The Student Room Group

Girls - Why you shouldn't use scales

Scroll to see replies

Reply 100
Original post by Nomes89
This is not always the case, hence the thread. Two years ago I was a whole 7lbs lighter but I'm in much better shape (emphasis on the word shape) now.


Oh lawd.

Unless you are losing a higher percentage of your muscle than fat, then you are losing body fat. Bare in mind, typical untrained females will have little lean body mass to lose at all ...
Original post by Jonnyy
Oh lawd.

Unless you are losing a higher percentage of your muscle than fat, then you are losing body fat. Bare in mind, typical untrained females will have little lean body mass to lose at all ...


That is not what you said - you said weight loss = leaner body which isn't absolutely correct or else you wouldn't get two people at the same height and weight with vastly different bodies such as the ones posted in the OP. And like you said it's the lack of lean body mass in most untrained females which prevents many of them losing weight and becoming lean at the same time. Lowering your body weight will not give you a leaner body by default.
It's not good to use JUST the scales, but they definitely are helpful if you're trying to lose body fat. Also, weight is relative to your height, so the pictures aren't comparable at all unless you know for sure that they are the same height (doubtful).
Reply 103
Original post by Nomes89
That is not what you said - you said weight loss = leaner body which isn't absolutely correct or else you wouldn't get two people at the same height and weight with vastly different bodies such as the ones posted in the OP. And like you said it's the lack of lean body mass in most untrained females which prevents many of them losing weight and becoming lean at the same time. Lowering your body weight will not give you a leaner body by default.



Clearly out of the two people in the OP, one is trained and one isnt, which i HOPE you can see.

OF COURSE lowering BF% will make you leaner because BY DEFAULT your fat:muscle ratio will be lower from the weight loss, how can you not see this !?
Reply 104
Original post by Emaemmaemily
It's not good to use JUST the scales, but they definitely are helpful if you're trying to lose body fat.


Maybe if you are obese. If you train and are just trying to loose body fat the scales wont be much help as fat doesnt weigh much compared to muscle.
The scales could say you have gaind weight when you could have dropped fat and gained muscle.
Original post by stayce88
Maybe if you are obese. If you train and are just trying to loose body fat the scales wont be much help as fat doesnt weigh much compared to muscle.
The scales could say you have gaind weight when you could have dropped fat and gained muscle.


You don't have to be obese for it to help. Just being over-weight it is helpful.
Like I've said, it's not the ONLY thing you should pay attention to, but that doesn't make it irrelevent.
So true.

When I was inactive and completely out of shape, I actually weighed less than I do now when I'm more active. And that's without even deliberately bulking.

When inactive and living a sedentary lifestyle, like most people who will use a scale, it isn't good. Your body composition (muscle, fat, water, bone density, etc.) changes slowly over time without you realising and before you know it you're out of shape. So your weight may stay the same even though you became fatter and lost muscle.

If your diet is in check and you're trying to lose fat, a decrease in the scale weight IS good. It's unlikely that your muscle gains are going to counteract the weight lost from fat, since muscle growth, realistically, doesn't happen that fast, unless you're a complete beginner
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 107
Original post by Emaemmaemily
You don't have to be obese for it to help. Just being over-weight it is helpful.
Like I've said, it's not the ONLY thing you should pay attention to, but that doesn't make it irrelevent.


For someone trying to go from the left hand picture to the right hand picture it wont be much help, if anything the scales would need to go up
Original post by stayce88
For someone trying to go from the left hand picture to the right hand picture it wont be much help, if anything the scales would need to go up


Perhaps, but that wasn't really my point, and the OP seemed to suggest that scales aren't useful at all (which they certainly are). Also, the pictures in the OP are not comparable because the significance of height has been ignored.
Original post by Jonnyy
Clearly out of the two people in the OP, one is trained and one isnt, which i HOPE you can see.

OF COURSE lowering BF% will make you leaner because BY DEFAULT your fat:muscle ratio will be lower from the weight loss, how can you not see this !?


Yes and they are the same weight. Muscle mass determines how lean someone is, not weight on it's own. Losing fat doesn't automatically mean someone, especially a woman has enough muscle remaining to be considered lean. Hence why you get girls who are a size 8 or even 6 with love hugs and flabby bellies. I already told you I'm leaner than I was when I was 7lbs lighter. I don't see how my point could be illustrated any clearer than it has been.
Reply 110
Original post by Nomes89
Yes and they are the same weight.


Who's saying the girl on the right isnt 6ft5 and the one on the left 4ft8??? Body composition is barely comparable by just counting weight on its own. Should I even have to say this !?

Original post by Nomes89
Muscle mass determines how lean someone is, not weight on it's own.


I am 12 and what is this? Muscle mass doesn't determine how lean somebody is at all! Its the ratio of FAT to MUSCLE on a person which determines their BF%. Their BF% shows how LEAN they are.

Original post by Nomes89
Losing fat doesn't automatically mean someone, especially a woman has enough muscle remaining to be considered lean.

Being 'considered lean' is relative to whoever your comparing it too.

The ONLY person you should be comparing yourself to, is yourself, and to deny you get leaner (lose BF%) when losing weight is ludicrous, regardless of if said person is lean compared to some athlete at the same weight.

Original post by Nomes89

Hence why you get girls who are a size 8 or even 6 with love hugs and flabby bellies. I already told you I'm leaner than I was when I was 7lbs lighter. I don't see how my point could be illustrated any clearer than it has been.


Why is this relevant?? Any girl can increase their muscle:fat ratio by lifting weights, which would ultimately make them leaner.
Original post by Jonnyy
Who's saying the girl on the right isnt 6ft5 and the one on the left 4ft8??? Body composition is barely comparable by just counting weight on its own. Should I even have to say this !?

Who's saying they aren't the same height? Are you trying to argue that it is impossible for two people, or the same person to have the same weight and different body composition? If you are then you are wrong. If not I don't know why you're arguing.


I am 12 and what is this? Muscle mass doesn't determine how lean somebody is at all! Its the ratio of FAT to MUSCLE on a person which determines their BF%. Their BF% shows how LEAN they are.


Being 'considered lean' is relative to whoever your comparing it too.


Again, you keep chopping and changing your argument and you are becoming confused. BF does show how lean someone is but that doesn't directly challenge the point that when someone loses weight, they don't automatically have a low BF percentage. Girl on the left is obviously small yet is still flabby and would not in any way be construed as lean - ever. So no, to an extent being considered lean is not relative. And if same girl lost another 7lbs she would still not be lean, because she does not have enough muscle mass to begin with. This will not even out enough simply by losing weight. She'd have to gain muscle which could mean gaining weight which would then mean she'd be leaner at a higher weight. Your argument doesn't stand.

The ONLY person you should be comparing yourself to, is yourself, and to deny you get leaner (lose BF%) when losing weight is ludicrous, regardless of if said person is lean compared to some athlete at the same weight.


I am comparing myself to myself, hence why I mentioned that I am leaner at a higher weight than I was when I was 9 stone. I also never said losing weight doesn't mean losing BF, I said losing weight doesn't always mean you are becoming leaner.


Why is this relevant?? Any girl can increase their muscle:fat ratio by lifting weights, which would ultimately make them leaner.

And by lifting weights and gaining muscle more often than not means one gains weight...which would means being heavier than before and leaner. Therefore losing weight does not automatically mean you are becoming leaner.


I'm beginning to think your definition of lean is completely different. Lean to me means increased muscle definition and not flabby, not simply being 'smaller'.
Reply 112
Original post by Nomes89
I'm beginning to think your definition of lean is completely different. Lean to me means increased muscle definition and not flabby, not simply being 'smaller'.


No lol, how many times do I have to explain???

Lean refers to a LOW BF%, aka having a relatively low fat:muscle ratio.
Reply 113
I find the statement true... But the woman on the left is a lot better looking than the one of the right.
Original post by Jonnyy
No lol, how many times do I have to explain???

Lean refers to a LOW BF%, aka having a relatively low fat:muscle ratio.


This isn't the opposite to what I said, low BF = better defined muscles and less flab. I know what BF is, no need to keep repeating it.

The girl on the left is small in terms of scale weight and inches yet has a high BF percentage. This is the crux of the thread and also highlights my point.

Lol.
Reply 115
Original post by Nomes89
This isn't the opposite to what I said, low BF = better defined muscles and less flab. I know what BF is, no need to keep repeating it.

The girl on the left is small in terms of scale weight and inches yet has a high BF percentage. This is the crux of the thread and also highlights my point.

Lol.


What is your point exactly? That an untrained female isn't lean, even though she doesn't weigh much on a scale? No **** Sherlock.
Just eat healthily and do some ****ing exercise that isn't 'walking' and you'll be alright..

Damn this country sometimes.. I agree fundamentally with the OP and other proven fitness people in here. The girl on the left could still look heaps a lot better if she exercised and had a better diet. And that's.. to actually have a better diet, not to go on a diet. For those who are champions at playing cherry-picking for the Olympics... :rolleyes:

This country has a long way to go.. and the general mentality in these forums are part of that reason.
Original post by Jonnyy
If your losing weight in the scale you are becoming leaner (dropping bf%)


Original post by Jonnyy
What is your point exactly? That an untrained female isn't lean, even though she doesn't weigh much on a scale? No **** Sherlock.


Losing weight on the scale does not always mean you are becoming leaner is my point.

If said female is untrained she is unlikely to become lean after losing 3lbs, 7lbs or 14lbs.

Which is why OP suggested girls shouldn't look at the scales as a sign of progression if they want to look 'fit' i.e. lean.

Instead of being rude and ignorant, actually try de-constructing my points? Maybe you won't because you can't and you are too proud to lose face and admit your initial blanket statement was wrong.

One things for sure, I advise you never give women any training advice if you would tell someone who is a size 6 and flabby that in order for her to get leaner and lose body fat she should simply 'lose more weight'.
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 118
Original post by Nomes89
Losing weight on the scale does not always mean you are becoming leaner is my point.

If said female is untrained she is unlikely to become lean after losing 3lbs, 7lbs or 14lbs.

Which is why OP suggested girls shouldn't look at the scales as a sign of progression if they want to look 'fit' i.e. lean.

Instead of being rude and ignorant, actually try de-constructing my points? Maybe you won't because you can't and you are too proud to lose face and admit your initial blanket statement was wrong.

One things for sure, I advise you never give women any training advice if you would tell someone who is a size 6 and flabby that in order for her to get leaner and lose body fat she should simply 'lose more weight'.



Like I've stated various times, the height of the said female is unknown, which nullifies any comparison to a lean person.

And yes I am saying she should lose weight and/or gain muscle to get leaner because by definition, leanness is having a lower fat:muscle ratio which she would acquire by losing body fat, as I've stated already.
Original post by Jonnyy
Like I've stated various times, the height of the said female is unknown, which nullifies any comparison to a lean person.

And yes I am saying she should lose weight and/or gain muscle to get leaner because by definition, leanness is having a lower fat:muscle ratio which she would acquire by losing body fat, as I've stated already.


No comparison needed, it is easy to objectively judge if someone is lean or not. The girl on the left is very slim (size 6-8) but not lean.

One can lose weight on a calorie deficit without too much attention to quality of food and exercise but without a good diet and exercise, one cannot be lean (generally speaking). This is why I say weight loss does not always lead to a lean body. If someone has already gotten to the point where they weigh 50kg and still have a 'fat' appearance, then it is clear they have a higher fat percentage, an imbalance which can only be redressed with gaining muscle not further weight loss.

Quick Reply

Latest