WhyNot, in this case even that is not the case. Someone with a BMI of 28 who has never lost weight and who is exercising 40 minutes daily and eating a nutrient dense diet is not at significant increased risk. The person who is at a BMI of 23 (astro’s “about right”) who is not exercising, is not as fit, however is.
DummyGladHands is certainly entitled to try to lose more fat if that what he/she wants for whatever reason. But he/she also needs to be aware that his/her health does not require that loss. It requires keeping up with the fitness program and a healthy nutrition plan long term.
I see a picture of an attractive, but chunky woman who is posing or posed at an angle to look slimmer. She could easily stand to lose 20 - 25 lbs.
[/QUOTE]
A 5’ 9" woman who is around 190-200 lbs with a medium build, who is not a hardcore athlete or an extremely robust build (ie 90%+ of the population) is usually going to be at carrying least 20-30+ lbs of fat they do not need. Your notion that a woman who is 195 and 5’ 9" does not need to lose any more weight at all is not supported by health recommendations or even the BMI index you cite with such enthusiasm.
BMI as measure of appropriate weight (IMO) has some serious flaws, but since you seem so fixated on it as an appropriate measure here is what it says for a 5’9" woman at 195 lbs. It’s at the higher range of overweight edging into obesity. This, so far as I can see, is pretty much on board with what I’ve been saying.
Telling me I’m being "mean and ignorant’ for giving arms length height/weight ratio recommendations is bizarre. Obviously you would never discuss this with a person in public or even out loud unless they are inviting the conversation, but we’re not talking about polite social conversation or party cocktail chatter in this thread, we’re talking about body realities when your underwear is off and you’re staring at yourself in the mirror.
Beyond all this back and forth, a woman who is 5’9" knows better than anyone else in the universe how much she should weigh to be fit and feel healthy. I’m sure there are 5’9" women who are perfectly happy at 195 lbs especially if they have robust frames or are athletes, but I believe most would like to weigh at least 20+ lbs less. Suggesting that moving below 195 by not just exercise, but also eating less is crazy necessary and “mean and ignorant” is an interesting perspective.
Things are so subjective - I see a beautiful woman, who looks about the perfect weight for her height. At most, I’d say she could lose about five pounds, but that would be far down the list of things I notice about her.
Not to be snarky, but women’s relationship with their bodies and healthy weights could hardly be any more messed up at this point.
To be frank astro you’re going on common wisdom but haven’t really followed very closely developments in research as it relates to being overweight, the health benefits of weight loss and etc.
I’m just a guy who got overweight once (obese, actually) and lost the weight, and took a keen interest in nutrition and such topics that I’ve followed ever since. But everything I’ve read has shown some changes in what science knows on this topic along these lines:
There are health problems that seem to align statistically with being obese. However, research in the last several years has shown that you can achieve the health benefits of weight loss by losing around 10% of your body weight. It doesn’t actually matter what your BMI is afterward, newer research has shown that if you’re at a weight associated with comorbidities the reduction you’ll enjoy from weight loss in those associated risk factors max out at about 10% body weight loss. That means an obese person can go from being obese to in the upper range of overweight, and they’ve actually statistically achieved the health benefits of weight loss according to the statistics we have now.
Newer research has shown that the lower end of the “healthy” BMI range is probably not set properly, and there is increased mortality versus other weights in being at the lower range of healthy (I’m not talking about the underweight BMI range, which has always been known to be associated with higher mortality.) Likewise, higher BMI up into the overweight range have been shown to not be really associated with increased mortality as we once thought.
Like I said, I’m just a person who lost weight and became interested in nutrition, I’ve read some of these studies but don’t have them handy and don’t want you to assume my information is precisely correct. DSeid is someone I’ve seen in a lot of these nutrition related threads and he’ll probably have some of the studies handy, I also think he’s a physician–not someone just spouting off on the internet like myself.
Martin Hyde, I already linked astro to past threads (the first one linked to, “Beyond Obesity,” contained the most interesting articles to me visavis astro’s faulty beliefs) that contained many cites and in depth discussions and to an article documenting how exercise and healthy nutrition choices achieve major benefits even if no weight is lost. If astro insists on saying that someone with the height/weight measurements in the picture I linked to has so fat as to have a hard time getting around lugging it all, and that someone with those measurements after losing as much weight as our op has lost, exercising 40 minutes a day, eating a restrictive calorie diet consisting of healthy food choices (presumably), needs to lose 30 plus more pounds else not be healthy, well, it aint worth much additional effort disabusing that false notion.
The bottom lines to our op remain –
Plateaus are normal and do not necessarily mean you need to change anything. If you are measuring calories accurately then if anything you might benefit from loosening your calorie restriction up some.
You have achieved the vast majority of the health benefits from weight loss. Easing up slightly on your calorie restriction (while remaining focused on eating nutrition dense foods and consuming adequate protein) while focusing more on further improving your fitness (via adding even more intensity and variety to your 40 minute sessions) is the best way from here to further improve your health and your body composition (less percent body fat, greater lean body mass, less intra-abdominal fat). That will both look and feel better even if the scale moves not a bit.
Astro nothing you’ve just said contradicts or even refutes any of the points we’re making. It’s also a pretty non-thorough rebuttal of a major and very recent study. But the larger points that were being made were not related to that study, and predate it, making references and rebuttals to the newer study irrelevant.
The recent study that came out showed that the mortality risk for people in the overweight range was actually lower than for the healthy weight range, and showed that the mortality risk in the obese range was higher than the healthy weight range but not by as much as was previously thought. So this most recent study actually did not say a population of obese people did not have increased mortality versus healthy weight people, it said a population of overweight people have no increased mortality rate versus healthy weight BMI population and actually slightly lower.
The reasons for that were not fully explored in the study, but one point of note is at least a good portion of those results is because healthy BMI starts at 18.5 but the range 18.5-20.0 appears to have much higher mortality than what one would think of as “healthy” which suggests the healthy range should be amended to be stricter on the definition of underweight.
But further, the point DSeid was making is/was wholly unrelated to these new studies on overweight/obese populations. Those studies and the alternate analysis you linked to are talking about groups of populations and comparative analysis. DSeid was talking about obese people who were overweight and associated with risk factors and that specific population and their decreased risk factors when they lost weight. What those studies have found is that in test groups of obese people who lose about 10% of their body weight, their personal risk factors go down as much at that loss as it would if they lost more. So basically any risk factors you have from being obese, you have maximized your ability to reduce those risk factors at around 10% body weight loss.
Martin already addessed things very well but I’ll chime in too.
I can’t say I can tell much about this newest article from either that synopsis of it or from its abstract, and the actual article, but a bit is clear.
As Martin points out they are critiquing one particular article. Before discussing that article and their critique allow me to place that article in context. If you’ve read any of the previous BMI and obeity threads you are already aware that the BMI cut-offs between classes were chosen in a very arbitrary manner. Over time a large body of data has been collected that shows that the population of inviduals with BMIs under 20 are at pretty high mortality risk (even though “underweight” does not begin until under 18.5 and 18.5 to 20 is considered “normal”). Lowest mortality rate has varied in different studies and different populations and ranges between the higher normal range (22.5 to 25) and into the lower “overweight” range (25 to 27). The JAMA study being critiquedwas done to try to address the fact that different studies had used different definitions of normal, etc. and kept with the 18.5 to 25, 25 to 30, so on catgories. Using those terms, terms that pushed the higher risk low normals in with the lower risk high normals, they found that “overweight” (25 to 30) had the lowest mortality. Got a bunch of press but really a silly little bit. Fom my POV they are just using a uselessly coarse measure that informs nothing on where the sweet spot is, which seems to still be somewhere just below and maybe a bit above 25.
Enter this study you cited. Honestly they come off like unskewed polls … something must be wrong with the sampling and unskewing the data we find that normal is least mortality after all. What evs. It already was a pretty unimpressive study.
Meanwhile the huge body of literature tell us that behaviors (quality of nutrition and regular exercise) matter more than BMI, especially in the 25 to 30 (overweight) range. That those with issues like DM, etc. do better if they are a bit overwight (the paradox). That body composition matters (where the fat is and how much is lean body mass). And that the obese gain the vast majority of the benefits of weight loss with the first 5 to 10% of body weight lost so long as it is maintained with good nutrition and exercise.
As far as BMI goes interpretation is not one size fits all.
DummyGladHands, have you broke through your plateau yet?
Thanks no, but hopeful; instead of varying between 2 to 5lb, it’s now a variance of 1 to 2 lb. I really can’t bitch (too much); my clothes are starting to make me look like a bag lady (NO, DON’T GO SHOPPING WOMAN!), I have tons more energy, and g-- help me, I can get down on the floor and pet my cat without groaning.
This tells you what’s going on, and why concentrating solely on the number on the scale is a bad, bad idea: you’re losing fat and gaining muscle. Since muscle is denser than fat, this change in your body composition doesn’t show up as a positive change on the scale (and in fact, it can show up as a negative change - you might actually get heavier for a bit!). But the looser fit of your clothes is telling you the real story, as is the increase in your energy levels. This is a very positive change for your health! So listen to DSeid and don’t fret over the “weight plateau,” as you’re clearly headed in the right direction.
And how you feel and your health is of course the point.
More on the issue of whether healthy “overweight” individuals should try to lose weight, rather than focus on behaviors … this studyis one of several that conclude trying to lose weight may cause more harm than good.
So, not to belabor the point, I saw my doctor today, and he had me review my food tracking app. and told me that I am severely lacking protein in my meal plans. I am now on a protein tracking regime, rather than strictly calories. I asked about some of the advice I read here about slowing my metabolism, or “starving” it, and he said that is exactly correct. I did a food recap for him of the last couple of days (salad, fruit, more salad, veggies) and he’s advised me to work on upping my protein, while being careful of fatty protein, i.e. egg yolks.