Should You Aim To Weigh What You Did 20-30-40 Years Ago?

Here is something I have been curious about for a long time.  It relates to setting your target weight.  

The question is, should you have, as a goal, to weigh what you did when you were much, much younger?  

(Obviously, this pertains only to those of us who are well beyond the spring chicken phase of life.  Presumably no-one in their twenties has the goal of returning to their pre-teen weight.)

On the one hand, it seems logical that at 40 and 50 and 60 y/o, there is no reason why we should weigh more than we weighed at 30 y/o.  Our skeletons haven't grown much, our organs neither, and we're not often more muscular than when we were in our prime.  The numbers say, why not? 

On the other hand, when I think about what I used to weigh, it seems sort of impractical.  At 30 y/o, I weighed 162 lb.  That is 18-19 lb less than I weigh today.  In theory, I could get there - it would take being about 12-15% body fat.  In practice . . . ?  I feel like I'd have to work like hell to get there, throw out everything in my closet, and then have to whip myself daily to stay there.   

What do you think - for yourself?  Are you (again, I'm mostly talking to the more venerable among us) aiming for your weight of 1990 or 1980?  Why, or why not?  What is your decision process? 

View the original article here