was everyone slim in the 1950s/60s

[ambereeree]

I've been watching old films and it seems that everyone was slim in the 50s and 40s. Even women with quite a few children. Is this reality or just in films?

I think active but not worrying about a bit of weight gain would be ideal. Unfortunately I have aging joints which are beginning to affect my movement, hey ho.

Actually, after a certain age, being very slightly overweight is healthier.

Is that true?

What I've heard is that subcutaneous fat - the type of fat you have on your bum or thighs - is not a health risk so long as it's not extreme, but visceral fat - the fat around your internal organs such as liver or kidneys - is the real risk.

Interestingly, it's quite possible for apparantly thin people to carry quite a lot of dangerous visceral fat, but this can only be diagnosed using special instruments. They even have a name for such people - TOFI - thin on the outside, fat on the inside!

So maybe skinny types shouldnt' be feeling too smug....

I read up research on this for work,( but it was some years ago so things may have changed)- at the time research showed that being a bit overweight was healthier than underweight, in terms of overall rate of death.

Research has shown that its healthier for people over 65 to be slightly overweight. I haven't seen any research about younger people.
My 93 yr old mother's BMI is 24. She's been skinny most of her life and doesn't like being bigger so is always trying to lose wt but she can't.
Doesn't take any notice of me when I tell her it's better to be a bit heavier at her age.

I thought that statistic had been debunked because they were skewed by people who are terminally ill lose a lot of weight, then die. I may be wrong. A bmi of 26 is only a tiny bit overweight anyway. It probably won't make a huge difference and isn't life limiting.

I’d be huge if I had a bmi that large.

Maybe someone should tell one of my GPs - that's doctors, not grandparents - about it being better to be slightly heavier as you get older, as she once told me, at the end of a consultation as I was leaving the surgery, that I 'should cut out the fatty food' - I don't eat fatty food - 'and lose more weight'; I'm 5ft6 weighed under 9.5 stone and had a BMI of 21, I was about 66 years old at the time and a size 10.

I do sometimes think there's a risk with some people of thinking that extreme thinness is the answer to all health problems.

Being heavier when you are older correlates with higher bone mass and muscle mass

Being heavier when you are older correlates with higher bone mass and muscle mass

Not if you are fatter it doesn't

I’d be huge if I had a bmi that large.

No you wouldn't.

No, it hasn’t been debunked, but as with pretty much all research, it has its critics.

Google obesity paradox.

I don’t necessarily believe it’s true myself, but it definitely isn’t as black and white as fat = unhealthy after a certain age.

My point was that it’s more nuanced than the pp who said “being overweight is not healthy - everyone knows that”, or words to that effect.

If I ever make it past 60, I definitely won’t be too worried if my bmi is 26ish.

Going by this thread some people’s definition of overweight is anything bigger than they are.

Lol! Kind of like the definition of 'old' is 'anyone 10 years older than my current age'.

One of the reasons it' sbetter to carry some padding when old (ie over 80) is that you are less likely to fracture a hip or shoulder should you fall, if you have some fat covering your bones.
Many v old people are delicate and birdlike, fall and break bones. The resulting shock and operation can ime seriously affect their health and mental state.

I'm astounded that anyone would think they were huge if they had a BMI of 26. Mine was 25 when I was at my thinnest ever and a size 10, you could see my upper ribs at that point.

blue I'd have to put on 20kg to have a bmi of 26, so yeah, I'd be massive. I'm slim but not skinny and I'm short. Not everyone is the same as you.

You must be massively underweight if you're 3 stone under a BMI of 26, I think you have a bit of body dysmorphia going on there.

blue are you fucking kidding me? You're diagnosing me???

I weigh 48kg. I'm 5ft nothing. If I had a BMI of 26, I'd have to be 65kg. So yes, a 5ft nothing 65kg woman is going to look pretty giant.

If you’re five foot nothing, then maybe a difference of one bmi point is going to look more significant. But surely bmi is bmi, so a tall person with a bmi of 26 would look the same level of fat as a short person no? 🤔

*I’d be huge if I had a bmi that large.

No you wouldn't.*

I have small wrists, narrow shoulders. I am not built to carry lots of weight. Currently 5. 8’’ and 9st 10. With a BMI of 21 I don’t look skinny at the moment. I am 54 and don’t feel losing weight would be a good plan but I do watch what I eat and my weight and try and keep roughly between 9st 9 and 19 stone.

with I don't get your post, it is very contradictory.

I was just trying to understand your point tbh. I don’t know enough about bmi to say whether your height, which you’ve brought up a few times in defence of your “I’d be massive at that bmi” comment, is relevant.

On the one hand, if a short person gains or loses a few lbs here or there, it will show up more than on a tall person.

But on the other hand, if your bmi takes your height into account, surely a 5’ woman with a bmi of 26 would look just as fat as a 5’11” woman with a bmi of 26.

So, I don’t know if your height is relevant. Maybe someone can correct me though .

Does that make any more sense?

Yes, I see what you mean. But generally, weight looks a lot more on small people than tall people.

But BMI takes account of height?

So yes weight looks loads more on shorter people but BMI takes that into account already.