Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
What are your unpopular opinions about health / fitness?
Replies
-
I don't know how unpopular those are, but here they are:
- I don't think we should eat many small meals (to keep our sugar levels etc.)
- I am very skeptical about how much protein we really need (I don't have a definite answer though)
- I think cake is a cake, wether is paleo, keto, vegan..you name it
- I am skeptical about all supplements
- I think it's better to have a real sugar once in a while then artificial sweeteners
- I don't think that the water intake is that big issue as represented
All of this for me.0 -
Ack. It's all utterly pants, isn't it.MsHarryWinston wrote: »HeliumIsNoble wrote: »
And a good thing too. If you want to be actually able to buy clothes.amusedmonkey wrote: »HeliumIsNoble wrote: »Wait. I thought this was all about US sizing, so I thought I'd stay out of the discussion. But if we're not... Size 12 means a 34.5 inch waist? Which country's sizes, @SezxyStef?
Sizing differs from store to store. Some call this vanity sizing. I call it stores making clothes big enough to sell, but that is another thread. High street stores publish individual size guides, to tell the public the dimensions they design their garments to fit.
In the UK:
1) River Island. Size 12 jeans and trousers are listed as 29 inch/73cm waists. Pay attention to the centimetre measurement! https://www.riverisland.com/how-can-we-help/size-guides/womens#extrasizeguide-womens-trousers
2) Next- 29 inches or 74cm. http://help.next.co.uk/Section.aspx?ItemId=31028
3) the White Stuff- it's 29 inches or 73cm .http://www.whitestuff.com/mobile/mobile-help-her-size/
4) Marks & Spencer- it's 29.5 inches or 75cm. http://www.marksandspencer.com/c/size-guides?mcptredirect
5) Monsoon- it's 28.5 inches or 73 cm http://uk.monsoon.co.uk/view/content/size-guide
This is the chart of US Standard sizing for adult women:
This is the size chart from the back of a McCalls Pattern. The pattern companies are required to use standard sizing.
That's interesting. According to the chart I'm a tight size 20 by hip and a size 18 by waist, but most of my current well fitting clothes are a size 14.
And THAT is where vanity sizing comes in. These standards were set using the measurements of American women compiled in the 1940's and 50's. Pattern companies are required to follow this, clothing manufacturers are not.
It's one thing for dressmaking patterns to have a specific set of measurements; if you're choosing to make your own clothes, you're probably able to adjust the bust or hips in or out to fit yourself
If you're a store selling clothes, you want to sell them to fit the shoppers, and the shoppers are not all going to magically have the body shape with the much lauded ten inch difference twix waist and hip that used to be taught as fricking holy gospel in sewing.
If you're a customer who wants to buy clothes, who can't sew, universal standardisation across stores would either see you able to buy everywhere, or... nowhere.
Government regulation on clothing sizes would be very restrictive here.
My 10" waist to hip difference is actually a huge pain in the butt, and even though it was annoyingly taught as "holy gospel" in sewing, it makes buying flattering pants that actually fit me right in the real world nearly impossible. Finding decent dresses is also tricky.
This isn't a "poor me" post, I'm just saying that buying clothes to fit my body right is actually really hard for me too. There's also currently a 12"
difference between my waist and my bust. Most clothes aren't cut for my shape. I need spandex in EVERYTHING.
But I wholeheartedly agree with your post because if clothing manufacturers were held to dressmaker measurements I'd be even worse off! Vanity sizing can be super annoying but as long as we take our measurements and pay attention to individual company sizing charts we are usually going to be ok.
When I overhear women bemoaning their luck in the neighbouring changing room cubicles, I sometimes wonder whether the prototype garments even fit the fit models, or whether it was just a case of "close enough" and "it'll do" on them!
2 -
HeliumIsNoble wrote: »
Ack. It's all utterly pants, isn't it.MsHarryWinston wrote: »HeliumIsNoble wrote: »
And a good thing too. If you want to be actually able to buy clothes.amusedmonkey wrote: »HeliumIsNoble wrote: »Wait. I thought this was all about US sizing, so I thought I'd stay out of the discussion. But if we're not... Size 12 means a 34.5 inch waist? Which country's sizes, @SezxyStef?
Sizing differs from store to store. Some call this vanity sizing. I call it stores making clothes big enough to sell, but that is another thread. High street stores publish individual size guides, to tell the public the dimensions they design their garments to fit.
In the UK:
1) River Island. Size 12 jeans and trousers are listed as 29 inch/73cm waists. Pay attention to the centimetre measurement! https://www.riverisland.com/how-can-we-help/size-guides/womens#extrasizeguide-womens-trousers
2) Next- 29 inches or 74cm. http://help.next.co.uk/Section.aspx?ItemId=31028
3) the White Stuff- it's 29 inches or 73cm .http://www.whitestuff.com/mobile/mobile-help-her-size/
4) Marks & Spencer- it's 29.5 inches or 75cm. http://www.marksandspencer.com/c/size-guides?mcptredirect
5) Monsoon- it's 28.5 inches or 73 cm http://uk.monsoon.co.uk/view/content/size-guide
This is the chart of US Standard sizing for adult women:
This is the size chart from the back of a McCalls Pattern. The pattern companies are required to use standard sizing.
That's interesting. According to the chart I'm a tight size 20 by hip and a size 18 by waist, but most of my current well fitting clothes are a size 14.
And THAT is where vanity sizing comes in. These standards were set using the measurements of American women compiled in the 1940's and 50's. Pattern companies are required to follow this, clothing manufacturers are not.
