Myth or not???

mermx
mermx Posts: 976
edited December 2024 in Chit-Chat
I read a lot on the forum about people who say...well I have a big frame/small frame/big bones/small bones

Is any of this stuff a myth or is it true?

do we not just have a frame/bones dependant on our height????

Is this just an excuse if we get fat to blame it on our frame/bones????

Replies

  • trinitrate
    trinitrate Posts: 219 Member
    It is true, and it is also an excuse.


    I'm 5'11" and will never ever, ever be 140 - 160.. I wouldnt be healthy or fit below about 180 - 190 (guessing) and would lose a lot of muscle to get lower than that.. My son is 6'1" and is 155 a could stand to gain a few but is healthy where he's at.

    It also becomes an excuse for people that dont want to admit to themselves that they need to lose weight...
  • mermx
    mermx Posts: 976
    So, underneath every big person is a person with normal bone structure/frame size???
  • trinitrate
    trinitrate Posts: 219 Member
    No.. some people are naturally going to carry -some- extra muscle and bone compared to others... but the Andre the Giant's are pretty rare in the world... There aren't many people that are natuarally going to be 275+ for example... but some men might be fit at 145lb while others are fit at 190lb... Its just not an excuse to ignore where you're at. If you're at 35% body fat, thats not because your 'big boned' no matter what your natural weight might be...
  • dizzydi1968
    dizzydi1968 Posts: 564
    I am 5' 7 and at my worst weighed 248 pounds. All my life I was told I was big boned!!

    I'm now 166, a UK size 10/12 (us 6/8) and body composition scales tell me that my bones weigh 6 pounds.

    To me, its a myth
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    Many people are wrong about their frame size, but there is a wide range of "frame" sizes for any given height.

    Actually, it is more accurate to say "fat free mass" because the differences can include a lot more than just the size of the bones.

    About 18 months ago, I just so happened to do fitness assessments on 3 women in the span of two weeks who were all 5'4" tall.

    Their fat free masses were 81lb, 102lb and 118lb respectively. Which means that their "recommended" weights at, for example, a 22% body fat target ranged from 103lb to 151lbs.

    The best way to determine this is with a reliable body fat % test. The "myth" comes from things like measuring the size of the wrist, etc. But different "frame" sizes? Absolutely.
  • mermx
    mermx Posts: 976
    Many people are wrong about their frame size, but there is a wide range of "frame" sizes for any given height.

    Actually, it is more accurate to say "fat free mass" because the differences can include a lot more than just the size of the bones.

    About 18 months ago, I just so happened to do fitness assessments on 3 women in the span of two weeks who were all 5'4" tall.

    Their fat free masses were 81lb, 102lb and 118lb respectively. Which means that their "recommended" weights at, for example, a 22% body fat target ranged from 103lb to 151lbs.

    The best way to determine this is with a reliable body fat % test. The "myth" comes from things like measuring the size of the wrist, etc. But different "frame" sizes? Absolutely.

    So myself, at 5`4" could have a different ideal weight based on my frame??? Even though another 5`4" person could be lots heavier/lighter and it would suit them but not me???
  • mermx
    mermx Posts: 976
    Just to confuse things a little more then?

    If a man has broad shoulders is this due to his muscles or bone structure or just the way he holds himself???
  • trinitrate
    trinitrate Posts: 219 Member
    Let me sum it up for ya.. . ;)


    You're body is different than everyone elses... work on it till you're happy with it... The scale is just to compare yesterday to today, not to compare you to someone else.

    Get your BF% measured and use that as your guide... Scales are way over valued.
  • heddy90
    heddy90 Posts: 144 Member
    A small/big frame is not a myth, but a heavy/light skeleton is. A person's skeletons weight does not vary much, just with about a pound or so. But a persons "frame" can vary quite a bit, for example some people have hips that stick out quite much, while some people do not.
  • StarkLark
    StarkLark Posts: 476 Member
    So myself, at 5`4" could have a different ideal weight based on my frame??? Even though another 5'4" person could be lots heavier/lighter and it would suit them but not me???
    Well I don't know about "lots" heavier or lighter, but in general height as well as skeletal structure determine "ideal" weight. So yes, you at 5'4" could have a different ideal weight that another person with different bone structure who is also 5'4".
    Just to confuse things a little more then?

    If a man has broad shoulders is this due to his muscles or bone structure or just the way he holds himself???
    I would say a combination of all three of those can affect the broadness of one's shoulders :smile:
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    Many people are wrong about their frame size, but there is a wide range of "frame" sizes for any given height.

    Actually, it is more accurate to say "fat free mass" because the differences can include a lot more than just the size of the bones.

    About 18 months ago, I just so happened to do fitness assessments on 3 women in the span of two weeks who were all 5'4" tall.

    Their fat free masses were 81lb, 102lb and 118lb respectively. Which means that their "recommended" weights at, for example, a 22% body fat target ranged from 103lb to 151lbs.

    The best way to determine this is with a reliable body fat % test. The "myth" comes from things like measuring the size of the wrist, etc. But different "frame" sizes? Absolutely.

    So myself, at 5`4" could have a different ideal weight based on my frame??? Even though another 5`4" person could be lots heavier/lighter and it would suit them but not me???

    Correct. As I mentioned earlier, the three women I measured had "ideal" weights that ranged from 103 to 151 lbs, even though all were 5'4".
This discussion has been closed.

Categories