Confused about how to measure waist - am I at risk or not?
Options
Replies
-
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »SingRunTing wrote: »Here is a picture of where different measurements fall on the two sexes (at least for sewing purposes):
This is for sewing. NOT for medical purposes.YOUR HIP WIDTH AFFECTS YOUR WAIST WIDTH FOR THE BAZILLIONTH TIME. having wide hips does not put you at risk. having excess fat on your waist does. the measurement of your waist does not all include excess fat and the baseline can be larger for people with wider hips. that's why you can't just take this one number and compare it to your height. you should also compare it to your hips. that's why i view the waist hip ratio to be better.
Okay look, believe whatever you want. I'm done. Denial is more than just a river in Egypt.
dude, 106 pounds. i don't need to be in denial about anything. this rule just doesn't make much sense since it ignores hip measurement.
Hip measurement is irrelevant. It's not a "rule", it's a health marker based on health data. Do you seriously not know how medical recommendations and disease risk factors work?
well, then it's a health marker that is too simplistic and innacurate in many cases just like bmi is.
How can a health risk marker be inaccurate? And yes, they are usually simplistic by nature.
they don't actually indicate a health risk for some people.
I don't mean to sound rude, but I think you need to find a dictionary and look up the word risk.
whenever someone starts off a sentence like that, it always means they are saying something rude. just own it.
I wasn't trying to be rude, though I knew saying that would seem so. It's clear that you are confused as to what health risk actually means. Not getting whatever condition you are/were at risk for does not mean you didn't/dont have the risk.
my point is, you might not have the risk at all if bone structure is making that area larger. i'm not confused at all.
if you are wide, but flat, you probably don't have much excess fat there, but your measurements would be bigger than someone who starts off narrow.
Not sure if you are serious, but it's clear you don't understand how risk factors work.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »SingRunTing wrote: »Here is a picture of where different measurements fall on the two sexes (at least for sewing purposes):
This is for sewing. NOT for medical purposes.YOUR HIP WIDTH AFFECTS YOUR WAIST WIDTH FOR THE BAZILLIONTH TIME. having wide hips does not put you at risk. having excess fat on your waist does. the measurement of your waist does not all include excess fat and the baseline can be larger for people with wider hips. that's why you can't just take this one number and compare it to your height. you should also compare it to your hips. that's why i view the waist hip ratio to be better.
Okay look, believe whatever you want. I'm done. Denial is more than just a river in Egypt.
dude, 106 pounds. i don't need to be in denial about anything. this rule just doesn't make much sense since it ignores hip measurement.
Hip measurement is irrelevant. It's not a "rule", it's a health marker based on health data. Do you seriously not know how medical recommendations and disease risk factors work?
well, then it's a health marker that is too simplistic and innacurate in many cases just like bmi is.
How can a health risk marker be inaccurate? And yes, they are usually simplistic by nature.
they don't actually indicate a health risk for some people.
I don't mean to sound rude, but I think you need to find a dictionary and look up the word risk.
whenever someone starts off a sentence like that, it always means they are saying something rude. just own it.
I wasn't trying to be rude, though I knew saying that would seem so. It's clear that you are confused as to what health risk actually means. Not getting whatever condition you are/were at risk for does not mean you didn't/dont have the risk.
my point is, you might not have the risk at all if bone structure is making that area larger. i'm not confused at all.
if you are wide, but flat, you probably don't have much excess fat there, but your measurements would be bigger than someone who starts off narrow.
Not sure if you are serious, but it's clear you don't understand how risk factors work.
I'm serious. I understand just fine. Doesn't seem like you do though.0 -
Because it crossed the line you tight-rope walk along. I've been very open and extremely polite in this thread, perhaps too polite. But I won't be called thick - either directly or indirectly. Especially by someone who can't even be bothered to read what I wrote.herrspoons wrote: »
.Wow, some properly thick people here, and I'm not talking about their physical appearance. If you are fat, you measure where the fat is at, i.e. the widest point. If you aren't fat, it doesn't matter where you measure, since none of this applies to you. Your waist could resemble a cartoon figure that was hit by a steamroller; if there is no fat there, you are not in the risk group regarding fat. Comprende?
And for the record, if your belly jiggles like a bowl full of jelly, then you are fat. If all you have is rock hard abs or maybe some loose skin and some soft bits, you are not fat.
I have reported this.
What for? It's on the money.
And as it is far too stressful to sift the kind, helpful advice from the advice of those who enjoy loading every sentence with dripping contempt, and tearing down new posters for the entertainment of onlookers and their own gratification, I certainly won't be posting here again. Which is a shame as I had a lot of support to give.
An interesting forum ruined by a few vile and spiteful people.
Unfortunately, this how many many people behave behind their computer screens and their keyboards.
I will put it like this... people just lack tact and politeness. OP I hope that you were able to get some good references on what you need to do to get your measurements down.
i'm a sweetheart both in person and online. it's good to be consistent.0 -
This sounds so much like those I-know-you-are-but-what-am-I routines that play out on elementary-school playgrounds all across America on a daily basis.I understand just fine. Doesn't seem like you do though.
