40 inch waist really that bad for a male?
Replies
-
I'd wager for the bulk of the population that it's impossible to have a 40 inch waist and not have it translate into a BMI that falls within the healthy range.8 -
mburgess458 wrote: »As much as we all disdain BMI as a health metric, this is a good example of where it can actually come in handy - to help people who don't know they may be overweight at least ask the right questions.
I have to disagree. If people don't realize they are overweight after looking in the mirror and seeing bodies like those shown in this thread, no type of metric like BMI is going to help. Nothing is going to get through that level of denial.
Specific benchmarks can be helpful, even if those benchmarks are somewhat questionable. Take the OP for example, he did not realize he needed to consider his weight until he became aware of a specific metric (waist size) to compare himself against.2 -
First thought, "Well, duh, you can wear your jeans below the belly." Fewer consequences for males. Women can't get away with that.
Second thought, "ooooo sexy"
After reading your post, well yeah. You are at a higher risk. Carrying around that sack of potatoes has also got to be hard on your back, your knees. You won't be doing a marathon any day soon.1 -
mburgess458 wrote: »As much as we all disdain BMI as a health metric, this is a good example of where it can actually come in handy - to help people who don't know they may be overweight at least ask the right questions.
I have to disagree. If people don't realize they are overweight after looking in the mirror and seeing bodies like those shown in this thread, no type of metric like BMI is going to help. Nothing is going to get through that level of denial.
Specific benchmarks can be helpful, even if those benchmarks are somewhat questionable. Take the OP for example, he did not realize he needed to consider his weight until he became aware of a specific metric (waist size) to compare himself against.
I get your point. He ignored the mirror but the 40 inch waist thing got him thinking, I suppose a high BMI might help some other people in denial.
It still shocks me that people can see a huge gut and think they aren't overweight or at risk health-wise. I wear size 30 pants and sometimes worry I'm a little too soft in the middle.1 -
You're 24. As you go through your 30s, 40s, 50s you'll experience increasing health issues related to your obesity - many of them major. Overweight is a risk factor for heart problems, high blood pressure, diabetes, back problems, joint problems, sleep apnea, and more. You have plenty of time now to make permanent lifestyle changes that will keep you healthy and happy for the rest of your life. I'm 70, and wish I had done so 40 years ago rather than waiting until my 60s to get my act together (I'm at 187lbs, 36 inch waist down from 265lbs and a 44 inch waist, and can stand to lose some more weight).2
-
First thought, "Well, duh, you can wear your jeans below the belly." Fewer consequences for males. Women can't get away with that.
Second thought, "ooooo sexy"
After reading your post, well yeah. You are at a higher risk. Carrying around that sack of potatoes has also got to be hard on your back, your knees. You won't be doing a marathon any day soon.
True marathons aren't really my thing LOL but I could def. stand to start walking or jogging and will probably get back to the gym and pay more attention to what I eat every day. My metabolism isn't what it was a few years ago! I'm finding out out the hard way!
0 -
mburgess458 wrote: »mburgess458 wrote: »As much as we all disdain BMI as a health metric, this is a good example of where it can actually come in handy - to help people who don't know they may be overweight at least ask the right questions.
I have to disagree. If people don't realize they are overweight after looking in the mirror and seeing bodies like those shown in this thread, no type of metric like BMI is going to help. Nothing is going to get through that level of denial.
Specific benchmarks can be helpful, even if those benchmarks are somewhat questionable. Take the OP for example, he did not realize he needed to consider his weight until he became aware of a specific metric (waist size) to compare himself against.
I get your point. He ignored the mirror but the 40 inch waist thing got him thinking, I suppose a high BMI might help some other people in denial.
It still shocks me that people can see a huge gut and think they aren't overweight or at risk health-wise. I wear size 30 pants and sometimes worry I'm a little too soft in the middle.
I don't really feel like I have a huge gut honestly. I definitely softened up a bit and got a little round but never thought it was that bad! Which is kind of why I was shocked about 40 inches being considered so awful. But reading up on it did bring it to my attention. So that's true! Because my BMI isn't bad so I never even thought I could be considered overweight -- until I read about waist circumference.
2 -
Shorelivin42 wrote: »mburgess458 wrote: »mburgess458 wrote: »As much as we all disdain BMI as a health metric, this is a good example of where it can actually come in handy - to help people who don't know they may be overweight at least ask the right questions.
I have to disagree. If people don't realize they are overweight after looking in the mirror and seeing bodies like those shown in this thread, no type of metric like BMI is going to help. Nothing is going to get through that level of denial.
