Dress Size vs. Scale Weight?

No Snacks, no sweets, no seconds. Except on Days that start with S. Too simple for you? Simple is why it works. Look here for questions, introductions, support, success stories.

Moderators: Soprano, automatedeating

Post Reply
User avatar
BrightAngel
Posts: 2093
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 4:22 pm
Location: Central California
Contact:

Dress Size vs. Scale Weight?

Post by BrightAngel » Wed May 14, 2008 2:52 pm

reinhard wrote: "I think there are two legitimate camps of no-essers:
minimal weighers (once a month or so) and scientific weighers.

I'm a minimal weigher myself,
and I think that's a good strategy for many, if not most people.
But I don't want the scientific weighers to feel like second class citizens,
or discourage people for whom scientific, daily weighing
tracking a moving average
might be the only personally realistic option."

Reinhard
I am a "scientific weigher",
and the tool with which I measure my weight-loss success is the scale.
However, I find that amoung dieters in general there is much talk
about dress size or clothing size as an indicater of successful weight loss.

One thing to bear in mind when dress size is used as a measure of success,
is that there is no state or federal regulation of dress size,
and clothing manufactors are free to use their own flexible standards.

In order to successfully market clothing, manufactors sort of stick together in a general way on sizing.
But, as a result of this, dress sizes will vary slightly from store to store,
for example, what is a size 6 in the majority of stores is the same as a size 0 in Chicos.
As a general rule, I've found clothing in the more expensive stores
are a bit roomier than clothing labeled the same size in the cheaper stores.

The past 30 years has brought a great deal of change overall in sizing labels.
I have fond memories of fitting into certain sizes at certain weights and ages,
but my recollections of those past sizes do not match the actuality of current sizes.

As an example of this: I now wear a size 6, both top and bottom.
This is the number I believe is my current size,
because no matter where I shop, I can fit into a size 6...and sometimes smaller.

Objectively speaking, what is a size 6?
  • Using Penny's catalogue sizing chart as a general measure,
    Size 6 is:
    • Bust: 34 -- 34 1/2
      Waist: 26 -- 26 1/2
      Hips: 36 1/2 -- 37
Now these also happen to be my current measurements,
so at present, I take that sizing to be generally correct.

However, in order to compare that with my past memories,
I need to see what the sizing measurements were when I was younger.
I can find that out by looking at sewing patterns.
Simplicity, McCalls, Butterick were around in my youth, and when I was a younger adult.
Unlike clothing manufactor's, those general sizing charts have not changed.
  • Using McCalls sewing pattern sizing chart as a general measure,
    Size 6 is:
    • Bust: 30 1/2
      Waist: 23
      Hips: 32 1/2
    Size 12 is:
    • Bust: 34
      Waist: 26 1/2
      Hips: 36
This clearly demonstrates the big shift in clothing sizes
that has taken place gradually during the past 20 to 40 years.
Our present size 6 is the same as the past size 12.

Using the same charts, further size differences are:
  • Current store size:
    Size 12 is:
    • Bust: 37 1/2 -- 38 1/2
      Waist: 29 1/2 -- 30 1/2
      Hips: 40 -- 41
    Sewing Pattern size:
    Size 16 is:
    • Bust: 38
      Waist: 30
      Hips: 40
Our present size 12 is the same as the past size 16.
  • Current store size:
    Size 14 is:
    • Bust: 39 -- 40
      Waist: 31 -- 32
      Hips: 41 1/2 -- 42 1/2
    Sewing Pattern size:
    Size 18 is:
    • Bust: 40
      Waist: 32
      Hips: 42
Our present size 14 is the same as the past size 18.

I find this information to be important and valuable because it brings weight-loss Reality into focus.
I remember my high-school weight,
and when I weigh now I can accurately compare past and present.
BUT, I also remember my high-school size,
but the past and present comparison is totally inaccurate.
BrightAngel - (Dr. Collins)
See: DietHobby. com

User avatar
Blondie
Posts: 309
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2005 6:36 pm

Post by Blondie » Wed May 14, 2008 3:14 pm

I find this phenomenon totally hysterical.

Depending on the store, at my present weight I am usually a 4-6, which I think is kind of low. I remember being smaller and wearing an 8. I actually have a suit that is a size 2. Come on. I'm 5'4" and around 130-something right now. Ridiculous.
What Navin said.

Buffalo Gal
Posts: 99
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 1:11 pm

Post by Buffalo Gal » Wed May 14, 2008 3:20 pm

Or you can try on a piece of clothing you already own. If it fits better chances are you have lost weight!

I can throw my jeans in the dryer now and they fit. I can hook my bra on the third hook instead of the second without cutting off blood supply. I can tuck in a t-shirt that I used to leave out.