It's one thing for dressmaking patterns to have a specific set of measurements; if you're choosing to make your own clothes, you're probably able to adjust the bust or hips in or out to fit yourself
If you're a store selling clothes, you want to sell them to fit the shoppers, and the shoppers are not all going to magically have the body shape with the much lauded ten inch difference twix waist and hip that used to be taught as fricking holy gospel in sewing.
If you're a customer who wants to buy clothes, who can't sew, universal standardisation across stores would either see you able to buy everywhere, or... nowhere.
Government regulation on clothing sizes would be very restrictive here.
My 10" waist to hip difference is actually a huge pain in the butt, and even though it was annoyingly taught as "holy gospel" in sewing, it makes buying flattering pants that actually fit me right in the real world nearly impossible. Finding decent dresses is also tricky.
This isn't a "poor me" post, I'm just saying that buying clothes to fit my body right is actually really hard for me too. There's also currently a 12"
difference between my waist and my bust. Most clothes aren't cut for my shape. I need spandex in EVERYTHING.
But I wholeheartedly agree with your post because if clothing manufacturers were held to dressmaker measurements I'd be even worse off! Vanity sizing can be super annoying but as long as we take our measurements and pay attention to individual company sizing charts we are usually going to be ok.
When I overhear women bemoaning their luck in the neighbouring changing room cubicles, I sometimes wonder whether the prototype garments even fit the fit models, or whether it was just a case of "close enough" and "it'll do" on them!
As far as model pics, there's a trick the fashion industry uses for picture. Butterfly clips. They are kept out of the picture, but used to pull the clothing together where it is baggier giving the appearance of a better fitted item. Saw this at a JC Penney's (when they would do them in store and use employees and thier kids) Little girls dress fit perfectly, then I saw her turn around: about 20 clips holding the dress to have it fit perfect.10 -
VeronicaA76 wrote: »HeliumIsNoble wrote: »
Ack. It's all utterly pants, isn't it.MsHarryWinston wrote: »HeliumIsNoble wrote: »
And a good thing too. If you want to be actually able to buy clothes.amusedmonkey wrote: »HeliumIsNoble wrote: »Wait. I thought this was all about US sizing, so I thought I'd stay out of the discussion. But if we're not... Size 12 means a 34.5 inch waist? Which country's sizes, @SezxyStef?
Sizing differs from store to store. Some call this vanity sizing. I call it stores making clothes big enough to sell, but that is another thread. High street stores publish individual size guides, to tell the public the dimensions they design their garments to fit.
In the UK:
1) River Island. Size 12 jeans and trousers are listed as 29 inch/73cm waists. Pay attention to the centimetre measurement! https://www.riverisland.com/how-can-we-help/size-guides/womens#extrasizeguide-womens-trousers
2) Next- 29 inches or 74cm. http://help.next.co.uk/Section.aspx?ItemId=31028
3) the White Stuff- it's 29 inches or 73cm .http://www.whitestuff.com/mobile/mobile-help-her-size/
4) Marks & Spencer- it's 29.5 inches or 75cm. http://www.marksandspencer.com/c/size-guides?mcptredirect
5) Monsoon- it's 28.5 inches or 73 cm http://uk.monsoon.co.uk/view/content/size-guide
This is the chart of US Standard sizing for adult women:
This is the size chart from the back of a McCalls Pattern. The pattern companies are required to use standard sizing.
That's interesting. According to the chart I'm a tight size 20 by hip and a size 18 by waist, but most of my current well fitting clothes are a size 14.
And THAT is where vanity sizing comes in. These standards were set using the measurements of American women compiled in the 1940's and 50's. Pattern companies are required to follow this, clothing manufacturers are not.
It's one thing for dressmaking patterns to have a specific set of measurements; if you're choosing to make your own clothes, you're probably able to adjust the bust or hips in or out to fit yourself
If you're a store selling clothes, you want to sell them to fit the shoppers, and the shoppers are not all going to magically have the body shape with the much lauded ten inch difference twix waist and hip that used to be taught as fricking holy gospel in sewing.
If you're a customer who wants to buy clothes, who can't sew, universal standardisation across stores would either see you able to buy everywhere, or... nowhere.
Government regulation on clothing sizes would be very restrictive here.
My 10" waist to hip difference is actually a huge pain in the butt, and even though it was annoyingly taught as "holy gospel" in sewing, it makes buying flattering pants that actually fit me right in the real world nearly impossible. Finding decent dresses is also tricky.
This isn't a "poor me" post, I'm just saying that buying clothes to fit my body right is actually really hard for me too. There's also currently a 12"
difference between my waist and my bust. Most clothes aren't cut for my shape. I need spandex in EVERYTHING.
But I wholeheartedly agree with your post because if clothing manufacturers were held to dressmaker measurements I'd be even worse off! Vanity sizing can be super annoying but as long as we take our measurements and pay attention to individual company sizing charts we are usually going to be ok.
When I overhear women bemoaning their luck in the neighbouring changing room cubicles, I sometimes wonder whether the prototype garments even fit the fit models, or whether it was just a case of "close enough" and "it'll do" on them!
As far as model pics, there's a trick the fashion industry uses for picture. Butterfly clips. They are kept out of the picture, but used to pull the clothing together where it is baggier giving the appearance of a better fitted item. Saw this at a JC Penney's (when they would do them in store and use employees and thier kids) Little girls dress fit perfectly, then I saw her turn around: about 20 clips holding the dress to have it fit perfect.
This is true for mannequins as well. Former retail merchandiser here.4 -
GemstoneofHeart wrote: »VeronicaA76 wrote: »HeliumIsNoble wrote: »
Ack. It's all utterly pants, isn't it.MsHarryWinston wrote: »HeliumIsNoble wrote: »
And a good thing too. If you want to be actually able to buy clothes.amusedmonkey wrote: »HeliumIsNoble wrote: »Wait. I thought this was all about US sizing, so I thought I'd stay out of the discussion. But if we're not... Size 12 means a 34.5 inch waist? Which country's sizes, @SezxyStef?
