As long as your body functions properly I doubt it's a bad thing.
Obviously the anxiety and disordered eating is a problem, and if being at such a low BMI causes you to obsess even more about it, then I would say being at such a low BMI is a problem.
Underweight can also mean undernourished. Your BMI is at the high end of the underweight category, so it's not that bad. But if you are contemplating losing more weight, you might want to think about long range consequences.
Long term undernourishment can cause irreversible damage to the bones, heart, and even the brain. I'm not saying you are suffering from this, just that we all need to be aware.
We all know what kind of health problems are caused by obesity, but what we often overlook is, those problems are reversible. The ones caused by poor nutrition are not.
Many obese people in the world who live off junk food are also undernourished.
It's very unlikely. For most people, to get underweight, they severely cut calories. In general, severely cutting calories leads to malnutrition because you aren't getting enough of the right micronutrients in your blood.
Remember, to MAINTAIN at a BMI of 18.5 or less, you need to eat less calories than people at BMI of 22.
I'd even challenge you, anyone of you, to come up with a diet that will give you the calories you need to maintain at a BMI under 18.5, and also give you the nutrition you need.
EDIT: Keep in mind that you get SOME nutrition from multivitamins and nutrition-packed snacks like Luna Bars, but unless you're getting enough fat in your diet, you aren't getting all of it, by far. You need fat in your diet to process the hydrophobic nutrients: A, D, E and K. Otherwise, you may be taking them in, but still not able to process and still suffer from malnutrition.
As I said, sunkissed, we are all aware of the health problems caused by obesity. Undernourishment is unlikely though, due to the large quantity of food consumed. Large amounts of even junk food contain essential vitamins. The cheese in multiple cheeseburgers, for instance, can supply the RDA of calcium, but only along with enough saturated fat to block the arteries.
The deadly problems are coronary artery disease caused by consuming too much saturated fat, and diabetes caused by a high sugar diet. Both are exacerbated by not enough activity, which is made difficult because of sheer bulk. Less deadly problems of joint pain, back pain, and difficulty caring for oneself.
All these things are reversable over time with a consistant good diet.
By contrast, in people who are starving, the brittle bones, rotted teeth, heart problems, kidney & liver failure, reproductive failure, and brain damage are not reversable.
But please realize that one would have to starve for quite a while for these things to occur. Just being a little underweight isn't going to do it.
She had started 'healthy eating' a few years before hand in order to lose a little weight and it had lead to her just eating fruit and veg, with very little meat, fish, dairy or carbs. It seems that 90% of your calcium is stored in your bones but you need calcium in your blood. When you arent eating enough calcium to keep the levels in you blood correct it takes it out the stores in your bones. Do this for long enough and you end up with holey bones lacking in calcium.
Osetopharsis is just one problem, but theres many many more your could get from under norishment, such as heart, kidney and liver failure!
Surely to go up to 19 BMI wont make you look bad? How about gaining a few lbs of muscle, just increase your protien.
Think it may be worth you posting what you eat daily
I fail to see your point.
I understand that "underweight" is a touchy issue. However, it's easy to become very thin without drastic calorie reduction. A daily deficit of 500-1000 calories can be used to reach any goal.
Furthermore, it is possible for anyone to be healthy at a BMI of 18.5 or lower. A smaller body burns less calories in the run of a day. Thus, calorie needs change. Nutrient requirements also change because they are proportionate to total intake.
Original Post by tandosnip: Tests and studies done on longevity actually show that people with BMI's between 20 - 22 live the longest and are at optimum health.
Life insurance companies, which bet real money on the lifespan of a given individual, evidently agree. My wife is the picture of health at 5'4" and 115lbs. (BMI 19.7) but when I bought life insurance for each of us, I put down 105lbs. (BMI 18.0) by accident. They raised her premium and she had to get a doctor's certification that she actually weighed more before they would give her the lower premium.
Original Post by hilary_88:I fail to see your point.
I understand that "underweight" is a touchy issue. However, it's easy to become very thin without drastic calorie reduction. A daily deficit of 500-1000 calories can be used to reach any goal.
Furthermore, it is possible for anyone to be healthy at a BMI of 18.5 or lower. A smaller body burns less calories in the run of a day. Thus, calorie needs change. Nutrient requirements also change because they are proportionate to total intake.
I don't believe that either of these two comments are true.
These comments suggest that you see the body as a simple system.. you put energy in, keep a reasonable deficit, and lose weight. It doesn't work like that.
Your body is not a simple system. It decide for itself precisely how much it thinks you should weigh and as you get closer and closer to that weight, you lose slower. I've got more than a few corroborations on that fact, that the closer to maintenance you get, the slower you lose. And eventually stops.
And, no, not all nutrient requirements change as your body mass changes. Again, it doesn't work like that.
Original Post by hkellick: Your body is not a simple system. It decide for itself precisely how much it thinks you should weigh and as you get closer and closer to that weight, you lose slower. I've got more than a few corroborations on that fact, that the closer to maintenance you get, the slower you lose. And eventually stops.
I can attest to that. I started at 216 pounds with a goal of 180. I've been stalled at 181-182 for a month or more despite consuming a reasonable amount of calories consisting of more fruits and vegetables than I thought possible. I am running 5k daily now and with some weightlifting thrown in a few times a week. No one thinks I look overweight anymore, I just wanted to get to 180, maybe even 175.
I'm beginning to think this is the right weight, even though my BMI is 25.3. If it goes lower it goes lower, but there's no sense starving myself to force it I guess. This may be as low as I get.
I fluctuate between 140 and 148 lbs and am 5'11''. It's shocking to learn that I can't lose more weight.
However, I checked online and it is healthiest to maintain.
Original Post by hilary_88: I fluctuate between 140 and 148 lbs and am 5'11''. It's shocking to learn that I can't lose more weight.
Why are you shocked? Because of what your shorter friends weigh? Runway models? :-)
You're female and 5'11". I don't even need to calculate the BMI to know that sounds perfect.
Original Post by southcarolinaguy:You're female and 5'11". I don't even need to calculate the BMI to know that sounds perfect.
20.4 (I DID Have to calculate the BMI :) ). And I agree, definitely a good healthy weight. :)
Listen to what your peers and family say. I guess if you read many of the posts on cc from those recovering from EDs you'll know what some of the warning signs are. Take care...
Couldn't you eat like 2000 calories, get all the nutrients and vitamins you need, and exercise? Sure you'd be tired and all, but I think it's possible.
im trying to gain weight right now on 2300 calories
i also exercise 5-6 times a week
so theres your answer. its possible to be healthy and maintain a bmi lower then 18.5
What type of food should not be eaten?
Calorie Count does not prescribe a particular diet or tell people to avoid particular foods. We only ask that you eat a balanced diet... Read more

