Just wondering how everyone chose their goal weight. For now mine is 197, because that is the number that makes me "overweight" instead of "obese" on the BMI scale. However, I hope to lose more than that. When I was younger I typically weighed around 165, which back then was a size 11/12 on me. Not sure if I dare make a goal smaller than that, it doesn't feel like it can become a reality. But then I haven't been under 200 in 18 years, and I see that number getting closer and closer, so I remain hopeful!

I arbitrarily picked the weight I was in high school...150. But I told my surgeon my super-duper-top-secret fantasy weight (125lbs). She smiled and said as gently as possible, "I'm afraid you will have to become an elite athlete or else suffer a limb amputation for that to be a realistic goal."

*sob* *killjoy*

(I've half a mind to prove her wrong...)

1 hour ago, FluffyChix said:

I arbitrarily picked the weight I was in high school...150. But I told my surgeon my super-duper-top-secret fantasy weight (125lbs). She smiled and said as gently as possible, "I'm afraid you will have to become an elite athlete or else suffer a limb amputation for that to be a realistic goal."

*sob* *killjoy*

(I've half a mind to prove her wrong...)

My doctor said a similar thing, but I don't understand why. It actually really pissed me off, so I'm determined to prove her wrong! That is a normal weight for people our height. I don't see why it's such a crazy idea.

I think it is because they know the average amount of weight people lose after WLS, its something like 60-65% of excess weight for sleeve and 65-75% for RNY. It's not normal to lose 100% of excess weight after wls, even if some do it, most people do not. I think they want you to have realistic expectations, and realize that if you want to get to a "normal" weight, surgery alone will not get you there.

@fruitandveggies IKR? I don't understand it at all?

@bostonmama--so the weight loss %'s are an average of people losing weight where the altered digestion/set point shift is the only real thing working? That's the % average for people without trying any extra?

2 minutes ago, bostonmama said:

I think it is because they know the average amount of weight people lose after WLS, its something like 60-65% of excess weight for sleeve and 65-75% for RNY. It's not normal to lose 100% of excess weight after wls, even if some do it, most people do not. I think they want you to have realistic expectations, and realize that if you want to get to a "normal" weight, surgery alone will not get you there.

Yeah I totally get this and I understand it. I just really hate that my medical team wants me to lower my standards. Like they'd rather see me fail (as long as the failure is better than where I started) than encouraging me and cheering me on. I'm not a child, I can handle myself if I get disappointed. And actually, I would never treat a child that way, I would encourage them the whole time that they can get their goals.

I picked a weight where I was last TRULY comfortable in my own skin. And looking back over the years, as the weight crept up, I was not happy at any weight over 140. I'm 5' 4" and was always muscular so my goal is get to wherever I get after six-nine months, see where my weight lands and start training to get solid again. Gads I hate the flab and....a new word I've learned...my panni [emoji53]

[mention=292075]bostonmama[/mention]--so the weight loss %'s are an average of people losing weight where the altered digestion/set point shift is the only real thing working? That's the % average for people without trying any extra?

Well, it's an average so the statistic factors in all the people who tried for extra. It is the average of everyone.

I set short term goals... under 200, less than my husband, my wedding weight... and after that let my body settle where it would. I got smaller than I ever dreamed at 127 (less than my HS weight by a good deal) then gained back to 135 where I comfortably maintain.

I hear all the time about people getting the "too skinny" comments. I echo what's been said, it's perspective and subjective. Go for health not comments. I dunno I never got any of those comments, I think it's regional... I live in CA land of movie stars! I got "you're so skinny" but it was a compliment, LOL

2 minutes ago, jess9395 said:

live in CA land of movie stars! I got "you're so skinny" but it was a compliment, LOL

I think it also depends on the size of those in your social circles and family. If many of them are over weight they will perceive you as becoming too skinny when you get closer to your goal weight. This has been my experience with some of my acquaintances that are now heavier then me. On the other hand my dh has been nothing but supportive and is very happy with my weight loss and tells me all the time that I should lose until I am happy with myself.

I chose 140 because that's the high end of the normal BMI range for my height. It's also the same weight I was at my thinnest, when I was 24 years old (actually, I probably was down to 135, or even lower, but I didn't have a scale and 140 is the last number I remember seeing). If I get to 140 I will have also lost 50% of total body weight from when I was at my largest, so it's a nice number to aim for. If I go lower, no problem. It gives me room for a little "bounce back" which often happens, and if it does, will probably be easier to maintain.

Interestingly, in Japan 22.9 is the high end of the normal scale, 23-24.9 is overweight, and anyone 25 and up is obese. So I'll probably never meet the "normal" weight limits on my yearly health checks, even though that BMI scale is meant for people of Asian descent. Recently I went home for a visit (and much needed clothes shopping), and my family, friends and random people (like shop assistants) refused to believe that I am still obese - again getting to the idea that we as a society have a skewed view of what is "normal" weight. Even my Western friends here in Japan don't believe that I could still be considered obese. Grant it, I'm very close to just being overweight, but still...

I actually modified my goal upwards. I found a research article (don't have a link, unfortunately), but it basically showed the range of weight loss to be 28% - 48% of starting total body weight. The middle of the range (38%) is where most people end up.

So for me, I started at 305lbs. 305 x .62= 189.1. So that is my new goal.

There was also a curve, and my loss at 6 months was squarely on average.

Edited to add:

But, the plot thickens because for me to reach 189 means I'll have lost 79% of my excess body weight, which is WELL above average! So I guess time will tell!

Maybe excess body weight is supposed to be calculated from a different point then 24.9 bmi (which I've been using). I'll go see...

8 hours ago, Berry78 said:

But, the plot thickens because for me to reach 189 means I'll have lost 79% of my excess body weight, which is WELL above average! So I guess time will tell!

You are one inch shorter then me so I think you should shoot for a normal BMI with a few pounds for bounce. You are doing so well I bet you could hit 160 fairly easily.

Aww, thanks! I do plan on sticking to the program... forever.... but I don't think just sticking to the program gets you where you want to be, necessarily. I'll keep my goal modest.. if I reach it, then I'll move it down...

I haven't picked up running like someone I know...

Been struggling with that question, so very glad you asked. I think it depends a great deal on your health issues (besides weight struggle). When you are healthy, you have shiny hair, good nails & energy. Been a long time for me.

I "should", according to the sadistic weight charts, weigh 125. I have no clue where I need to end up. So setting short term goals along the way is a fantastic idea.

Also, you are very brave about the skin reduction surgery. Totally get why we would like that. I think, my overhall health & surgical history as a factor,, I may have to be ok with a bit of saggy baggy! But that's okay for where I am in liife. Best outcome to you!

On 9/24/2017 at 9:27 AM, Berry78 said:

Maybe excess body weight is supposed to be calculated from a different point then 24.9 bmi (which I've been using). I'll go see...

Ok, the plot is officially as thick and opaque as molasses..

Apparently most studies use the Metlife height/weight charts to determine "ideal body weight".

Interesting reading:

http://halls.md/met-life-ideal-weight/

For those that don't read the page.. basically it says that your height should be measured when you are wearing 1" heels. Weight measured wearing 3 pounds of clothing. Small/medium/large frames are subjective.

But, in an effort to find my own "ideal" weight, I persevered.

Take my height, add an inch. Look on the large frame side to accomodate extra skin and bone mass from being obese virtually my whole life. Then find the middle of the range, and finally, subtract 3 pounds.

My ideal weight should be 153lbs. Which happens to be 6 pounds less than the top of the normal bmi range.

But, remember all those studies didn't figure it that way. They just take your height and do the middle of the medium, which for me is 143lbs... assuming they don't forget the 1" heels! Arrrgggg...

But if we're talking clothed weight, then my starting weight was 308, ideal weight is 143 and so after subtracting 65% from my 165lbs of excess body weight, I'm left with an expected loss down to 200lbs.

....

....

Remember what I said about the dart board???