Why Isn’t There a “Right Weight”?

In light of a few past discussions about BMI and body fatness etc I’ve come to a realization that is just another indication of how our societal norms change the language to disguise the truth and try to make everyone feel exactly the same.

The issue is with the way we describe body size and the use of the word ‘weight’ and the thinking around it.

It’s not uncommon to refer to someone as ‘overweight’, even the individual themselves can easily recognize when they’re overweight and will often refer to themselves with this word.

It’s also not uncommon to refer to someone as underweight, or too light, too skinny etc.

So if the categories of overweight and underweight exist…what are they being compared to?

The ‘right’ weight?

Normal weight?

The ‘correct’ weight?

Average weight?

Good weight?

If you think about it you’ll realize we don’t have a term that is associated with the word ‘weight’ to describe what ‘overweight’ and ‘underweight’ are being compared to?

If ‘normal’ weight or ‘average’ is in fact the correct technical terms we certainly don’t use them in the general discussions or pop culture (it might show up in clinical setting’s such as the BMI chart…and we all know how well that goes over)

Instead we tend to use other terms that don’t associate the word weight.

We use terms like “In shape”, “athletic”, “lean”, “toned”, “jacked”. Whatever.

But we never use a ‘weight’ associated word. When was the last time you heard someone say “she’s at her correct weight”

However it’s perfectly normal to say “she’s overweight”…BUT in order for someone to be ‘overweight’ that means by definition there has to be an ideal/normal/correct/right weight…otherwise how do you know you’re over it?!

“Overweight” cannot exist without “normal” weight to compare it to.

“Skinny” cannot exist without “normal” size/weight to compare it to.

I think this is another instance where you can’t point out what is good or ideal or right or correct because then it seems to suggest someone is ‘better’ than someone else. (when it could very well be that physically they are, you’re just forbidden by societal norms to say it)

John

Posted by johnbarban in Weight Loss
Tags: goal weight, overweight, underweight, Weight Loss |11 Comments

11 Responses to “Why Isn’t There a “Right Weight”?”

  1. Cooper Says:
    March 30th, 2010 at 11:11 am

    John,

    It would be great if you could do a blog post on body compositional analysis methods. I deciding to try a little experiment to compare the different methods on myself and the results were all over the place. DEXA came back as high as 24%, 7-site caliper put me at around 15%, 1-site caliper (Accumeasure) put me at 12.4%, BIA put me at 18% on normal mode and as low as 10% on athlete mode. My waist size changes by more than an inch throughout the day and so on. It seems there’s no benchmark here either. As you pointed out, we don’t have a good benchmark for weight since the normal BMI range is huge.

    So when you read forums or magazines and they talk about being less than 12% (sometimes 10%) to see a 6-pack, which analysis method are they talking about? Is it a morning or night measurement, hydrated or dehydrated, fed or fasted, clothed or naked, etc.

    I’ve decided to keep losing weight until I can see a 6-pack but I have absolutely no idea how long I will have to do this for, i.e. no endpoint or goal to aim for, and no way to predict how long it will take.

    Cooper

  2. Cooper Says:
    March 30th, 2010 at 11:15 am

    I should also say that I’m an Engineer and if I’d come up with an Engineering solution similar to body compositional analysis, I would be laughed at.

    It makes no sense to take a measurement when the error in the measurement is greater than the rate of change of the variable over a sensible time frame.

  3. johnbarban Says:
    March 30th, 2010 at 11:18 am

    Cooper,

    You got it, and I think I might write a manual/guide book on this. Because every point you just brought up is valid.

    The reality is there is no such thing as how much you weigh. There is a range that you weigh based on food, hydration, time of day etc.

    And within this range there is also an associated look.

    Bodyfat % measurements are BS and not worth talking about because it’s just a matter of the device you use and how accurate/inaccurate they are. Each one has it’s error ranges.

    Anyone who states that they know what their bodyfat percentage is, is just showing you how little they know of how difficult it is to get an accurate measurement.

    You’ve got the right attitude…and that is if you want to see your abs, just keep dieting down and exercising until you can see them. And it’s completely irrelevant how much you weigh or what some calipers say when you get there.

    BTW, How in the hell do you have access to a DEXA?

    JB

  4. anthony Ramos Says:
    March 30th, 2010 at 11:45 am

    John, I was explaing to a workout buddy why I do certain exercises and skip others (like I usually don’t do deadlift b/c I don’t believe they improve the look i’m going for very much, I’m generally going for the Vtaper you describe). The training partner , a football player, then explained to me why I should worry about shaping, but instead, just try to pick my one or two genetic attribute that I’m naturally gifted with and try to excel in that. I thought about explaining to him some of the aesthetic and attraction research that you talk about, but didn’t go into it.

    The moral of the story is that people are often confused about what kind of fitness goal they should have. For instance, if my goal is to attract women, I probably should not be training for a marathon, and I also should probably not go for a power lifter look.

    If my goal is fitness, IMO it should be to minimize mortality risk factors and maximize mobility / quality of life.

  5. Cooper Says:
    March 30th, 2010 at 2:05 pm

    John,

    There’s a hospital here in Houston that provides DEXA scanning for a fee of $100. I guess they thought they might as well offer an additional service when the machine is not being used for bone density scans.

    This was just a one-time thing for this experiment. I don’t know how much radiation it emits but I would guess it’s probably a bad idea to unnecessarily expose myself to ionising radiation. And $100 isn’t exactly cheap either.

    It did help confirm what my intuition told me about tracking changes in body composition, and you confirmed it as well. Thanks! I had asked questions before on other forums about body composition and was just always told I was doing it wrong. I also remember reading Silvester Stallone’s book, “Sly Moves” and he said he was down to 2.8% for Rocky 3. I remember thinking at the time that that’s got to be BS. The numbers I saw being thrown around elsewhere just never seemed consistent with the corresponding photos.

    Cooper

  6. Cooper Says:
    March 30th, 2010 at 2:10 pm

    Oh, and I forgot to add. A manual/guide book on this would be absolutely great. In my experience, almost no-one seems to really understand body composition. I was recently told by a girl I know that she lost 5% body fat without losing any weight, according to Tanita scales. Of course, I knew it was BS, but I also knew she wouldn’t believe me if I tried to explain it to her.

  7. Brad Says:
    March 30th, 2010 at 2:15 pm

    Thanks for discussing this; I have the exact same issues as Cooper. I have made great progress following the Eat Stop Eat lifestyle but haven’t quite gotten rid of enough abdominal fat to uncover my abs even though I’m at what I thought was a good “target” body weight. Based on some advice Brad Pilon gave me of his experience on this topic back in January. Brad related, “when I got down to 180-182, I was pretty depressed that I still didn’t ‘look’ really lean, then when I hit 177…everything just came together, almost overnight.” I’m really looking forward to when I reach this point!

  8. Andrew Says:
    March 30th, 2010 at 5:17 pm

    Most people overestimate how much they need to weigh when trying to build muscle and underestimate how much they have to lose to look ripped.

    But, generally, after you’ve been to the low bodyfat point, you know what it takes and about how much you can realistically gain without losing the ripped look.

  9. Biggahboy Says:
    March 30th, 2010 at 7:46 pm

    I agree Andrew, imo i think to get ripped or have 6 pack abs, one will have to weigh less than they think. currently i weigh btw 175-173lbs, i thought i would have abs by now, but ill lift hard and eat less and go down to 168lbs and see what happens.

  10. B. Howard Says:
    March 30th, 2010 at 8:04 pm

    Cooper,

    That’s the funny thing about it all… that no one really gets.

    If you’re measuring in “lbs” for example, yet your measuring device is calibrated at plus or minus 1-2 lbs… that’s one helluva error.

    I’d like to see at least one significant figure or order of magnitude’s in error… but that won’t happen anytime soon for most of this stuff (ie measuring in lbs… good to plus or minus 1/10 of a pound)

    You bring up a good point for sure.

    B

  11. The Homebody Says:
    March 30th, 2010 at 9:23 pm

    Well this actually makes me feel a little better about myself because I’m often called skinny, slim or, if someone’s being nice, lean.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>