Specific benchmarks can be helpful, even if those benchmarks are somewhat questionable. Take the OP for example, he did not realize he needed to consider his weight until he became aware of a specific metric (waist size) to compare himself against.
I get your point. He ignored the mirror but the 40 inch waist thing got him thinking, I suppose a high BMI might help some other people in denial.
It still shocks me that people can see a huge gut and think they aren't overweight or at risk health-wise. I wear size 30 pants and sometimes worry I'm a little too soft in the middle.
I don't really feel like I have a huge gut honestly. I definitely softened up a bit and got a little round but never thought it was that bad! Which is kind of why I was shocked about 40 inches being considered so awful. But reading up on it did bring it to my attention. So that's true! Because my BMI isn't bad so I never even thought I could be considered overweight -- until I read about waist circumference.
You didn’t think you looked overweight in the picture you posted? How would you describe your look in that picture?
Not trying to be a jerk, just struggling to understand.5 -
mburgess458 wrote: »As much as we all disdain BMI as a health metric, this is a good example of where it can actually come in handy - to help people who don't know they may be overweight at least ask the right questions.
I have to disagree. If people don't realize they are overweight after looking in the mirror and seeing bodies like those shown in this thread, no type of metric like BMI is going to help. Nothing is going to get through that level of denial.
I definitely noticed I had softened up and gotten a bit round but I just didn't realize how unhealthy it was. But reading up on waist size being such a serious health factor helped me understand that. I still don't feel like I'm insanely out of shape but thanks to the community here, Im feeling enlightened and I could certainly stand to lose a bit at least. I may have been in denial but reading up on waist size helped me realize I should do something..
1 -
mburgess458 wrote: »Shorelivin42 wrote: »mburgess458 wrote: »mburgess458 wrote: »As much as we all disdain BMI as a health metric, this is a good example of where it can actually come in handy - to help people who don't know they may be overweight at least ask the right questions.
I have to disagree. If people don't realize they are overweight after looking in the mirror and seeing bodies like those shown in this thread, no type of metric like BMI is going to help. Nothing is going to get through that level of denial.
Specific benchmarks can be helpful, even if those benchmarks are somewhat questionable. Take the OP for example, he did not realize he needed to consider his weight until he became aware of a specific metric (waist size) to compare himself against.
I get your point. He ignored the mirror but the 40 inch waist thing got him thinking, I suppose a high BMI might help some other people in denial.
It still shocks me that people can see a huge gut and think they aren't overweight or at risk health-wise. I wear size 30 pants and sometimes worry I'm a little too soft in the middle.
I don't really feel like I have a huge gut honestly. I definitely softened up a bit and got a little round but never thought it was that bad! Which is kind of why I was shocked about 40 inches being considered so awful. But reading up on it did bring it to my attention. So that's true! Because my BMI isn't bad so I never even thought I could be considered overweight -- until I read about waist circumference.
You didn’t think you looked overweight in the picture you posted? How would you describe your look in that picture?
Not trying to be a jerk, just struggling to understand.
Basically, what I said in the OP. I had gained 15 or so pounds and knew I put on a little. I wouldn't refer to myself as skinny anymore but I didn't think I was outrageously out of shape either. I have some rolls when I sit and don't really fit in my pants I bought last year so yeah I knew I gained weight. I didn't know it was that bad is what I'm saying
1 -
Shorelivin42 wrote: »First thought, "Well, duh, you can wear your jeans below the belly." Fewer consequences for males. Women can't get away with that.
Second thought, "ooooo sexy"
After reading your post, well yeah. You are at a higher risk. Carrying around that sack of potatoes has also got to be hard on your back, your knees. You won't be doing a marathon any day soon.
True marathons aren't really my thing LOL but I could def. stand to start walking or jogging and will probably get back to the gym and pay more attention to what I eat every day. My metabolism isn't what it was a few years ago! I'm finding out out the hard way!
As a male your metabolism slows maybe around 5% per decade. Don't be a victim, you're just eating more and moving less.
Good luck.6 -
Shorelivin42 wrote: »Hey all,
Recently put on some weight and was reading up about waist size. I was a little shocked to find out that my waist size is unhealthy and apparently puts me at risk. I am 24 yo, 5'10", 181 lbs with a 42 inch waist. I've gained about 15 lbs in the last 8 months or so and probably 5 inches on my waist. I'm okay with it but I know I've got a little beer belly now
and I'm definitely a bit softer in the middle than I was LOL but I was shocked to see that a waist over 40 inches is considered very unhealthy. Should I consider losing weight for health reasons? Is anybody else surprised?! LOL
I'm a bit more than double your age, and exact same height. My waist is 32, but occasionally reached 34 where it never stayed too long. You definitely should consider getting it under control now while you're still young.2 -
My sons 17 years old and size 40.. it does look like he needs to lose weight.. He isomer 6ft tall so not what I consider huge but yeah is too big. But I am lost as what to do for him.. The more I try to control him the more he sneaks junk.2
-
mygrl4meee wrote: »My sons 17 years old and size 40.. it does look like he needs to lose weight.. He isomer 6ft tall so not what I consider huge but yeah is too big. But I am lost as what to do for him.. The more I try to control him the more he sneaks junk.
At 17, you're not going to be able to "control" what your son eats. All you can do is manage what's available to eat at home and set an example by your own healthy habits. He's old enough that he will have to make the decision to get to a more healthy weight on his own.4 -
Tacklewasher wrote: »Just a note that pant size <> waist size. I can get into 36W, but my waist is over 40". I've got a ways to go yet.
Yupper. With the possible exceptions of Santa Claus and Gomer Pyle, few men wear their pants up around the actual waist.
2 -
Can I just point out that the perspective of OP’s belly is quite distorted from the angle of the pic.
I absolutely agree this is not a healthy looking body, as per my previous posts, but keep in mind the degree of ‘gut’ and has been accentuated in this particular image.3 -
A 40 inch waist is fine if you are 7 feet tall
You a fat man or pregnant.3 -
mygrl4meee wrote: »My sons 17 years old and size 40.. it does look like he needs to lose weight.. He isomer 6ft tall so not what I consider huge but yeah is too big. But I am lost as what to do for him.. The more I try to control him the more he sneaks junk.
You're in denial. A 17 year old with a size 40 waist is huge. Remember the pants size is generally the bigger than the waist size, so his actual waist is probably more like 42-44.3 -
the waist size differs on different people at different heights and different body composition.0
-
The stats given in the original post suggest a BMI of just on 26, but the pic looks closer to 33 or so.2
-
Tacklewasher wrote: »Just a note that pant size <> waist size. I can get into 36W, but my waist is over 40". I've got a ways to go yet.
Yupper. With the possible exceptions of Santa Claus and Gomer Pyle, few men wear their pants up around the actual waist.
Guess I'm one of those guys. I have a measured 39 inch waist and wear either 40's or 42's depending on what I've got stuffed in my pants(I generally carry a pistol IWB)0 -
Packerjohn wrote: »
Omygrl4meee wrote: »My sons 17 years old and size 40.. it does look like he needs to lose weight.. He isomer 6ft tall so not what I consider huge but yeah is too big. But I am lost as what to do for him.. The more I try to control him the more he sneaks junk.
You're in denial. A 17 year old with a size 40 waist is huge. Remember the pants size is generally the bigger than the waist size, so his actual waist is probably more like 42-44.
The OP actually did say in his first post that his waist is 42". I don't know what happened there unless he meant 40 is the suggested cutoff and he is "only" 2" larger than that or something?
But yeah, to everyone answering, to back and re-read...his waist is 42".0 -
stanmann571 wrote: »Tacklewasher wrote: »Just a note that pant size <> waist size. I can get into 36W, but my waist is over 40". I've got a ways to go yet.
Yupper. With the possible exceptions of Santa Claus and Gomer Pyle, few men wear their pants up around the actual waist.
Guess I'm one of those guys. I have a measured 39 inch waist and wear either 40's or 42's depending on what I've got stuffed in my pants(I generally carry a pistol IWB)
We'll add you to the list then.
Total count so far: three, and two are imaginary creations.
BTW, Gomer Pyle stuffed, too.
1 -
Can I just point out that the perspective of OP’s belly is quite distorted from the angle of the pic.
I absolutely agree this is not a healthy looking body, as per my previous posts, but keep in mind the degree of ‘gut’ and has been accentuated in this particular image.
True, but even his before picture from January when he "only" had a 37" waist he had a protruding gut. Not as flabby, but even that was an unhealthy belly in my untrained opinion.1 -
Packerjohn wrote: »
Omygrl4meee wrote: »My sons 17 years old and size 40.. it does look like he needs to lose weight.. He isomer 6ft tall so not what I consider huge but yeah is too big. But I am lost as what to do for him.. The more I try to control him the more he sneaks junk.
