You don't have ''big bones'' or a ''big frame''
Options
Replies
-
summerkissed wrote: »ClosetBayesian wrote: »summerkissed wrote: »3dogsrunning wrote: »summerkissed wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »summerkissed wrote: »Some of the responses here make my head hurt. Lemme go get some fresh air.
Don't worry I know what your saying.....this is MFP and it's a place that no matter what you say people will try and put you down! They search the boards to find something to jump on!!
Congratulations on your weight loss you are awesome!
When I was a big girl my nan used to say "don't worry your just big boned" to try and stop the hurtful things people called me from hurting me too much...to make me feel like it wasn't my fault! I know different now but I used that excuse for a long time x
She's telling those of us with demonstrably large frames that we are delusional and you are ok with this? Alrighty then.
Large frame or not the use of "I'm big boned" is no excuse for high body fat levels! I have swimmers shoulders I don't fit into most women's shirts because they are broad.......but actually it's not the bone it's that I'm lucky and I hold a lot of muscle there!!!....means tank tops look awesome on me and I don't buy shirts! I've got long legs as well so a lot of jeans are too short.....but that's my bone length not because I'm "big boned" my frame/skeleton size came in at above average for a 34 year old woman (that's when I had tests) and the extra weight from it was well under 1kg I wish I could find my darn dexa scan results!!! They will most certainly put this into perspective........I think what's more important is your body type are you Mesomorph, Ectomorph or Endomorph are you apple or pear shape? Where are you prone to hold fat?
There is very minimal difference in the weight/thickness of bone structure in a fully grown adult!
No one. Not one person in this thread, or in any of the threads OP posted in, used being "big boned" or "large framed" as an excuse for high body fat levels.
Somatypes are bunk. A complete myth. They have zero basis in science.
It's somatotypes btw and they still have there place because it's been since proven there to be some accuracy to the distinct body types without the connection to personality
What? What connection to personality? Also, citation needed that "somatotypes have their place because it's been proven there to be some accuracy to the distinct body types." (What?). Peer-reviewed studies or it doesn't count.
What connection? But I thought you knew about somatotypes you said that they are a myth so I assumed you knew what it was to begin with
Ps I couldn't care less about spelling
Yet you cared enough to correct mine.1 -
summerkissed wrote: »summerkissed wrote: »BMI is outdated and doctors here in Australia are steering away from the use of it and using the hip to waist ratio as a more accurate method of determining weight related health issues....BMI is a very very basic method
And waist/hip ratio is not?
?
?
It's the fat around the organs that they are most worried about now so a lot of doctors are using that instead of the BMI
I would say a lot of go yours are using waist / hip measurement in conjunction with BMI - not instead of it.
Which is what people, have said all along - BMI is a good screening tool,not the be all and end all.
0 -
A lot of doctors, not go yours.0
-
Also just to put some proportion in this thread I am not big boned but I agree the idea that all body frames are the same is nonsense.
I have the opposite problem to some posters here - my fingers are long and narrow ( my mother always called them piano players fingers) and my feet are small and narrow - I have difficulty with shoes because they are often too wide, despite fitting in length.0 -
summerkissed wrote: »summerkissed wrote: »BMI is outdated and doctors here in Australia are steering away from the use of it and using the hip to waist ratio as a more accurate method of determining weight related health issues....BMI is a very very basic method
And waist/hip ratio is not?
?
?
It's the fat around the organs that they are most worried about now so a lot of doctors are using that instead of the BMI
When I was 90lbs heavier, my ratio want fat off from healthy. While I carried my weight "well" it didn't actually mean I was healthy.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »
Also I didn't say you're all delusional, just that there's more people saying they're far off than there should be statistically.kshama2001 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »...To be honest, the amount of people here saying how freakishly off they are from the average proportions reminds me of the many people saying they have a high/slow metabolism on facebook/9gag/etc. posts about weight loss. Far more than statistically likely so I'm inclined to believe at least some are from their own perception and/or measurement error.
I guess the USAF was also measuring wrong when it failed to supply boots and hats in my size...