This morning I noticed I was sitting with my feet flat on the floor of the bus. My feet where not turned out (if you have a lot of weight to lose like I do you know what I mean).

So there are many ways to gauge how you are doing including sleep patterns, breathing, energy levels and so on. Sizing on a garment is the last tool I would use to judge weight loss.

Buffalo Gal
If you want the rainbow, you gotta put up with the rain.

camburger
Posts: 24
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 3:08 pm
Location: Louisiana

Post by camburger » Wed May 14, 2008 4:01 pm

I've heard that Marilyn Monroe was a size 16 back in the day, but in all actuality she was probably smaller than today's size 12. Now that I think of it, did a size zero even exist back then? I don't think size changes have a big correlation with the growing waistline of America, but more a marketing ploy to make women feel better about themselves so they'll buy more clothes.

User avatar
NoelFigart
Posts: 1639
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 1:23 pm
Location: Lebanon, NH
Contact:

Post by NoelFigart » Wed May 14, 2008 4:30 pm

It's called vanity sizing. The clothing industry has been doing it since the 1970s.

If you were a size eight back in the day, take your measurements and then look on the back of a sewing pattern envelope. That'll be a far, far more accurate comparison, as the sewing pattern industry does not use vanity sizing.

BrightAngel is absolutely right on this!

MissyMoo
Posts: 19
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 2:41 pm

Post by MissyMoo » Wed May 14, 2008 4:35 pm

I always assumed that when people spoke of using clothing size as a gauge for their weight loss, they meant in terms of any changes in how the clothes they already own fit them. I know that there are things in my closet that I cannot possible squeeze into right now. If in several months (or years!) I can fit into them, I can be sure that I have decreased in size. Using a store's sizing is completely unreliable, as others have already pointed out.

I also think it makes more sense to speak in terms of reducing one's body size (not clothing size) rather than weight. As another thread pointed out, two people of identical height can weigh the same, while one is much "fatter" (i.e. has more body fat) than the other.

The number on the scale is not a very good reflection of body composition, except where relatively large numbers are concerned. (If you weigh 500 pounds, you can pretty much rely on that number to tell you you're carrying too much fat!). When I was working out, I looked thin at 130. When I wasn't working out, I didn't really look thin unless I was about 116. (I'm 5'2").

Just my two cents. :wink:

User avatar
fkwan
Posts: 399
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 7:04 pm
Location: middle of nowhere, Texas

Post by fkwan » Wed May 14, 2008 4:35 pm

30-24-34, size 6. That's a size 4 top and a size 6 bottom. :)

However, I wear elastic-waist or drawstring pants which feel pretty good on me in a range of weights/sizes (some pairs are old size 8s, I'm sure there's a 4 in there somewhere). If they ever don't feel good, I'll know it's time to lose weight.

Gym/sports bras vary wildly even in same brand and style. I wear Champion, size M. Most of them stretch into something that might as well not even be on at all, but I have two that feel as if I am being wrapped in mummy bandages. Currently these two do not hurt at all.... :D

f
One must know his limitations. -- John Milius
Beginning weight: 115
Currently: Haven't a clue

flipturn
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 10:05 pm
Location: Cincinnati

Post by flipturn » Wed May 14, 2008 4:41 pm

Yes, vanity sizing is nothing new. To have a truly meaningful no-scale indication of your weight journey, you have to use clothing, etc., that you already own. When my watch strap no longer leaves indentation marks on my wrist, I know that I am headed in the right direction!

cornelia
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 4:50 pm
Location: El Dorado, Kansas

Post by cornelia » Wed May 14, 2008 8:14 pm

Anyone who can wear a 4 or a 6 shouldn't be overly worried about their weight. Not only do I not want to count calories or points, I don't want to count ounces. This is such a wonderful way to eat. I don't want to over think any of it. When you lose weight, everything you own gets loose. Watch bands, rings, shoes, waist bands, etc. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to be able to judge slow, steady progress.

User avatar
BrightAngel
Posts: 2093
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 4:22 pm
Location: Central California
Contact:

Post by BrightAngel » Wed May 14, 2008 9:34 pm

cornelia wrote:Anyone who can wear a 4 or a 6 shouldn't be overly worried about their weight.
I have to say:
That is SO WRONG :!:

For people like me, who are working to maintain a very large weight loss,
it is extremely important to closely moniter body size and weight.
Perhaps you will begin to understand that importance when I tell you that I have
re-gained 100+ lb losses three separate times in my life.

I have learned from personal experience, that
After a formerly fat person becomes small,
it takes an enormous amount of effort to stay small.
BrightAngel - (Dr. Collins)
See: DietHobby. com

User avatar
fkwan
Posts: 399
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 7:04 pm
Location: middle of nowhere, Texas

Post by fkwan » Wed May 14, 2008 10:01 pm

BrightAngel wrote:
cornelia wrote:Anyone who can wear a 4 or a 6 shouldn't be overly worried about their weight.
I have to say:
That is SO WRONG :!:

For people like me, who are working to maintain a very large weight loss,
it is extremely important to closely moniter body size and weight.
Perhaps you will begin to understand that importance when I tell you that I have
re-gained 100+ lb losses three separate times in my life.

I have learned from personal experience, that
After a formerly fat person becomes small,
it takes an enormous amount of effort to stay small.
Absolutely. That's why No S is so great. Just because one is small doesn't mean that one won't fall off the wagon again. If the habits don't remain moderate the weight will be regained. I've noticed a huge difference in my arthritis just losing 8 pounds!

f
One must know his limitations. -- John Milius
Beginning weight: 115
Currently: Haven't a clue

jules
Posts: 88
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 5:46 am

Post by jules » Wed May 14, 2008 10:02 pm

I think Cornelia and BrightAngel might both be right.

I think key in Cornelia's phrase was overly worried. However, as BrightAngel points out, individual circumstances do matter -- and some people have to be constantly vigilant. Personally, I think there's a big difference between worry and vigilance but maybe that's just me. :D

While it might just be a matter of semantics, I still think it's a very important distinction. Vigilance sounds like watchfulness, readiness, and preparedness. Worry sounds fretful, stressful, even neurotic. The former sounds more like moderation to me while the latter sounds a bit more extreme.

What BrightAngel has quite consistently described about her practice seems to me to be vigilance. She knows the personal consequences of leaving vigilance behind. For some, her vigilance may sound like it's extreme -- she weighs everyday and counts calories -- but her individual circumstances are different from many on the forums. It's what she does to remain watchful, ready, and prepared.

jules

User avatar
Mavilu
Posts: 319
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: California

Post by Mavilu » Wed May 14, 2008 10:40 pm

Well, of course sizes vary and there's vanity sizing, however, generally you do know your personal sizes.
Measuring weight-loss success isn't about going to a store you've never been before and going OMG now I fit on a smaller size, I must have lost weight!!, it is about that range of sizes (generally two or three) from brands you regularly buy (since most people tend to stick to a handful of brands) and most every time from those clothes you already have that you used to fit into, but not anymore and now again.
When it is this way varying sizes from company to company and vanity sizing are irrelevant.
You do know your sizes, where they come from and what do they mean to you in relation to where your body is right now, was and want it to be in the future.

All my clothes are right now 10-12, I'm a large in some and a medium in others, all my small-mediums and most of my 6-8 fit unflateringly tight and in the back of the closet, I'll know I lost signifcant weight when I'll fit into those again.

Now, if you are comparing your size to someone else's, well, yes, it becomes problematic, but most adults just want to fit back into their old jeans as opposed to compete with their cousin or what have you.

cornelia
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 4:50 pm
Location: El Dorado, Kansas

Post by cornelia » Thu May 15, 2008 6:27 am

BrightAngel: I absolutely understand what you are saying and I think you are our poster child for weight loss. I wish I had your determination and will power. At my age some of the spunk I had 20 years ago is just not there anymore. I would like to know at what point in your weight loss you started No S.

User avatar
BrightAngel
Posts: 2093
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 4:22 pm
Location: Central California
Contact:

Post by BrightAngel » Thu May 15, 2008 1:16 pm

cornelia wrote:BrightAngel:
I would like to know at what point in your weight loss you started No S.
Cornelia,

I would love to tell you that No S is the way I lost my weight,
but I can't honestly do that.

Basically I ate what I wanted (within a 1000 to 1200 calorie limit) while counting calories,
using a food journeling program called Diet Power
where I logged in all of my food every day, and
Diet Power told me how many calories it was and stored them for me.
Because I've been doing that for about 3 1/2 years,
I now have access to tons of personal information about myself, my weight, and my eating habits,
which help give me insight.

My daily use of the Diet Power software has become an enjoyable Habit for me,
I don't find it a hassle, and I intend to continue using it forever.
However Diet Power isn't a diet or food plan, just a way to record food.
I've experimented with many different diets,
looking for a food plan that I can live with long term.

I discovered No S recently through that Woman's Day article,
and have only been working on it for the past month.
My goal is maintenance of my weight-loss.
I am now in my 28th month of working to do that,
and it HAS been work.
I keep looking for a better way for me to handle food,
and I hope No S is the answer.

If you go to my check-in and read my entries, you'll get a good idea of my progress with No S.
BrightAngel - (Dr. Collins)
See: DietHobby. com

Post Reply