Hip, Bust, Waist Ratios?

24

Replies

  • nadamandar
    nadamandar Posts: 82
    I'm just over 5'4", 124 lbs.

    34-29-38. Damn beer - totally goes to my belly!
  • Francl27
    Francl27 Posts: 26,371 Member
    5'5", 133 pounds, 37/30/37.
  • lemon629
    lemon629 Posts: 501 Member
    People keep mixing hourglass and ruler shapes.
    An hourglass shape has bust and hip measurements that are equal or close to equal, with the waist ten inches smaller.
    Figures that have approximately the same bust and hip measurements but with a waist measurement that is less than ten inches smaller (like 7 or 8 inches) is considered a "ruler" shape. For example, 38-26-38 would be an hourglass. 38-31-38 would be a ruler.

    I think the hip/waist ratio is supposed to be .08 or less regardless of figure type.

    Also, your waist measurement should be no more than half your height. For example, a 5'4" (64 inches) girl should have a waist no larger than 32 inches.
  • SwedishSarah
    SwedishSarah Posts: 4,350 Member
    People keep mixing hourglass and ruler shapes.
    An hourglass shape has bust and hip measurements that are equal or close to equal, with the waist ten inches smaller.
    Figures that have approximately the same bust and hip measurements but with a waist measurement that is less than ten inches smaller (like 7 or 8 inches) is considered a "ruler" shape. For example, 38-26-38 would be an hourglass. 38-31-38 would be a ruler.

    I think the hip/waist ratio is supposed to be .08 or less regardless of figure type.

    Also, your waist measurement should be no more than half your height. For example, a 5'4" (64 inches) girl should have a waist no larger than 32 inches.


    Would 37-26-38 be considered an hourglass? I am an inch off from bust to hips.
  • Heartisalonelyhunter
    Heartisalonelyhunter Posts: 786 Member
    An hourglass is generally defined by a waist/hip ratio of 0.7 or less (usually that's about 10 inches difference or more) with bust/hip measurements around equal. The lower the ratio the lower your risk of heart disease.
    Here's a calculator.
    http://www.healthstatus.com/calculate/waist-to-hip-ratio

    The ideal ratio in terms of health (and even fertility) is 0.7 for a woman, 0.9 for a man
  • giggitygoo
    giggitygoo Posts: 1,978 Member
    An hourglass is generally defined by a waist/hip ratio of 0.7 or less (usually that's about 10 inches difference or more) with bust/hip measurements around equal. The lower the ratio the lower your risk of heart disease.
    Here's a calculator.
    http://www.healthstatus.com/calculate/waist-to-hip-ratio

    The ideal ratio in terms of health (and even fertility) is 0.7 for a woman, 0.9 for a man

    Interesting. I'm curious how thoroughly this has been studied.

    Here's what the calc spat out when I gave my measurements:

    Your shape puts you at reduced risk of coronary heart disease, diabetes and stroke. Frequently referred to as pear shape, you tend to keep fat off your midsection and more on your hips. Your body does not convert this lower body fat as readily as midsection fat, which keeps cholesterol down.
  • Heartisalonelyhunter
    Heartisalonelyhunter Posts: 786 Member
    An hourglass is generally defined by a waist/hip ratio of 0.7 or less (usually that's about 10 inches difference or more) with bust/hip measurements around equal. The lower the ratio the lower your risk of heart disease.
    Here's a calculator.
    http://www.healthstatus.com/calculate/waist-to-hip-ratio

    The ideal ratio in terms of health (and even fertility) is 0.7 for a woman, 0.9 for a man

    Interesting. I'm curious how thoroughly this has been studied.

    Here's what the calc spat out when I gave my measurements:

    Your shape puts you at reduced risk of coronary heart disease, diabetes and stroke. Frequently referred to as pear shape, you tend to keep fat off your midsection and more on your hips. Your body does not convert this lower body fat as readily as midsection fat, which keeps cholesterol down.

    It has been studied extensively... Here's the link to Wikipedia which mentions some of the studies. It's definitely a fascinating subject.
    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waist–hip_ratio
  • CalicoMonroe
    CalicoMonroe Posts: 14
    Every single measurement they have managed to come up with over the decades has flaws. Every single person is completely different in shape and their genetics.....

    I am the same in height and I have a hourglass figure with a naturally large behind. I gain weight evenly and lose weight evenly. Looking at me I do not look anywhere near how much I actually weigh because the fat that I am fighting is very well hidden. I can lose quite a bit of weight and it takes a long time for me to see a difference but I can feel a difference right away.

