Is there a such thing as big boned?

Options
1246

Replies

  • SupermanRitz
    SupermanRitz Posts: 59
    Options
    Many of the above responses make great sense but I'd like to add; have you ever seen a "fat" skeleton?

    :noway:


    ^^this, discussion over.

    'Big boned' depends on perspective. Taller people have longer limbs and of course longer bones, so in that sense, yes they are 'bigger boned'. However the diameter and average density of human bones doesn't change much.
  • SammyyRae
    SammyyRae Posts: 2
    Options
    theres def such thing as big boned. that's my problem :( trainers and doctors have told me in big boned or built to be "thick" not technically fat just thick. not sure how it all works out!
  • nccarolb
    nccarolb Posts: 858 Member
    Options
    Big-boned may be a misnomer, but there are certainly different "frames" for different people. I am 5'8" and I have broad shoulders (trying to find shirts that fit in the shoulders but don't hang everywhere else is hard) and I have have (OMG!!) birthing hips! I also have big feet and broad hands.

    Case in point is my son's pediatrician. The doctor and my son are approximately the same height (around 6'3") but he is SO much smaller than my son. My son's shoulders are half again as wide, his hips are wider, and his hands and feet are bigger. I would consider the pediatrician to be small framed and my son to be medium to large framed.

    IMHO, the density of the bones has nothing to do with "big-boned" but instead refers to a person's build.
  • FrenchMob
    FrenchMob Posts: 1,167 Member
    Options
    Enjoying the bro science thread. :laugh:
  • Phaedra2014
    Phaedra2014 Posts: 1,254 Member
    Options
    Perhaps people have wider or smaller frames but I don't think one can be big or small boned. That sounds more like colloquialism.
  • sheldonz42
    sheldonz42 Posts: 233 Member
    Options
    Even the "evil" insurance companies acknowledge varied frame sizes. Frame size and body fat percentage, however, are not related.
  • zyxst
    zyxst Posts: 9,134 Member
    Options
    Enjoying the bro science thread. :laugh:
    Almost worth the necro, isn't it? :tongue:

    ETA: Dinosaurs are big boned. Humans are not.
  • ARDuBaie
    ARDuBaie Posts: 379 Member
    Options
    I ran across this, if it helps you at all
    Calculating Your Frame Size

    Following is the method the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company used to calculate frame size:

    1. Extend your arm in front of your body bending your elbow at a ninety degree angle to your body so that your forearm is parallel to your body.
    2. Keep your fingers straight and turn the inside of your wrist towards your body.
    3. Place your thumb and index finger on the two prominent bones on either side of your elbow, then measure the distance between the bones with a tape measure or calipers.
    4. Compare to the chart below. The chart lists elbow measurements for a medium frame - if your elbow measurement for that particular height is less than the number of inches listed, you are a small frame - if your elbow measurement for that particular height is more than the number of inches listed, your are a large frame.

    http://www.healthchecksystems.com/heightweightchart.htm

    Thanks for this! By this, I am big boned. Using the wrapping your thumb and middle finger around the wrist, I am still big bone. At 5' 2", being big boned sucks, but I can carry a bit more weight with the bigger bones.

    I think people should also be aware that race/ethnicity plays a role as well. Native Americans and Blacks have denser bones whereas Jewish people and Asians have less dense bones than the 'average' person used to make the BMI scale. The density of bone will affect one's BMI rating. A Black person who is on the upper edge of their normal weight for their height on the BMI scale should not panic. Because your bones are more dense, you should be expected to be at the upper end, whereas an Asian person would be considered overweight if they were at the upper end of normal because they have less dense bones.