Sizing differs from store to store. Some call this vanity sizing. I call it stores making clothes big enough to sell, but that is another thread. High street stores publish individual size guides, to tell the public the dimensions they design their garments to fit.
In the UK:
1) River Island. Size 12 jeans and trousers are listed as 29 inch/73cm waists. Pay attention to the centimetre measurement! https://www.riverisland.com/how-can-we-help/size-guides/womens#extrasizeguide-womens-trousers
2) Next- 29 inches or 74cm. http://help.next.co.uk/Section.aspx?ItemId=31028
3) the White Stuff- it's 29 inches or 73cm .http://www.whitestuff.com/mobile/mobile-help-her-size/
4) Marks & Spencer- it's 29.5 inches or 75cm. http://www.marksandspencer.com/c/size-guides?mcptredirect
5) Monsoon- it's 28.5 inches or 73 cm http://uk.monsoon.co.uk/view/content/size-guide
This is the chart of US Standard sizing for adult women:
This is the size chart from the back of a McCalls Pattern. The pattern companies are required to use standard sizing.
That's interesting. According to the chart I'm a tight size 20 by hip and a size 18 by waist, but most of my current well fitting clothes are a size 14.
And THAT is where vanity sizing comes in. These standards were set using the measurements of American women compiled in the 1940's and 50's. Pattern companies are required to follow this, clothing manufacturers are not.
It's one thing for dressmaking patterns to have a specific set of measurements; if you're choosing to make your own clothes, you're probably able to adjust the bust or hips in or out to fit yourself
If you're a store selling clothes, you want to sell them to fit the shoppers, and the shoppers are not all going to magically have the body shape with the much lauded ten inch difference twix waist and hip that used to be taught as fricking holy gospel in sewing.
If you're a customer who wants to buy clothes, who can't sew, universal standardisation across stores would either see you able to buy everywhere, or... nowhere.
Government regulation on clothing sizes would be very restrictive here.
My 10" waist to hip difference is actually a huge pain in the butt, and even though it was annoyingly taught as "holy gospel" in sewing, it makes buying flattering pants that actually fit me right in the real world nearly impossible. Finding decent dresses is also tricky.
This isn't a "poor me" post, I'm just saying that buying clothes to fit my body right is actually really hard for me too. There's also currently a 12"
difference between my waist and my bust. Most clothes aren't cut for my shape. I need spandex in EVERYTHING.
But I wholeheartedly agree with your post because if clothing manufacturers were held to dressmaker measurements I'd be even worse off! Vanity sizing can be super annoying but as long as we take our measurements and pay attention to individual company sizing charts we are usually going to be ok.
When I overhear women bemoaning their luck in the neighbouring changing room cubicles, I sometimes wonder whether the prototype garments even fit the fit models, or whether it was just a case of "close enough" and "it'll do" on them!
As far as model pics, there's a trick the fashion industry uses for picture. Butterfly clips. They are kept out of the picture, but used to pull the clothing together where it is baggier giving the appearance of a better fitted item. Saw this at a JC Penney's (when they would do them in store and use employees and thier kids) Little girls dress fit perfectly, then I saw her turn around: about 20 clips holding the dress to have it fit perfect.
This is true for mannequins as well. Former retail merchandiser here.
And anyone who sells any clothing online. I buy and sell vintage clothing, I pin it on my manny all the time to show correct fit (but disclose it's pinned), obviously retailers do it to show best fit.3 -
I have bipolar disorder and struggled through many weight loss methods in order to lose weight.
I have a really wide range of unpopular methods due to my struggles.
I lost 130 lbs, in very unconventional ways.. not necessarily unhealthy..
I just don't play by all the rules.
My workouts are pretty much everywhere anytime.. I do consolidate them to mostly the morning hours, but I just make most things I do a challenge physically, in order to increase stamina and endurance. It takes a lot of mindfulness and daily practice and.. well obsession. I use dance, weights, and common daily household chores to work out. I use the mantra, "moving is better than not moving." Ppl say that's too simple. But for me, it's either move, or not move.. and who cares if I'm doing it wrong if I'm burning. I lost the weight and got the results.
Most people get really freaked out about my method because it's highly personalized and almost impossible to teach someone else. Since I ride manias to get the results I want.
In regards to nutrition, I try to balance everything g out. No tricks or fads, just balance. And people think that's too simple.
Unfortunately I struggle with the occasional binge, which has gotten better through the years.. my standards have changed, and my attitude toward it as well.
I actually think the occasional binge is necessary in my life. But that's mostly because if I didn't have that small thing, there would be other problems, worse ones.
We are all so different, and are all on different paths. What works for one may not work for another. I am certainly a huge example of that.
Due to the bipolar, I was left with learning issues that really put bumps in my road, so I had to use whatever means I could (within healthy limits) to make this happen. And I'm damn proud of it!
So if you struggle, and feel like you just don't get it.. remember.. you know good.. you know bad... just do what you think is good, and no bad can happen.. simplify it..
Just a message for us screw ups
(Kim ~lost 130lbs)
17 -
HeliumIsNoble wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »HeliumIsNoble wrote: »
Ah, I have, kind of. Therein lies the small dilemma. I had gradually worsening knee pain for an embarrassingly long time (as in, if anyone else reported the same symptoms to me over the same timescale, my screeches of "go to the bloody doctor, you muppet" would be heard across the Atlantic). After months of private hypochondria and Dr Google, I went to the doctor who showed me a model of a knee, told me the diagnosis (which, needless to say, was not any of the things I'd worried myself sick about), gave me exercises for it, and told me to go to the practice physio if they didn't work.Nony_Mouse wrote: »HeliumIsNoble wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »Ah, exercise shaming...also, I shall let my physiotherapist know that she's wasting my time having me do squats as part of my therapy to correct my patello-femoral joint issues. And here was us thinking that was working to restrengthen my glutes and quads...
Ooooh. *pricks up ears* Is it working?
Yep! I have a list of things to do now, we've been adding more each week as my knee's improved. I'd slacked off strength training at the end of last year, then munted my knee a couple of months ago doing a mountain hike
. Quad and glute strength are apparently the key (for me anyway) to getting that pesky joint to track properly. Even though my strength and flexibility were still better than the average bear's at the time, my left leg was (and still is) weaker and less flexible than the right, which is what caused the problem.
If you're having patello-femoral joint issues I highly recommend seeing a physio.
Well, they ARE working. Brilliantly. I've gone from my knee collapsing under me regularly (as in three times on the short walk between my house and the doctors' surgery in May) plus knee pain which was getting more and more constant, to complete stability. It's so stable, that I've finally been able to start Cto5K, which was on my list of stuff to try this year. I've just got in from one of the runs right now, in fact!
Buuuuut I'm still getting occasional lower-key aches in the same place during runs and after other high impact cardio. This could mean I need a more specialised assessment, so I could go to the physio. But suppose it's just that I haven't been doing the other exercises for long enough/consistently enough? It's exactly three months since I got them, and I have slacked off on it a few times. It would be really embarrassing to take up a valuable NHS physio slot unnecessarily,
and I can't afford a private consult.
At the moment, I'm planning to do the exercises really consistently until September, and then reassess.
Maybe scale back on the high impact and really commit to the strengthening for a time to see if it helps and slow ly reintroduce more volume to the other stuff. And then if it's still a concern or deteriorates go to the physio. You're not wasting precious NHS time if in the end all you need is one consult. And if it is more serious then it's the opposite of a waste.
I get it, I'm concerned a bone development issue isn't something physio can help with but there's not really many alternatives beyond waiting until it needs surgery and maybe there's something they can do to slow that. If not then again, one or two consults isn't taking too much time away from someone else who needs it more.
Ell oh ell. Scale back...
*looks shifty* *changes subject* Anyway... Logically, you're right about NHS resources and all that, but I just hate going to the doctor. I sit there in the waiting room, feeling the picture of health, and eye all the Properly Deserving with limbs hanging off.
I have an enforced couple of weeks off organised cardio things, while all and sundry go on holiday from teaching. I will have to see how it goes. It's improved so much already.
V. good advice. In my case, lack of flex shouldn't, theoretically, be the problem, but it is my less flexible leg that's doing all this. If it is lack of flexibility, then gawd knows how other people sort this kind of thing.Nony_Mouse wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »HeliumIsNoble wrote: »
Ah, I have, kind of. Therein lies the small dilemma. I had gradually worsening knee pain for an embarrassingly long time (as in, if anyone else reported the same symptoms to me over the same timescale, my screeches of "go to the bloody doctor, you muppet" would be heard across the Atlantic). After months of private hypochondria and Dr Google, I went to the doctor who showed me a model of a knee, told me the diagnosis (which, needless to say, was not any of the things I'd worried myself sick about), gave me exercises for it, and told me to go to the practice physio if they didn't work.Nony_Mouse wrote: »HeliumIsNoble wrote: »Nony_Mouse wrote: »Ah, exercise shaming...also, I shall let my physiotherapist know that she's wasting my time having me do squats as part of my therapy to correct my patello-femoral joint issues. And here was us thinking that was working to restrengthen my glutes and quads...
Ooooh. *pricks up ears* Is it working?
Yep! I have a list of things to do now, we've been adding more each week as my knee's improved. I'd slacked off strength training at the end of last year, then munted my knee a couple of months ago doing a mountain hike. Quad and glute strength are apparently the key (for me anyway) to getting that pesky joint to track properly. Even though my strength and flexibility were still better than the average bear's at the time, my left leg was (and still is) weaker and less flexible than the right, which is what caused the problem.
If you're having patello-femoral joint issues I highly recommend seeing a physio.
Well, they ARE working. Brilliantly. I've gone from my knee collapsing under me regularly (as in three times on the short walk between my house and the doctors' surgery in May) plus knee pain which was getting more and more constant, to complete stability. It's so stable, that I've finally been able to start Cto5K, which was on my list of stuff to try this year. I've just got in from one of the runs right now, in fact!
Buuuuut I'm still getting occasional lower-key aches in the same place during runs and after other high impact cardio. This could mean I need a more specialised assessment, so I could go to the physio. But suppose it's just that I haven't been doing the other exercises for long enough/consistently enough? It's exactly three months since I got them, and I have slacked off on it a few times. It would be really embarrassing to take up a valuable NHS physio slot unnecessarily, and I can't afford a private consult.
At the moment, I'm planning to do the exercises really consistently until September, and then reassess.
Maybe scale back on the high impact and really commit to the strengthening for a time to see if it helps and slow ly reintroduce more volume to the other stuff. And then if it's still a concern or deteriorates go to the physio. You're not wasting precious NHS time if in the end all you need is one consult. And if it is more serious then it's the opposite of a waste.
I get it, I'm concerned a bone development issue isn't something physio can help with but there's not really many alternatives beyond waiting until it needs surgery and maybe there's something they can do to slow that. If not then again, one or two consults isn't taking too much time away from someone else who needs it more.
Agree with this ^^. I'm hoping to get the all clear to start running again soon, and will start right back at the beginning of C25K to help build strength further (and because my fitness level has gone to utter crap). Flexibility is also really important. Do you yoga? Check out Yoga with Adriene on YouTube, she has some awesome practices for runners, including one that focuses on hamstrings. I do her full 15 minute practices before and after running.
After my initial consults with Dr Google, I was rather panicking that my juvenile over-enthusiastic stretching and lazy form (exploiting my mobility instead of learning to perform techniques precisely) had caught up with me!
I have the Yoga Studio app, but I'll definitely make time to check out Adriene. More yoga is always good; I'm desultorily trying to get my splits back to where they used to be.
Ah, see, it's not about how flexible you are compared to others
. Even when I've been completely slack and not done any flexibility work for weeks, I can touch my toes with ease. It's the fact I'm weaker and less flexible on one side. Work on that, esp hamstring and quad flexibility, and see if it helps. Believe me, I was all 'wtf? I'm way stronger and more flexible than the average person! How did this happen??'. When my physio checked my flexibility the other day, my left quad will stretch as far as my right, but is a lot more resistant to it, so still needs loosening up, my left hamstring is about 10% off from my right (was 20%). 3 -
Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »MsHarryWinston wrote: »HeliumIsNoble wrote: »Wait. I thought this was all about US sizing, so I thought I'd stay out of the discussion. But if we're not... Size 12 means a 34.5 inch waist? Which country's sizes, @SezxyStef?
Sizing differs from store to store. Some call this vanity sizing. I call it stores making clothes big enough to sell, but that is another thread. High street stores publish individual size guides, to tell the public the dimensions they design their garments to fit.
In the UK:
1) River Island. Size 12 jeans and trousers are listed as 29 inch/73cm waists. Pay attention to the centimetre measurement! https://www.riverisland.com/how-can-we-help/size-guides/womens#extrasizeguide-womens-trousers
2) Next- 29 inches or 74cm. http://help.next.co.uk/Section.aspx?ItemId=31028
3) the White Stuff- it's 29 inches or 73cm .http://www.whitestuff.com/mobile/mobile-help-her-size/
4) Marks & Spencer- it's 29.5 inches or 75cm. http://www.marksandspencer.com/c/size-guides?mcptredirect
5) Monsoon- it's 28.5 inches or 73 cm http://uk.monsoon.co.uk/view/content/size-guide
This is the chart of US Standard sizing for adult women:
This is the size chart from the back of a McCalls Pattern. The pattern companies are required to use standard sizing.
Lol so my bust is a 26, or a stretchy 24 and my waist down is about a 20. Joy! "Hello, yes, I'm trying to find a shirt that is flattering for my size 20 waist AND size 26 boobs" *facepalm*.
Not going to lie, finding shirts that fit well can be a bit annoying but I'll take the current 2 size difference in sizing for my body instead of the old 6.
Right now I generally fit a 1X(14/16)/16 on top and a 14/16 on bottom depending on the cut.
wow you have an amazing hourglass figure. I wish I did. I have 27in waist but 29in hips. According to this chart i am a 14 in waist but below a 4 in hips LOL
Lol thanks. It has gotten much easier for me to appreciate in the last few years once I was able to find clothes and bras that fit me well. Which was nearly impossible growing up in a mid-sized Canadian town. The amount of time that I spent bawling my eyes out in a changeroom because clothing manufacturers didn't believe my proportions existed is... well it's a lot.2 -
HeliumIsNoble wrote: »
Ack. It's all utterly pants, isn't it.MsHarryWinston wrote: »HeliumIsNoble wrote: »
And a good thing too. If you want to be actually able to buy clothes.amusedmonkey wrote: »HeliumIsNoble wrote: »Wait. I thought this was all about US sizing, so I thought I'd stay out of the discussion. But if we're not... Size 12 means a 34.5 inch waist? Which country's sizes, @SezxyStef?
Sizing differs from store to store. Some call this vanity sizing. I call it stores making clothes big enough to sell, but that is another thread. High street stores publish individual size guides, to tell the public the dimensions they design their garments to fit.
In the UK:
1) River Island. Size 12 jeans and trousers are listed as 29 inch/73cm waists. Pay attention to the centimetre measurement! https://www.riverisland.com/how-can-we-help/size-guides/womens#extrasizeguide-womens-trousers
2) Next- 29 inches or 74cm. http://help.next.co.uk/Section.aspx?ItemId=31028
3) the White Stuff- it's 29 inches or 73cm .http://www.whitestuff.com/mobile/mobile-help-her-size/
4) Marks & Spencer- it's 29.5 inches or 75cm. http://www.marksandspencer.com/c/size-guides?mcptredirect
5) Monsoon- it's 28.5 inches or 73 cm http://uk.monsoon.co.uk/view/content/size-guide
This is the chart of US Standard sizing for adult women:
This is the size chart from the back of a McCalls Pattern. The pattern companies are required to use standard sizing.
That's interesting. According to the chart I'm a tight size 20 by hip and a size 18 by waist, but most of my current well fitting clothes are a size 14.
And THAT is where vanity sizing comes in. These standards were set using the measurements of American women compiled in the 1940's and 50's. Pattern companies are required to follow this, clothing manufacturers are not.
It's one thing for dressmaking patterns to have a specific set of measurements; if you're choosing to make your own clothes, you're probably able to adjust the bust or hips in or out to fit yourself
If you're a store selling clothes, you want to sell them to fit the shoppers, and the shoppers are not all going to magically have the body shape with the much lauded ten inch difference twix waist and hip that used to be taught as fricking holy gospel in sewing.
If you're a customer who wants to buy clothes, who can't sew, universal standardisation across stores would either see you able to buy everywhere, or... nowhere.
Government regulation on clothing sizes would be very restrictive here.
My 10" waist to hip difference is actually a huge pain in the butt, and even though it was annoyingly taught as "holy gospel" in sewing, it makes buying flattering pants that actually fit me right in the real world nearly impossible. Finding decent dresses is also tricky.
This isn't a "poor me" post, I'm just saying that buying clothes to fit my body right is actually really hard for me too. There's also currently a 12"
difference between my waist and my bust. Most clothes aren't cut for my shape. I need spandex in EVERYTHING.
But I wholeheartedly agree with your post because if clothing manufacturers were held to dressmaker measurements I'd be even worse off! Vanity sizing can be super annoying but as long as we take our measurements and pay attention to individual company sizing charts we are usually going to be ok.
When I overhear women bemoaning their luck in the neighbouring changing room cubicles, I sometimes wonder whether the prototype garments even fit the fit models, or whether it was just a case of "close enough" and "it'll do" on them!
Pants! Absolutely pants! I'd even go so far as to say that it's all complete b*ll*cks, but I don't know if MFP will censor me lol.1 -
HIIT does not burn that many calories...and it doesn't.6
-
Yes, with what they call HIIT, C25K would qualify as HIIT. It's silly to call anything that's interval training HIIT. Why not just call it interval training?7
-
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Yes, with what they call HIIT, C25K would qualify as HIIT. It's silly to call anything that's interval training HIIT. Why not just call it interval training?
'Cos HIIT is what the cool kids do! 12 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Yes, with what they call HIIT, C25K would qualify as HIIT. It's silly to call anything that's interval training HIIT. Why not just call it interval training?
'Cos HIIT is what the cool kids do!
0 -
prolly not 'unpopular' exactly, but it seems to be a minority view: i get annoyed every time some poor innocent says the word 'tone' and people rudely and gleefully unfurl the no such thing as tone! banner and jump down their throats.
it seems unnecessarily mean-spirited and pedantic to me. if visual 'toning' really didn't exist then there wouldn't be all this 'forget what the scale says - are your pants two sizes looser than they used to be?' and if physical tonus doesn't exist then every massage therapist and physio who's ever poked me to assess mine was just making stuff up.24 -
Got to agree with you @canadianlbs.
To me 'toned' is when one uses their muscles enough that they are firm to the touch and, if body fat is low enough, visible.
This is not the 'pumped' look of just after a lifting session, where the muscles are engorged, but the daily look of muscles that are used.
This is also not the 'flat' flaccid, soft, look and feel of muscles that are not engaged in any regular stress, exercise or daily living/work.
I think the pushback is because of all the 'toned in 10' articles in magazines.
Ie: it has taken 3 weeks for my muscles to go quite 'flat' as I am taking a break. Usually, though not very visible, my muscles, when lifting regularly, have a solid feel- to me that is they have 'tone', or are 'toned'. I don't know another word for that day to day state as it is different than pumped post workout and unused flat/flaccid.
Cheers, h.20 -
canadianlbs wrote: »prolly not 'unpopular' exactly, but it seems to be a minority view: i get annoyed every time some poor innocent says the word 'tone' and people rudely and gleefully unfurl the no such thing as tone! banner and jump down their throats.
it seems unnecessarily mean-spirited and pedantic to me. if visual 'toning' really didn't exist then there wouldn't be all this 'forget what the scale says - are your pants two sizes looser than they used to be?' and if physical tonus doesn't exist then every massage therapist and physio who's ever poked me to assess mine was just making stuff up.
please show me a post where people have "gleefully" jumped down someone's throat for using the word "tone"
Tone as used in the fitness industry is a catch phrase that really has no real meaning except for what they want it to...
and it's overused "tone up in 10 days", "get toned with these simple exercises"...etc.
and if that word actually meant what they want it to....then the magazines would be full of crap and selling something akin to plastic wrap making you lose weight...just doesn't work that way.7 -
@canadianlbs had a point. All the "serious" lifters do make a point to show just how much srsbznz lifting is and how much cred they have whenever the word tone comes up.
Well, some of them.
Some of them are gracious and explain it all nicely and realize that there's a difference between the person misusing the term and the people who market the term.
I'm with the previous posters. I know what people who say they want to tone up mean.
My mother used to say that it wasn't kind to correct people if you knew what they meant if you were doing it in a jerky way. So I've never piled on that particular turn of phrase.
I think that's pretty good advice to remember.26 -
canadianlbs wrote: »prolly not 'unpopular' exactly, but it seems to be a minority view: i get annoyed every time some poor innocent says the word 'tone' and people rudely and gleefully unfurl the no such thing as tone! banner and jump down their throats.
it seems unnecessarily mean-spirited and pedantic to me. if visual 'toning' really didn't exist then there wouldn't be all this 'forget what the scale says - are your pants two sizes looser than they used to be?' and if physical tonus doesn't exist then every massage therapist and physio who's ever poked me to assess mine was just making stuff up.
I agree with your main point, about the (kinda snotty) replies that sometimes happen when some innocent person, new to fitness but willing - even eager - to learn, mentions "toning". It's as if some folks are more eager to prove how cool & insider-y they are, than to help the new person along. (Analogous thing happens on some other hot-button topics, too)
(I'm sure I'm guilty of this myself, sometimes, too - I try to act decently, but I'm fundamentally not a particularly nice person. ).
But I'm really in just to say this:
My current, very good, well-educated/trained massage therapist is also a very science-y, no-woo guy. He firmly contends that many of the things many massage therapists say they can feel, are not actually feelable at all. He insists he cannot feel them. He's talking not just about nebulous "energy fields" or auras, but about physical phenomena like felt "tightness", " knots", etc. But he can, I assure you, capably do All The Thingz.
He says he can assess from range of motion and other observable phenomena, and use his knowledge of anatomy/physiology to locate & treat problem areas, and that with long experience some of that has become almost subconscious and intuitive.
I don't totally believe him ( ) about his "I can't feel anything", but found his view very interesting.
Edited: typo8 -
I've never jumped down anyone's throat to tell them that toning doesn't exist. I have, however, explained the misconception that is so prevalent when it comes to toning.
There's a lot of people who think that their soft arms are a result of their muscles not being tight enough and that if they just workout, their soft muscles will tighten up and make them look lean and firm.
That's just not how it works though. In order to look more toned, one has to lose fat (which is what actually makes your arm feel soft) or gain enough muscle for it become more visible amidst the fat. Or both.3 -
middlehaitch wrote: »I think the pushback is because of all the 'toned in 10' articles in magazines.
i agree about that. some of my irritation probably comes from me having that frustrating sense that i'm watching people argue with the wrong lamppost.please show me a post where people have "gleefully" jumped down someone's throat for using the word "tone"
tell ya what. i don't happen to have a useful list of them in my back pocket right now, but the next time i see an example of it i'll tag you.Tone as used in the fitness industry is a catch phrase that really has no real meaning except for what they want it to...
kind of 'exactly', actually. it has meaning to any individual person who uses it here. so what i find rude is, when someone seems so anxious to put that person in their place, they're not even interested in trying out to find what the word means to them.and it's overused "tone up in 10 days", "get toned with these simple exercises"...etc.
sure. but again i think people are arguing with the poor messenger and imo it sucks. because they're really having a personal argument that's all their own with some industry or some magazine, but they're going through a real live human to score their know-it-all points.
when i first tried to learn how to lift i didn't know the right words for anything, and if i weren't so stubborn i would have been discouraged from it for good by the knee-jerk putdowns and snubs i got while i was trying to work out how to say what i meant.and if that word actually meant what they want it to....then the magazines would be full of crap and selling something akin to plastic wrap making you lose weight...just doesn't work that way.
who says though that anyone who comes to the fitness and exercise section saying they want to 'tone', they're looking for that kind of b.s. and a quick fix? who says you know what someone else 'wants' it to mean?
15 -
"My current, very good, well-educated/trained massage therapist is also a very science-y, no-woo guy. He firmly contends that many of the things many massage therapists say they can feel, are not actually feelable at all. He insists he cannot feel them. He's talking not just about nebulous "energy fields" or auras, but about physical phenomena like felt "tightness", " knots", etc.
this is interesting. i believe that it's true of him too, if he says it is. but i'd love to invite him to my pvc-pipe sessions sometime, when i'm amusing myself by cross-rolling my glute fibres between my sitz bones and the pipe. i can get them to make this gritch-gritch noise you can hear from ten paces away.
0 -
canadianlbs wrote: »My current, very good, well-educated/trained massage therapist is also a very science-y, no-woo guy. He firmly contends that many of the things many massage therapists say they can feel, are not actually feelable at all. He insists he cannot feel them. He's talking not just about nebulous "energy fields" or auras, but about physical phenomena like felt "tightness", " knots", etc.
this is interesting. i believe that it's true of him too, if he says it is. but i'd love to invite him to my pvc-pipe sessions sometime, when i'm amusing myself by cross-rolling my glute fibres between my sitz bones and the pipe. i can get them to make this gritch-gritch noise you can hear from ten paces away.
I don't think he'd argue that you can't feel things in your own body (well, maybe not the auras & energy fields) - in fact, I know he wouldn't. He asks a lot about what I feel, and does specific "testing" motions to me whike he assks.
And he believes in things that make noises. I predict he'd have an opinion about your "gritch-gritch", some diagnostics, probably some on-the-table interventions, and maybe send you off with some stuff to do yourself at home. He just denies the magic sensitive fingers of other-perception.
Guy's a peach, I swear. 2nd best MT I've ever had (1st best moved out of town
). I shopped a long time to find a new one.
Here's an unpopular (?) opinion: Good bodywork pros - MTs, physical therapists, manipulative osteopaths, etc. - have a technology that's indistinguishable from magic.
Edit:fix quote tags3 -
I don't think he'd argue that you can't feel things in your own body (well, maybe not the auras & energy fields) - in fact, I know he wouldn't.
ah. well, i don't have much time for people who claim to be able to determine what my life was like in third grade by palpating my armpit or elbow either. but i'm intrigued by the idea that he can't tell any difference in objective texture, because tbh i'd defy him not to notice there's parts of me that are like corduroy and other parts that are . . . not. i'd buy the idea that just because something is stringy or lumpy or makes a strange noise when you cross-friction it, that means anything about tenderness or pain, maybe.
i need someone to experiment on now, darn it. i need to go out and accost strangers to see if they're willing to let me hurt them for science reasons.4 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »I've never jumped down anyone's throat to tell them that toning doesn't exist. I have, however, explained the misconception that is so prevalent when it comes to toning.
There's a lot of people who think that their soft arms are a result of their muscles not being tight enough and that if they just workout, their soft muscles will tighten up and make them look lean and firm.
That's just not how it works though. In order to look more toned, one has to lose fat (which is what actually makes your arm feel soft) or gain enough muscle for it become more visible amidst the fat. Or both.
That's, of course, the nice way of explaining it to someone who's read a magazine article. Even though I know the difference, I (remembering my own newbie confusion) appreciate seeing those posts in threads because they're helpful.
There are others that do confuse the message and the messenger and I've seen them.7 -
canadianlbs wrote: »middlehaitch wrote: »I think the pushback is because of all the 'toned in 10' articles in magazines.
i agree about that. some of my irritation probably comes from me having that frustrating sense that i'm watching people argue with the wrong lamppost.please show me a post where people have "gleefully" jumped down someone's throat for using the word "tone"
tell ya what. i don't happen to have a useful list of them in my back pocket right now, but the next time i see an example of it i'll tag you.Tone as used in the fitness industry is a catch phrase that really has no real meaning except for what they want it to...
kind of 'exactly', actually. it has meaning to any individual person who uses it here. so what i find rude is, when someone seems so anxious to put that person in their place, they're not even interested in trying out to find what the word means to them.and it's overused "tone up in 10 days", "get toned with these simple exercises"...etc.
sure. but again i think people are arguing with the poor messenger and imo it sucks. because they're really having a personal argument that's all their own with some industry or some magazine, but they're going through a real live human to score their know-it-all points.
when i first tried to learn how to lift i didn't know the right words for anything, and if i weren't so stubborn i would have been discouraged from it for good by the knee-jerk putdowns and snubs i got while i was trying to work out how to say what i meant.and if that word actually meant what they want it to....then the magazines would be full of crap and selling something akin to plastic wrap making you lose weight...just doesn't work that way.
who says though that anyone who comes to the fitness and exercise section saying they want to 'tone', they're looking for that kind of b.s. and a quick fix? who says you know what someone else 'wants' it to mean?
I didn't say they were looking for a quick fix ...I said the magazine would be selling one if that word meant what they thought it did...
aka tighten up the muscle...
and it's not about what they "want" it to mean it's about what the fitness industry is selling as the meaning....
As well I am not arguing anything..I asked for examples of people jumping down throats...you don't have any...and I fully don't expect to see any...mainly because a lot of time people claim "nastiness" based on "tone" of writing or assumed toned when in fact the post is matter of fact with no Woo in it...and that is seen as "jumping"
anyway tag me all you want in the Mean posts...I would be interested to see them, report them and have the person being nasty taken to task.12 -
canadianlbs wrote: »middlehaitch wrote: »I think the pushback is because of all the 'toned in 10' articles in magazines.
i agree about that. some of my irritation probably comes from me having that frustrating sense that i'm watching people argue with the wrong lamppost.please show me a post where people have "gleefully" jumped down someone's throat for using the word "tone"
tell ya what. i don't happen to have a useful list of them in my back pocket right now, but the next time i see an example of it i'll tag you.Tone as used in the fitness industry is a catch phrase that really has no real meaning except for what they want it to...
kind of 'exactly', actually. it has meaning to any individual person who uses it here. so what i find rude is, when someone seems so anxious to put that person in their place, they're not even interested in trying out to find what the word means to them.and it's overused "tone up in 10 days", "get toned with these simple exercises"...etc.
sure. but again i think people are arguing with the poor messenger and imo it sucks. because they're really having a personal argument that's all their own with some industry or some magazine, but they're going through a real live human to score their know-it-all points.
when i first tried to learn how to lift i didn't know the right words for anything, and if i weren't so stubborn i would have been discouraged from it for good by the knee-jerk putdowns and snubs i got while i was trying to work out how to say what i meant.and if that word actually meant what they want it to....then the magazines would be full of crap and selling something akin to plastic wrap making you lose weight...just doesn't work that way.
who says though that anyone who comes to the fitness and exercise section saying they want to 'tone', they're looking for that kind of b.s. and a quick fix? who says you know what someone else 'wants' it to mean?
I didn't say they were looking for a quick fix ...I said the magazine would be selling one if that word meant what they thought it did...
aka tighten up the muscle...
and it's not about what they "want" it to mean it's about what the fitness industry is selling as the meaning....
As well I am not arguing anything..I asked for examples of people jumping down throats...you don't have any...and I fully don't expect to see any...mainly because a lot of time people claim "nastiness" based on "tone" of writing or assumed toned when in fact the post is matter of fact with no Woo in it...and that is seen as "jumping"
anyway tag me all you want in the Mean posts...I would be interested to see them, report them and have the person being nasty taken to task.
Three thoughts, at least one of which is an opinion (possibly unpopular):- Most of us don't compile a running cross-indexed database of tone in threads, and one can't readily use search tools to find them. Expecting someone to produce one on demand is unrealistic. It's not equivalent to failing to produce cites to support a scientific "fact". Several people have agreed with the opinion in question here, most of them not "frail sensitive flower" types.
- IMO, snarky tone is not necessarily a reportable offence under MFP TOS, even if uncalled for or socially inappropriate. We're adults, not 3rd-graders, so we can do some self-policing rather than dragging in busy mods.
- Tone in writing is a thing, and effective communicators strive to manage it. If one is called out as snarky, dismissive, judgemental, etc., by multiple people on a thread, that person would do better to give some thought to whether they're communicating effectively, rather than hiding behind variations of "didn't mean it that way - you're reading it wrong".
35 -
I'd just like to weigh in to say that I have seen people posting on newbies' threads asking for advice on toning up merely to snarkily say "there's no such thing as toning". Repeatedly. I didn't bookmark the threads or post on them, but I did note it down as a subject I needed to look into later.
I think it was actually @Carlos_421 in this very thread, who explained to me many pages ago the point these snappish people were trying to get across, and why.6 -
My unpopular for the day is that people just like to hear themselves type. They'll argue just to be contrarians.
*tap*tap*tap*tappity*tap20 -
cmriverside wrote: »My unpopular for the day is that people just like to hear themselves type. They'll argue just to be contrarians.
*tap*tap*tap*tappity*tap
This and the passive aggressive humble bragging that runs rampant. "Hey everyone, look how totally wonderful and nonjudgmental I am, why can't you all be just like me?"
10
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions