How do you measure up?

[figbat]

Those numbers are remarkably and depressingly high for the population across all age groups :-\ Unsurprisingly, 'here' seems an awful lot trimmer!
I've not changed in dimensions since I was twenty: 1.75m / 72cm, or 5'9" / 28"; now 61, and 68kg

I was surprised that the lowest available option was 38.5”! On a forum where most are active participants in a form of exercise.

32” here, and that is with a little “middle-age spread”. Waist size is also not a great metric for any kind of proxy for fitness, weight or other health attribute.

 

[Sea of vapours]

I was surprised that the lowest available option was 38.5”! On a forum where most are active participants in a form of exercise.

They're the same size brackets as the survey being quoted to allow easy comparison.

Whilst waist size in absolute terms is not a great measure, it's often claimed that the ratio of chest to waist *is* a very good measure, and in many ways superior to the over-used BMI. People who are 'athletic' - 100m sprinters famously - tend to come up as verging on obese using BMI, but look 'very fit' when using waist to chest ratio. It's all contextual of course. Interpretation is the key on all these single number metrics.

 

[cyberknight]

bmi is ridiculous as i come in at 23.4 which is borderline overweight , im not built like the average cyclist though !
im the guy in the old velo moira kit ....

 

[Punkawallah]

I was surprised that the lowest available option was 38.5”! On a forum where most are active participants in a form of exercise.

32” here, and that is with a little “middle-age spread”. Waist size is also not a great metric for any kind of proxy for fitness, weight or other health attribute.

The current measure of ‘health’ is if your waist is more than half your height, you are too fat. Over 50% get 10% extra height because they are, naturally, more rounded people. Makes more sense than BMI, anyway.

 

[Punkawallah]

bmi is ridiculous as i come in at 23.4 which is borderline overweight , im not built like the average cyclist though !
im the guy in the old velo moira kit ....

View attachment 784779

My brother and I both worked out our BMI one Sunday after seeing it in the News of the World. He was an aspiring cyclist, and ‘overweight’, I was swimming in a county competition, and ‘obese’. We figured we were not fat, just ‘under-height’.

 

[figbat]

The current measure of ‘health’ is if your waist is more than half your height, you are too fat. Over 50% get 10% extra height because they are, naturally, more rounded people. Makes more sense than BMI, anyway.

This doesn’t account for those with a ‘narrow’ waist with a gut hanging over it.

 

[tyred]

The current measure of ‘health’ is if your waist is more than half your height, you are too fat. Over 50% get 10% extra height because they are, naturally, more rounded people. Makes more sense than BMI, anyway.

Put simply, I need to grow about 7" taller...

 

[raleighnut]

This doesn’t account for those with a ‘narrow’ waist with a gut hanging over it.

A la Clarkson

 

[postman]

Put simply, I need to grow about 7"

I don't think i would bother about cycling,i would go in to films.

 

[Punkawallah]

This doesn’t account for those with a ‘narrow’ waist with a gut hanging over it.

The ‘waist’ is typically just above the navel?

 

[Drago]

11 inches.

Oh, wrong thread!

 

[Gunk]

This doesn’t account for those with a ‘narrow’ waist with a gut hanging over it.

That’s me!

 

[Drago]

36 waist, 54 chest. As long as the latter is am good bit bigger than the former thennim happy enough.

 

[lazybloke]

81cm, and that's with a slight belly that I've been developing since i hit my 50s.
Actually, have lost a bit of weight recently, can pull down my jeans without unbuttoning them. Would like to restore a 30 inch waist...

 

[Gwylan]

78, Wednesday
1,76m
87+ cm waist
80.5 kg

I have not been tall enough for my weight for a few years now.