To think that skinny celebrities do have a negative impact on women and girls?

[thatisnotcoffee]

How could they not? When you constantly have this ideal body type pushed in your face as the only right one and and when size 14 is considered to be overweight then how can that not effect you?

Dakota Fanning is considered to be a good role model for teenagers and young women but she's a stick! How can that be healthy? She's 21 and still has the body of a child.

I watched an interview with Amanda Holden recently and she's wasting away. I also looked up Gillian Anderson recently when I found out the X Files was coming back and I was shocked to see that she's also very thin. I was even more shocked when I looked at even older pictures of her from 10-20 years ago and I realised she was very skinny even back then. I just don't understand how being that thin can be healthy tbh.

This sort of shit just makes me feel like crap and that I must be a hippo at a size 16 even though that's the average size.

Even though being a size 16 is now the average that doesn't make it healthy. Far from it.

I am slightly above average height and a size 12. I maintain my weight by rarely eating more calories than I burn. It's not rocket science. I don't have a magic wand. I just rarely eat more than 2k calories a day. It really is that simple.

I have never discussed weight or body shape in front of DD (14). Instead we talk in terms of 'do they look healthy and do they look strong.'

DD isn't stick thin and has no interest in being so. She belongs to a rowing club and plays competitive tennis. She is very pleased that she has an athletic build and broad shoulders because they allow her to excel at the sports she loves. She is easily as strong as any 14 year old boy.

Actually, it is healthier to be slightly overweight, most research says so, I really wish we'd focus our attentions on the obese, rather than vilifying people who are a size 14/16, who are probably healthy anyway.

Thedevil - for women of an average height, size 16 usually IS obese though.

(for example, when I was slightly overweight, at 11st and 5ft 6, I was still in a size 12. Sizes are bigger than they used to be).

If you're 5ft 4 (average height) and a size 16 then you are obese.

How is it healthier to be slightly overweight? At my height, I could be between 8-11 stone and be a healthy BMI. Slightly overweight would put me over 11 stone. How can that be healthier than 9 or 10? It makes no sense.
And at 9 stone I am a size 8. I would have to be about 13 stone to be a 16. How is that slightly overweight?

thedevilinside If attention was only focused on the obese, there would be no preventative measures to stop the overweight from eventually falling into that category, surely?

Every obese person would have been overweight at one time. I know from reading MN, that many of them wish they had focused more on being overweight, thus preventing themselves from becoming obese.

Actually, it is healthier to be slightly overweight, most research says so

And yet, for the absolute majority of human history, humans haven't even been vaguely overweight.

So how can being slightly overweight be healthier....?

According to the NHS BMI calculator I could gain two stones and still be just in the healthy weight category, even though I would be undoubtedly fat.

So no way would being 'slightly overweight' be healthy for me.

Plus it's a slippery slope really as weight tends to be a bit harder to lose as we get older, so slightly overweight now could well mean very overweight for me in a few years time.

'More healthy to be slightly o erweight'

Nonsense. This is the sort of empty guff that people placate themselves with and helps them ignore the fact their belly overhangs their jeans.

I've only got into the x files in the last year and every time I watch it I'm struck by how beautiful Gillian Anderson is. I'm not normally like that about people but there's just something about her...

I have read that being slightly overweight is healthier when you are quite old- 70s/80s. I think it's to do with when you get ill, you have fat reserves.

I've never heard it for younger people though.

Actually, this study does suggest that slightly overweight people have less chance of dying than "normal" BMI- whatever your age

healthland.time.com/2013/01/02/being-overweight-is-linked-to-lower-risk-of-mortality/

worra your point about the slippery slope is right and it is why the 'overweight' category does have some use - if poor lifestyle (rather than natural build) has taken you there - which will be the case for the majority of people - and you continue living that way then obviously you subsequently get into the obese category and then there are associated health issues. But the evidence does show that being overweight is better in terms of longevity - probably because if you get a serious condition such as cancer, which is accompanied by immediate and severe weight loss, you have better reserves to support you through treatment. Which is why I said probably the best thing to be in terms of health is to have a good diet, exercise lots, drink very little, not smoke and have a BMI of 25-29. Bakeoff it seems to apply not only for old people but from about 35 onwards iirc.

I was about to dig out a similar article bakeoff . The evidence isn't coming from some small study, its very robust, but it goes so strongly against everything we are told about weight and health that it is hard to believe.

That article doesn't say much. It says overweight people live longer- nothing about them living healthier- and that this may be because:
Their weight leads to:
More intervention from HCP which leads to disease diagnosed earlier
Being "thin" towards the end of your life being associated with disease (ir cancer) I think it's stretching it to say is telling us be a little
Overweight your whole life and you'll be healthier than someone who is not

Sorry bakeoffcake missed that you posted about age above

This study is NOT telling us that it is "healthier" to be slightly overweight, although I understand why overweight people might want to tell themselves that it is.

All that study tells us is that fewer slightly-overweight people died during the course of the study than average-weight or thin people.

Which of course makes sense. Because lots of very ill people lose weight so, when they die, they are thin.

Also, as a pp said, if you're overweight you are more at risk of diabetes etc, so are more likely to be monitored regularly health-wise, and serious illnesses might be picked up more quickly - meaning that you're less likely to die from whatever it is than the slim, fit marathon runner who never goes to the GP.

Size 14/16 is actually a perfect and healthy size for women to be. I'm a size 16 and I'm 5'4 and just over 12 stone. I am perfectly healthy! And a lot more attractive than skin and bones

You are the exact same size as me. And I've got big boobs and hips which are that way even when I'm thin. We're overweight bordering on obese.

I agree with what Running is saying about the conclusions of the study. Additionally, the data masks those people who are underweight due to illness which would skew things.

HOWEVER, I find that this obsession with weight really is the wrong message. Focus should be on fitness, rather than weight, which really is a crude measure of things. Carrying a few extra pounds (or even quite a few extra pounds) is balanced out by having a high level of fitness - and yes, you can be fat and fit. Being thin and fit and being fat and fit carries the same health benefits and I really wish that people would focus on that rather than numbers on a scale.

Any article online about overweight people will have a horde of commentators basically saying the same thing: 'you fat lardies have only yourselves to blame.This answer works for everyone. Eat less, excercise more, you will not be fat. Simples. Genetics is just an excuse for greed and laziness.

Cue thin people. 'We're just made that way. However much we eat we can't put on weight.Don't call us skinny. You are just being horrible to us. It's genetic.'

• call us

I don't think I've seen anyone claiming their thinness is genetic, although I appreciate I might have missed it as the thread is quite long.

I think it's more common to hear thin people saying that they can't eat more than their appetite allows.

I know if I forced food into myself when I was full, I would probably throw it back up.

Cue thin people. 'We're just made that way. However much we eat we can't put on weight.Don'tl us skinny. You are just being horrible to us. It's genetic.'

I am a slim person (5'1", 8 stone) and as a woman in her late forties I make some effort to stay slim - limit my portion sizes/take exercise.

It is worth the effort - being slim looks good & feels great

I am a newly slim person, after going from a bmi of 24 to a bmi of 21.
It takes effort to stay here - diet and exercise. But I look and feel great. I'm fitter than I've ever been, I'm getting running PBs all the time, and I like being able to buy size 10 skinny jeans, knowing they'll look good.

Slimness is not genetic for me, but it is worth the healthy eating and exercise. I love my body and want it to be as healthy and strong as it can.