Women are often told not to focus on weight loss if they go to the gym. There is a preconceived notion that lifting weights can turn them into a bodybuilder. They will become too muscular and lose out on the "femininity" of their body. But is that the case? To break this myth, we spoke to a Fitness trainer, health coach and nutritionist Apar Jain.

Women Do Not Become Bodybuilders If They Weight Train

"Weight training offers numerous health benefits for women, from improved strength and muscle tone to better bone density and metabolism," says Jain. He also points out that women do not "bulk up" like male bodybuilders and one of the reasons for that is their hormones.

Men generally have higher levels of testosterone, a hormone that also promotes muscle growth, whereas the levels are much less in women. "So even with regular weight training, they are more likely to build lean, toned muscle, rather than large, bulky ones," he explains.

Myth of Bulking: Jain explains that many women worry that lifting weights will make them bulky, but in reality, it helps them achieve a toned, athletic look. It also helps them create a leaner, more defined body by reducing body fat and increasing lean muscle mass.

"So, is it bad for women to weight train? Absolutely not! Weight training is one of the best

things women can do for their bodies, supporting overall health, longevity, and confidence. The key is to train with a balanced routine that includes both strength and cardiovascular exercise, along with a nutritious diet that supports personal fitness goals," he explains.

Why Is There A Belief That Women "Bulk Up"?

Addressing this preconceived notion, Jain says that media portrayals of bodybuilding have often shown men and women with extreme muscular physiques. Many people thus associate any kind of weightlifting with this look. "They are unaware of the specialised training and dietary practices that bodybuilders follow. This visibility makes women worry that lifting weight will quickly lead to a similar physique."

Other factors that lead to this misleading notion, as Jain points out are:

Historical Fitness Stereotypes: For decades, fitness marketing for women emphasised “slimness” and “toning” without muscle growth. Women were encouraged to stick to cardio or light weights with high reps, reinforcing the idea that lifting heavier weights would somehow “masculinise” their bodies. These stereotypes have taken time to fade as fitness knowledge has evolved.

Biology Misunderstandings: Many people don’t fully understand how muscle growth works or the role hormones like testosterone play. Women naturally have lower levels of testosterone than men, so they’re not biologically predisposed to gain large amounts of muscle mass. But without a solid understanding of this, many assume that lifting heavy weights alone will lead to “bulking up.”

Misleading Fitness Advice: Some fitness advice still focuses on the idea of “toning” muscles by lifting very light weights. However, muscle definition actually comes from a balance of strength training, cardiovascular exercise, and diet, rather than avoiding heavy weights. This misconception has led many women to avoid weight training altogether or stick to very low weights, reinforcing the fear of bulking.

Social Pressure and Body Image: Cultural pressures around femininity have often emphasised a lean, slim look, leading some women to avoid weight training for fear of appearing too muscular or “unfeminine.” Even as body positivity and strength are increasingly celebrated, the old biases about how women “should” look still linger.

Lack of Education and Exposure: Many women may not have access to accurate information or the support of knowledgeable trainers who can explain the benefits of weight training without bulk. As more women gain exposure to strength training and see results for themselves, this myth is starting to break down.

As a doctor I often hear the line: "I know I should take care of my health but I’ll start after things settle down." Unfortunately for people that "later" never comes. Whether people postpone exercise delay a health check-up cut back on sleep or hold off on eating habits these small choices can add up and cause big health problems later.

Lifestyle-related diseases do not appear all at once. Diabetes, hypertension, obesity, heart disease, fatty liver disease and even some cancers change slowly over years. The problem is that these diseases are often quiet in the beginning. Many people feel perfectly healthy while hidden damage goes on unnoticed.

How Postponing Exercise And Health Check-Ups Can Add Up

Also read: What Rock–Paper–Scissors “Run And Eat” And Other Eating Challenges Are Really Doing To Your Health?

Exercise is one of the signs of healthy ageing. Yet sitting and not moving has become more common. When exercise is always put off the body starts to lose muscle metabolism slows weight goes up and the danger of insulin resistance and heart disease rises. Regular movement is not about being fit; movement is a vital investment in long-term health moving easily and staying independent.

Preventive health check-ups are equally vital. Many people skip screenings because they have no symptoms. High blood pressure, bad cholesterol, early diabetes kidney problems and several kinds of cancer may not show symptoms until health problems are advanced. Timely health assessments find risk factors early letting health care stop complications later.

Why Sleep And Food Choices Matter In The Long Run

Also read: Foods That Boost Immunity In Children

Sleep is another area where people often give up because they think work is more important than rest. In truth not enough sleep hurts every body system. Long-term lack of sleep links to risk of obesity, diabetes, high blood pressure, weak immunity, bad mood, memory loss and heart disease. Good sleep is not an extra, it is a biological need.

Food choices add up over time. Eating processed food, much sugar and bad fats may seem small each day but years of poor food can cause inflammation, metabolic problems, digestive issues and heart problems. Healthy, balanced eating habits last longer than diet fads.

As a doctor who works with adults and older people I see the long-term impact of delayed health decisions. Many problems we treat could have been. Reduced by earlier lifestyle changes and regular health check-ups. The good news is that the body reacts well to habits at nearly any age. Even tiny changes such as a walk better sleep habits, healthier food choices or a routine health check-up, can bring real benefits.

Health is rarely set by one choice. Instead health comes from habits that are practiced each day for years. The price of delaying choices may not show today but it appears later. The best time to put health first is not when symptoms show, it is now.

By Dr. Yogesh Gupta, Director – Internal Medicine & Geriatrics, Sterling Hospitals, Gurukul, Ahmedabad

Your date of birth indicates your chronological age, but it may not reflect the actual picture of how your body is ageing. According to Dr Prateek Sharma, professor of medicine at the University of Kansas, simple measures like grip strength, walking speed and VO₂ max could help assess a person’s biological age and life span.

Speaking at a session on Longevity in the Indian Context: Diet, Supplements and Myths, Sharma said the focus is gradually shifting from simply asking how long people live to how many years they can remain healthy and functional.

He said, “Soon, biological age will be measured through indicators such as epigenetics, grip strength, gait and VO2 max, rather than chronological age.”

Biological Age Is Not Equal To Actual Age

Chronological age is the number of years that passed since you were born. Biological age, on the other hand, captures how your well body is functioning as years pass and how quickly it may be ageing.

Two people who are both 50 may have very different levels of muscle strength, cardiovascular fitness, metabolic health, and mobility.

Factors That Shape Healthy Ageing

Dr. Sharma says that apart from genes, lifestyle and environment factors play a key role in healthy ageing.

He said, “Genes are important. Genes load the gun, but environment and lifestyle are the ones that pull the trigger as well.”

He added that factors including diet, sleep, physical activity and environment can substantially influence healthy ageing.

Also read: French Court Links Flight Attendant’s Breast Cancer To Workplace Radiation; How Does Flying Increase Cancer Risk?

What Grip Strength Can Tell About Your Biological Age?

Lower grip strength has often been associated with conditions including frailty and sarcopenia. Additionally, research has linked poor grip strength with higher risks of hospitalisation and mortality.

A 2024 review described handgrip strength as a potentially useful health biomarker, although the measurement also needs to account for factors like age, sex and complete body size.

It is important to note that there is no single grip-strength number that can tell everyone their biological age.

Also read: Study Finds The Wealthiest Americans Had Higher Mortality Than The Poorest Europeans

Walking Speed Can Measure Healthy Ageing

The way a person walks can also provide signs about their physical function. Gait speed reflects how multiple systems work together. These systems include muscle strength, balance, coordination, cardiovascular fitness and neurological function.

A slow walking pace can therefore sometimes be an early sign of declining physical function and poor biological age.

Despite promising findings, expert caution that mobility tests are not sureshot ways for predicting lifespan. They are better considered as screening tools that can alert doctors to possible health issues that require further assessment.

Auriel Willette, an expert in brain ageing from Rutgers University said, “A poor or declining result is a reason for a health professional to investigate why function is changing, rather than gauging how long someone will live.”

Grip strength and gait are greatly influenced by age, body composition, injuries, neurological conditions, physical activity, overall fitness, and other lifestyle factors. A temporary decline may not necessarily mean a person is ageing rapidly.

Doctors can potentially use these findings to measures the loss of strength or mobility early. It could help them decide when interventions like exercise, nutrition and treatment of underlying health problems may help.

For years, people trying to lose weight have been told that slow and steady is the safest and most sustainable approach. But a new study is challenging that long-standing advice.

Researchers found that losing weight more quickly may actually lead to greater weight loss that can be maintained over time.

The findings, presented at the European Congress on Obesity 2026, followed 284 adults with obesity, around 90% of whom were women. Researchers compared a rapid weight-loss method with a more gradual approach.

What Did The Study Find?

During the first 16 weeks, participants in the rapid weight-loss group followed a low-calorie diet that started below 1,000 calories a day and gradually increased to around 1,500 calories. The gradual-loss group consumed approximately 1,400 calories a day.

Those in the rapid-loss group lost an average of 12.9% of their body weight during the first 16 weeks, compared with 8.1% among those following the gradual approach. But the researchers were particularly interested in what happened after the initial weight-loss phase.

Both groups subsequently entered a 36-week weight-maintenance program, receiving regular support and guidance on maintaining healthy eating habits.

After one year, the rapid-loss group had still lost more weight overall, averaging 14.4% of their starting body weight, compared with 10.5% in the gradual-loss group.

Also read: Meniscus Tears: Why Runners & Athletes Shouldn't Ignore This Common Knee Injury

Does This Mean Fast Weight Loss Is Better?

The study challenges the idea that rapid weight loss automatically leads to weight regain. It does not mean people should drastically cut back calories or attempt crash diets.

HealthandMe spoke to Dr Rajiv Kovil, Diabetes & Obesity Specialist, S L Raheja Hospital, to understand which approach is truly sustainable for long-term weight loss.

He says, “Scientifically, this reinforces an important concept: the speed of initial weight loss and the sustainability of weight loss are not necessarily opposites. Larger early weight loss may provide metabolic benefits, improve mobility and motivation, and give patients a greater “weight-loss buffer” before biological pressures favouring regain become prominent.”

One of the most important details is that the rapid-loss programme was structured and professionally supervised, with consistent support after the initial weight-loss period.

He further explains, “This was rapid, medically structured weight loss—not unsupervised crash dieting. Participants received continued behavioural and weight-regain-prevention support. Moreover, the results are currently reported from a conference presentation rather than a fully peer-reviewed publication, and body-composition and energy-expenditure data were not reported.”

Dr Kovil goes on to say that truly sustainable weight loss should never revolve around the number of kilograms lost.

He said, “The message therefore is not “faster is always better.” It is that obesity treatment should move away from an arbitrary obsession with the rate of kilograms lost.”

Dr Marie Spreckley of the University of Cambridge said the study involved an intensive intervention with frequent professional support, meaning the results may not necessarily translate to unsupervised dieting in everyday life.

Dr Dimitrios Koutoukidis of the University of Oxford also cautioned that the study was based on limited data from a conference abstract and mostly involved women.

Also read: Walking Becomes Harder With Age Not Just Due To Weaker Muscles; Study Says Your Ankles May Be To Blame Too

Why Slow Weight Loss Has Been Recommended?

The traditional argument is that gradual weight loss is easier to maintain and may reduce the risk of losing muscle or encourage weight regain.

But experts say the new findings suggest the speed of weight loss itself may not be the main factor determining whether weight comes back. What may matter more is what happens after the weight comes off.

Dr Adam Collins of the University of Surrey noted that metabolic adaptation and reductions in lean mass appear to relate more closely to the total amount of weight lost than simply how quickly it was lost.

Dr Kovil concludes, “In obesity medicine, the real endpoint is not how slowly you lose weight—it is how safely you lose fat, preserve muscle and maintain the metabolic benefit. Sustainability is determined less by the speed of weight loss and more by the quality and continuity of long-term treatment.”