Just how many do you think there be, statistically? MFP has a large following, and the responses to this thread hardly represent a random sampling of it. It shouldn't come as a surprise that it has drawn the attention of a disproportionate number of members who are more than a standard deviation or two from the mean.
On average? If 90% are in the normal shoulder width group and we assume an equal bell curve in both directions, 5% would have bigger than average bones, with most of them still being barely above the average, so I'd say, less than 2%, possibly 1% of the population have noticably wider shoulders than the general population. Probably the same with other measurements too. In here there's obviously more than that but as was pointed out, I guess they're more drawn to this thread to begin with.0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »...To be honest, the amount of people here saying how freakishly off they are from the average proportions reminds me of the many people saying they have a high/slow metabolism on facebook/9gag/etc. posts about weight loss. Far more than statistically likely so I'm inclined to believe at least some are from their own perception and/or measurement error.
I guess the USAF was also measuring wrong when it failed to supply boots and hats in my size...
One person that far off of average proportions not a surprise. 50% of the thread that far off, a surprise. Statistics.
Not that this population would be biased to think that they're bigger proportioned than average.
It's not just thinking. We have problems shopping. Especially telling is not being able to buy bracelets or hats big enough.
The thread title is probably drawing in we outliers, so not a random sample.
This--so this. I'm with you hon. The people saying our measurements are normal--because "statistics" have not lived with the problem. Bone size difference is real, just take a look at nature. The difference between a workhorse and a thoroughbred for instance--same height, different bone structure. Why oh why is it so hard to understand in humans?0 -
So, I completely agree that people have different frame sizes.
However, I'm an example of someone who used to think that I was "big boned" when I was just fat. I've always had a larger ring size (my engagement ring is a size 9, which for a 5'3" female is pretty big) and when I would do the wrist measurement, it always came out as a large frame. This thinking really hurt me because I really believed that there was no point to even trying to lose weight because I would always be big.
Then something changed and I decided to lose weight anyway. Even if I ended up larger, I would still aim for a lower body fat and look muscular. So I started losing. Funny thing happened - my rings are huge on me and my fitbit slowly but surely got looser. I was seriously shocked, not kidding. I didn't think my wrists/fingers would have so much fat around them that they would change so drastically. Now when I do the measurements, I'm medium framed, and it could go down even more as I reach my ideal weight. I'm waiting until I'm done losing weight to get my rings resized.
Basically, my point isn't that I don't believe that people have large frames. Some people absolutely do. But I do believe that you can't really use any of the online measurements unless you are close to your ideal weight (by body fat %) or else they just don't work. A lot of obese people will believe they are large framed when they are not because the measurements don't work when you have excess body fat.2 -
I find it baffling that this even needs to be a contentious point of discussion, but then... this is MFP. It's clear just from observing normal, healthy BMI-range individuals that even people who are the same height can have wildly different body structure. Some have narrower hips; some have broader shoulders; some have long limbs; some have short torsos, etc. Humans are such a wonderfully diverse group.
Some are differences due to where people hold fat/muscle, but some are definitely due to bones being different lengths. I do believe that most of the population can have a healthy weight inside the normal BMI range regardless of bone structure - otherwise it would be a completely useless measurement tool. There will always be outliers (like @kshama2001 ) - that's the nature of statistics.
I don't claim to have a large bone structure. I really can't be sure what I look like until I'm closer to my goal weight. I have what I call "man hands" (larger than every boyfriend I've had) and large feet (10.5 ) and wider hips, and I measured my elbow breadth at 2.75". Does that make me "big boned?" No idea, and, honestly, I don't care. Labels aren't really my thing.0 -
I disagree with you that big boned doesn't exist. I have large hands and feet, broad shoulders and wide hips.0
-
jobellerina wrote: »The OP is talking nonsense. I know someone of the same height who looked far thinner than me when they were 10 stone than when I was 8 stone. She had size 7 feet to my 5, 36" rib cage to my (then) 28" and was overall broader than me. I genuinely do not understand how people can see the natural variation in animal breeds sizes/shapes/frames and then claim that people could or should have exactly the same physique. It's ridiculous.
