Ideal Weight? Does anyone have a goal or target weight??

[simon43]

Quote

 

Avoid Thai Food....

Mostly Deep Fred..., with excess salt or sugar, or fish sauce...,,

stick to Healthy Salads, no Dressings....as like everything else, sugar coated....

its just a matter of dieting and exercise...., 
 

 

 

Yes, my diet is well-defined now since I started at the beginning of February.  My fat is slowly coming off and it may take a year or more to get to my goal.

 

Since starting my health routine, I've thought about the 3 components that I'm following:

 

- Diet

- Cardio (cycling, treadmill, cross-trainer)

- Gym (upper body free weights and equipment (chest press, pull-downs etc)

 

I've come to the conclusion that diet is the most important part of losing the flab, aided by cardio to get me sweating off the pounds.  The gym work is only there to tone up my puny muscles and to stop me looking like a weakling.

 

My fellow Myanmar teachers also use the gym, but continue to eat Myanmar food (white rice, fatty meats, oil and more oil) every day.  Small wonder that none of them has reduced their body fat levels by even 1 ounce.....

 

...there is still some excess fat there....

 

When I wrote this, I was writing tongue-in-cheek.  I'm very much aware that I still have a lot of excess fat.  But I'm snapping photos of my abdomen every week, and the 'paunch' is much-reduced.

 

I'm in BKK in a week or so, and intend to buy a pair of body fat calipers, so I can get a more accurate idea of the week-on-week fat reduction.

[tropo]

4 hours ago, robertthebruce said:

 

 

Yes, still a bit to go.....now you need definition......but it's a start......

I don't see a lot of fat there at all. How about taking the same shot holding it in. If you have a protruding abdomen (beer gut), the fat is on the inside (visceral), not subcutaneous.

 

I can push my stomach out way bigger than that (4 months pregnant), but if I suck it in you'll see abs... and that's at a skin fold thickness of 5 - 7mm.

 

Get some skin fold calipers and take some measurements. They're easy to get and cheap.

 

LOL> I can see anorexia developing here.

[simon43]

They're easy to get and cheap

 

Well, not easy to get in Naypyidaw (I'd think impossible). They are on my BKK shopping list for next week.

 

That photo is with my stomach relaxed, neither pushed out nor sucked in. If I suck in then I can still grab a handful of flab (about 3cm thickness). But it is certainly less than 2 months ago.

[tropo]

2 hours ago, simon43 said:

 

 

 

Well, not easy to get in Naypyidaw (I'd think impossible). They are on my BKK shopping list for next week.

 

That photo is with my stomach relaxed, neither pushed out nor sucked in. If I suck in then I can still grab a handful of flab (about 3cm thickness). But it is certainly less than 2 months ago.

 

It should be taken in the context of the entire body. For example, I may pinch 5mm on the stomach, and 17mm on the upper back. Distribution varies from person to person. I carry no fat on the legs, whereas many people do. Of course, this is all in your genes, but if you have one particular area that holds onto fat while other areas are stripped bare, you're always going to face an uphill battle to get the area you want lean - in your case, the abdominal region.

 

 As an example.... an ex-girlfriend of mine (Farang) had a beautiful 6-pack but loads of jiggly fat on her ass. Nothing could be done about that. No amount of training or dieting could take care of that. Perhaps liposuction could have worked. I can't get my upper back lean even though I'm about 10% bodyfat (which really annoys me because it covers my back muscles that I work very hard to develop). I'd have to strip nearly all my bodyfat to do that, and that's not worth the effort. I can't see any point struggling to lower my bodyfat any further.

 

 

[simon43]

Yes, I'm aware that it might be that no amount of dieting will reduce my abs flab.  If that is the case, then maybe a bit of lipo will do the trick. That's a last resort.

 

I have lots of time to lose fat AND get fitter and healthier in the process - slowly, slowly said the tortoise to the hare.

 

My legs are where I have minimal fat.  I've always liked cycling and I can't pinch any fat on my legs :)  Legs of Adonis!

 

I've done a very approximate fat measurement at different points on my body using my fingers (I'll repeat it when I get the calipers). According to the online calculators, I'm probably around 18% fat right now.  

 

I'd really like to have a DEXA scan, but AFAIK, this is not available in Bangkok.

 

One thing that I can add is that since I started my health/fitness programme, I have learnt a lot about my food intake and balance, carbs, fat, protein etc etc.  This knowledge has really helped me to understand what I should and shouldn't be putting inside my mouth, (no sexual pun intended).

[tropo]

3 minutes ago, simon43 said:

Yes, I'm aware that it might be that no amount of dieting will reduce my abs flab.  If that is the case, then maybe a bit of lipo will do the trick. That's a last resort.

 

I have lots of time to lose fat AND get fitter and healthier in the process - slowly, slowly said the tortoise to the hare.

 

My legs are where I have minimal fat.  I've always liked cycling and I can't pinch any fat on my legs :)  Legs of Adonis!

 

I've done a very approximate fat measurement at different points on my body using my fingers (I'll repeat it when I get the calipers). According to the online calculators, I'm probably around 18% fat right now.  

 

I'd really like to have a DEXA scan, but AFAIK, this is not available in Bangkok.

 

One thing that I can add is that since I started my health/fitness programme, I have learnt a lot about my food intake and balance, carbs, fat, protein etc etc.  This knowledge has really helped me to understand what I should and shouldn't be putting inside my mouth, (no sexual pun intended).

 

I believe you're getting two separate issues confused. Your "beer gut" is not noticeable in your front facing photo, but the beer gut problem is not the same as a lack-of-ab-definition problem.

 

If you're only "pinching an inch" (close enough to 30mm), then that's not enough fat to be causing a protrusion. That protrusion is caused by visceral fat INSIDE the abdominal cavity, not an inch layer of subcutaneous fat. That could disappear quickly through exercise and diet (it's usually first to go) which would leave you with a layer of fat over the abs but no distension.

 

At 120 kg I had a hugely distended abdomen (over 40 inches), yet I had decent ab definition. Go figure! By the time I was back down to around the 100kg mark, the visceral fat was gone as determined by a DEXA scan. I went from around 25% fat in the abdominal region (whole body fat was around 16 - 17% at that time) to under 10%. At 25% abdominal fat I couldn't do a stomach vacuum, and when I laid on my back it would still protrude upwards. It was a solid mass. Now I can suck my stomach in until it nearly touches my spine and show ribs too. I actually perform stomach vacuums every morning. You develop great control over your midsection by doing this exercise.

 

Take it step by step - first focus on losing the gut (visceral fat) and see where you are then. Of course, you're going to lose subcutaneous fat while you're at it.

 

 

[tropo]

 I forgot to mention above... there was a guy (the 7% fat guy) on your other thread who mentioned BIA analysis in Bangkok that he claims is quite accurate. You might want to find out where that machine is.

 

I had my fat measured on an upmarket BIA machine at a  university at the same time I had a hydrostatic weighing and a DEXA scan. They were all done within an hour and the 3 were only about 2% apart. I have the measurements tucked away somewhere, so I'll post them when I find them.

 

That BIA machine in BKK might be worth trying. Always make sure it's a device which measures impedance through your arms and legs at the same time.

 

 

[jvs]

One thing i should add here,do not get hooked up over measurement.

In my gym there was sign saying,fitness is not the way you look,it is how you feel.!!!

It may be nice to know exactly how much body fat you have but for what purpose?

If you lift right and your back is getting wider it will appear your midsection is smaller.

Some guys just look at weights and they grow,other people strain for years and do not gain a lot.

I am not talking about athletes but normal working people.

 

 

[tropo]

6 hours ago, jvs said:

One thing i should add here,do not get hooked up over measurement.

In my gym there was sign saying,fitness is not the way you look,it is how you feel.!!!

It may be nice to know exactly how much body fat you have but for what purpose?

If you lift right and your back is getting wider it will appear your midsection is smaller.

Some guys just look at weights and they grow,other people strain for years and do not gain a lot.

I am not talking about athletes but normal working people.

 

 

 

The only problem with that theory is that how people feel is usually tied into their image of how they look. They (think) they look bad - they feel bad. It's a cliche expression to make fat people feel better about themselves.

 

No amount of back width will make a big midsection look small. There is no way to make a 40-inch midsection look small. At one point I had a back well over 50 inches wide with a midsection in the low 40's. It did NOT look good. It did not look smaller. Apart from that, developing back width is extremely hard to do and can take years of dedicated work. It's much easier to lose stomach girth. Most people don't walk around with flared lats anyway, so even if they have back width it will not show from the front.

 

 

This guy has a wide back. Rather than his wide back making his midsection look smaller, his big midsection is making his back look small. 

 

 

It's very important to monitor bodyfat. If a person has a lot of fat, weight training to build muscle will just make him look bigger and fatter. There's no point working your a** off to build muscle when it's covered with fat and you can't see it.

 

[jvs]

54 minutes ago, tropo said:

The only problem with that theory is that how people feel is usually tied into their image of how they look. They (think) they look bad - they feel bad. It's a cliche expression to make fat people feel better about themselves.

 

No amount of back width will make a big midsection look small. There is no way to make a 40-inch midsection look small. At one point I had a back well over 50 inches wide with a midsection in the low 40's. It did NOT look good. It did not look smaller. Apart from that, developing back width is extremely hard to do and can take years of dedicated work. It's much easier to lose stomach girth. Most people don't walk around with flared lats anyway, so even if they have back width it will not show from the front.

 

 

This guy has a wide back. Rather than his wide back making his midsection look smaller, his big midsection is making his back look small. 

 

 

It's very important to monitor bodyfat. If a person has a lot of fat, weight training to build muscle will just make him look bigger and fatter. There's no point working your a** off to build muscle when it's covered with fat and you can't see it.

 

You are talking body builders and i am talking normal people,very few people will ever look ripped because it is a lot of work and you can not maintain it.I happen to know a few people who are overweight but in very good shape!!

[tropo]

5 minutes ago, jvs said:

You are talking body builders and i am talking normal people,very few people will ever look ripped because it is a lot of work and you can not maintain it.I happen to know a few people who are overweight but in very good shape!!

 

You were talking about widening the back. You can't do that unless you do a lot of hard bodybuilding work. It's hard to do even if you're a bodybuilder.

 

I don't know of anyone who is overweight and in good shape. They are diametrically opposed. Do you mean overweight and fit or overweight and strong? That's possible...  

[simon43]

As an update to this thread, I am on holiday in Pattaya. My visible fat continues to reduce, my puny upper-body muscles continue to increase in size, and my weight continues to fall (although my weight-loss is not so important - my muscle increase will offset the weight-loss).

 

I had a battery of health tests whilst in Pattaya.  The doctor got the results back and said to me

 

'Simon, you are not fit...... '

 

'You are VERY fit  '

 

Every result was good, 120/80 BP, high HDL, low LDL, very low Triglycerides, PSA level OK, DHEA normal, Glycated Hb absolutely normal etc etc etc.  

 

My testosterone was a little low (518 ng/dL), but I was already aware of that, and might do some T injections to raise it.

 

But overall, I'm absolutely on a good path of diet, exercise and lifestyle.

 

Now to avoid getting squashed by a bus when I cross the road....

 

 

[jvs]

Simon good for you!!!Keep up the good work.I hear that just being around a lot of women will also raise your T level.

Pattaya seems like a good place to test that?

I also want to have some tests done and see how i am doing but if you feel ok you are ok?

 

[simon43]

I hear that just being around a lot of women will also raise your T level.

Pattaya seems like a good place to test that?

 

I doubt it - most of them seem to have d*cks.....

 

but if you feel ok you are ok?

Actually, I cannot agree with your comment at all!  I think there are all manner of insiduous illnesses that can creep up on you without any prior symptoms.  For example, prostrate and colon cancer can be quite advanced before you notice any symptoms.

 

Healthwise - I feel great.  But it was important for me to confirm that by regular health tests, and I'll come back in a year to repeat them all.  (Your age will determine how often you should have a full health check-up).

 

I also had a bunch of booster vaccinations (tetanus, hep A, hep B, Diptheria, Polio), just in case I step on a rusty nail or stick my genitals in a rusty woman in Myanmar...

[jvs]

Yeah maybe you are right about things that can creep up on you,old age also does that.

But you are very wrong about the d*ck thing,i do not know any women with one of those.

Maybe you are in the wrong part of town.

[CharmaineFuentes]

Well, I really don't have a target weight since what I am aiming for now is to be in great shape, just to lower my waist in order for me to have a better figure.

[bbi1]

On 2016-10-25 at 0:20 PM, robblok said:

 

BMI is an outdated formula its ok for the average public but not for people who exercise and have some muscle. It should be banned because it really gives a wrong result for healthy active people. For the average non active person its ok.

BMI is the biggest load of crap ever. All the body builders are obese according to the BMI theory 

[bbi1]

On 2017-3-24 at 11:48 PM, robertthebruce said:

 

I am 65 Kilos , and exercise every second day, for three hours in the extreme heat..

 

watch what I eat, and avoid Thai Food as it's loaded with Sugar, Salt, or deep fried..

 

62 Would be ideal for me....still a bit to go....

Geez, are you trying to be anorexic or are you small like below 150cm?

 

Ideally for me I'm aiming for around 95kgs while maintaining muscle mass and cutting about 10kgs of fat.

[simon43]

Quote

 

Geez, are you trying to be anorexic or are you small like below 150cm?
 

 

 

I see comments like this time and time again.  It's clear that some forum members have minimal understanding of healthy body weights.  

 

What is a healthy weight for one person can be an under or over weight for another.  It depends on several factors, including gender, age, muscle mass, body type etc.

 

For example, I am about 170cm tall.  I currently weigh about 63Kg, having lost 10Kg in the past few months.  I still have love handles and a flabby stomach.  I cannot see my ribs, and I don't look like a skeleton.  I have a healthy weight for my body type.

 

I expect to drop several more Kg of fat in the next few months, although my weight will probably stay fairly constant, since my muscle mass is slowly increasing.

 

BTW, one of my ex-wives was 147cm in height (just under your 150cm value).  Her healthy weight was a mere 33Kg (very compact body type, but deadly when she got angry...)

 

Update:

 

Here is a detailed, 'healthy weight' calculator that takes into account several influencing factors, including your lifestyle, exercise etc.

 

According to this calculator, my healthy weight range is 53.6 - 71.8 Kg.

[bbi1]

42 minutes ago, simon43 said:

 

Update:

 

Here is a detailed, 'healthy weight' calculator that takes into account several influencing factors, including your lifestyle, exercise etc.

 

According to this calculator, my healthy weight range is 53.6 - 71.8 Kg.

That calculator said my healthy body weight range is: 58.6 to 79.1 kilograms. Holy shitttt, I'd be an anorexic twig at that range! Considering my muscle mass is currently 75kgs that gives me 4.1kgs MAX for bone density, water weight, fat, blood, organs, etc. And that was at the maximum allowable 19% body fat! What a piece of junk these calculators are. Also under "Activity Level" there's nothing that covers off lifting weights, all I see is "(no weight) & (no lifting)".

[simon43]

That calculator said my healthy body weight range is: 58.6 to 79.1 kilograms. Holy shitttt, I'd be an anorexic twig at that range! 

 

So what are the values that you're entering into the calculator?

 

Perhaps your idea of 'anorexic' doesn't match that of most other people? :)

[bbi1]

17 minutes ago, simon43 said:

 

 

 

So what are the values that you're entering into the calculator?

 

Perhaps your idea of 'anorexic' doesn't match that of most other people? :)

19% body fat, which is the maximum allowable body fat that the calculator allows. 178cm height.

 

How can an ideal body weight range for most of the range given be less than your current muscle mass weight of 75kgs? Just doesn't make any logical sense.

[simon43]

What's your weight?  What's your waist and hip measurements?

 

Many of these calculators give erronous values when the person is very athletic, but if you are 178cm height and have 75Kg muscle mass, then it sounds like you have a 'body-builder' body (ie excessive muscle mass).

[bbi1]

2 hours ago, simon43 said:

What's your weight?  What's your waist and hip measurements?

 

Many of these calculators give erronous values when the person is very athletic, but if you are 178cm height and have 75Kg muscle mass, then it sounds like you have a 'body-builder' body (ie excessive muscle mass).

Certainly don't have a bodybuilder body, still very far from it lol. Weight, nearly 108kgs.

 

In that calculation page I put in a 33% body fat wanting to get to a 19% body fat (It says "Body fat goal must be a number between 1 and 19").

 

Problem is their calculator doesn't take into account muscle mass in their calculations.

[tropo]

 

Geez, are you trying to be anorexic or are you small like below 150cm?
 
 

 
I see comments like this time and time again.  It's clear that some forum members have minimal understanding of healthy body weights.  
 
What is a healthy weight for one person can be an under or over weight for another.  It depends on several factors, including gender, age, muscle mass, body type etc.
 
For example, I am about 170cm tall.  I currently weigh about 63Kg, having lost 10Kg in the past few months.  I still have love handles and a flabby stomach.  I cannot see my ribs, and I don't look like a skeleton.  I have a healthy weight for my body type.
 
I expect to drop several more Kg of fat in the next few months, although my weight will probably stay fairly constant, since my muscle mass is slowly increasing.
 
BTW, one of my ex-wives was 147cm in height (just under your 150cm value).  Her healthy weight was a mere 33Kg (very compact body type, but deadly when she got angry...)
 
Update:
 
Here is a detailed, 'healthy weight' calculator that takes into account several influencing factors, including your lifestyle, exercise etc.
 
According to this calculator, my healthy weight range is 53.6 - 71.8 Kg.

There's no such thing as a heathy weight. Tables just give averages based on statistics which are as good as lies for individuals. You can carry lots of fat and be very heathy or be lean and on death's door. I show ribs and abs at 100 kg but I'm no picture of heath and have worse blood test results than the OP with flab. Don't confuse asthetics with health.


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[NoshowJones]

On 9/21/2016 at 0:47 AM, KittenKong said:

I weigh 106kg and should weigh around 90.

 

Is it going to happen? No.

You should weigh around 90K? you must be some height, I always keep my weight on the 77. 5 k mark, and I am 6ft. 185 Ks on my pink ID card.

[MuntyC0re]

I don't havetarget weight I thin that my weight now is idea, I am 165 cm high and 47kg  weight

[kekalot]

On 2017-06-29 at 4:57 PM, possum1931 said:

You should weigh around 90K? you must be some height, I always keep my weight on the 77. 5 k mark, and I am 6ft. 185 Ks on my pink ID card.

no doubt that person is either really tall and/or disillusioned about weight in general (extremely common and slightly annoying)

 

I am athletic (not buff, save me the BS) at 191cm, (6 ft 3) ±69kg, 31' waist (Arnold had a 32' waist). 14-15% body fat

I used to be leaner (10-11%), probably around 67kg or so I would see abs again.. definitely not now

 

my dad who is slightly overweight told me one time "you should gain at least 15kg to be healthy" and it was at a time that I couldn't see my abs anymore because I gained 2-3kg..

so, I had a good laugh because he is the same height as me.. I told him "15kg for what? so I could be the same size as you and make you feel better?"

 

oh boy, he didn't like that much, but it made him think.

 

from my experience, most overweight people will tell athletic or thin people that they should gain weight because their view of what "normal" is, is overweight.

every time I see pictures of people that I went to school with back home (Canada), I see 90% of them people are quite a bit overweight. like Facebook pictures of my thin sister with her 9 overweight friends.

 

anyways, from this calculator linked previously:

 

Your weight: 69 kilograms

Healthy body weight range is: 67.3 to 90.9 kilograms

The weight range does not consider your level of fitness.

If you are a lean athlete, your weight goal based on your percent body fat would be a better indicator of what you should weigh.

 

 

[NoshowJones]

56 minutes ago, kekalot said:

no doubt that person is either really tall and/or disillusioned about weight in general (extremely common and slightly annoying)

 

I am athletic (not buff, save me the BS) at 191cm, (6 ft 3) ±69kg, 31' waist (Arnold had a 32' waist). 14-15% body fat

I used to be leaner (10-11%), probably around 67kg or so I would see abs again.. definitely not now

 

my dad who is slightly overweight told me one time "you should gain at least 15kg to be healthy" and it was at a time that I couldn't see my abs anymore because I gained 2-3kg..

so, I had a good laugh because he is the same height as me.. I told him "15kg for what? so I could be the same size as you and make you feel better?"

 

oh boy, he didn't like that much, but it made him think.

 

from my experience, most overweight people will tell athletic or thin people that they should gain weight because their view of what "normal" is, is overweight.

every time I see pictures of people that I went to school with back home (Canada), I see 90% of them people are quite a bit overweight. like Facebook pictures of my thin sister with her 9 overweight friends.

 

anyways, from this calculator linked previously:

 

Your weight: 69 kilograms

Healthy body weight range is: 67.3 to 90.9 kilograms

The weight range does not consider your level of fitness.

If you are a lean athlete, your weight goal based on your percent body fat would be a better indicator of what you should weigh.

 

 

Very interesting post, though I did think that you should be a certain weight according to your height. I have little fat and little muscle, I was never strong when I was a teenager, just about everyone would beat me at arm wrestling, but when it came to running, I was faster than most other guys in my age group.

 

But take a guy at 185 Cms, he should weigh around 78-80Ks. If a guy is big muscled, no fat, 185 cms tall and weighs about 95 Ks, he is still well overweight no matter how you dress it up, and he is only that weight because of pumping iron, and probably on steroids, as muscle weighs more than fat.

[robblok]

4 minutes ago, possum1931 said:

Very interesting post, though I did think that you should be a certain weight according to your height. I have little fat and little muscle, I was never strong when I was a teenager, just about everyone would beat me at arm wrestling, but when it came to running, I was faster than most other guys in my age group.

 

But take a guy at 185 Cms, he should weigh around 78-80Ks. If a guy is big muscled, no fat, 185 cms tall and weighs about 95 Ks, he is still well overweight no matter how you dress it up, and he is only that weight because of pumping iron, and probably on steroids, as muscle weighs more than fat.

Your a funny guy with a skinny guy complex... overweight is used for fat not muscle. 

 

But now that you explained how everyone could beat you up it all made sense to me.