    So, I am 1/8 Native American and I am big bone (my thumb and middle finger are about 1" apart when wrapped around my wrist), so I would expect to be at the higher end of normal weight on the BMI scale because of these facts.
  • servilia
    servilia Posts: 3,453 Member
    Options
    big boned/big framed exists. simply put, some people look better heavier than their 'ideal weight' because their bones are heavier than other peoples. I prefer to think of myself as 'normal' and finer boned people as 'scrawny' :p

    Actually the range of bone thickness is pretty small. Yes someone might have wider shoulders and hence a bigger frame but that won't account for why someone's arm is twice the size of someone else's. Mainly it's an excuse by some.
  • QuietBloom
    QuietBloom Posts: 5,413 Member
    Options
    You can be tall and still be small boned - for instance many models are this. You can also be short with big bones. It's not really 'frame size' per se, but rather how large your actual bones are. This can be estimated by your elbow breadth as an earlier poster said.
  • GothyFaery
    GothyFaery Posts: 762 Member
    Options
    Not sure if this is considered "big boned" or not but when I was a teenager on the verge of anorexia, my ribs were always very wide. Although I was underweight, I still wore a Large or XLarge tee shirt. I used to dream of getting a surgery to have them reset to be smaller. So glad I outgrew that mindset. Right now I have a lot of extra meat on my ribs but I imagine if I were to go back to an unhealthy weight, I would still have wide ribs in comparison to my waist and hips.
  • QuietBloom
    QuietBloom Posts: 5,413 Member
    Options
    I ran across this, if it helps you at all
    Calculating Your Frame Size

    Following is the method the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company used to calculate frame size:

    1. Extend your arm in front of your body bending your elbow at a ninety degree angle to your body so that your forearm is parallel to your body.
    2. Keep your fingers straight and turn the inside of your wrist towards your body.
    3. Place your thumb and index finger on the two prominent bones on either side of your elbow, then measure the distance between the bones with a tape measure or calipers.
    4. Compare to the chart below. The chart lists elbow measurements for a medium frame - if your elbow measurement for that particular height is less than the number of inches listed, you are a small frame - if your elbow measurement for that particular height is more than the number of inches listed, your are a large frame.

    http://www.healthchecksystems.com/heightweightchart.htm

    Thanks for this! By this, I am big boned. Using the wrapping your thumb and middle finger around the wrist, I am still big bone. At 5' 2", being big boned sucks, but I can carry a bit more weight with the bigger bones.

    I think people should also be aware that race/ethnicity plays a role as well. Native Americans and Blacks have denser bones whereas Jewish people and Asians have less dense bones than the 'average' person used to make the BMI scale. The density of bone will affect one's BMI rating. A Black person who is on the upper edge of their normal weight for their height on the BMI scale should not panic. Because your bones are more dense, you should be expected to be at the upper end, whereas an Asian person would be considered overweight if they were at the upper end of normal because they have less dense bones.

    So, I am 1/8 Native American and I am big bone (my thumb and middle finger are about 1" apart when wrapped around my wrist), so I would expect to be at the higher end of normal weight on the BMI scale because of these facts.

    The only quibble :smile: I have with your post, is that finger wrapping your own wrist is not very accurate, because people have different lengths of fingers, and you can also carry a good layer of fat around your wrist, which can skew the measurements. I have seen people post that once they lost the weight, they could wrap their fingers all the way around.
  • ARDuBaie
    ARDuBaie Posts: 379 Member
    Options
    myth-i-am-just-big-boned.jpg

    Wow that visual really shows me how important it is to reduce the stress put on joints from too much weight. .

