How do you pick a goal weight?

A

amynicole

Cathlete
I am having trouble deciding on what my goal weight should be. I know that a lot of people here tell me to not focus on the scale but mentally I need to have a number to shoot for. I was 150 before I had my kids and always wanted to be a size smaller. So I thought I would shoot for 125. I am 5'7. My DH expressed concern about this when I told him. He is very supportive of me losing weight but said he does not want me to lose all my curves and thought 135 would be a healther weight. DH is also a physician and thought 125 would be getting too low considering I have been anorexic/bulimic in the past.

What do you guys think? Is 125 realistic or is 135 a healthier weight to shoot for? Right now I am waaaay more than that after just having baby number 3 last month.
 
I go by how I looked and felt when I was close to my goal weight before. I've picked a range between 120 and 130. I'm 5'4" and am shooting for a size 6. The main reason I want to be that small is because I want to be a faster runner. Otherwise, I'd be happy at size 8. You might want to shoot for a size, rather than a weight, so you don't end up losing too much weight. I suspect your husband is probably right when he suggests 135 as a good goal weight for you. Why not go for 135 and maintain it for a while? If you don't like it, then revise your goal.
 
We don't know much about you....like how much muscle you have, what your bone structure is, etc. Even if you are very tiny boned, 125 seems very low for as tall as you are. My own opinion is that 135 would be more realistic. I think your hubby is right on this one.
 
When I decided on my goal weight -- 135 -- I did some research on my height & body type. I've also spoken with a few health professionals (easy for me because I work in an office within a hospital). I'm 5'6" with a medium size frame & currently weigh 147. People tell me that I'm too thin now however these people don't see the roll of fat that sticks out over my bike shorts when I workout! I would be happy with my weight if that was gone & in reality that is my ultimate goal. I wouldn't care what my weight if I could just get rid of that layer of fat.

I agree with honeybunch, 135 for someone 5'7" does seem like a really low weight.
 
This is a very generalized comment that doesnt really take body type or lean muscle to fat ratio into account, but I read in a fitness journal a few years ago that a quick way to approximate your "goal" weight is for a female, start with 5 ft and 100 lbs and add 5 lbs for every inch in height over 5 ft. Thus at 5'7" you are 7 inches over 5 ft, so 7 x 5 lbs = 35 lbs. Adding this to the base weight of 100 gets you a "goal" weight of 135 lb. Applying this to myself, at 5'2" I "should" weigh 110 lb...no way that's gonna happen. I started at 128 and got down to 119 in 4 months. I couldnt fathom dropping 9 more lbs without getting a limb amputated or something! My calorie count was already 1200-1400 per day and my workouts were 5-6 days a week. I've sinced gained back most of the weight and I'm at 124 now (rough period in my life, clean eating went to hell). I still would like to be 115 though. I was 110 in high school but had nowhere near the muscle I have now. So pick a number, like 135, but dont carve it in stone! Good Luck!!

:)Stacy
 
I agree that 125 is way too low for most women who are 5'7". I am also 5'7" with a history of eating disorders and I know that when I weighed 125 I looked terrible and my friends and family were concerned about me. I had absolutely no curves and my upper body was practically skeletal. I liked myself at 135, but most people still thought I was too thin and thought I looked healthiest around 142 or so.
My suggestion would be to make small goals for yourself at this point and not worry about the final weight that you want to be. It will probably take a lot of experimenting to get to that magic number/size for yourself!
Wishing you lots of luck with your weight loss!
Erica
 
I think that if you haven't been below 150 or so recently it might be a better idea to set your initial goal weight at 135, or even higher, and then re-evaluate when you reach that. If you want to be a size below what you were at 150, I certainly don't think you'd need to drop down to 125. I tend to drop a size about every 10 pounds. Everyone is different, though!

I'm about 5'7" and I look and feel the best around 125, but as soon as I'm even a pound or two below that, I start to look too thin (and chestless :)) I have a really small frame, though, and have friends who are shorter than I am who would be skeletal at 125. You may be at your best at 135 or more; It's really hard to judge until you're at that weight.

Good luck!
Sarah :D
 
It all depends on YOUR body type and your frame. I'm 5'7. I was 118 in high school (skinny but not sickly) and now I'm 135. I look my best at about 128-130 depending on my bf %. So I think you should get your body fat checked then you can choose a healthy bf% that is in the healthy but lean range then all you have to do is figure out how much fat weight you need to loose. I hope that all made sense.
 
I never understood the 'goal weight' thing.
Last time I lost weight, I decided to let my body tell me what weight it wanted to be.
Kathy
 
Stacy's correct

The method posted by Stacy is the one taught in fitness & nutritional programs. Females should consider 100#'s for 5' normal plus 5#'s per inch over 5'. It's a guideline & assumes normal body fat. So a low body fat person would be denser & weigh a bit more than the guideline. It also assumes a medium bone structure. Add 10% for large boned & drop 10% for small boned.

Males should consider 106# normal for 5', plus 6# per inch over 5'.

Debra
 
I'm totally with Kathy on this. I think the goal weight thing actually promoted my eating disorder in a big way. Amynicole if you do have a history of eating disorders and are already focusing on an unrealistic weight than I would suggest that you do away with it. Goal weights really do not take into account how much bone or muscle you have. For e.g I am actually supposedly small framed (I have thin limbs) but some of the larger bones in my body (hips, ribs, shoulders etc.) are a lot broader than my friends who would fall under the medium frame category. Infact my shoulders are almost as broad as my husband's. In my opinion, to keep weight off permanently you need to find your body's set point weight i.e. a weight that your body finds comfortable maintaining with your diet and exercise habits. You will find that you do not have to starve yourself or do anything drastic to maintain that set point weight. Besides if you exercise consistently, that set point weight will be a lot lower than you expect it to be (atleast mine seems to be). I would also like to add that at that weight, you will look better - particularly things like your hair and skin.

Sorry about the passionate message, but this is a subject that is very close to my heart. I find that my ED needs to be fought consistently and things like goal weights, very obsessive calorie counting etc. only invites old problems back. Amynicole try to pursue eating healthily and exercising well. Just see where it takes you. Keep on track by calorie counting and weighing occasionally. You will get good results and those results will be enough to motivate you. You will find that you don't really need a goal weight to keep you going. I am still amazed at the results that I continue to get with Cathe and I have no goal weight to motivate me. Best of luck!
 
Hi prfitness,
I agree with you that we shouldn't all strive to hit a certain number on the scale. But I am also confused when people say what you just posted about letting your body find it's own set point. Don't get me wrong, I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm more asking how we determine a healthy "set point". When I exercise consistantly and watch my calories, my 5'2 frame "prefers" a weight of 135. Anything over that I start getting a double chin and my arms rub against my ribs causing a rash when I power walk, etc. My body "likes" 135 lbs. I have to watch my calories at that weight yes, but I can on occasion enjoy a treat (on weekends and not gain).

Obviously 135 lbs cannot be healthy at my 5'2 frame. I "feel" good at this weight and energetic and I feel good in shorts in the summertime, but NO WAY would I consider a bathing suit without the skirt on it. And my BMI puts me in the slightly obese category. Also type 2 diabetes runs in my family and my weight at 5'2 is certainly going to increase my chances of getting diabetes in the future (according to what I've read). Also heart attacks are common in my family too. Sorry, I'm babbling.

I don't really agree or disagree with you, I'm just saying that I'm not so sure of this "set Point". Even with muscle, my body cannot be healthy at 135 when considering what I've read about diabetes, heart conditions, etc. Yet reaching any number below 135 means having to become totally obsessed with every calorie and NEVER NEVER having a treat even occasionaly and NEVER NEVER missing a workout.

So do I just be happy with my weight?

I'm already somewhat happy with it but this means ignoring what the diabetes and heart associations say because I am truly in a risk category.

So I have to wonder if it's safe to ignore the number on the scale completely. ?????? Just my .02.

Lisa
 
I'm 108 at 5'6". Probably too skinny. I have trouble finding clothes that fit anymore. I read an article about a fitness professional named Laura Mak (M&F Hers) who I thought looked great and she was 5'6" and 130 (competition weight). But she is heavily muscled and probably is "smaller" at 130 than I am at 108.
 
RE: Stacy's correct

Thanks for all the input. I was surprized to see so many responses when I logged on. I appreciate what some of you are saying about the value of not setting a goal weight but for myself, I need a number I can count down to. I think I'll aim for 135, seems like a healthy number. If I get there and am unhappy with it, I can re-evaluate from there. I am medium boned so that number sounds about right.
 
I just want to add one more thing. I am about 5'6" but I have a very small behind and a thick waist. I know women who are my height and weigh 15-20 # more than me but they wear the same size because their glutes, quads and hams are larger than mine. So I guess what I'm trying to say is that body type is VERY important when setting a goal.

-joy
 
Hi Lisa - I know what you mean. I by no means disagree with you. The body likes to settle at a comfortable weight which may not be healthy according to national guidelines. But I guess I buy into the principle that we are all physiologically unique. Weight charts, BMI, calorie calculators etc. are just rough guidelines and not all of us fit into them. For e.g if you are already making a great deal of effort to maintain your weight through diet and exercise and your set point is higher than what health authorities dictate, then I think that's what it takes for your body to be healthy. I truly believe that what is a healthy weight for one person may actually not apply to another person who is the same height and frame. IMHO, taking your weight b'low or above your own 'set point' is what poses health risks. Once again this is just my opinion and not a very educated one at all.
 
As you get near the goal, it'll be much easier to see if it's reasonable. I am 5'7" and weigh 140. I think I could lose 10 pounds of fat to look perfect, but if I had wider shoulders, a larger torso, I might be fine at this weight, but there are a couple of handfuls of jiggly stuff on each thigh, so obviously, 140 is not it for me. But I've weighed between 115 and 150 and I know that 130 is where I look best.

Don't worry about it so much. 135 sounds like a very reasonable goal. The worst that can happen is you'll get to 145 and say, "Whaddya know? I look perfect already! I think I'll stop losing weight!"
 
PRFitness, I couldn't have said that better myself. I am in complete agreement with you and I admire your ability to organize your feelings in such a thoughtful way. I went on my daily walk after reading this post 1-2 hrs. before and I couldn't get this thread off my mind (and no I am not weight-obsessed). If I 'fit into' the guidelines, I would be seriously underweight for my frame and body make-up (and was once, so I am not guessing). I am 5'4", and am between 136-142 (usually 136-138). I am very fit at this weight.
Even at 133, I look underweight. So I do second your opinion on taking each case individually.
Thank you for the thoughtful post-
Kathy
 
I don't have goal "weights" anymore. Jeez, especially after I discovered Cathe. Now I just have a goal "look". Focusing on a scale is just downright non-productive. ESPECIALLY for a person that trains with weights. I will never fit into a height weight scale. BUT I have over 105 lbs of lean body mass.

But it is true that the way you wish to look might not be really healthy. And it probably is not if you have struggled with an eating disorder before. Have you had outside help for your disorder?? Tried to change the way you were thinking?? I know that is hard, but is sometimes what it entails. Maybe your physician husband is right, although men never seem to want you as skinny as you want to be. Proves that you are your own worst critic!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Our Newsletter

Get awesome content delivered straight to your inbox.

Top