To think I shouldn't be THIS heavy??

[Lotsofsausage]

So to start, I know I am no supermodel. Fairly tall at 5'8, size 14, smaller waist, medium bust. Fairly curvy arse/ thighs but toned. I am fit and strong and exercise 4-5x per week, including strength training.

Now I know measurements and photos are a better gauge than the scales, and muscle is meant to weigh more than fat (but I thought that was bullshit).....I am 14.5 stone! I have a friend with the same body measurements as me and same height and she is TWO STONE lighter.
Can some people just be 'heavy'???

What are your measurements, OP?

I'm same height. 38-28-38. 2.5 stone lighter than OP's friend.
I have thunder thighs, even so.

You must train very hard for that speed which just isn't consistent with carrying 3 stone more weight than the upper end of your BMI range

Perhaps it's just that the OP's scales are broken.

I want a pic of OP's body. I'll show you mine if you show me yours.

sounds about right to me.... when I was last 14.5 stone I was a UK size 16 and I'm 5ft 9''

14 - 16 , I should say

there are other factors to take into consideration though! At that size I had skinny legs, but my boobs weigh about a stone!

@prequelle

There's actually thought that BMI actually underestimates the amount of fat someone has because we in general are much more sedentary as a society and as such don't have the muscle mass the BMI expects is to have.

Not true, compared to bmi, which is quite high my body fat % is quite low.

MumOfOne92 i appreciate your experience but that does not mean that what I've said is 'not true', if you read my other posts you'll see studies that demonstrate this. You are not representative of the population in general.

The BMI healthy weight range is massive. The OP is 3 stone over the heaviest weight in the healthy weight range

I'm not convinced that's in any way healthy

Fraza I am early 30s. I am not sub 20 - just over 20 so sub 21 technically..... that's what I means when I said 20 mins.

Sub 21 is common for my local running club but yes there are very young trim ladies who are around the 18/19 min mark but I'm nowhere near them. There are also 'larger' ladies who run sub 21, I suppose because it's relatively short distance. size 12/14 people like me do not commonly run longer distances .

Got to dash to work, thanks everyone! I have messaged someone local about fat measurements, will be very interesting!

Don't have tape measure to hand but i am 36 chest band (not a huge cup size though, my boobs are more muscle at the top) and 32 waist. My 14 clothes are always baggy on waist but I cannot fit my shoulders and hips into a 12 comfortably, so have to wear elasticated waists or they gape at the back !
Not uploading pic of myself as I have a very identifying tattoo!

And very quickly, I am not bothered about the mean/ aggressive comments at all. It says more about the posters if they can't get their point across without being demeaning or belittling. I know I am fit strong and healthy, my question was about how inconsistent body weight can be for the same height and dress sizes. which all of the comments on here prove!

I am however getting my body fat checked so I am takings something from the constructive advice so thank you. l cannot pinch an inch around my middle but it must be my arse or something.

I keep chuckling at the thought of some of the bitchy posters chasing me around a 5k or on the podium at a competition shrieking at me that I am obese and unhealthy like they have in the comments :)

I call bullpoop on your 5K time at your weight and height. You are in denial

Your running club has multiple overweight women running a 5k in under 21minutes?

Chinny reckon.

I think there must be something wrong with your scales then. Because there's no way you are 3 stone over the top end of your BMI and not being able to 'pinch an inch'. I think you must be lighter than what you think surely? Especially with the 5k thing coupled in?

Good on you. I’m a 5’7” size 8, about 9 stone and a although a healthy BMI I imagine probably only just.

I wouldn’t be able to complete a 5k. I’m so unhealthy. I eat too much crap but because im genetically slim I guess it doesn’t bother me.

If you’re fit, healthy then whatever! Sound sabsolutely fine to me!

OP, I'm 5ft 10 and a size 14 but I weight 11 and a half stone. I think yours must be muscle mass. I am relatively strong and fit but I don't weight train or exercise as much as you.
My DP is 6ft 3 and he weight 15-16 stone but he has the biggest muscles in his legs from playing football so often, his legs are so heavy. I'm sure thats what makes him "overweight" on BMI calculators because he's not over weight.

@TheOrigRightsofwomen exactly this. You would need to hit speed sessions 3 to 4 times a week hard to get close to this. non-runners might look up on Google a good 5K time, but until you run you have no idea how hard that is for most good male runners. All the women at my club that can go 20 mins or lower are lean and short. Not saying it is not true, but anyone can say "I can do 20min 5K", where is the proof?

Val Adams (shotput) has the BMI closest to OPs and with her it is very very obvious that it is her muscular percentage that is putting her in the obese range. This is exactly how it tends to be. Outliers are made very obvious by looking at them. You can see their muscles. It isn't umming and arring about 'well maybe it's muscle', it's obvious. I've calculated thousands of BMIs over the years, it's interesting to see from an objective view when someone is adamant they cant be overweight or obese.

That's why I think there's something wrong with OPs measurements because if she's saying she can't pinch an inch and that she can run in that time, something doesn't seem right. Obviously difficult to tell withiut seeing OP though but would never expect them to post a photo for us daft shites to judge

Yep, unreal. The way she said size12/14s don't normally do longer than 5k shows she had never attended any 10k, half mara or whatever. Those distances are designed for larger plodders. They might not podium but the race is full of them!

She sounds like someone making guesses or, as you say, googling.

@RiversDisguise not just overweight, technically obese. 3 stone of OP is not muscle.

At my parkrun in it's history only 2 women have hit sub 20. it is not a flat course, but not overly hard either. My local running clubs club record breaking female does it in 20.28 PB, and she is 8st soaking wet. She does 5 miles in 33.19 and a half marathon in 1.29.

You do not do a 20 min 5K at that weight, unless you can prove different, it just does not add up. I Googled what is a good women's 5K time and first result says 20 to 25 mins. As a runner I know 20 mins is very good, 25 is very good, but more achievable by most women. a min per K improvement on that is very hard. To carry your weight around that fast your VO2max must be superhuman.

hun rivers? I meant they don't usually do larger distances QUICKLY. the 'larger plodders' don't usually win the marathons do they? I have never competed at a 10k but have been to many.

As for my time - ok, believe what you like, of course I can't prove it on here but that's fine. that's not what my OP was about. But my coach is much smaller than me and not skinny at all (similar shape to me) and she has a better time than me, i'm going to ask about her BMI.

Ps: running is not my main sport but it is often part of my sport I compete in so people from my gym/ sport don't often look like typical runners iyswim. You'd be surprised by looking at them how then can run! lots of the men are very big.

sorry meant *huh rivers

......I just clarified NOT SUB 20 5k (I Never said that) it is sub 21. which is good but not incredible,

Anyway I am working so need to log off !

Sub 21 is bloody incredible for a (non professional) woman over 5k. Any runner knows that. I can't prove it, but I know it's a lie. With regards to your OP. If you are as fit as you say then there is no reason to worry surely. Just carry on as you are.