    They're quickly finding that BMI is not the best way to predict health and rarely does anyone fall into 1 solid category of body shape. If you look at the weight recommendations there is such a LARGE range (for our height a "healthy" weight can be anywhere from 101 to 131).

    If you want to know the very best indicator of health you will look to your physician and your blood work (cholesterol, liver/kidney functions hormone levels) and cardiac workup. You can meet every single number of the BMI, the scale, the tape measure and still be so very unhealthy. I have also seen people who fall into the morbid obese range and yet their blood work and cardiac workup comes back AMAZINGLY healthy.

    That is just my two cents from working as a nurse in primary care for 10+ years.....
  • tmaryam
    tmaryam Posts: 289 Member
    I think it varies. For instance, I have a very small waist, but I still carry belly fat below my natural waist line. (Not saying I'm overweight, I could stand to gain about 15 lbs of muscle.) I have nice measurements, but I also have 30% body fat so that can't be good.
  • AeonAi
    AeonAi Posts: 60
    Cw 126
    Bust 34
    Waist 26
    Hips 32

    Height 5ft 1

    :)
  • macchiatto
    macchiatto Posts: 2,890 Member
    Interesting thread!

    I've read that a woman's waist measurement should be under 35" (and a man's under 40") but I can't find where that measurement is to be taken. My natural waist is considerably smaller than my measurement at belly button level! I also agree with pp's that a waist to height ratio makes a LOT more sense than one number for people of all different heights and builds. And then I think the waist: hip ratio is supposed to be 0.8 or greater?

    Anyhow, I'm 5'7", about 131 lbs and bust 37", natural waist 29", hips 38".
  • mehrunisan
    mehrunisan Posts: 64 Member
    bust - 34
    waist-23
    hips-34

    what shape am i? :O
  • 321blueeyes
    321blueeyes Posts: 279 Member
    My measurements are pretty close to the OP. Once I lose this weight, my waist will go down 2-3 inches but my hips/bust only go down about 1 inch each. I don't look terribly curvy, as I have muscular thighs & broad shoulders, plus my waist gets hidden easily by clothing. In most clothes, I would look like a "ruler", but put me in a figure-hugging dress with some spanx & I definitely look like an hourglass.

    5'2" - 153 lbs (working to lose 15-20)
    bust 39
    waist 31
    hips 41
  • einzweidrei
    einzweidrei Posts: 381 Member
    From what I've read, nothing has ever discussed bust at all. Most of what I have read seems to suggest nowadays, hip-to-waist ratio is more indicative of overall health than BMI. Belly fat is the really big no-no nowadays.

    5'9.25"
    B: 35
    W: 26.5
    H: 36.5
  • lemon629
    lemon629 Posts: 501 Member
    Interesting thread!

    I've read that a woman's waist measurement should be under 35" (and a man's under 40") but I can't find where that measurement is to be taken. My natural waist is considerably smaller than my measurement at belly button level! I also agree with pp's that a waist to height ratio makes a LOT more sense than one number for people of all different heights and builds. And then I think the waist: hip ratio is supposed to be 0.8 or greater?

    Anyhow, I'm 5'7", about 131 lbs and bust 37", natural waist 29", hips 38".

    The measurement is supposed to be taken at the natural waist (narrowest part of the torso).
    The hip ratio is supposed to be 0.8 or smaller. Larger than 0.8 is not good (apple shape).
  • cstringfellow2013
    cstringfellow2013 Posts: 172 Member

    I dont think I am a pear, i think I am more guitar shaped which was a body type term used in the 50s/60s

    I MUCH prefer the guitar shape over pear shaped!
  • twhaley1990
    twhaley1990 Posts: 140 Member
    Height: 5'2.75
    Weight: 116
    Bust: 35
    Waist: 27
    Hips: 37

    I would say I'm hour glass just looking at me, but after this thread, who knows lol
  • headofphat
    headofphat Posts: 1,597 Member
    36-24-36....haha, only if she's 5'3". I like big butts and i cannot lie.
  • TXRanchGirl
    TXRanchGirl Posts: 303
    Im 118-120
    5'3
    bust-32
    waist-27
    hips-33

    Ive been called an hourglass and a "banana"..
    when I weighed more, interesting, I think I looked classic hourglass..I can still see curves, but Ive lost so much fat off my hips, its not a "big" a curve as it used to be.
  • twhaley1990
    twhaley1990 Posts: 140 Member

    I dont think I am a pear, i think I am more guitar shaped which was a body type term used in the 50s/60s

    I MUCH prefer the guitar shape over pear shaped!

    Agreed!

Categories