Weightloss sizes

VintageFeline

not_my_first_rodeo wrote: »

Is the UK any better than the US for standard sizing? Even when I was thinner, I could be anywhere within 3 sizes dependent on the brand/designer. It also seems to be dependent on the type of material. And I have no real sense of where I will be at my goal weight. Last time I was there I was consistently in a US 12, but who knows now. That was so long ago...

Nope, UK no different.

emayc24

tcunbeliever wrote: »

If it took you 5 months to lose one size, then do you think it's realistic to lose 3 sizes in another 5 months? To me that sounds like a recipe for disappointment. A realistic goal would be 1 size in the next 5 months. Are you making some kind of extreme change to your plan that is going to triple your results?

Yes but I was bigger then and as I'm getting smaller it's less to loose to get down to the next size not more

MaybeLed

VintageFeline wrote: »

Non standardisation is why I shop by my measurements online and take 3 sizes into a fitting room if I can be bothered trying on out and about. Modern sizing also has a smaller variance between waist and hips/bust due to women being larger in the waist on average now.

My waist is 28", most UK retailers have this around a UK10 (US6) but my backside and thighs can be a 12 or 14.

Let's not even start a discussion about gymnasts/dancers calves and knee high boots.............

@VintageFeline may be worth having a look at Ted and Muffy if you're in the UK (yes I did ballet growing up) I own the only pair of boots that have ever fitted from there, they've been resoled twice because I wear them so much.

I've gone down from a UK 20/22 to a UK 16/18 in tops at 2 stone lost, though I've only gone down like a size in bottoms, unless it fits on the waist (like skirts) when it's gone down 2.

Basically I don't think you'll have have a perfect answer what with non-standard sizing and how other people lose weight from different areas.

The only reason I know I've lost 2 sizes is because I've bought the exact same tops in a 20, then 18, now 16 from M&S, alas doesn't mean I'm a 16 anywhere else though.

Ming1951

Sizes differ so much from brand to brand. At my heaviest (225) I was a size 20, I can still wear them though now I am 206 but I am not budging. I think I can go down to a 18 (have to check my closet) but they will be tight, (i am thick in the mid section) Even when I was young and thin 120 lbs my smallest size ever was a 14. And then again the brand could make me go a size up or down. Oh and I'm 5'6

SusanMFindlay

Are you by any chance older? I'm 40 and I wore a 12 or 14 when I was a teenager. But I wasn't fat then (even though I thought I was). It's just that a size 14 was a lot smaller then than it is now. Even the really skinny girls were wearing 6s or 8s back then. 0s didn't even exist.

gayletschopp

I am 5'3" have a small frame, but dense bones and am 49 years old. My starting weight at 47 was 175 lbs and size was 14. In August I weighed 132 and wore a slightly lose size 6. After 8 weeks of Beach Body's PiYo program and following Chalean Extreme eating plan (all clean eating, very little processed foods), I am in a size 3 and way 122 lbs. I know that sizes has gotten more generous, but at 125 back in the dark ages of high school, I was not even close to the size I am now. I believe that the exercise of choice makes a a big difference. I have much more muscle mass and a lot of people tell me I am too thin.

Suzy_in_DE

What a wide variance. I am 5'3". At my heaviest, 181 I was a very tight 12. Currently, at 157 and I am at a loose 8 for most pant brands that I wear. I have broad shoulders and boobs, so my tops are always large/12 to prevent the button gap.

tomteboda

DebSozo wrote: »

workinonit1956 wrote: »

These posts are so interesting. I started out at 184 and size 12 jeans-not exactly too small but lots of midsection puff out:(
Today at 160, I'm in a 10 so for me it's 24 pounds/ one size.

If the 12s were so tight that you were getting muffin top puff over, then you were probably actually a size 14? In that case it would be likely to be a 2 size drop down.

While this may be true, keep in mind that low rise jeans cause muffin top in anyone with a hhig iliac crest. My hipbones are a couple inches above most mid rise jeans, and with a flat tush, keeping them up is a challenge.

lmew91

Clothing can be tricky. Sizes vary so much depending on the style of the clothing and the brand. At my heaviest I was probably about a 10 juniors, but I didn't really buy a lot of clothes. And I could still fit into some size 8 things I owned (whether it was a flattering fit is a different story...) Now I'm mostly a 4/6 in juniors sizes, or a 2 in womens. I went from 160-ish to 130-135 lbs.

DebSozo

SusanMFindlay wrote: »

Are you by any chance older? I'm 40 and I wore a 12 or 14 when I was a teenager. But I wasn't fat then (even though I thought I was). It's just that a size 14 was a lot smaller then than it is now. Even the really skinny girls were wearing 6s or 8s back then. 0s didn't even exist.

The sizing is way different now for sure than it used to be!

emayc24

SusanMFindlay wrote: »

Are you by any chance older? I'm 40 and I wore a 12 or 14 when I was a teenager. But I wasn't fat then (even though I thought I was). It's just that a size 14 was a lot smaller then than it is now. Even the really skinny girls were wearing 6s or 8s back then. 0s didn't even exist.

No I'm in my early 20s. Sizing is all different now

Shana67

At 5'9" and 215lbs I was a very tight size 14 (US). I'm now at 175 and a size 10. For my height and frame, it seems to be about 20 lbs to lose a dress size.

bexilashious

I lost 2 stone and didn't budge
But when I hit 3 stone I suddenly went down 2 sizes x

Nicole_kayy

suzeqnu wrote: »

I heard somewhere that the standard is about every 20lbs you drop a size. I'm glad this question came up. I've always wonder if it was different for others. My arms always keep me from dropping shirt sizes.

I feel like I have that problem as well. I carry a lot of extra weight in my upper arms.

newheavensearth

Just an aside about clothes sizes... I know someone who is obsessed with being a size 0 because according to her it's "like being so small you have no dress size". But duh you still have weight and mass because you still have a corporeal body. And 0 is a size. You did not become ether. Should I tell her they make a size 00 or 000? Or would that blow her mind?

LynnBBQ72

OK - after reading this thread during the week, I decided to try a little experiment. I'm 44 years old and 5 ft 5.5 inches tall. I started in January at a very tight 22W pants and 234 lbs. I was almost too big for 22W and was seriously considering buying some 24W's so I would not be so uncomfortable. Then I lost 12 lbs and got down to 222 and my 22W's all fit comfortably. I started on MFP on July 25 at 222 lbs and still size 22W. I carry all of my weight in my belly and my legs are muscular.

I'm now at 200 lbs and most of my size 18W jeans fit in the waist but are baggy in the legs. Mind you, these jeans are the ones I saved from maybe 2009? So yes they are older but not "vintage!" Last weekend I pulled out my size 16 Regular (not 16W) jeans that I wore in maybe 2006 and 2007. None of them fit in the waist. Some were a inch or so from meeting at the snap, and some were a good 4 inches. Most of them fit OK in the legs but it was totally impossible to button/zip a single pair. I had 8 pairs from a range of makers.

I went to Kohl's last night and tried on around 15 pairs of jeans. Really. I grabbed mostly size 16 Regulars and a couple of 14 Regulars. None had elastic waists. EVERY SINGLE PAIR of every brand's size 16's fit just fine. None were uncomfortably tight and none were really loose in the waist/butt. Some of the cuts looked better in the legs but that would be up a personal choice, not a fit issue. This tells me that in just 8 years the manufacturers have added between 2 and 5 inches to the waist of size 16 Regular jeans.

Here's the kicker: THE SIZE 14'S FIT ALSO! Those were definitely snug and not attractive at all on me, but they snapped and zipped and I could move in them. I'm sure there are plenty of people my weight and build wearing them, but I did not like the way they made me look. I probably last wore a size 14 when I weighed 160 lbs or less, back in the mid 90's. I understand that sizes have changed since Marilyn Monroe's time, but I am still amazed at the sizing changes from just a few years ago. An earlier poster around my age wrote that the skinniest girls in the early 90's wore size 6 or 8 and that is completely true. Never ever ever would I have believed that someone who weighs 200 lbs could fit into a size 14 - but I did it myself. My eyes have been opened!

savithny

For what its worth: Within individual brands I've found sizing relatively constant. I found a pair of jeans in the basement last year that I'd packed away before I had my first kid. To give you an idea: They were light-rinse (not quite acid wash), high waisted, and had PLEATS. They had to be from pre-2000.

The fit, once you account for the high waist vs. low rise? Was not that different than the fit of the same brand of jeans now.

But that's Dork Jeans too -- I wear a lot of pants from Lands End, LL Bean, and Eddie Bauer. They've been fairly consistent for years.

TanyaHooton

Women's size is arbitrary and nonsensical. I'm 5'6" and I fit a size 12 on top and 10 on bottom, generally speaking. However, with the loss of a few inches around my waist I've been able to squeeze into a few size 8 dresses if they are stretchy. I know they're not a true 8 because of vanity sizing - I've been shopping for wedding dresses and they are built to older sizing standards, and because 10 years ago when I was down at 135, I was a size 8. I am 155 now, so there's definitely been some size creep since then.

FWIW, I lost inches before I lost weight (I've been lifting) and my clothes fit differently despite the scale not moving. A lot of it is how we are proportioned and where the fat settles.

kellerycelery02

I'm 5'4" and was wearing a 20w pant comfortably, 22w if I wanted them loose, at my heaviest of 265. Down 15 pounds and the 22s are practically falling off but the 20s fit the same. I also wore a 16w dress at my heaviest (im very pear-shaped) and now that is big... sizes are weird.

SCoil123

It takes 20-30lb for me. Im down 15lb from a size 10 and my 8 are not comfortable yet.