that you would ever weigh 160 pounds? And as with all calculators, the outlyers (the super heavy and the super thin) will probably not fit.
In this case - the calculator is putting way to much emphasis on current weight and past history because while a 640 lb woman might not ever get and maintain 160 they sure as heck can get under 320 which is what it said and anyone who is 640 is going to need surgury to remove excess skin which probably would cause 20-25 lbs of weight loss all by itself.

Regardless - as you mentioned - it's just a calculator and doesn't mean much.

For your question - I personally think that is going to be a balance where the effort to maintain isn't worth it vs what you're happy with. I use the words "happy with" because for health being overweight doesn't mean much. You can defintately be overweight and very healthy.
__________________
"Getting solid information is easier than ever. Getting misinformation is even easier." - Kaplods

Maintaining for two years and I eat whatever I want - just not however much I want. Details here.
JohnP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 01:40 AM   #25
Empress/Queen
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 6,274

Thumbs up

Your dh's thoughts and your philosophical question and discussion are very insightful and thanks for sharing.

As for the calculators, etc., I have no thoughts. Re whether what weight is better for you to maintain, no one else can say. That is very personal for all of us.

Sustainability, I think, should always be some part of our contemplation of our "ideal weight."

My "ideal weight" shifts from time to time as I move through life, guessing that is true for everyone.

Amarantha2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 08:07 AM   #26
Vex
There is no try.
 
Vex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 1,237

S/C/G: 281/T/140

Height: 5'6"

Default re:

I feel like I'm gong to be the lone voice of dissent, but that's ok.

You will and should do whatever you think is best for you, but let me tell you why numbers in the 170's would not satisfy me, even if I felt healthy.

It's still 20lbs overweight. I know BMI never takes many things into consideration - muscle mass etc. The world uses BMI charts though to determine many things about you - how much you'll pay for insurance, for example.

20lbs is still 20lbs extra my heart doesn't need to drag around.

Are we truly healthy at this weight or are we kidding ourselves? What about labs, how are the most recent ones?

Like I said, you'll do what you feel is best for you.
__________________
.

Vex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 10:22 AM   #27
Positive Focus
 
BeachBreeze2010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,041

S/C/G: 225/ticker/125

Height: 5'1"

Default

I've actually been having the same thoughts and had a similar conversation with my boyfriend last week. I revised my weight goal from 125 to 145 for the exact reason your husband described. It's something that I think I'll feel good with when I get there and won't mean that I am barely eating and exercising all the time to maintain 125 lbs. I don't need a perfectly hard body nor do I think that it is the ideal feminine shape (for me). I want to keep some of my "softness" and curves but still be healthy. That leaves me 10lbs over what the charts tell me, but so what. And - when I get to 145 if I want to go further, I can. If I get too low - I can always gain it back - goodness knows I'm good at that! LOL But also, once I reach 145 I'm not going to really change anything except maybe add back in 100-200 calories per day so I might continue to lose on what I'm already doing. I do agree with him that trying to maintain a weight below your lifestyle comfort could make us more prone to rebound gains. There's been a lot of controversy over the years about the "set point" or "true weight" concept. Some believe in it, others don't and some think it's adjustable over time and others don't. Regardless, just live the lifestyle that makes you healthy and happy and see where it ends up. I'm so glad that you have a husband you can talk to about these things that is loving and supportive. Count your blessings!
__________________
Annie

There's no ticker here because I have no idea what I weigh, nor do I have plans to get on the scale anytime soon. My goals are to take care of myself in healthy ways and let the scale fall wherever it will. "It's not about skinny anymore - it's about healthy."
BeachBreeze2010 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 10:55 AM   #28
Keeping it real!
 
healthyangie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Eastern PA
Posts: 644

S/C/G: 40/31/30 waist inches!

Height: 5' 4"

Default

I couldn't help myself - I did my number and it's 141. Interesting - I also like that they had you check your frame by holding your wrist!
__________________


New goal is waist measurement! One dancer for each inch lost!
healthyangie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 10:59 AM   #29
Senior Member
 
Rana's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,065

S/C/G: 200/164/140

Height: 5'5"

Default

I'm glad you posted this too BBB, because it's something I've had to think about for about a year now.

My boyfriend is in the same camp as your husband, in the sense that he sees that I work so hard to reach 161 and it was a struggle to get there and my ultimate goal was 140, 150 for the doctors, but I would have to give up a lot in my life -- including my schooling right now -- in order to even think about reaching those amounts. And no social life whatsoever.

I think I can lose another 10 lbs, but I can't do it right now and I can maintain 165 (up or down a few pounds) with the exercise and Paleo that I follow (when I'm not stressed out).

And I hate that I can't get below that with all the effort that I currently do -- diet and exercising 6 days a week for at least 1 hour on those days.

I feel I should weight more along the 140s and my boyfriend agrees that for the work I put into it, 140s should be showing up on the scale but it doesn't. So, I don't know what to do.

Well, right now, all I'm going to do is finish my schooling and then I'll have to rethink what I'm doing in terms of diet/exercise. I may just claim maintenance and weight train and see if that lowers the scale.

*sigh*
__________________
Rana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2013, 11:09 AM   #30
Melissa
 
berryblondeboys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 5,899

Height: 5'6.5"

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vex View Post
I feel like I'm gong to be the lone voice of dissent, but that's ok.

You will and should do whatever you think is best for you, but let me tell you why numbers in the 170's would not satisfy me, even if I felt healthy.

It's still 20lbs overweight. I know BMI never takes many things into consideration - muscle mass etc. The world uses BMI charts though to determine many things about you - how much you'll pay for insurance, for example.

20lbs is still 20lbs extra my heart doesn't need to drag around.

Are we truly healthy at this weight or are we kidding ourselves? What about labs, how are the most recent ones?

Like I said, you'll do what you feel is best for you.
There is truth in that companies use those ridiculous charts for everyone when they were meant for masses, but... I will never, ever, ever be able to be 150 pounds and maintain it. I would have to work out 6 days a week and I would need to eat 1200-1300 calories and I would probably have a body fat percentage around 20%.

Is it true that the extra 20 pounds is harder on my heart? Sure, just as it is for a big, built athlete. Just like it is for large cats and dogs - they live shorter lives because their organs tend to fail faster than their lighter/smaller kin.

But I can't change my body build.

I know there are TONS of people who say they have a large frame when they don't but guess what, some of us do. My 7 year old is WAY over the BMI chart for his age and height and has been since birth and never, ever has anyone say he was fat. His pediatrician says, "those charts aren't useful for him, so don't worry about it." Guess what... I'm his mother and he's built like me, just has more height from his father.

When I was 175 I saw the endocrinologist and my regular doctor. Neither of them said I should lose more weight, but they didn't tell me to NOT lose any weight either.

My cholesterol was 167
My fasting blood sugar was 91
My blood pressure was 118/68
All my other tests were perfect.
My resting heart rate was 55 as I was exercising 5 days a week consistently.

Now at 190, I have some fluff and I don't like it. I liked how I felt and looked at 165, so I still want to get there and we'll see if I look and feel better at 160, but below that is just, well, not going to happen. Not with the loose skin on my tummy and arms (which add weight) and not with my body build and mass.

I will continue with exercise and losing weight as I don't feel THIS is good. I had a bod pod test done in January and will have one in March. I will do one again when I get to a weight I'm happy with and see what it says for body fat percentage.

So far, the bod pod, the fancy tanita scale at the gym (used by PTs) and mine at home all say the same thing. Which, if that holds true, when I was 165, I had 27% body fat and I'm definitely more fit now than then (with more muscle). So, we'll see.

I LIKE feeling strong. Plus, it 'supposedly' allows me to eat more. I cannot imagine how little I would be able to eat if I were not exercising and lifting weights!
__________________
My journey to a healthier lifestyle blog: http://melissaslife42.blogspot.com/



berryblondeboys is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Posts by members, moderators and admins are not considered medical advice
and no guarantee is made against accuracy.


Thread Tools

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
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Introductions to those of us on Ideal Protein wuv2bloved Ideal Protein Diet 495 04-04-2012 12:43 PM
Sarge's No Excuses / Boot Camp To Beach Weather #5 JayTee Chicks up for a Challenge 476 05-28-2011 10:06 PM
Beck Diet For Life/Solution – February 2011 – Support, Discussion, Buddy/Coach BillBlueEyes Beck Diet Solution 325 03-01-2011 04:52 AM
Beck Diet For LIfe/Solution – February 2009 – Support, Discussion, Buddy/Coach BillBlueEyes LA Weight Loss 283 03-01-2009 06:40 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:42 PM.






Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.3.2