Does anyone here know who old this Aviva chick is? Cuz she sounds like a sweetheart child to me.0 -
Because it crossed the line you tight-rope walk along. I've been very open and extremely polite in this thread, perhaps too polite. But I won't be called thick - either directly or indirectly. Especially by someone who can't even be bothered to read what I wrote.herrspoons wrote: »
.Wow, some properly thick people here, and I'm not talking about their physical appearance. If you are fat, you measure where the fat is at, i.e. the widest point. If you aren't fat, it doesn't matter where you measure, since none of this applies to you. Your waist could resemble a cartoon figure that was hit by a steamroller; if there is no fat there, you are not in the risk group regarding fat. Comprende?
And for the record, if your belly jiggles like a bowl full of jelly, then you are fat. If all you have is rock hard abs or maybe some loose skin and some soft bits, you are not fat.
I have reported this.
What for? It's on the money.
And as it is far too stressful to sift the kind, helpful advice from the advice of those who enjoy loading every sentence with dripping contempt, and tearing down new posters for the entertainment of onlookers and their own gratification, I certainly won't be posting here again. Which is a shame as I had a lot of support to give.
An interesting forum ruined by a few vile and spiteful people.
Unfortunately, this how many many people behave behind their computer screens and their keyboards.
I will put it like this... people just lack tact and politeness. OP I hope that you were able to get some good references on what you need to do to get your measurements down.
The comment about "jiggle" is inaccurate, anyways. The waist measurement is about how much visceral fat someone has (padding around their organs). The fat that can be grabbed, and looks lumpy just under the surface, is subcutaneous fat, and is not linked to the same dangers.
Visceral fat (indicated by a waist measurement above 35" or 40" in men) is linked to an increase in cardiovascular disease, metabolic syndrome, and type II diabetes. In women, it is also linked to breast cancer and the need for gallbladder surgery.
Consuming high amounts of fructose (through added sugars) has been linked to central obesity (visceral fat). Regular exercise and adequate quality protein intake can protect against it.
Fortunately, there are proven ways to specifically reduce visceral fat. Moderate exercise, and including dairy, fruits, and whole grains, can reduce waist size and improve the waist-hip ratio, so that even when no weight is lost, the amount of visceral fat is reduced.
My belly button is right under my hipbone too. If my health risk is based on my belly button measurement rather than between my hip and ribs, I'm doomed. The lowest that my hip has measured was 36", and I was 116 lbs then....0 -
Joe_Buck69 wrote: »
This sounds so much like those I-know-you-are-but-what-am-I routines that play out on elementary-school playgrounds all across America on a daily basis.I understand just fine. Doesn't seem like you do though.
Does anyone here know who old this Aviva chick is? Cuz she sounds like a sweetheart child to me.
why do you want to know my age?0 -
I went away for 24 hours and this thread blew up! I remember a similar thread about waist measurement getting like this. I'm not really sure why. All I can say is I have a vanity measurement: my smallest point. If the doctor would measure me I would assume it would be closer to my belly button.0
-
arditarose wrote: »I have a vanity measurement: my smallest point. If the doctor would measure me I would assume it would be closer to my belly button.
Actually it's useful for more than just vanity. The waist measurement at the narrowest point, I've found, corresponds pretty closely to my jeans size, even though I wear my jeans much lower down. If I were to measure the actual circumference of the waistband of my jeans, they'd be several inches bigger than the size on the label. But the size on the label matches my narrow waist measurement pretty closely. So it's handy when I'm shopping.0 -
arditarose wrote: »I have a vanity measurement: my smallest point. If the doctor would measure me I would assume it would be closer to my belly button.
Actually it's useful for more than just vanity. The waist measurement at the narrowest point, I've found, corresponds pretty closely to my jeans size, even though I wear my jeans much lower down. If I were to measure the actual circumference of the waistband of my jeans, they'd be several inches bigger than the size on the label. But the size on the label matches my narrow waist measurement pretty closely. So it's handy when I'm shopping.
Oh true, I use it for dresses but I was actually wondering about jeans. I don't think I could wear a pair of 27 inch jeans though because my thighs are so thick. I've had no money since dropping the last few pounds though so I should try.0 -
arditarose wrote: »Oh true, I use it for dresses but I was actually wondering about jeans. I don't think I could wear a pair of 27 inch jeans though because my thighs are so thick. I've had no money since dropping the last few pounds though so I should try.
Depends on the brand and cut, of course. But hey, worth trying them on!0 -
I've noticed my waist getting slightly thicker since heavy lifting. I still have a layer of fat on top of the muscle, and was wondering how this would impact the measurement? Which fat takes longer to burn off? I'm genuinely curious if this would make a difference in this measurement? I definitely have room to improve, but it feels like my waist has gotten somewhat wider instead of narrower.
And to the OP..... It takes all kinds to make a community, online or otherwise. It's always the loudest voices that stand out the most, but often have the least value to contribute. Just my 2 cents.
0 -
I've noticed my waist getting slightly thicker since heavy lifting. I still have a layer of fat on top of the muscle, and was wondering how this would impact the measurement? Which fat takes longer to burn off? I'm genuinely curious if this would make a difference in this measurement? I definitely have room to improve, but it feels like my waist has gotten somewhat wider instead of narrower.
And to the OP..... It takes all kinds to make a community, online or otherwise. It's always the loudest voices that stand out the most, but often have the least value to contribute. Just my 2 cents.
Are you lifting at a surplus? What do you mean "which fat takes longer to burn off"? I'm not sure what kind of difference it would make in the measurement. If you have a thicker waist due to strength training, it would still be good to cut and keep your belly fat within a healthy range or whatever.0 -
Would visceral fat or subcutaneous fat burn off first? I can just research this myself though... I was just wondering if anyone contributing knew the answer. I've just started my cut this past week, so hopefully that will help with what's hanging around.0
-
And No, I wasn't lifting at what I considered a surplus 1650 while watching my macros, but I guess it's been at surplus for what I'm looking for.0
-
Because it crossed the line you tight-rope walk along. I've been very open and extremely polite in this thread, perhaps too polite. But I won't be called thick - either directly or indirectly. Especially by someone who can't even be bothered to read what I wrote.herrspoons wrote: »
.Wow, some properly thick people here, and I'm not talking about their physical appearance. If you are fat, you measure where the fat is at, i.e. the widest point. If you aren't fat, it doesn't matter where you measure, since none of this applies to you. Your waist could resemble a cartoon figure that was hit by a steamroller; if there is no fat there, you are not in the risk group regarding fat. Comprende?
And for the record, if your belly jiggles like a bowl full of jelly, then you are fat. If all you have is rock hard abs or maybe some loose skin and some soft bits, you are not fat.
I have reported this.
What for? It's on the money.
And as it is far too stressful to sift the kind, helpful advice from the advice of those who enjoy loading every sentence with dripping contempt, and tearing down new posters for the entertainment of onlookers and their own gratification, I certainly won't be posting here again. Which is a shame as I had a lot of support to give.
An interesting forum ruined by a few vile and spiteful people.
Unfortunately, this how many many people behave behind their computer screens and their keyboards.
I will put it like this... people just lack tact and politeness. OP I hope that you were able to get some good references on what you need to do to get your measurements down.
The appalling rudeness in this thread is not just evidence of people lacking tact and politeness though. It's evidence of people with antisocial personality disorders bullying and intimidating regular posters, and new posters like myself, typically by dressing up quite outrageous remarks as "tough love", and then getting endorsement for their behaviour when really they should be blocked and told to seek therapy.
My fat tummy is a lot less of a concern, overall, than the diseased minds that have revealed themselves here.
I have been a prolific poster on UK forums and I've never seen anything like it.
0 -
[quote="herrspoons;31057804"
Measuring it above that is akin to being one of those sad people who balance on the scales on their tiptoes whilst holding on to a wall to support their weight. Don't be that person.[/quote]
I'd sooner be that person than spend my time bullying people who are already vulnerable.
Is this you? Because this is how you come across in your posts.
"Antisocial personality disorder
A person with an antisocial personality disorder sees other people as vulnerable and may intimidate or bully others without remorse. They lack concern about the consequences of their actions.
Symptoms include:
lack of concern, regret or remorse about other people's distress
irresponsibility and disregard for normal social behaviour
difficulty in sustaining long-term relationships
little ability to tolerate frustration and to control their anger
lack of guilt, or not learning from their mistakes
blaming others for problems in their lives
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has published guidelines on how people with antisocial personality disorders should be treated. For more information, see NICE: antisocial personality disorder (PDF, 250kb)."
0 -
It is so sad that so many threads get ruined because some people are rude and obnoxious. It is so off putting! Even if you are right about something there are polite ways of saying it but to continuously "shout" shows poor communication skills. I have kept reading this thread because there are some thoughtful replies among the drama. Ooci you look fabulous and have come such a long way already. You will get to your goal and I am sure some of the dangerous fat around the organs has melted away and will continue to do so 0
-
It is so sad that so many threads get ruined because some people are rude and obnoxious. It is so off putting! Even if you are right about something there are polite ways of saying it but to continuously "shout" shows poor communication skills. I have kept reading this thread because there are some thoughtful replies among the drama. Ooci you look fabulous and have come such a long way already. You will get to your goal and I am sure some of the dangerous fat around the organs has melted away and will continue to do so
Warm thanks, to you and the other thoughtful, kind and generous people in this thread.
Most people know that overweight people get enough of a kicking without adding to it here.
0 -
I dunno about "Antisocial Personality Disorder" ... but I'm pretty sure lots a folks would put me in the Sociopath bucket.
I'm OK with that.0 -
There's a whole separate topic that could start here about the behaviour of people on internet forums, and the group dynamics that cause it.
But I'm not gonna go there. Instead I'll just say that everyone here who is trying to lose weight for their health is deserving of support and encouragement.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.5K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 392 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 926 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions