[quote]Chris Shugart wrote:
So I bought a tape measure last night so I could take my measurements today. I didn’t do much with it last night, but I did try and measure my waist.
My results - wtf? The pants I own range from 34" to 36" waists. It obviously depends on the brand. But the 34s that I wear I fit comfortably, not like I’m dying wearing them. When I buy 36’s, they usually fit a little big, and the reason I buy them is because I don’t fit that brand’s 34s, and would probably need a 35, but that size isn’t offered.
Nonetheless, using the fabric measure, I could NOT get a waist measurement other than 39-40". It didn’t mattered if I measured around my belly button, or where I wear my pants (lower than that). How the hell does that work?
Well, one of the most common mistakes I see is men who think they’re lean and healthy just because they wear size 34 or whatever. In truth, their true belly/waist size is 40+, and that puts them in the danger zone when it comes to several disorders and diseases.
Sometimes it’s because they store their fat very high. Sub-abdominal or Syndrome-X type fat (heart attack fat) is often stored high and, as the name implies, under the abs. This creates that hard, pregnant looking belly. BUT, jean size seldom increases with that type of fat storage. The result: guys with a size 32 jean who look like they’re about to deliver twins… with the breastfeeding-ready boobs to match.
Now, subcutaneous fat, the fat stored right beneath the skin, can often be mushed down easily by your pants, so denim will flatten it out while a tape measure won’t, giving you a larger (but truer) measurement.
In the end, the tape measure is better and more accurate. So as long as you’re consistent with measuring, it’s the best way to monitor fat loss. I’ll take a tape measure over a scale any day, even though those waist measurements are painful to see at first.
I wouldn’t say that if you’re 40 plus, that you are in the danger zone for disease and disorders. There are plenty of NFL lineman who are in the sub 300 pound range who are more than likely in the 40 plus pant size category who are far from being fat. You have to take into account height, body type, muscle mass, etc. I get your point and for more people that is a large size. I mean for example i’m 6-8 and when I go to the doctors i’m morbidly obese on all their charts and i’m a 295 with bodyfat in the upper teens. I see if you’re 5-6 with a 40 inch waist that means a lot different than someone who is 6-8 or 6-10. I have a friend who is a littler taller than me who wears like a 44 inch waist and he’s a lanky kind of dude who is a minor league baseball pitcher. I wouldn’t say he’s unhealthy by any means.