Viewing the message boards in:

waist should be less than half your height

Posts: 19,251 Member
edited November 2024 in Health and Weight Loss
According to a new study being reported in various news outlets:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/11080588/Key-to-a-long-life-is-a-waist-measuring-less-than-half-your-height.html

Welcome!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
Sign In
Register
«1345678

Replies

  • Posts: 844 Member
    If I'm calculating right than that means I need a 30. That seems doable.
  • Posts: 1,030 Member
    At 5' 10" I need to get to 35", better get going on my 30 day challenge!
  • Posts: 274 Member
    Mine is already less than half n I expect to lose several more inches off so I'm good. .
  • Posts: 12,950 Member
    Hm, it says mine should be 35. That's what mine is.

    I'll have a fulfilling life!
  • Posts: 1,457 Member
    if this is true i only have one more inch to go. woot woot!
  • Posts: 6,646 Member
    Mine is already less than half and I have 50 more pounds to go.
  • Posts: 610 Member
    Les Mayhew, a professor of statistics at Cass Business School, said: “There is now overwhelming evidence that government policy should place greater emphasis on waist to height ratio as a screening tool.”

    Of course, the NHS does place great emphasis on the waist size. They're a bit more draconian though - women's waists ideally should be less than 31.5" and men's less than 37".

    http://www.nhs.uk/chq/Pages/849.aspx?CategoryID=51

    Due to the dreaded middle aged spread, I'm pretty sure I'm not going to get under that again. Should make 32.5", though. (at 65", that's half.)
  • Posts: 41
    My goal puts mine at half, so seems plausible...
  • Posts: 30,860 Member
    My insurance company has been using that as part of its assessment for a while.

    (31.5 for me, so not unreasonable, even though I wish I tended more to the hourglass instead of being super high-waisted.)
  • Posts: 2,604 Member
    I know they say waist, but do they mean waist (as in the natural waist) or belly? If they mean waist, I'm close. If they mean belly, not so much...
  • Posts: 6,646 Member
    show previous quotes

    Of course, the NHS does place great emphasis on the waist size. They're a bit more draconian though - women's waists ideally should be less than 31.5" and men's less than 37".

    http://www.nhs.uk/chq/Pages/849.aspx?CategoryID=51

    Due to the dreaded middle aged spread, I'm pretty sure I'm not going to get under that again. Should make 32.5", though. (at 65", that's half.)
    The idea that a fixed waist measurement is useful, regardless of the height of the person involved, seems brain damaged even for government.
  • Posts: 1,297 Member
    Mine should be 32? Being short with a small torso, this would make me a beach ball. Maybe it ok as a general rule, but definitely not my preference.
  • Posts: 13,575 Member
    Oh, I hope that is true! I only need to lose one inch off my waist to meet that requirement, even though I'm just starting and I'm more than 20 lbs overweight by BMI.

    I did a little googling to make sure I was measuring the in the right spot, and I am (between the lowest rib bone and the hip bone, according to one article on the study).

    I suppose I should thank my parents.
  • Posts: 4,391 Member
    Eek. If that's true, I need a 36" waist.

    i don't think I even had a 36" waist when I was in high school and I was in decent shape back then!
  • Posts: 2,604 Member
    Mine should be 32? Being short with a small torso, this would make me a beach ball. Maybe it ok as a general rule, but definitely not my preference.

    Really, did you have to go there? Maybe I'm just feeling sensitive today, but that just struck a "well then I must look like a blimp" nerve.
  • Posts: 1,297 Member
    show previous quotes

    Really, did you have to go there? Maybe I'm just feeling sensitive today, but that just struck a "well then I must look like a blimp" nerve.

    Are you me? With the same body type, frame and measurements? Am I missing a twin?
  • Posts: 2,604 Member
    show previous quotes

    Are you me? With the same body type, frame and measurements? Am I missing a twin?

    I'm shorter than you and have a bigger waist. I'm not saying it's logical, but it did strike a nerve.

    Edited to add: I'm not usually this sensitive, but it just hit me hard. I'm not going to fight about this though, so have a good day!
  • Posts: 59 Member
    That would put me at 32.5".. I'm at 31 so I guess I should just keep at it and live until I'm 100! Woop! Always wanted to live until 2089
  • Posts: 1,297 Member
    show previous quotes

    I'm shorter than you and have a bigger waist. I'm not saying it's logical, but it did strike a nerve.

    My torso is disproportionately shorter than my height. I have an extremely small frame. I have had a 32 inch waist before. People carry their weight differently. A 32 inch waist on one person will look astoundingly different on another.
  • Posts: 19,251 Member
    show previous quotes

    Of course, the NHS does place great emphasis on the waist size. They're a bit more draconian though - women's waists ideally should be less than 31.5" and men's less than 37".

    http://www.nhs.uk/chq/Pages/849.aspx?CategoryID=51

    Due to the dreaded middle aged spread, I'm pretty sure I'm not going to get under that again. Should make 32.5", though. (at 65", that's half.)
    Damned middle age spread. I should probably measure mine again!
  • Posts: 19,251 Member
    Mine should be 32? Being short with a small torso, this would make me a beach ball. Maybe it ok as a general rule, but definitely not my preference.
    For health.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • Posts: 410 Member
    show previous quotes

    Really, did you have to go there? Maybe I'm just feeling sensitive today, but that just struck a "well then I must look like a blimp" nerve.

    Perhaps you shouldn't read the forums then if something like that will "strike a nerve" on your sensitive days. She was talking about herself, not you. She also made a good point about it being a general rule but not a guideline. Nothing here was aimed at you personally. Jeesh, chill out.
  • Posts: 505 Member
    It's interesting, because they've always said that the hourglass shape is correlated with lower risk of heart disease and stuff. A lot of this is genetic; my mom is overweight but she would have to be really overweight to be more than 34" at the waist, just because of her shape. Even when I'm "bigger", my waist is still 24". So it sounds like it's less about weight than where your body holds fat.
  • Posts: 3,836 Member
    Sounds like I need to get A LOT TALLER!!! No, seriously, I'm still just proud that my circumference is less than my height. Half? Eek!!
  • Posts: 2,353 Member
    sounds accurate

    29509743.png
  • Posts: 6,208 Member
    show previous quotes

    I'm shorter than you and have a bigger waist. I'm not saying it's logical, but it did strike a nerve.

    Edited to add: I'm not usually this sensitive, but it just hit me hard. I'm not going to fight about this though, so have a good day!
    Is it bad that I found this funny?
    I'm a jerk.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • Posts: 236 Member
    nevermind, just deleting my post. I guess I have a weird body shape. lol
  • Posts: 30,860 Member
    Mine should be 32?

    Less than 32. So your preference is fine.
This discussion has been closed.

Welcome!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
Sign In
Register

Quick Links

Categories