You're in denial. A 17 year old with a size 40 waist is huge. Remember the pants size is generally the bigger than the waist size, so his actual waist is probably more like 42-44.
The OP actually did say in his first post that his waist is 42". I don't know what happened there unless he meant 40 is the suggested cutoff and he is "only" 2" larger than that or something?
But yeah, to everyone answering, to back and re-read...his waist is 42".
Misread: nothing to see here!0 -
Packerjohn wrote: »
Omygrl4meee wrote: »My sons 17 years old and size 40.. it does look like he needs to lose weight.. He isomer 6ft tall so not what I consider huge but yeah is too big. But I am lost as what to do for him.. The more I try to control him the more he sneaks junk.
You're in denial. A 17 year old with a size 40 waist is huge. Remember the pants size is generally the bigger than the waist size, so his actual waist is probably more like 42-44.
The OP actually did say in his first post that his waist is 42". I don't know what happened there unless he meant 40 is the suggested cutoff and he is "only" 2" larger than that or something?
But yeah, to everyone answering, to back and re-read...his waist is 42".
Yes my waist is 42". The 40" that I mentioned in the subject line was in reference to an article I read saying that a waist size of over 40" creates risk of health issues.0 -
mburgess458 wrote: »Can I just point out that the perspective of OP’s belly is quite distorted from the angle of the pic.
I absolutely agree this is not a healthy looking body, as per my previous posts, but keep in mind the degree of ‘gut’ and has been accentuated in this particular image.
True, but even his before picture from January when he "only" had a 37" waist he had a protruding gut. Not as flabby, but even that was an unhealthy belly in my untrained opinion.
You are right, but again consider the optical difference a change in posture makes.
Allow me to use myself as an example:
4 -
Aaron_K123 wrote: »mburgess458 wrote: »...those hardish bellies that look like the guy is pregnant or just swallowed a basketball.
Whenever I see those bellies (and that's quite frequently, actually, and on younger and younger guys these days) I automatically think heart attack and low testosterone. It just flashes into my mind first thing. And not in a judgmental way. I feel concern, like, "I hope that guy's gonna be alright...looks like he's on the way out." (I've known several round-bellied guys with serious early-onset health complications, like diabetic-related sepsis at age 28, heart attack at 33, etc...) I know a person is not their body, but as a health-conscious person, it's an association I make unconsciously. I keep it to myself in RL, though. No need to hurt anyone's feelings.
I know you are trying to be helpful but honestly your posts on here have been a bit over dramatic. Listing off anecdotes of people you know who have almost died from X and you causally linking that to them having a gut is not actually accurate medical advice. What matters is the population averages and epidemiological studies that have been done associated with weight and they aren't nearly as dire as you are making them out to be. Having a gut as a young man doesn't mean you are "on your way out". Is it perfectly healthy? No. Would they benefit from losing weight? Yes. Are they about to die? No, come on. There is no need to blow it out of proportion. A person can be encouraged to take action without the need to fear-monger unnecessarily which can often be demotivating. I mean are you intending your posts to be encouraging? I'm guessing the guy has a doctor and when he goes into the doctor I'm guessing the doctor has eyeballs. If the guys condition was really as dire as you seem to be implying solely based on his gut do you not think some sort of intervention from his doctor would have occurred?
OP if you happen to still be reading don't read me the wrong way here, you definitely should endevour to lose some weight for your overall future health.
I've actually been to see my physician since I've put on the weight for other reasons. She noted that I had gained 15 lb. but the last time I had been there was over two years ago. She didn't suggest losing any weight or anything of that sort so I guess I thought nothing of it. I probably would have acted sooner had my doctor said it was becoming an issue.0 -
mburgess458 wrote: »Can I just point out that the perspective of OP’s belly is quite distorted from the angle of the pic.
I absolutely agree this is not a healthy looking body, as per my previous posts, but keep in mind the degree of ‘gut’ and has been accentuated in this particular image.
True, but even his before picture from January when he "only" had a 37" waist he had a protruding gut. Not as flabby, but even that was an unhealthy belly in my untrained opinion.
You are right, but again consider the optical difference a change in posture makes.
It is probably the least flattering photo of me. I'm sitting and the angle is sort of underneath. The pants I'm wearing are definitely much too tight. I thought twice about posting but figured I shouldn't hide it if I'm looking for honesty. I don't look nearly as big standing up of course!1 -
^^ those pics are about 30 seconds apart.
And no, not pregnant. Just been eating wheat and this bloating is part of what it does to me.2
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.4K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 435 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.9K MyFitnessPal Information
- 15 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.7K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions