Are waist size and waist to height ratio important?

Hey y’all,
I’ve always been pretty physically fit but in the past year or so I’ve put on 20 lb. and pretty much all of it has gone to my waist. I’m mid twenties, 5’10” and about 185 lb. About a year ago my waist was 34-35” and it is now about 43”. I’m not talking pants size but waist measurement. Anyway, I’m aware I put on 20 lb lol I have a little belly now and there is clearly some fat but I didn’t think it was that serious until I read online about the dangers of a waist over 40 inch and about waist to height ratio. I clearly have stomach fat but didn’t necessarily think it would affect my health so much as I don’t feel like I’m literally overweight. About 5 lb of my weight gain has come during the quarantine lol Anyone know more about this? Should I be taking these numbers seriously

Replies

  • heyfromnj
    heyfromnj Posts: 7 Member
    45ihap3qa987.jpeg
  • harper16
    harper16 Posts: 2,564 Member
    edited May 2020
    Yes they are important, and you trying to lose weight to get back to a healthy bmi?
  • heyfromnj
    heyfromnj Posts: 7 Member
    harper16 wrote: »
    Yes they are important, and you trying to lose weight to get back to a healthy bmi?

    I was just shocked to see that my waist being anything over 40 was a risk. I knew I gained weight but didn’t see it as a problem. I also never took the BMI thing very seriously because I always read that it was not very accurate.
  • heyfromnj
    heyfromnj Posts: 7 Member
    lgfrie wrote: »
    Aside from BMI, yes, a waist of 40" for men (and I believe 35" for women??) is oft noted as the cutoff for high risk. I've read that this is a really key measure, maybe even moreso than BMI as a predictor of heart disease/diabetes. That 40" figure isn't something someone pulled out of a hat, that is a well researched number. Taking your measurement and seeing that it's 43 " is a good start. You know what you need to do next.

    Some of us older folk (I'm 57) are thinking "Time goes so much more quickly than people in their mid 20's can even imagine - one day you wake up and you wish you'd grabbed this bull by the horns 30 years ago". Don't wake up at 50 wishing you'd decisively dealt with your expanding girth 25 years ago. Do it now.

    BUT ... Are you sure you're measuring correctly? I'm 5'10.5" and my waist is 42" and my weight is 248. You're about the same height, 63 pounds less, and have an inch more stomach? That doesn't add up. When I was 185 pounds in college, I was in size 35 / 36 jeans.

    Hey, thanks for your help! 43” is me measuring my waist at the largest point with measuring tape. My pants size is actually like a 33/34 (they’re tight lol)
  • heyfromnj
    heyfromnj Posts: 7 Member
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    Do YOU feel that your current weight and waist sizes are indicative of a normal weight, normal health risk, individual?

    While you are only overweight by BMI. I believe that your waist circumference and waist to height ratio both indicate that you're at a higher risk than what your BMI (extra weight), by itself, would indicate.

    https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health-pro/guidelines/current/obesity-guidelines/e_textbook/txgd/4142.htm

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/7529111_Six_reasons_why_the_waist-to-height_ratio_is_a_rapid_and_effective_global_indicator_for_health_risks_of_obesity_and_how_its_use_could_simplify_the_international_public_health_message_on_obesity

    While a reclining picture is guaranteed to show you in way worse light than a "staged" one... as presented, you are failing to make the pitch that you're not at an elevated risk.

    Does this mean that you have to go full on tilt on a starve till I lose 25lbs by tomorrow diet? NO. It does not.

    But it does call for you to really think about what may have changed in your life during the past couple of years and what you ought to be doing (over the long term) to adjust to these changes.

    Don't be me and wait till you're 48 to do something about it.


    I attached the pic to try and show that while I obviously have some fat on the stomach, I didn’t think it was serious. I feel like I was trying to show it all and not really suck in lol

    And thank you for that. That is a good point and I guess I don’t want to continue to gain weight at this rate! Because then my weight could be a pretty big problem later. Makes sense
  • PAV8888
    PAV8888 Posts: 14,240 Member
    Correct measurements help one make decisions.

    Please read online to make sure you're measuring your waist at the correct location. Some of the waist to height discussions tell you how to find the midpoint between your iliac crest, I believe it is called, and your lowest rib while making sure your tape is horizontal.

    You may end up with a different measurement.

    Having said that.

    Our perceptions are substantially influenced by what we see around us most of the time

    My own perceptions of how obese I was (and even on how thin I might have become) has been substantially influenced by my environment and my own mirror.

    It is common to have a lag between what one perceives and what others would perceive looking at the same image.

    It is also very easy to see things in pictures or videos that are different in real life.

    Recently there was a u-tube link to an absolutely healthy athletic individual pulling a "before"/ after transformation from slob to shredded in a few hours-in reverse, to show how it can be faked.

    First starting with a pumped from exercise and oiled to look shredded "after". Then eating sodium and carbs to retain water and bloating up via carbonation and milk (think ice cream float internally) to take the "before".

    He looked more at risk than you in the "before".... taken a few hours after the "after"

    The picture you showed, shows ME someone who should be thinking about making changes sooner as opposed to later!
  • Theoldguy1
    Theoldguy1 Posts: 2,495 Member
    heyfromnj wrote: »
    harper16 wrote: »
    Yes they are important, and you trying to lose weight to get back to a healthy bmi?

    I was just shocked to see that my waist being anything over 40 was a risk. I knew I gained weight but didn’t see it as a problem. I also never took the BMI thing very seriously because I always read that it was not very accurate.

    BMI will be a realistic measurement of overfat for 80-90% of the population. It can be a bit misleading if one works out on a regular basis with weights or has a manual labor job.

    Unless one is a very special snowflake, a waist size over 40, BMI in the higher end of overweight or obese and over fat on a measurement of bodyfat will all be directionally the same, pointing to too much fat.
  • MikePfirrman
    MikePfirrman Posts: 3,307 Member
    I've always read that your waist should be 50% of your height or less. And you measure it right around the belly button. I watch this number really close. I'm 5'10" as well and I always strive to stay at 35 inches or less there.

    I'm also 188 or 189 but I'm very muscular in my back, shoulders, lats and arms.

    It is one of the best measures you can use for your health. It's as important of a measurement to me as my "red line" weight.
  • heyfromnj
    heyfromnj Posts: 7 Member
    Theoldguy1 wrote: »
    heyfromnj wrote: »
    harper16 wrote: »
    Yes they are important, and you trying to lose weight to get back to a healthy bmi?

    I was just shocked to see that my waist being anything over 40 was a risk. I knew I gained weight but didn’t see it as a problem. I also never took the BMI thing very seriously because I always read that it was not very accurate.

    BMI will be a realistic measurement of overfat for 80-90% of the population. It can be a bit misleading if one works out on a regular basis with weights or has a manual labor job.

    Unless one is a very special snowflake, a waist size over 40, BMI in the higher end of overweight or obese and over fat on a measurement of bodyfat will all be directionally the same, pointing to too much fat.

    I was just confused by how my BMI is only slightly over what it should be but everything I read says that my waist size is much more than it should be. I know I gained weight but didn’t feel like I really needed to lose any.
  • heyfromnj
    heyfromnj Posts: 7 Member
    I've always read that your waist should be 50% of your height or less. And you measure it right around the belly button. I watch this number really close. I'm 5'10" as well and I always strive to stay at 35 inches or less there.

    I'm also 188 or 189 but I'm very muscular in my back, shoulders, lats and arms.

    It is one of the best measures you can use for your health. It's as important of a measurement to me as my "red line" weight.

    We’re about the same height, and about a year ago my waist was the same as yours and I felt like I was in great shape.

    But the waist to height calculator says that my waist to height is .61 now and says that I’m “very overweight” and I just don’t feel like I’m “very” overweight lol I just have kind of a beer belly. I’m only slightly overweight by BMI so the difference between the numbers is crazy

  • lgfrie
    lgfrie Posts: 1,449 Member
    Theoldguy1 wrote: »
    heyfromnj wrote: »
    harper16 wrote: »
    Yes they are important, and you trying to lose weight to get back to a healthy bmi?

    I was just shocked to see that my waist being anything over 40 was a risk. I knew I gained weight but didn’t see it as a problem. I also never took the BMI thing very seriously because I always read that it was not very accurate.

    BMI will be a realistic measurement of overfat for 80-90% of the population. It can be a bit misleading if one works out on a regular basis with weights or has a manual labor job.

    Unless one is a very special snowflake, a waist size over 40, BMI in the higher end of overweight or obese and over fat on a measurement of bodyfat will all be directionally the same, pointing to too much fat.

    Indeed I think the correlation is strong between men's waist = 40" and the lower end of the entry-level BMI Obese Class I category (BMI = 30-35), which makes sense - both variables point to being at the starting gate (on the way up) of dangerous obesity, and both point (on the way down) to getting back into healthy shape. In my case, I know from my past that my waist = 40" when my BMI = 32. It's my next stop on the weight loss train & I've long considered it a key landmark on the journey. I started at BMI = 46.7 / waist size 50, and am currently BMI = 35.1 / waist size 42. For me, BMI and abdominal girth seem fairly interchangeable. If your waist is 40" you're almost definitely BMI Class I obese or maybe a few pounds shy, and need to lose weight, that really being the key here.

  • PAV8888
    PAV8888 Posts: 14,240 Member
    Well. Especially since belly buttons are not always at the same spot for people, I was all happy to have found a prevalent protocol that measured waist circumference at the midpoint between the iliac crest and lowest rib.

    Apparently... it doesn't matter?!!!!! 🤷‍♂️

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17956544/
  • MikePfirrman
    MikePfirrman Posts: 3,307 Member
    VeryKatie wrote: »
    I've always read that your waist should be 50% of your height or less. And you measure it right around the belly button. I watch this number really close. I'm 5'10" as well and I always strive to stay at 35 inches or less there.

    I'm also 188 or 189 but I'm very muscular in my back, shoulders, lats and arms.

    It is one of the best measures you can use for your health. It's as important of a measurement to me as my "red line" weight.

    Personally, I can't measure at my belly button. Doing so is measuring my hips. I measure at the 0.5 inch gap I have between ribs and hips. I have been blessed with a very short waist and a low belly button. It works for some to measure at belly button though. I actually take 2 measurements... one at the gap and one at the widest part. But the widest part also encompasses bone, which I can't move... unless I want them wider in which case I could have more babies. They've gotten 2" wider since having my children.

    Another waist definition is halfway between belly button and sternum. Which for me is ribcage.

    Basically, the waist lands differently on different people.

    You're right, that's a little lower than you should. That is what they recommend. I think it's around the same for guys but very different for women.

    https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/245328#3
  • PAV8888
    PAV8888 Posts: 14,240 Member
    So @MikePfirrman you're advocating the same location that I was remembering (mid-point of iliac crest and lowest rib); but.... see my link above where they basically say it doesn't matter, which seems weird to me since on myself there were definitely times where the location would change my risk classification.
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 34,183 Member
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    So @MikePfirrman you're advocating the same location that I was remembering (mid-point of iliac crest and lowest rib); but.... see my link above where they basically say it doesn't matter, which seems weird to me since on myself there were definitely times where the location would change my risk classification.

    Difference between something being equivalent at the population level, vs. at the individual level, probably? (i.e., false positives/false negatives balance out, law of large numbers, blah blah blah.)