    This is a great visual. Not only is all that weight affecting the lower joints (each pound is equivalent to 5 pounds on the joints), but look at the reduced lung capacity because of the fat pushing up on the diaphragm. As a nurse, I have noticed that a lot of obese people are diagnosed with asthma and put on inhalers and other medication. Perhaps the problem is 'bigger' than that. Perhaps the breathing issue is a result of obesity, not asthma. (I am not saying that all asthma issues are related to obesity, but there are many people taking medications that they could quit taking if they would just lose weight.)
  • RiverDancer68
    RiverDancer68 Posts: 221 Member
    Options
    I'm always confused when this is discussed. If you are using "big boned" as a means to justify being at an unhealthy weight, then no, I think the term is antiquated and should be removed from our vocabulary. Bone density and frame size, on the other hand, do affect what weight range best suits someone. Bone density and frame size are two different things, correct? You can't determine bone density through a measuring tape, you have to actually have a bone density scan. Frame size can roughly be determined through various measurements...but, they can be confusing or misleading. I have small wrists (6" for 5'9"=Small Frame), but have a 3" elbow breadth=Large frame. I have 44" shoulders and a 34" rib cage (measuring the actual rib cage, under the bra area). My low end weight on the chart posted is 149 for Large frame, so technically at 140, I'm underweight?? I think knowing what weight (based on a body fat %-not BMI) looks and feels the healthiest on you is the best, honestly. Case in point, my coworker is roughly the same weight and height as me, but she wears a size 4, and I wear a size 6 (larger hips), but I "look" smaller than her because I have a lower body fat %. And, yes, I know this is an old thread :smile: , but I think this topic is important to a lot of people, and it is good to bring it up every now and then.
  • ARDuBaie
    ARDuBaie Posts: 379 Member
    Options
    I ran across this, if it helps you at all
    Calculating Your Frame Size

    Following is the method the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company used to calculate frame size:

    1. Extend your arm in front of your body bending your elbow at a ninety degree angle to your body so that your forearm is parallel to your body.
    2. Keep your fingers straight and turn the inside of your wrist towards your body.
    3. Place your thumb and index finger on the two prominent bones on either side of your elbow, then measure the distance between the bones with a tape measure or calipers.
    4. Compare to the chart below. The chart lists elbow measurements for a medium frame - if your elbow measurement for that particular height is less than the number of inches listed, you are a small frame - if your elbow measurement for that particular height is more than the number of inches listed, your are a large frame.

    http://www.healthchecksystems.com/heightweightchart.htm

    Thanks for this! By this, I am big boned. Using the wrapping your thumb and middle finger around the wrist, I am still big bone. At 5' 2", being big boned sucks, but I can carry a bit more weight with the bigger bones.

    I think people should also be aware that race/ethnicity plays a role as well. Native Americans and Blacks have denser bones whereas Jewish people and Asians have less dense bones than the 'average' person used to make the BMI scale. The density of bone will affect one's BMI rating. A Black person who is on the upper edge of their normal weight for their height on the BMI scale should not panic. Because your bones are more dense, you should be expected to be at the upper end, whereas an Asian person would be considered overweight if they were at the upper end of normal because they have less dense bones.

    So, I am 1/8 Native American and I am big bone (my thumb and middle finger are about 1" apart when wrapped around my wrist), so I would expect to be at the higher end of normal weight on the BMI scale because of these facts.

    The only quibble :smile: I have with your post, is that finger wrapping your own wrist is not very accurate, because people have different lengths of fingers, and you can also carry a good layer of fat around your wrist, which can skew the measurements. I have seen people post that once they lost the weight, they could wrap their fingers all the way around.

    There is very little fat on my wrist (I can see my bones very well in that area and can easily feel them with no pressure) and I have long fingers. Hope that helps. :) Yes, these things can affect this particular assessment, though. I had thought of that, but don't believe that is interfering with the assessment for me.
  • Koldnomore
    Koldnomore Posts: 1,613 Member
    Options
    Yes, large frames exist.

    Almost 75 lbs lost and I still can't touch my fingers around my wrist. That's for all the people who said it was just because I was fat...guess what? you're wrong :p
  • QuietBloom
    QuietBloom Posts: 5,413 Member
    Options
    I'm always confused when this is discussed. If you are using "big boned" as a means to justify being at an unhealthy weight, then no, I think the term is antiquated and should be removed from our vocabulary. Bone density and frame size, on the other hand, do affect what weight range best suits someone. Bone density and frame size are two different things, correct? You can't determine bone density through a measuring tape, you have to actually have a bone density scan. Frame size can roughly be determined through various measurements...but, they can be confusing or misleading. I have small wrists (6" for 5'9"=Small Frame), but have a 3" elbow breadth=Large frame. I have 44" shoulders and a 34" rib cage (measuring the actual rib cage, under the bra area). My low end weight on the chart posted is 149 for Large frame, so technically at 140, I'm underweight?? I think knowing what weight (based on a body fat %-not BMI) looks and feels the healthiest on you is the best, honestly. Case in point, my coworker is roughly the same weight and height as me, but she wears a size 4, and I wear a size 6 (larger hips), but I "look" smaller than her because I have a lower body fat %. And, yes, I know this is an old thread :smile: , but I think this topic is important to a lot of people, and it is good to bring it up every now and then.

    To add to the confusion, you can be of mixed frame size. For instance, pears can be small framed on top and medium framed on the bottom per wrist and ankle measurements. I am in that particular boat myself.
  • MajCracker
    MajCracker Posts: 1
    Options
    No, there isn't. Not for most people. Check out this page to see for your self.

    http://thinklean.net/blog/?p=393
  • QuietBloom
    QuietBloom Posts: 5,413 Member
    Options
    I ran across this, if it helps you at all
    Calculating Your Frame Size

    Following is the method the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company used to calculate frame size:

    1. Extend your arm in front of your body bending your elbow at a ninety degree angle to your body so that your forearm is parallel to your body.
    2. Keep your fingers straight and turn the inside of your wrist towards your body.
    3. Place your thumb and index finger on the two prominent bones on either side of your elbow, then measure the distance between the bones with a tape measure or calipers.
    4. Compare to the chart below. The chart lists elbow measurements for a medium frame - if your elbow measurement for that particular height is less than the number of inches listed, you are a small frame - if your elbow measurement for that particular height is more than the number of inches listed, your are a large frame.

    http://www.healthchecksystems.com/heightweightchart.htm

    Thanks for this! By this, I am big boned. Using the wrapping your thumb and middle finger around the wrist, I am still big bone. At 5' 2", being big boned sucks, but I can carry a bit more weight with the bigger bones.

    I think people should also be aware that race/ethnicity plays a role as well. Native Americans and Blacks have denser bones whereas Jewish people and Asians have less dense bones than the 'average' person used to make the BMI scale. The density of bone will affect one's BMI rating. A Black person who is on the upper edge of their normal weight for their height on the BMI scale should not panic. Because your bones are more dense, you should be expected to be at the upper end, whereas an Asian person would be considered overweight if they were at the upper end of normal because they have less dense bones.

    So, I am 1/8 Native American and I am big bone (my thumb and middle finger are about 1" apart when wrapped around my wrist), so I would expect to be at the higher end of normal weight on the BMI scale because of these facts.

    The only quibble :smile: I have with your post, is that finger wrapping your own wrist is not very accurate, because people have different lengths of fingers, and you can also carry a good layer of fat around your wrist, which can skew the measurements. I have seen people post that once they lost the weight, they could wrap their fingers all the way around.

    There is very little fat on my wrist (I can see my bones very well in that area and can easily feel them with no pressure) and I have long fingers. Hope that helps. :) Yes, these things can affect this particular assessment, though. I had thought of that, but don't believe that is interfering with the assessment for me.

    :flowerforyou:
  • GothyFaery
    GothyFaery Posts: 762 Member
    Options
    myth-i-am-just-big-boned.jpg

    While this is a very great visual of the stress weight puts on your body, it is not entirely accurate. For one, the one on the left is a male body while the one on the right is female. The male and female skeleton are different and when trying to compare size you want your subjects to be the same gender. Also the two images are not scale. We see much less of the one on the left. With the one on the right you can see past the hips and down to the thighs, not so with the one on the left. Still a very interesting comparison but I would love to see this done better with the only variable being weight.

Categories