What number are you aiming for on the scale, and what makes it the one?

I only figured out my goal weight once I'd already reached it. Standing 5'7", my lowest was 135lbs and my highest was 172lbs.

Right now I'm around +/-140lbs with 12% body fat. Looking in the mirror, I'm happy with it.

I debated going after 135 once more, yet that would have been overly lean.
 
At first I was fixed on a goal weight, but eventually it became clear that body fat percent told me more. That’s why I made under 12% my target. I’m not sure what the percent a woman your age should be.
 
Beardboost said:

25 weeks back I was at 330 lb's, and 200 lb's is what I set as my target. Right now I'm sitting at 237 lb's, though I suspect that target will shift once I see how much belly fat is still left to lose.
Click to expand...
@Beardboost If I could, I'd send you thumbs up and smiley face emojis, but honestly I'm way too envious! Close to 100 lbs over 25 weeks -- that beard is Zeus-level amazing! I can't picture what it's like to shed 4 lbs week after week. You, my good friend, have found the key crafted to unlock your wish -- my bet is you'll hit your goal weight sooner than your estimate.
 
Last year I weighed 306#. My primary care provider had me on Trulicity, a GLP I wasn't happy with, and across more than a year I dropped only about 20#. Roughly a month ago I moved over to Reta, and it took a couple of weeks before the change really became noticeable. In the past month I've moved from 287 down to 270 as of this morning. That happened while my lean muscle mass held steady and even ticked up a little.

For context, I'm a 52 yo male at 6' 0".

A DEXA scan I had recently put my lean mass at 163.5#. So that's what I'm working toward: keep that lean mass and drop to roughly 12% BF. At that point I'd be sitting at 186#.
 
Goal 1: a buck 80. That's my IBW, and it's also the weight I was at in college, back when fitness was a big part of my life. Goal 2: 205, but lean. It's somewhat arbitrary, yet it happens to be the top of the UFC Light Heavyweight division, and that division was my favorite when I used to watch the early UFC days with my dad. Bf% at 10% is just to see what I look like, but long term I'm aiming around 15%, since that's more sustainable and doesn't come with a performance hit that leaner percentages can have.
 
Male, 76 years old. My height went from 5'8 down to 5'6 as the disks in my spine kept getting squeezed by gravity. Back in March I found out I'd hit 180 lbs — the heaviest I'd ever been. Two months before that, I came across a piece in The Atlantic about an underground drug called retatrutide that apparently a lot of people were quietly using for weight loss. Once I saw that figure on the scale, I started digging around online and came across plenty of suppliers ready to sell, so I put in an order for my first vial. I picked an absurdly aggressive target of getting down to 155, which meant losing 25 lb. It took almost no time at all to reach 155, so I made a fresh goal of 140 — a weight I hadn't seen in maybe 30-40 years. Not long after, I got there too, a 40 lb drop. In the meantime, that so-called smart scale of mine claimed my more ideal weight would sit around 135. These days I'm at 133, and I'm trying to add muscle and climb back up the scale. The trouble is I've still got roughly 5 lbs of visceral fat sticking around. I've been doing progressive resistance training 3 or 4 or 5 times a week, a hour each session. My arms, legs and chest look pretty good, but that damn belly fat just won't let go. Another issue is that my face has aged a lot. My wife tells me "whaddya expect? Your pushing 80..." I suppose she's right. Anyway, 47 lbs lost since March 20.
 
reta-stacker said:

Male, 76 years old. My height went from 5'8 down to 5'6 as the disks in my spine kept getting squeezed by gravity. Back in March I found out I'd hit 180 lbs — the heaviest I'd ever been. Two months before that, I came across a piece in The Atlantic about an underground drug called retatrutide that apparently a lot of people were quietly using for weight loss. Once I saw that figure on the scale, I started digging around online and came across plenty of suppliers ready to sell, so I put in an order for my first vial. I picked an absurdly aggressive target of getting down to 155, which meant losing 25 lb. It took almost no time at all to reach 155, so I made a fresh goal of 140 — a weight I hadn't seen in maybe 30-40 years. Not long after, I got there too, a 40 lb drop. In the meantime, that so-called smart scale of mine claimed my more ideal weight would sit around 135. These days I'm at 133, and I'm trying to add muscle and climb back up the scale. The trouble is I've still got roughly 5 lbs of visceral fat sticking around. I've been doing progressive resistance training 3 or 4 or 5 times a week, a hour each session. My arms, legs and chest look pretty good, but that damn belly fat just won't let go. Another issue is that my face has aged a lot. My wife tells me "whaddya expect? Your pushing 80..." I suppose she's right. Anyway, 47 lbs lost since March 20.
Click to expand...

Given this situation, I'd really like to know what the "correct" approach is for working out BMR/BMI.

My height has gone down too, because of several compressed discs.

I used to be 5'10", and now I'm roughly 5'81/2"

For the BMI calculation, which number should I enter: the height I used to be, or the shorter one I am now?
 
Skidude said:

reta-stacker said:

Male, 76 years old. My height went from 5'8 down to 5'6 as the disks in my spine kept getting squeezed by gravity. Back in March I found out I'd hit 180 lbs — the heaviest I'd ever been. Two months before that, I came across a piece in The Atlantic about an underground drug called retatrutide that apparently a lot of people were quietly using for weight loss. Once I saw that figure on the scale, I started digging around online and came across plenty of suppliers ready to sell, so I put in an order for my first vial. I picked an absurdly aggressive target of getting down to 155, which meant losing 25 lb. It took almost no time at all to reach 155, so I made a fresh goal of 140 — a weight I hadn't seen in maybe 30-40 years. Not long after, I got there too, a 40 lb drop. In the meantime, that so-called smart scale of mine claimed my more ideal weight would sit around 135. These days I'm at 133, and I'm trying to add muscle and climb back up the scale. The trouble is I've still got roughly 5 lbs of visceral fat sticking around. I've been doing progressive resistance training 3 or 4 or 5 times a week, a hour each session. My arms, legs and chest look pretty good, but that damn belly fat just won't let go. Another issue is that my face has aged a lot. My wife tells me "whaddya expect? Your pushing 80..." I suppose she's right. Anyway, 47 lbs lost since March 20.
Click to expand...

Given this situation, I'd really like to know what the "correct" approach is for working out BMR/BMI.

My height has gone down too, because of several compressed discs.

I used to be 5'10", and now I'm roughly 5'81/2"

For the BMI calculation, which number should I enter: the height I used to be, or the shorter one I am now?
Click to expand...
That's a great thing to bring up, and it's crossed my mind plenty of times too — so your post pushed me to go ask AI about it. The short version: go with the height you are now. At the same time, it flags that BMI deserves extra skepticism in a situation like this, and points to other numbers that track better:

Track these every week instead:

  • Waist circumference (the strongest marker for visceral fat)
    • Men: aim for < 40 inches
    • Women: aim for < 35 inches
  • Waist‑to‑height ratio
    • Healthy target: < 0.5
 
Skidude said:

reta-stacker said:

Male, 76 years old. My height went from 5'8 down to 5'6 as the disks in my spine kept getting squeezed by gravity. Back in March I found out I'd hit 180 lbs — the heaviest I'd ever been. Two months before that, I came across a piece in The Atlantic about an underground drug called retatrutide that apparently a lot of people were quietly using for weight loss. Once I saw that figure on the scale, I started digging around online and came across plenty of suppliers ready to sell, so I put in an order for my first vial. I picked an absurdly aggressive target of getting down to 155, which meant losing 25 lb. It took almost no time at all to reach 155, so I made a fresh goal of 140 — a weight I hadn't seen in maybe 30-40 years. Not long after, I got there too, a 40 lb drop. In the meantime, that so-called smart scale of mine claimed my more ideal weight would sit around 135. These days I'm at 133, and I'm trying to add muscle and climb back up the scale. The trouble is I've still got roughly 5 lbs of visceral fat sticking around. I've been doing progressive resistance training 3 or 4 or 5 times a week, a hour each session. My arms, legs and chest look pretty good, but that damn belly fat just won't let go. Another issue is that my face has aged a lot. My wife tells me "whaddya expect? Your pushing 80..." I suppose she's right. Anyway, 47 lbs lost since March 20.
Click to expand...

Given this situation, I'd really like to know what the "correct" approach is for working out BMR/BMI.

My height has gone down too, because of several compressed discs.

I used to be 5'10", and now I'm roughly 5'81/2"

For the BMI calculation, which number should I enter: the height I used to be, or the shorter one I am now?
Click to expand...
According to Gemini, the usual medical approach is to rely on the height you had before disc compression occurred—meaning the stature you would have without that injury. In medicine, a person’s height is still considered accurate even when they have an injury or an amputation.

It also pointed out that BMI is only an approximation regardless, and that for males, waist circumference gives a better indication than BMI does.
 
Back
Top