3in9th Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Is it possible to get down to one's pre-pregnancy waist size without surgery? I want to know if this is a viable goal for me to work toward or if I should settle for something wider. FWIW, my hips size are exactly what they were before kids. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SparklyUnicorn Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 For me no not really. I've got a stretched out piece of flabby skin no matter what I do. I'd need cosmetic surgery to get rid of that. But I think this varies from person to person in terms of whether or not it is possible (and whether or not they end up with the issue I just described). 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laura Corin Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 I'm back to where I was, but I never had a small waist: I'm very short in the torso, so there's not much distance for my waist to go in between rib cage and hips. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MEmama Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Yes, for some. Only you know your body and how it's changed. Mine didn't change as a result of pregnancy but I have to actively work on maintaining it as a result of getting older. I'm not sure I would focus solely on waist size as your goal, but on overall fitness. How that looks in various stages is different for everyone. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeacefulChaos Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 When I was in my early 20s, shortly after having the first 2 kids? Yes. Now? No. And I'm okay with that. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsuga Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Is it possible to get down to one's pre-pregnancy waist size without surgery? I want to know if this is a viable goal for me to work toward or if I should settle for something wider. FWIW, my hips size are exactly what they were before kids. I am slim. I do not have extra skin. I have worked extremely hard to get to my pre-pregnancy waist size in spite of diastasis recti which I am not willing to have surgery for without a serious health risk. Had my second at 31. I have gotten within an inch, but that's it. That took me about two solid years of working out and I had no weight to lose--that was purely re-shaping. If you also have weight to lose it could take longer. The muscles and organs seem to be shaped differently. However, I do think it's possible in many cases to get a waist back even if it's not a virginal waist. I recommend workouts that focus on the transverse abs and muscle tone over calorie burning. I found ChaLean Extreme and P90X3 helpful for the waist. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brit29 Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Absolutely it is. I'm at least 2 inches smaller than I was before my kids. Now, I do still have a nice wrinkly stomach...that will likely never go away without a tummy tuck. I lift heavy weights with little to no cardio, 5 days a week. I focus on strength and muscle building. I also eat a LOT, high protein and fat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momof3littles Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Do you have diastasis recti? That is a split in your abdominal muscles that allows everything else (organs, etc.) to kind of bulge forward. It is quite common. Since it affects your core strength considerably, it is also helpful to remedy for non cosmetic reasons. There are videos on youtube (Julie Tupler for example) on how to check yourself. Traditional ab exercises, jack knife positions, etc. can make it worse. Working your transverse abdominal muscles actually serves as a corset of sorts and holds everything in. That can be improved and it is really quite common for women who have given birth to have diastasis recti. I am not overweight but gain any weight I put on in my stomach thanks to being insulin resistant (PCOS). Cutting carb intake makes my stomach flatter. Like a PP, I have overstretched, wrinkly belly skin that isn't going to resolve without surgery (biggish babies, I'm short, and have a short torso on top of that, so my belly was enormous in pregnancy. Everything got pushed way out in front of me). If I could get that cut off, I would probably drop a size in pants. Like another PP, I have a very short torso. When I was in graduate school, my anatomy professor was fascinated because I have like a half inch between the bottom of my rib cage and the top of my pelvis. That explains why I have always looked like rectangle with little waist definition. It really depends on so many things. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsuga Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Absolutely it is. I'm at least 2 inches smaller than I was before my kids. Now, I do still have a nice wrinkly stomach...that will likely never go away without a tummy tuck. I lift heavy weights with little to no cardio, 5 days a week. I focus on strength and muscle building. I also eat a LOT, high protein and fat. Where were you with respect to weight-for-height pre-kids? This seems almost impossible if you were fit before children. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb_ Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 When I was in my early 20s, shortly after having the first 2 kids? Yes. Now? No. And I'm okay with that. This was my experience. I had my first three in my 20s and my waist bounced back, but it took a little longer with each baby. I had the last four in my 30s. After #4 it still looked pretty good, but the last two babies ensured I'd never have a perfectly flat stomach again. Oh well :) I think is age as much as it is pregnancies. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momof3littles Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 I am slim. I do not have extra skin. I have worked extremely hard to get to my pre-pregnancy waist size in spite of diastasis recti which I am not willing to have surgery for without a serious health risk. Have you ever tried working on your diastasis via conservative (non surgical) means? Tupler Technique, a physical therapist who specializes in women's health, etc.? Many people have some success without surgery. I improved mine pretty significantly. I still have a gap, but it is shallower, and I was able to close the top and bottom of mine substantially. I still have a two finger gap in the middle, but it is substantially better than it was, and I feel like I have my core back to the point I can do more varied exercise than I could before. I was a physical therapist in my premommy days and could feel myself substituting muscles all of the time when my core was weak. It was incredibly frustrating because it was like a vicious cycle. Some exercises were out entirely, some I couldn't do with correct form due to how bad my core was, and that all made it tougher to get back into working out. Depending on moves in something like PD90x, it can put more strain on a diastasis and worsen it (moves like planks, jackknife moves, etc.) You are probably aware, but just mentioning that in case it is something others want to consider. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
73349 Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Not for me. I'm at the bottom of the healthy BMI range, but I still look 2-3 months pg under my clothes (yes, I was showing that early). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brit29 Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Where were you with respect to weight-for-height pre-kids? This seems almost impossible if you were fit before children. Pre kids I was 5'5 and let's say 135lbs. I was never fit, probably hadn't worked out for more than a few hours total. I was jeans size 8 and medium shirts. I think bloated is a good word to describe how I looked before. Now, after kids I'm still 5'5 and 130 lbs..however, I'm a size 2 in jeans and small in shirts. It's amazing what muscle vs fat can do to a body! I'm getting my bodyfat checked sometime this month, and I'm estimating it will show almost a 8% change from when I started weight training to now! 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catwoman Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Yes, it was possible for me. I was 36 when I had my ds. My stomach flattened out quickly with normal tight skin, but I didn't gain a lot of weight when I was pregnant and I only had the one pregnancy. My mom had three kids and you could have bounced a quarter off her abs even when she was in her 60's, and my aunt was the same, so I'm thinking it might be something that runs in the family as opposed to anything I did or didn't do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KungFuPanda Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 I'm in shape and I've always been fairly thin, but achieving a 22 inch waist at 42 will never make it to the top of my list of priorities. It's an interesting question. I'm just not sure it's possible or healthy unless you were packing a little extra pre-kids or you waited until you were older to have your first baby. I do think our kids are an easy scapegoat for body changes that age would likely bring. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsuga Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 I was 36 when I had my dh. That must have been painful. And awkward. 20 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catwoman Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 That must have been painful. And awkward. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: Off to fix my unfortunate typo! Serves me right for posting from my phone!!! 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsuga Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Pre kids I was 5'5 and let's say 135lbs. I was never fit, probably hadn't worked out for more than a few hours total. I was jeans size 8 and medium shirts. I think bloated is a good word to describe how I looked before. Now, after kids I'm still 5'5 and 130 lbs..however, I'm a size 2 in jeans and small in shirts. It's amazing what muscle vs fat can do to a body! I'm getting my bodyfat checked sometime this month, and I'm estimating it will show almost a 8% change from when I started weight training to now! Okay well I think that's different, because imagine you were 5'5" and 110 lbs before children... you had somewhere to go from 135 as that's at the top of the healthy scale. Assuming you were healthy beforehand, or even very slim, what would you do to lose that? I wouldn't want to get down to my pre-pregnancy weight as I was unhealthy. I gained 7 lbs and stayed the same size. However I am still a different shape. I know what my potential was before because I was slim and did yoga. So I guess what I'm saying is you have to give context. :) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KungFuPanda Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 I notice that now that I'm 35 I have to think about food consummation and exercise. I don't think I'm getting the image you intended. Maybe 'consumption' is a better word? 11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3in9th Posted February 27, 2015 Author Share Posted February 27, 2015 My problems have been ramping up (middle-aged spread), but last fall some medication really exacerbated it and I gained several pounds (and was the heaviest ever w/o being pregnant/post-partum) AND I gained an inch on my waist. Also, a bit on my hips, but that's back down. And I have lost that extra inch on my waist plus one more that was post-kid normal. I definitely have belly fat. Not just skin, fat. Pinch an inch, no four. Nearly everywhere else on me is what it was before I had kids, even my upper most thighs. I'd have three inches to lose on my waist to get me back. I'm not sure if that's reasonable. Maybe one or two more. But I'm really, really concerned about the belly fat. I'm holding my weight there and I know that can't be good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
regentrude Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Yes, I did not have any problem with that. It took 9 months after my second child. I was 31 years old. I had always normal weight, but was at my thinnest adult size when my kids were age 1 and 3. Now in my mid 40s, I do not have the waist from back then anymore. ETA: I have friends who are absolutely skinny and have a figure like a teen after two kids. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catwoman Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Okay well I think that's different, because imagine you were 5'5" and 110 lbs before children... you had somewhere to go from 135 as that's at the top of the healthy scale. Assuming you were healthy beforehand, or even very slim, what would you do to lose that? I wouldn't want to get down to my pre-pregnancy weight as I was unhealthy. I gained 7 lbs and stayed the same size. However I am still a different shape. I know what my potential was before because I was slim and did yoga. So I guess what I'm saying is you have to give context. :) I don't understand why it wouldn't be possible to get back to the 5'5" and 110 pounds if that was your normal weight before pregnancy. :confused: I didn't find it to be difficult at all -- but I wonder if it may actually be easier for a naturally slim person to get back to her old size quickly than it would be for a woman who has always struggled a bit with her weight. I also think there is bound to be a difference if one woman gained 15-25 pounds and another gained 50 or more pounds, because the first woman would have far less weight to lose after she had the baby. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hornblower Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Oh, I think it's absolutely possible in terms of inches, but you might still look a bit different than you did before.... I'm below what I used to be if you look at actual true waist (you know that dorkily high measurement above your belly button). But I also have a silly little muffin below the waist. When I lost weight, my face & already little boobs disappeared & apparently took up semi permanent residence in my lower belly; you can see a number of my ribs & collar bones etc so I'm fairly lean, but I still have a roll of fat there. It has been getting smaller but I care about it less and less. So long as I know I have good muscles underneath, my aerobic capacity is good, and my bmi is in the bottom 1/2 of healthy range, I'm willing to have this small jiggly memory of pregnancy bellies. I don't have stretch marks on my belly either but all the extra skin is wrinkly depending on how I suck it in. It's quite funny IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kerileanne99 Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 I don't think I'm getting the image you intended. Maybe 'consumption' is a better word? He, he, I hope you didn't get the same unfortunate mental images I did:) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3in9th Posted February 27, 2015 Author Share Posted February 27, 2015 Alright, I just checked and I do have diastasis recti. Two and a half fingers at the belly button and medium depth, one above and below the belly button and that connective tissue is very firm and like silly putty that the video I watched said it should be. Now what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SparklyUnicorn Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Yes, it was possible for me. I was 36 when I had my ds. My stomach flattened out quickly with normal tight skin, but I didn't gain a lot of weight when I was pregnant and I only had the one pregnancy. My mom had three kids and you could have bounced a quarter off her abs even when she was in her 60's, and my aunt was the same, so I'm thinking it might be something that runs in the family as opposed to anything I did or didn't do. So weird how everyone is different. I hardly gained any weight when I was pregnant and I'm flabaroni. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SparklyUnicorn Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 I do not know which answers are more reassuring lol Brain hears: Nope. Do not fret. Yes, but are you ready to train for the Olympics? Either reality kinda sucks. LOL 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsuga Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 I don't understand why it wouldn't be possible to get back to the 5'5" and 110 pounds if that was your normal weight before pregnancy. :confused: I didn't find it to be difficult at all -- but I wonder if it may actually be easier for a naturally slim person to get back to her old size quickly than it would be for a woman who has always struggled a bit with her weight. I also think there is bound to be a difference if one woman gained 15-25 pounds and another gained 50 or more pounds, because the first woman would have far less weight to lose after she had the baby. It is possible and I did, but it's not healthy because 110 lbs is underweight. I also wasn't the same waist size! I lost weight but my stomach didn't knit back together so it all just splayed out. It was impossible to gain muscle and stay that thin and breastfeed because the body needs fat to breastfeed. So I chose nursing but I was not able to consume enough to build muscle and breastfeed, since I already have high metabolism, and I don't need advice on that, I can eat 3,000 calories per day and I have and I know how but that was only enough for nursing and there's a limit to how much junk I will eat. SO, I had to wait until I was done nursing to build my muscles up to get my stomach together. Now I have the body tone to hold my stomach in place and have a waist. But it's not like I could just lose the weight and get my waist back, no. I did lose the weight and no waist. Then I gained weight and got a waist. Body shaping is very hard, and I consider myself extremely lucky in that I don't have loose skin or anything to complicate matters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catwoman Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 It is possible and I did, but it's not healthy because 110 lbs is underweight. I also wasn't the same waist size! I lost weight but my stomach didn't knit back together so it all just splayed out. It was impossible to gain muscle and stay that thin and breastfeed because the body needs fat to breastfeed. So I chose nursing but I was not able to consume enough to build muscle and breastfeed, since I already have high metabolism, and I don't need advice on that, I can eat 3,000 calories per day and I have and I know how but that was only enough for nursing and there's a limit to how much junk I will eat. SO, I had to wait until I was done nursing to build my muscles up to get my stomach together. Now I have the body tone to hold my stomach in place and have a waist. But it's not like I could just lose the weight and get my waist back, no. I did lose the weight and no waist. Then I gained weight and got a waist. Body shaping is very hard, and I consider myself extremely lucky in that I don't have loose skin or anything to complicate matters. I think frame size needs to be taken into consideration when we try to determine our best weight. I was at a healthy weight at 5'5" tall and 108 pounds, but I am also very small-boned. One of my friends is the same height and looks and feels fit and firm at 130 pounds, but she is larger-boned than I am. I am overweight when I weigh 125 pounds, even though most people think that sounds fairly slim. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TranquilMind Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 Is it possible to get down to one's pre-pregnancy waist size without surgery? I want to know if this is a viable goal for me to work toward or if I should settle for something wider. FWIW, my hips size are exactly what they were before kids. Possibly. I had a tiny waist - about 23 inches - and had kids late, so no, it didn't happen. I'm larger than 23 inches now! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lolly Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 I did. I was in prepreg clothes a week after the first. Even after twins, I shaped back up within a few weeks. And then again after a spare a couple of years later. Now, No way is it happening. For me, it was age, not pregnancy. However, I never did have the same shape again. I gained BooKs with the first that never did go away. I also gained hips (filled out those pants better than I did before). Both were welcome additions. I was built like a 10 yo before babies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paige Posted February 27, 2015 Share Posted February 27, 2015 It's definitely possible for some depending on personal genetics and history. It may not be possible for everyone for many reasons, and isn't really a good goal, IMO. I think better, more attainable and healthy goals, would be things like: exercise x times a week, eat a certain healthy distribution of carbs/fats/proteins, replace calorie filled beverages with water, etc. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unsinkable Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 "Twenty inches! I've grown as big as Aunt Pitty! You've simply got to make it eighteen and a half again!" 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommymilkies Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 I don't understand why it wouldn't be possible to get back to the 5'5" and 110 pounds if that was your normal weight before pregnancy. :confused: I didn't find it to be difficult at all -- but I wonder if it may actually be easier for a naturally slim person to get back to her old size quickly than it would be for a woman who has always struggled a bit with her weight. I also think there is bound to be a difference if one woman gained 15-25 pounds and another gained 50 or more pounds, because the first woman would have far less weight to lose after she had the baby. So many factors. Hormones, thyroid, genetics, diet, lifestyle, environment... I actually put *on* weight after #2 and #5 vs. before pregnancy and during pregnancy! The first time it took them 9 months to find nodes on my thryoid. This time? No idea. I exercise, eat very healthy 99% of the time, and I've had my tsh tested. I simply can not do it. :/ I think it's part age and part hormones and blood sugar issues (life long hypoglycemic catching up with me?). Just because you did not find it difficult does not mean even most people find it easy, it is a very common issue postpartum. OP-Even when I was very underweight postpartum, I never got my waist down to what my trainer said they wanted to see. No DR, must just be genetic. I'm a pear shape and I have bone thin wrists and, well, a powerful lower portion. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arcadia Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 I was 23" waist, 36"hip, less than 100lbs most of my life. Small bone, small frame 5'3" tall. My pregnancy weight was at most 110lbs. Both boys were more than 8lbs at birth. Lost weight after birth for both pregnancies. Most of my cousins are slim with high metabolism so it's probably genes. It's hard to find clothes my size in the ladies section so it's no fun being small for size either. I can almost hide behind my 10 year old boy. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barnwife Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 Alright, I just checked and I do have diastasis recti. Two and a half fingers at the belly button and medium depth, one above and below the belly button and that connective tissue is very firm and like silly putty that the video I watched said it should be. Now what? I have been using the exercises from here to help with my diastasis recti. I've definitely had some improvement. My waist is about the same after 3 kids, but my belly isn't. I'm hoping working on the diastasis recti gives me some improvement, but I don't think it will ever be a 20-something stomach again. And that is just fine with me. Overall well-being/health is my goal, not a certain waist size. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catwoman Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 So many factors. Hormones, thyroid, genetics, diet, lifestyle, environment... I actually put *on* weight after #2 and #5 vs. before pregnancy and during pregnancy! The first time it took them 9 months to find nodes on my thryoid. This time? No idea. I exercise, eat very healthy 99% of the time, and I've had my tsh tested. I simply can not do it. :/ I think it's part age and part hormones and blood sugar issues (life long hypoglycemic catching up with me?). Just because you did not find it difficult does not mean even most people find it easy, it is a very common issue postpartum. OP-Even when I was very underweight postpartum, I never got my waist down to what my trainer said they wanted to see. No DR, must just be genetic. I'm a pear shape and I have bone thin wrists and, well, a powerful lower portion. I never said that most people find it easy. I said that I did. I further qualified it by saying that it might be because I am naturally slim. I also mentioned in another post that my mom and my aunt were the same way, so I thought it might run in my family. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catwoman Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 The amount of weight you put on during pregnancy I think should be considered. I was 108 lbs @ 5'5" at the beginning of my first pregnancy. It was deemed underweight (which I think was due to lack of muscle, not fat). I gained 40 lbs with that pregnancy so it doesn't surprise me that I didn't get close to that size afterwards. I just had my second baby recently and I gained a lot less weight and she was born a couple of weeks before due date. Huge difference in weight gain between the pregnancies. In the end I weighed basically the same at the end of the pregnancy since I started out bigger the second time. I wasn't able to breastfeed with my son so I think that affected things as well. This time I saw the pounds falling off the first week or two which I think was largely linked to breastfeeding. I just think there are a lot of factors to take into consideration. I think I move around more than I did before, too (I had a desk job and now I'm home but I get up more). ETA: lol I just saw we were the same weight, Catwoman. I totally agree about frame. I am small framed and I feel better at a lower weight (not aiming for 108 but something around 115 might look and feel right to me). Of course what looks and feels right to me may still be considered underweight on the charts. 115 is about right for me now that I have gotten older. I think I would look gaunt if I got back down to my old "ideal" weight of 108, because I think my neck and face would look bony. At least that's what I keep telling myself. :D 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arcadia Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 And I'm going to tell myself I can weigh more now because I have a hint of boobs from having kids. I was really really small before. You are nursing. You need all the "fat stores". Glad you manage to rent a good pump. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsuga Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 I think frame size needs to be taken into consideration when we try to determine our best weight. I was at a healthy weight at 5'5" tall and 108 pounds, but I am also very small-boned. One of my friends is the same height and looks and feels fit and firm at 130 pounds, but she is larger-boned than I am. I am overweight when I weigh 125 pounds, even though most people think that sounds fairly slim. I have a small frame by any measure and even on the 1950s height-weight charts 111 lbs is underweight: http://rkcblog.dragondoor.com/how-do-you-arrive-at-your-ideal-bodyweight/(Please note that while the chart is of interest I do not endorse the other material on that blog at all.) When I was 111 I was looking at mortality charts and decided to increase bone density and muscle mass. It's nice to be slim to wear any dress but at some point health has to come before a silhouette: http://www.everydayhealth.com/columns/jared-bunch-rhythm-of-life/obesity-paradox-weight-longevity/ When these studies started coming out, I started lifting weights. Truthfully, at my smallest, I wasn't just underweight, I was under-nourished, but I didn't feel it because I was under-active. The absolute lowest healthy weight, even for someone of Asian descent, would be 112. http://aadi.joslin.org/content/bmi-calculator The reason I emphasize this is that sometimes, getting back to a teenage weight is NOT the healthiest option. Strong ladies have muscles and muscles carry weight. So do dense bones which will help you prevent breaks and fractures in old age.6+3 . 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsuga Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 115 is about right for me now that I have gotten older. I think I would look gaunt if I got back down to my old "ideal" weight of 108, because I think my neck and face would look bony. At least that's what I keep telling myself. :D Bah, did not see that when I posted. I was concerned for you. 108 is tiny for a grown woman of 5'5". 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catwoman Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 Bah, did not see that when I posted. I was concerned for you. 108 is tiny for a grown woman of 5'5". Thanks! :) I weighed that much until I was in my 40's. My doctors always said I was at a healthy weight. I truly didn't look skinny and I was always in good shape so I didn't look scrawny. I don't worry about my weight and I only get on a scale if my jeans start feeling too tight. ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeacefulChaos Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 This was my experience. I had my first three in my 20s and my waist bounced back, but it took a little longer with each baby. I had the last four in my 30s. After #4 it still looked pretty good, but the last two babies ensured I'd never have a perfectly flat stomach again. Oh well :) I think is age as much as it is pregnancies. Yep. Granted, there are a lot of things different from then... pre-kids (got pregnant with Link at 20, for reference), I was a pretty steady 133 lbs. I think before I had Link I had gotten up to 140 (and I think I can pinpoint why - we were staying with DH's parents at the time, who really introduced me to 'snack food' and the habit of having snacks on hand at all times and actually eating them... before that, my whole life, there may have been snacks but we just didn't eat them much. Sigh... ) but then I lost down to about 130 before I began gaining with him (horrible, horrible sickness with him - I looked pregnant before I had gained weight, which was about 5 or so months in). I gained 20 lbs during that pregnancy, and thought I was going to make it through without any stretch marks, but those last two weeks... dagnabbit!!!! My whole body, however, was smaller - my wrists and everything were smaller than I had ever been when I was pregnant. It was odd. After I had Link, I went right back down to 133 and was able to wear normal clothes within a week of delivery. I got a lot of comments when he was about 3 months old about how small I was (the women who had tried to talk me into breastfeeding were like, 'Oh, imagine how small you'd be if you'd have breastfed!' :001_huh: Um, ok...), but I'm not sure if I had lost weight at that time or not. I didn't weigh myself regularly, I don't even think I owned a scale. Then we moved, snacks were no longer something in our budget, and honestly we were pretty dang poor so we didn't eat a heck of a lot of food - enough to not be hungry, obviously, and we weren't sick or anything - but all the 'extras' were just not in the budget. When Link was 1 I got pregnant with Astro and I still weighed 133 (per the first doctor visit at 10 weeks). I never once got sick during that pregnancy and gained 30 lbs. After I had Astro, I went back... again... to 133. Was wearing regular clothes within a week or two. Still poor. :lol: :lol: We decided not to have any more kids, at least mostly (I had originally planned on a tubal during my c/s with Astro but changed my mind halfway through the pregnancy, 'just in case' - I had always gone back and forth between 2-3 kids), and I had an IUD and my stomach was getting back in shape. When Astro was 1.5 we started thinking that maybe we'd want another one, right after I'd gotten back to a nice, flat, stomach... :glare: Sigh. At that point, we also were doing better financially. Snacks made their way back into our lives. I was starting to get a little older - when Astro was about 1 I got up to 150 lbs. I lost it by cutting back on - you guessed it - snacks. :lol: But then when we decided to have another kid again, it's like my body just decided to do whatever it wanted and weigh more, etc... I had the ectopic pregnancy shortly after Astro turned 2, and then was on BCP for a few months which was all wonky (I hate BCP), so by the time I got pregnant with Pink (Link was 4.5, Astro was going to be 3 in a few months, and I was 25) I weighed about 155-160. I didn't get sick during that pregnancy but I did get really nauseous, which doesn't really help with weight gain lol.... since the best thing to keep nausea under control is light, bland, boring snacking (for me, anyway). I gained about 25 lbs when I was pregnant with her, and after having her I was stuck at about 170 for a few months. I tried WW at the time and got down to 160, but it was a lot of work and my free trial was over :lol: (mostly it was the free trial), so I stopped doing it and stayed around that weight from then on. I've gained here and there, and lost again, and now I'm bigger than that - bigger than I've ever been, actually - but oh, well. I have diastasis recti also. I usually avoid anything that will 'work my abs' because it doesn't do anything good for me - I was doing some specific exercises for it at one time that seemed to help, but I got out of the habit. I need to pick those up again. What's interesting is, size has absolutely NOTHING to do with being in 'good shape'. Sure, I was in ok shape in high school and stuff, but the best shape I've ever been in in my entire life I still weighed around 160-165, when I was running a couple years ago. That was the first time, ever, that I could just run. I could do 5ks (which aren't all that impressive, whatever), and I remember passing the 1 mile mark on my first 5k and being like, 'Seriously? A mile already? I've never in my entire life been able to just run a mile like it's nothing.' Now I can't see myself ever really getting below 150, even if I dieted my @$$ off and did crazy things to get there. When I look at pictures from when I was smaller, I look a little bony and malnourished... but honestly, I don't think I look that bad now, either. It's all perspective, I guess. I'm looking forward to getting back out and running but that's because I like the way I feel when I run, not because I think it's going to make me lose weight (which it won't). I'm rambling. Sorry. :lol: 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hikin' Mama Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 I'm not overweight, but my waist is definitely thicker than before I had kids. But I've never been a person who had a tiny waist in proportion to the rest of me. I have a couple friends who have tiny little waists, but bigger hips and thighs than I do. I think it's just the way our weight is distributed. And as far as healthy vs. unhealthy weight...some people just are what they are. I was 110 and 5'6" forever. It wouldn't have bothered me except for the couple hundred people who felt the need to tell me I was too skinny. I ate like crazy in high school trying to gain weight. I was always so self-conscious about it. I finally gained weight at about 19 and then took it off again when I moved to a mountain town where I did lots of hiking and biking. I ate whatever I wanted. Even after my first was born when I was 24, I quickly went back to 110. I now weigh 128, but I started lifting weights a few years ago and I am perfectly happy with me now, because I am stronger and fit and could care less what others think. :) 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3in9th Posted February 28, 2015 Author Share Posted February 28, 2015 Fellow skinny minnies, I feel ya. We've probably been picked on our whole lives for being so skinny. (A word I hate, BTW.) Our BMI probably shows us perpectually underweight, but it truly doesn't take into account bone size and I'm definitely bird-boned. My dh, OTOH, has very large bones and is very fit and muscular and he's always shown as overweight. We know what's right for us and I've always felt that your ideal weight is the one your body stays at if you get really muscular or if you slack and get really flabby. For me, that's been between 105 and 110 lbs. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soror Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 I've never been super duper skinny but fairly thin- my usual size is around a 3-4 or so. I was able to lose my pregnancy weight with my first 3 by 4-9 months but I worked at it each time, it didn't just fall off. With my last one I had pretty much lost all but a few pounds by 9 months but then I started gaining and gaining(short story hormones and thyroid), I've lost some of that but I'm still about 10-15 lbs over(depending on the day). My waist has never got down to quite what is was pre-kids, I've been close but just not quite there, however my level of fat was on the verge of messing my fertility before hand. I read an interesting book one time about women and fat and weight levels throughout life which discussed size as we age. The book looked at various cultures around the world and also our culture through the ages. We seem to have this insidious idea in a culture that it is ideal that women never gain weight and to do so is some type of moral or other failing, however in cultures around the world women naturally gain weight as they age, hips widen as well. This is not unhealthy but quite the opposite, in middle age a bit more weight is associated with better health. Now a bit more weight is around 10-15 lbs (or so forgive me I cannot remember the exact number but in that range), not 50+ lbs. They even had these interesting charts showing what amount is natural to gain through age which I found very interesting. Anyway, I don't know that it helps at all with the acceptance factor. Personally I'm trying to figure out how much I should accept and how much I should fight, it still bothers me way more than it should but so far there doesn't seem to be much I can do about it with impaired thyroid and hormone function. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3in9th Posted February 28, 2015 Author Share Posted February 28, 2015 Now a bit more weight is around 10-15 lbs (or so forgive me I cannot remember the exact number but in that range), Honestly, given my frame an extra 10-15 pounds would cause me problems. Seriously, my bones are that small. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MEmama Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 Honestly, given my frame an extra 10-15 pounds would cause me problems. Seriously, my bones are that small. I have a friend who can add 15-20 pounds on her frame without it showing at all. It just distributes itself evenly (both a blessing and a curse). She is tall and very well proportioned. OTOH, I only get a couple "extra" pounds from my ideal weight before my pants get tight. I'm 5'4 with a small frame and there just isn't anywhere for it to hide. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arcadia Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 Honestly, given my frame an extra 10-15 pounds would cause me problems. Seriously, my bones are that small. An extra 10lbs from her usual weight would be tiring for my mom who suffers from rheumatoid arthritis. She is small bone small frame ectomorph body shape. I do get fats on my thighs if I stay in all winter but I love to walk so that hasn't been much of an issue health wise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommymilkies Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 I never said that most people find it easy. I said that I did. I further qualified it by saying that it might be because I am naturally slim. I also mentioned in another post that my mom and my aunt were the same way, so I thought it might run in my family. 1. Why am I getting no notifications for likes or quotes on WTM anymore? 2. My mother is naturally slim. I hoped I would be, too. Nope, I got my grandma's "birthing hips" as my mother puts it. She would be back in jeans the day after giving birth. :p You did say you didn't understand how people couldn't, so that's what I was referring to. Honestly, given my frame an extra 10-15 pounds would cause me problems. Seriously, my bones are that small. Same here. Tiny frame, and people look at my weight and go, "well, that sounds healthy!", but no, it's not. It's very uncomfortable and doesn't suit my body frame, especially with my arthritis. :/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.