0 -
Every so often someone on MFP will say they have ''big bones'' or a ''big frame''. This is just not true. Have a look at the photos in the success story threads. People will go from 150kg to 65kg and their bodies change a LOT.
I've only lost about 8kg but my shoulders have shrunk so much that my UK size 14/US size 12 jacket is now too big around the shoulders. It used to fit me perfectly, but I now drown in it and yes, even the sleeves have become too long.
Your body WILL change when you lose weight. If you're a woman, you more than likely DO NOT have broad shoulders. The ''body frame size calculators'' are WRONG.
My best friend is 5'7" and has weighed as little as 127 pounds. Trust me, she has broad shoulders and large wrists. She has a large frame. It does exist.0 -
SingRunTing wrote: »So, I completely agree that people have different frame sizes.
However, I'm an example of someone who used to think that I was "big boned" when I was just fat. I've always had a larger ring size (my engagement ring is a size 9, which for a 5'3" female is pretty big) and when I would do the wrist measurement, it always came out as a large frame. This thinking really hurt me because I really believed that there was no point to even trying to lose weight because I would always be big.
Then something changed and I decided to lose weight anyway. Even if I ended up larger, I would still aim for a lower body fat and look muscular. So I started losing. Funny thing happened - my rings are huge on me and my fitbit slowly but surely got looser. I was seriously shocked, not kidding. I didn't think my wrists/fingers would have so much fat around them that they would change so drastically. Now when I do the measurements, I'm medium framed, and it could go down even more as I reach my ideal weight. I'm waiting until I'm done losing weight to get my rings resized.
Basically, my point isn't that I don't believe that people have large frames. Some people absolutely do. But I do believe that you can't really use any of the online measurements unless you are close to your ideal weight (by body fat %) or else they just don't work. A lot of obese people will believe they are large framed when they are not because the measurements don't work when you have excess body fat.
I agree with this. My wrists have gotten tiny after I lost weight, and I still have a fair amount of weight to lose. The frame tests used to tell me I had a large frame, now they tell me I have a small frame. People may have large frames, but I don't think the size of your wrist is a good way to determine this.1 -
I have 13.5 inch shoulders. My friend has 18 inch shoulders. It is indeed possible for two women who are not very different in height to have very different frame sizes. (She has an amazing hourglass figure to go with those shoulders).1
-
SingRunTing wrote: »So, I completely agree that people have different frame sizes.
However, I'm an example of someone who used to think that I was "big boned" when I was just fat. I've always had a larger ring size (my engagement ring is a size 9, which for a 5'3" female is pretty big) and when I would do the wrist measurement, it always came out as a large frame. This thinking really hurt me because I really believed that there was no point to even trying to lose weight because I would always be big.
Then something changed and I decided to lose weight anyway. Even if I ended up larger, I would still aim for a lower body fat and look muscular. So I started losing. Funny thing happened - my rings are huge on me and my fitbit slowly but surely got looser. I was seriously shocked, not kidding. I didn't think my wrists/fingers would have so much fat around them that they would change so drastically. Now when I do the measurements, I'm medium framed, and it could go down even more as I reach my ideal weight. I'm waiting until I'm done losing weight to get my rings resized.
Basically, my point isn't that I don't believe that people have large frames. Some people absolutely do. But I do believe that you can't really use any of the online measurements unless you are close to your ideal weight (by body fat %) or else they just don't work. A lot of obese people will believe they are large framed when they are not because the measurements don't work when you have excess body fat.
I agree with this. My wrists have gotten tiny after I lost weight, and I still have a fair amount of weight to lose. The frame tests used to tell me I had a large frame, now they tell me I have a small frame. People may have large frames, but I don't think the size of your wrist is a good way to determine this.
It is if you don't have fat on your wrists--mine are 8.5". No fat on my wrists--they can't get any smaller.0 -
I think it goes a bit beyond frame too. I would even say that muscle density factors in as well. I'm fat but I wear a smaller pants size than my friend that is 20 lbs lighter than me.0
-
SingRunTing wrote: »So, I completely agree that people have different frame sizes.
However, I'm an example of someone who used to think that I was "big boned" when I was just fat. I've always had a larger ring size (my engagement ring is a size 9, which for a 5'3" female is pretty big) and when I would do the wrist measurement, it always came out as a large frame. This thinking really hurt me because I really believed that there was no point to even trying to lose weight because I would always be big.
Then something changed and I decided to lose weight anyway. Even if I ended up larger, I would still aim for a lower body fat and look muscular. So I started losing. Funny thing happened - my rings are huge on me and my fitbit slowly but surely got looser. I was seriously shocked, not kidding. I didn't think my wrists/fingers would have so much fat around them that they would change so drastically. Now when I do the measurements, I'm medium framed, and it could go down even more as I reach my ideal weight. I'm waiting until I'm done losing weight to get my rings resized.
Basically, my point isn't that I don't believe that people have large frames. Some people absolutely do. But I do believe that you can't really use any of the online measurements unless you are close to your ideal weight (by body fat %) or else they just don't work. A lot of obese people will believe they are large framed when they are not because the measurements don't work when you have excess body fat.
I agree with this. My wrists have gotten tiny after I lost weight, and I still have a fair amount of weight to lose. The frame tests used to tell me I had a large frame, now they tell me I have a small frame. People may have large frames, but I don't think the size of your wrist is a good way to determine this.
My issue with bracelets not fitting occurred before I was overweight. In fact, my grandmother's bracelet only fit me when I was a child. I added links to it after I inherited it.
BTW, I add links with the little gold circles from the jewelry section at Michael's craft stores and two needle-nose pliers. I'm sure jewelery stores would do this as well.1 -
stevencloser wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »...To be honest, the amount of people here saying how freakishly off they are from the average proportions reminds me of the many people saying they have a high/slow metabolism on facebook/9gag/etc. posts about weight loss. Far more than statistically likely so I'm inclined to believe at least some are from their own perception and/or measurement error.
I guess the USAF was also measuring wrong when it failed to supply boots and hats in my size...
Are your feet and head proportional to your height or not though? That's the question with frame size. That bigger people have bigger bones is obvious. Now a 5' woman with broader shoulders than a 6' guy that would unquestionably be a big frame. or small frame on the guy.
Also I didn't say you're all delusional, just that there's more people saying they're far off than there should be statistically.
A thread like this would probably attract a disproportionately large number of people with large frames. After all, they're the ones being specifically pointed out as being delusional.
Based on experience with clinical trials, I disagree. Titles like this attract a disproportionately large number of people who believe they have large frames whether they do or not. That may or may not skew the stats towards those who actually do have larger frames than most others their height. And I agree, the thread title does imply that they are delusional.
I certainly don't believe that they're all delusional. I do think some are likely to not be correct in their self-assessment.0 -
summerkissed wrote: »Please correct me if wrong OP but wasn't this thread about overweight people using "I'm big boned" as an excuse for there weight? Cause that's the impression I got.
Nope.
To refresh your memory, the OP included:
"You don't have ''big bones'' or a ''big frame''"
"The ''body frame size calculators'' are WRONG."
The OP objects to people like me saying I don't worry about being in the Normal part of the BMI chart due to my large frame. The only time I've ever had a BMI of 24 was after 6 weeks of under-eating and over-exercising in military boot camp when I was 19. When I get to a low Overweight BMI, that will be good enough for me.1 -
This topic prompted me to look up the whole "wrist size" thing and I was surprised to see guidelines and tables on an NIH govt website. I've never given much credence to that at all. But maybe that's because I am trained to look at lean body mass as a whole, rather than just "bone structure".
Based on my experience, tracking body fat is the only really useful tool for analyzing changes in body composition and for determining realistic weight-loss goals.
A couple of years ago, I just so happened to have 3 good example come in in a short period of time for assessments. All were women, 5'4" in height. Based on their lean body mass baselines, their goal weights for a 25% body fat target were 108lbs, 127lbs, and 149lbs.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.7K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 395 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 959 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions