Is it even possible for ANYONE to be a size 0/1?

Options
1234689

Replies

  • RosieRose7673
    RosieRose7673 Posts: 438 Member
    Options
    peleroja wrote: »
    Given that I was a size 6 when I was 3 lbs from the bottom of my healthy BMI range (5'9" 128lb), I think I can confidently say that even centuries after I'm dead, when there is nothing left but a pile of old dry bones, said bones will still not fit into a size 0.

    On the other hand, by then with vanity sizing, a 0 may well fit a family of 4 and their cat, so I guess I should never say never.

    Exactly. I'm a good ten pounds from the bottom of my "healthy" weight per BMI, not especially petite at 5'4", and I'm a 0 or even 00 in a lot of mall brands because the vanity sizing is so out of control. Some brands, like Old Navy, often swim on me even in the smallest size.

    Meanwhile, some other (usually designer or euro) brands I'm a 4 or 6 and I can comfortably wear my mom's size 8s from the 1980s and my own 6s from high school, so I try not to take clothing size as an indicator of anything.

    On the plus side, my height and weight makes me fit perfectly into kids' sizes 12-16 depending on brand, so I'm saving a ton of money that way! If US brands keep up the ever-expanding clothing I guess I'll just have to get used to wearing pants with puppies on them to work :lol:
    peleroja wrote: »
    Given that I was a size 6 when I was 3 lbs from the bottom of my healthy BMI range (5'9" 128lb), I think I can confidently say that even centuries after I'm dead, when there is nothing left but a pile of old dry bones, said bones will still not fit into a size 0.

    On the other hand, by then with vanity sizing, a 0 may well fit a family of 4 and their cat, so I guess I should never say never.

    Exactly. I'm a good ten pounds from the bottom of my "healthy" weight per BMI, not especially petite at 5'4", and I'm a 0 or even 00 in a lot of mall brands because the vanity sizing is so out of control. Some brands, like Old Navy, often swim on me even in the smallest size.

    Meanwhile, some other (usually designer or euro) brands I'm a 4 or 6 and I can comfortably wear my mom's size 8s from the 1980s and my own 6s from high school, so I try not to take clothing size as an indicator of anything.

    On the plus side, my height and weight makes me fit perfectly into kids' sizes 12-16 depending on brand, so I'm saving a ton of money that way! If US brands keep up the ever-expanding clothing I guess I'll just have to get used to wearing pants with puppies on them to work :lol:

    Ahahaha! Pants with puppies! That made me chuckle.

    Sounds like we're alike! I also found old navy notorious for crazy vanity sizing! I'm usually a 0 but cannot shop at old navy due to their crazy vanity sizing!

    On the other hand, I'd totally wear puppy jeans. If they were kittens, even better!
  • TheUwuest
    TheUwuest Posts: 36 Member
    Options
    yes but the taller you are the lower a bmi you'd have to have to fit into it. there is such a thing as a small build.
  • Heartisalonelyhunter
    Heartisalonelyhunter Posts: 786 Member
    Options
    I think it would be painful and dangerous for me to try. I think I'm a UK size 8-10 at the moment. If you're in the US that's a 6-8. A US 0 is UK size 2, and I didn't even know they made clothes in that size. Size 6 was always the smallest you could get, I used to shop in the children's department when I was smaller though in my early 20s, but was probably a size 6-8 (4-6 in US)

    They're not equivalent though . I'm a size 4 in the US but there is no way I can squeeze into a UK size 8. I tried last time I was over. They cut the clothes much smaller. (FYI a uk size 8-10 is a US 4-6, not 6-8 and in your 20's you were size 2-4 US size)
  • DougInSC
    DougInSC Posts: 1 Member
    Options
    My wife has been a 00 to a 1 forever. The only time that she was bigger than that was when she was pregnant with our kids. 3 months after each kid was born, she was right back to her pre-pregnant weight. I'd be happy to get back to my pre-marriage weight, which is 60 lbs away.
  • lithezebra
    lithezebra Posts: 3,670 Member
    Options
    It's much safer to judge yourself by body composition than by your clothing size, your weight, or your measurements. If your body fat percentage is healthy, you don't need to lose weight. Not everyone was meant to be a size 0. Not everyone who is a size 12 is overweight.

  • Gisel2015
    Gisel2015 Posts: 4,144 Member
    Options
    The only clothes that come in a size 0 here in Aus are babies clothes.
    How anyone can be a size nothing totally confounds me! I would love to know why and who came up with ridiculous concept..

    @Christine_72 - I might be mistaken, but I think our size 0 is the equivalent of Aus size 4. Measurement wise I think it's like a 24" waist. Our sizes are pretty messed up here, but they added it because of vanity sizing. We even have a 00.

    CHICOS in the USA also carry odd sizing. I wear Chicos' pants 00 that are really a size 4 petite for other stores. They are still wide for my waist but they fit OK around my hips, maybe a little bit to lose, and the capris sit just above my ankles. I tried Chico's 00 petite and they are too small around the hips. So we just need to forget about sizing because every store and designer has its own crewed up idea of how a woman body is or should be.

    And by the way, I was a size 0 or 1 depending on the style when I was a young person. Not anymore.
  • dolliesdaughter
    dolliesdaughter Posts: 544 Member
    edited July 2016
    Options
    Vanity sizing is out of control, according to where I purchase clothes, I fit US 10 to US 16. I go by what fits, and not let labels drive me bonkers. I know plenty others who state they wear a 8 and will purchase an 8 no matter. Some fit, some are loose and others are tight, but being in a 8 regardless is a badge of honor. No, thank you.

    IMHO too tight clothes look just as bad as too large clothes.
  • maillemaker
    maillemaker Posts: 1,253 Member
    Options
    FeedMeFish wrote: »
    For those of you ladies who are also size 0 (or under), I'm curious as to what your measurements are? Because I'm a 0 (close to 00) and mine are 32-23-34.

    Man, I had to get out a tape measure to visualize that. My thigh is bigger around than your waist. I could almost put my hands around your waist and have my fingers and thumbs touch!



  • kaylasaurus
    kaylasaurus Posts: 45 Member
    Options
    FeedMeFish wrote: »
    For those of you ladies who are also size 0 (or under), I'm curious as to what your measurements are? Because I'm a 0 (close to 00) and mine are 32-23-34. Just wondering if there's similar/common measurements for these small sizes. And what height and weight are you? I'm 5'6 and 125.

    I am a 00/0 in most things - I am 5'1 and my measurements are 34-23-34 so sounds about right!
  • peleroja
    peleroja Posts: 3,979 Member
    Options
    FeedMeFish wrote: »
    For those of you ladies who are also size 0 (or under), I'm curious as to what your measurements are? Because I'm a 0 (close to 00) and mine are 32-23-34. Just wondering if there's similar/common measurements for these small sizes. And what height and weight are you? I'm 5'6 and 125.

    I am a 00/0 in most things - I am 5'1 and my measurements are 34-23-34 so sounds about right!

    That's about where I sit as well (5'4", 118 lbs), about 33-23-34. My ribcage is narrow, though, so I wear like a 28F bra and am visually pretty top-heavy although my hips are actually bigger than my bust when I measure.

    It makes work clothing a challenge, as I can't normally get stuff from places like Old Navy/BR/Gap, Loft, and J Crew (and in department store type brands like Tahari and Calvin Klein) to fit right, but I usually do just fine at places like Zara or H&M or at shops for teenage girls.

    And I've seen vintage clothing charts that make me anywhere from an 8 to a 12 in pre-1980s clothing. Also, I don't look especially slim - I don't have a thigh gap unless I tilt my hips the right way, I'm busty, my arms are pretty big for my size, etc etc. I am DEFINITELY not what people think of when they think "size 0", I can guarantee it, but clothing is really just that big now.
  • robininfl
    robininfl Posts: 1,137 Member
    Options
    I think it depends on a few things.

    I was smaller than a zero (well there weren't size 0 back then, but smaller than a "1") when I was in late teens/early 20's because I always either didn't have enough to eat (poor) or wasn't inclined to eat (disordered). That was 98lb on my (then) 5'8" frame (I grew one inch when I achieved a healthy body mass). Still probably 26-27 inch waist, slim hips, probably 33" because I had not much butt, skinny legs, I don't have big boobs, and had thin arms.

    I was also a 0 in my early 40s when I dropped a little too much weight but this was a much bigger size by then.

    Also anyone who is shorter and slim would be smaller around, in inches, than someone tall and slim.

    Clothing wise, I have historically had much more trouble with needing tall clothes than anything else. Tall Small is hard to find.

    So yes, of course, people are different sizes, and some people when slim are smaller because they are built narrow, frame-wise, and others are built wider.

  • yirara
    yirara Posts: 9,425 Member
    Options
    FeedMeFish wrote: »
    For those of you ladies who are also size 0 (or under), I'm curious as to what your measurements are? Because I'm a 0 (close to 00) and mine are 32-23-34. Just wondering if there's similar/common measurements for these small sizes. And what height and weight are you? I'm 5'6 and 125.

    See, I'm your size and weight but wwould never get into anything size 0. Pants is probably M if it's a loose fit, top probably M as well. I do have a terrible tigh gap though, but because I have a wide frame. We're all different.
  • itsbasschick
    itsbasschick Posts: 1,584 Member
    Options
    i'm 5' 3", and when i was 14 through 17 and the same height, i ranged from a size 0 to a size 4, depending on the outfit and i had a 19" waist. omg - i just realized my waist is a little over double what it was then!
  • Shana67
    Shana67 Posts: 680 Member
    Options

    I'm 5'9" too, and I was a size 6 at 128. Currently I'm 145 (21.4 BMI) and I can't get my size 8 shorts over my hips.

    I was only half joking earlier about my skeleton not fitting into a 0.

    A lot of it has to do with body type, don't you think? I'm super proportionate, so I think that's why I fit into smaller sizes. I think. :)

  • middlehaitch
    middlehaitch Posts: 8,484 Member
    Options
    FeedMeFish wrote: »
    For those of you ladies who are also size 0 (or under), I'm curious as to what your measurements are? Because I'm a 0 (close to 00) and mine are 32-23-34. Just wondering if there's similar/common measurements for these small sizes. And what height and weight are you? I'm 5'6 and 125.

    OK I'm in.
    Size 0 most of the time with an occasional size 4. Is there a size 2?

    As a 14 yo in the UK I was 5', 7 1/2 stone (105lbs), and measurements were 34b, 27w, 34h. I took a 34b bra, wore 27w,27leg Levi's and a size 10 in Marks and Spencer clothes.

    Roll on 49 years (62yo) and I am 5'1 (grew an inch somewhere between 20 and 38) maintain between 100-105lbs, and my measurements now are 33b, 26w, 34h. I take a 32d bra, size 0 in a regular Jean, 4 in a skinny jean, and most UK Marks and Spencer size 8 clothing is loose on me, including the 4 pr of jeans I bought 3year ago at at the same weight.

    Most of my dresses are xsmall or 0 as are tops and dress pants. Having a thicker waist means if high waisted pants or stiff fitted dresses ever come back in fashion I will have to go up a size.


    Except for the 30lbs weight gain blip, I have weighted between 98-112 (7-8st) all of my adult life but this is the first time I have worn a 0 or had size 8 UK too big.

    Cheers, h.
    (Profile pic is 98lbs)
  • Noreenmarie1234
    Noreenmarie1234 Posts: 7,493 Member
    Options
    I am a size 00. I've found as vanity sizing increases, 0 has gotten bigger. I've been a 00 for years.
  • Noreenmarie1234
    Noreenmarie1234 Posts: 7,493 Member
    Options
    synacious wrote: »
    macgurlnet wrote: »
    robs_ready wrote: »
    This is a genuine question, is size 0 even healthy?

    I'm 5' tall and ~113 pounds and a size 0 is just about right for me - I've got pretty narrow hips.

    Also, a size 0 now isn't the same as a size 0 from a while back. I have a pair of shorts my aunt gave me (these shorts are probably 20+ years old now) and they're labeled as a size 8, but are about as snug as the 0's I've picked up at Target recently.

    A size 0 isn't possible for everyone, but there's plenty of folks that can fit into that size and be a healthy weight also.

    ~Lyssa

    Exactly. I'm 5'3" and 109 pounds. I'm not a size 0 at Target anymore, I'm a 00. The vanity sizing in the US, especially at Target, is out of control. In equivalent sizing I'd be between a UK 4 and 6.

    Vanity sizing is INSANE! I'm a size 0 in some brands but others are way to big for me in general. I'm 5'4.5 and 130. I do have very narrow hips and broad shoulders but still!

    If it gets worse, they'll have to make 000 and 0000. I wouldn't be surprised if a 000 existed!

    I KNOW! I hate the vanity sizing, it's ridiculous. I had a bunch of 00 jeans from like 5 years ago, when I went to buy new jeans from the SAME store, 00 was too big. There was a HUGE difference in the size. 00 now is like size 2 back then. Now many stores make 000's.
  • jrochest
    jrochest Posts: 119 Member
    Options
    The only clothes that come in a size 0 here in Aus are babies clothes.
    How anyone can be a size nothing totally confounds me! I would love to know why and who came up with ridiculous concept..

    US (and Canadian) sizes changed from UK and Aussie sizes -- so a 2 is about the same as an AU 8 and a 0 is a 6.
  • Christine_72
    Christine_72 Posts: 16,049 Member
    Options
    jrochest wrote: »
    The only clothes that come in a size 0 here in Aus are babies clothes.
    How anyone can be a size nothing totally confounds me! I would love to know why and who came up with ridiculous concept..

    US (and Canadian) sizes changed from UK and Aussie sizes -- so a 2 is about the same as an AU 8 and a 0 is a 6.

    Yeah I know the conversion. I just think it's stupid to have a clothing size say zero, it honestly make not one iota of sense to me, and is one of the few things that make me see red :rage:
    Does it make women happy to say "look I'm sooooo skinny that I can fit into a size nothing" ?? This is the only reason I can come up with to invent a size 0