body type
Options
Replies
-
Seeing as how my wrist size dropped as I lost weight, I would have to go with no.0
-
TimothyFish wrote: »I believe there is some truth to it. The size of the bones at a person's wrist will normally give an indication of the size of the bones elsewhere. More bone means that a smaller percentage of a person's weight is made up of muscle and fat. But none of that has much meaning unless the person is at a "normal" weight. For overweight people, differences in bone size are an insignificant percentage of their total mass.
This makes sense to me.
I was always a slightly taller than average, morbidly obese woman with MUCH smaller wrists, fingers, and sometimes even neck or ankles, than the majority of my friends who were average weight or slightly overweight.
Now at a healthy weight, I still have hugely wide hips but everything else about me is somewhat petite if you don't realize how tall I am...so I would honestly say that despite being a larger person overall due to height I DO have a small frame size.0 -
TimothyFish wrote: »For overweight people, differences in bone size are an insignificant percentage of their total mass.
Bones are not a static entity -- they grow when you get bigger and they shrink when you get smaller. They make up around 15% of your body mass, regardless of your size.
In other words, someone who weights 150 pounds has around 22 pounds of bone mass. If this same person gained 100 pounds, they would then have around 38 pounds in bone mass, not 22.
The weight gain is in muscle, fat, and bone (and probably veins, tendons, and all the other stuff that we are made of).
Bones are constantly growing and dying. This is why calcium is so important throughout our lives, not just as little kids.
0 -
seltzermint wrote: »I would honestly say that despite being a larger person overall due to height I DO have a small frame size.
I'm medium framed but short, so matter how much weight I lose, I'll always look like I should be in a field picking potatoes for a living.
0 -
DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »Bones are not a static entity -- they grow when you get bigger and they shrink when you get smaller. They make up around 15% of your body mass, regardless of your size.
In other words, someone who weights 150 pounds has around 22 pounds of bone mass. If this same person gained 100 pounds, they would then have around 38s pound in bone mass, not 22.
The weight gain is in muscle, fat, and bone (and probably veins, tendons, and all the other stuff that we are made of).
Bones are constantly growing and dying. This is why calcium is so important throughout our lives, not just as little kids.
No.
Our bone density and muscle mass decreases with age. Plus, some people do experience bone loss when they lose weight, mostly because they don't consume enough calcium. That can put many people, especially women after menopause, at increased risk of osteoporosis. Which is why it's so important to focus on getting enough calcium even during weight loss.
The rest of what you quote is untrue. The average man has about 15% of his mass from bone (and the average woman 12%, due to higher average percentage of body fat for women). But your bones don't magically grow and shrink to adjust to weight loss or gain. Most people stop growing around age 18-21, and bones typically achieve maximum density by age 30 or so, after which they start losing bone density.0 -
mustgetmuscles1 wrote: »Body type: human, male
Negative, you are a meat popsicle.
hahaha! Made my day!
0 -
I'm not really convinced body types are correct in general since fat storage and bone structure are two different things (eg I have wide hips so my measurements seem like a pear but I don't gain weight in my butt as much as I do my stomach). What happens if you have long fingers? Totally possible, even with an average frame. So using the wrist rule if you're average framed but have long fingers you might think you're small framed, no?
ETA: I do believe there are small, medium and large frames (talking about bones here) though. I'm just not convinced measuring a wrist will tell you what you are.0 -
NoelFigart1 wrote: »I'm short and stocky. I'll never be a delicate little sylph. I could starve myself to 100lbs and I won't look delicately slender like a ballerina. I'll look like a lollipop head. I have short arms and legs and that's never going to change.
Ditto. When I was skinny, my head looked ginormous compared to the rest of my body. If wrist circumference is an indicator of what my frame is supposed to be, then I will also look like a lollipop head.0 -
mustgetmuscles1 wrote: »Body type: human, male
Negative, you are a meat popsicle.
Who the hell flags something like this?0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »mustgetmuscles1 wrote: »Body type: human, male
Negative, you are a meat popsicle.
Who the hell flags something like this?
people will flag ANYTHING!0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »mustgetmuscles1 wrote: »Body type: human, male
Negative, you are a meat popsicle.
Who the hell flags something like this?
Some who's jealous, I'd guess.0 -
I think there is something to "frame size" but calculating it is in-exact. I have small wrists(5.75" non-dominant hand, slightly under 6" dominant hand), small hands ("small" size glove), and small feet (size 6.5) and am 66 inches tall - I think that my frame size is "small." But that being said, I don't really know what difference it makes.0
-
tincanonastring wrote: »mustgetmuscles1 wrote: »Body type: human, male
Negative, you are a meat popsicle.
Who the hell flags something like this?
People who are also meat popsicles but who do not wish to be.
0 -
I'm assuming they thought it was some kind of insult. But who knows. Some people will flag anything. Lis at the top of this page was flagged for congratulating someone on their weight loss, lol.tincanonastring wrote: »mustgetmuscles1 wrote: »Body type: human, male
Negative, you are a meat popsicle.
Who the hell flags something like this?
OP, I'm not sure I understand the question. Do I believe some people have bigger bones than others? Absolutely. I know it.
Do I think any single number (BMI, waist circumference, etc.) tells the whole story? No.
My friend is <1cm taller than me. She has a wide frame and her waist is bigger than mine. She is in better shape than I am, though. Not great shape, lol, but she's better off than I am.
So many things factor in. If you could do your own health exams by using google, they could shut down the medical schools.
-1 -
The point is, none of these things really have a major bearing on weight loss.
The things that matter are weight and, more importantly, body fat percentage.
We will all be different shapes and sizes when all is said and done. Even if I lose the fat and get to a lean, fit, low bf% of myself, I'll still be short (5'1") and my hip bones will still be wider than my shoulder bones. I'll still have a small head, tiny (5") wrists, and short fingers. I'll still have to hem sleeves and pant legs on everything I buy.
So, okay, that's me. That's my frame. Big whoop-de-do. Is it an excuse not to lose the weight? Heck no!0 -
DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »TimothyFish wrote: »For overweight people, differences in bone size are an insignificant percentage of their total mass.
Bones are not a static entity -- they grow when you get bigger and they shrink when you get smaller. They make up around 15% of your body mass, regardless of your size.
In other words, someone who weights 150 pounds has around 22 pounds of bone mass. If this same person gained 100 pounds, they would then have around 38 pounds in bone mass, not 22.
The weight gain is in muscle, fat, and bone (and probably veins, tendons, and all the other stuff that we are made of).
Bones are constantly growing and dying. This is why calcium is so important throughout our lives, not just as little kids.
So you're saying a 500 lb. man has 75 lbs of bone. I kinda doubt that, but the fact that we gain or lose bone as the need increases or decreases shouldn't have a significant impact on the size of the bones at the wrist, since they do not carry a significant portion of the excess weight.0 -
TimothyFish wrote: »DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »TimothyFish wrote: »For overweight people, differences in bone size are an insignificant percentage of their total mass.
Bones are not a static entity -- they grow when you get bigger and they shrink when you get smaller. They make up around 15% of your body mass, regardless of your size.
In other words, someone who weights 150 pounds has around 22 pounds of bone mass. If this same person gained 100 pounds, they would then have around 38 pounds in bone mass, not 22.
The weight gain is in muscle, fat, and bone (and probably veins, tendons, and all the other stuff that we are made of).
Bones are constantly growing and dying. This is why calcium is so important throughout our lives, not just as little kids.
So you're saying a 500 lb. man has 75 lbs of bone. I kinda doubt that, but the fact that we gain or lose bone as the need increases or decreases shouldn't have a significant impact on the size of the bones at the wrist, since they do not carry a significant portion of the excess weight.
It's true. The human skeleton is roughly 15-20% of total body weight. Most of a person's weight is actually water.0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »mustgetmuscles1 wrote: »Body type: human, male
Negative, you are a meat popsicle.
Who the hell flags something like this?
Never question the flags... it's coming for you next... run away...-1 -
tincanonastring wrote: »mustgetmuscles1 wrote: »Body type: human, male
Negative, you are a meat popsicle.
Who the hell flags something like this?
Wasnt me. I have doing my best to become a meat popsicle and was flattered someone noticed.
0 -
No.
Our bone density and muscle mass decreases with age. Plus, some people do experience bone loss when they lose weight, mostly because they don't consume enough calcium. That can put many people, especially women after menopause, at increased risk of osteoporosis. Which is why it's so important to focus on getting enough calcium even during weight loss.
The rest of what you quote is untrue. The average man has about 15% of his mass from bone (and the average woman 12%, due to higher average percentage of body fat for women). But your bones don't magically grow and shrink to adjust to weight loss or gain. Most people stop growing around age 18-21, and bones typically achieve maximum density by age 30 or so, after which they start losing bone density.
This MFP tradition of starting a post with "No" when you disagree is very offputting. I'm not your dog.
That said, you are right -- it's not like you become taller if you get heavier. I misunderstood something I read to mean "our bones get bigger when we get heavier" instead of "our bones get stronger when we get heavier" and broscienced that to the 15% average.
My point was that our bones are not static, but are in a state of flux all the time.
-1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 998 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions