Oh, I so totally agree. They don't take frame-size into account, for one thing. Even if I were able to diet down to 110 pounds, I would never look like Kate Moss the supermodel; I would probably look like a linebacker for the Green Bay Packers who somehow got locked in a dressing room for the entire off-season and who survived by chewing on leather shoes -- emaciated but still fundamentally big.

Having said that, I have to admit that I don't really know what my "lower limit" weight-wise should be. I never used to weigh myself when I was a teenager, probably because I was afraid to find out what I weighed -- I know it was a whole lot more than my friends weighed, but then I was likely 6 inches taller than most of them. I am quite tall (5'10") and quite curvy, and I certainly wasn't fat then, but I probably weighed about 170. When I was an undergraduate (having no doubt gained that "freshman five") I went to the university health clinic for a checkup, and the doctor on staff recommended I lose about 15 pounds in order to "match the charts" more perfectly. I've kept that target weight in my head all these years, through weight ups (pregnancies) and downs (post-partum diets) but quite honestly I doubt that I will get exactly "there", or that I even should. What I'm going by is flab -- I've still got it, so I'm not done yet. When I've shrunk the belly roll to what I consider to be an acceptable amount, I'll have arrived at the destination. The number on the scale is arbitrary, and I refuse to let it dominate my life.