Hip, Bust, Waist Ratios?

My measurements at the mo are:

Height: 5 ft 2" (hopefully this won't decrease!)
Bust: 44 inches
Waist: 39 inches
Hips: 46 inches

My body shape is hour glass (doesn't feel like it at the mo with the extra fat!)

My waist to hip ratio is 0.85 which is just border line between moderate health risk and high health risk, I have lost weight so I'm going in the right direction!

5'5", 133 pounds, 37/30/37.

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.

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.

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.....

Cw 126
Bust 34
Waist 26
Hips 32

Height 5ft 1

bust - 34
waist-23
hips-34

what shape am i? :O

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

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!

36-24-36....haha, only if she's 5'3". I like big butts and i cannot lie.