Weight Loss Support - Frame...and also hunger question.




View Full Version : Frame...and also hunger question.


mlgibson
07-11-2011, 10:35 PM
I've heard before that your wrist can tell you if you have a large, medium, or small frame. And that this can help guide you into what is your ideal weight, and can also tell you more about your body type.

Any truth to this?

My right wrist is a hair under 6 inches, and I'm 5'7". I'm also quite busty.

My other question...I didn't want to post two seperate threads in case that bothers someone...

I only had 911 calories today, haven't eaten dinner yet. And ate 1,083 yesterday. Before on diets I fought cravings...now I find myself rarely hungry. Should I make myself eat something? Or is it okay to be that low for a couple days? Cause on other days my calories will be 1,200-1,400. I don't want to enter starvation mode.


envelope
07-11-2011, 10:48 PM
My wrist are just over 5.5 inches. I have been told all of my life that I am larger framed. Would be interested to see statistics on what is considered large, mdm, small framed.

I can only speak for myself here...If I found myself 1 day under 1200, I might not eat anything else. If it happened again, I would eat a little more, unless I was feeling under the weather.

TooManyDimples
07-11-2011, 10:50 PM
No such thing as starvation mode. It's not going to hurt you if you have a couple days that low in calories, you just don't want to make it a habit.

As far as the wrist thing, I tend to think there is something to that. I have a large frame, even without the wrist test I know it for a fact by the size of my rib cage. At my height with a large frame my healthy weight range is 134-151. For a small frame it would be 114-127. That's a pretty big difference.

Of course you have to realize that all those charts and calculators aren't perfect. Everyone is different and just because I get those numbers doesn't mean I have to fit perfectly into that label in order to be healthy and happy. All those things are just guidelines to me. Take and leave what you want.


mlgibson
07-11-2011, 10:51 PM
My wrist are just over 5.5 inches. I have been told all of my life that I am larger framed. Would be interested to see statistics on what is considered large, mdm, small framed.

I can only speak for myself here...If I found myself 1 day under 1200, I might not eat anything else. If it happened again, I would eat a little more, unless I was feeling under the weather.

Seeing the statistics would be interesting...I have never really heard anything on it aside from that they exist...

fitness4life
07-11-2011, 11:22 PM
How do you measure one's "frame"? Good question!!There is a difference for sure.

Anyone??

Angie
07-11-2011, 11:39 PM
Here's what I found when I Googled it...

Determining frame size:
To determine the body frame size, measure the wrist with a tape measure and use the following chart to determine whether the person is small, medium, or large boned.

Women:

height under 5'2"
small = wrist size less than 5.5"
medium = wrist size 5.5" to 5.75"
large = wrist size over 5.75"

height 5'2" to 5' 5"
small = wrist size less than 6"
medium = wrist size 6" to 6.25"
large = wrist size over 6.25"

height over 5' 5"
small = wrist size less than 6.25"
medium = wrist size 6.25" to 6.5"
large = wrist size over 6.5"

Men:

height over 5' 5"
small = wrist size 5.5" to 6.5"
medium = wrist size 6.5" to 7.5"
large = wrist size over 7.5"

xty
07-12-2011, 12:23 AM
Ive seen frame size calculated in 2 ways. One is via wrist size, as you note. An easy guide without a tape measure:
Grip your wrist using your thumb and index finger.
If your finger and thumb don't touch you are a LARGE frame.
If your finger and thumb just touch you are a MEDIUM frame.
If your finger and thumb overlap you are a SMALL frame.

Ive also seen it calculated based on the distance of the two bones in your elbow.

Here is an online calc that factors in both methods above + gender + height.
http://www.healthstatus.com/calculate/fsz

re: starvation mode. If you arent hungry and have had ~1K, you are fine to not eat anything else. If you notice 2 days of low cal leads to midnight snacking or overconsumption the next day, be careful in the future.

berryblondeboys
07-12-2011, 12:28 AM
That's what I've found too for wrist sizes. For the record, my wrist is 7 1/8 and I KNOW I have a large frame. There's also a way to measure your elbow joint. Here's the link. It's a bit trickier to get this. I use a compass from school to get mine (helps to have kids who have these things). In that, I get around 3", so again, large frame.

http://www.fitnessandfreebies.com/fitness/bodyframe.html

MariaMaria
07-12-2011, 12:40 AM
Except fatter people have bigger wrists-- that's fat, not bone. And finger length isn't correlated to frame size (the do your fingers touch) AFAIK.

berryblondeboys
07-12-2011, 12:43 AM
Except fatter people have bigger wrists-- that's fat, not bone. And finger length isn't correlated to frame size (the do your fingers touch) AFAIK.

Nope, not true. There is very little fat around the wrist (they've done scans to verify this in research) and same with the elbow bones (we're not talking about the fleshy parts here, but the actual BONE ends).

alaskanlaughter
07-12-2011, 01:04 AM
i have very little fat on my wrists....my fingers just barely dont touch which seems to confirm what i have always thought, that i have a larger frame...while im over 200 pounds, i honestly dont think I LOOK LIKE i weigh that much...ive had honest ppl peg me at 180-190 before and once at 170 and even ive had doctors surprised at my weight on their scale and said i dont look like that....maybe i just have heavy bones LOL!

dZsmalls
07-12-2011, 01:39 AM
lol I'm at 7 3/4 inches, but I already knew I had a large frame.

But the wrist thing does have it's limitations, because your wrist does shrink a bit with major weight loss. I had a problem with my watches no longer fitting without having links removed. I think the measurement is a pretty good estimate, but I'm sure that obese people have measurements that are slightly skewed upward.

Esofia
07-12-2011, 05:55 AM
I definitely put weight on my wrists, and I only ended up about 15lb overweight and 35lb over my ideal weight. At my heaviest, I can't get my thumb and middle finger to touch. At my lightest, I can get my thumb and little finger to touch. That's quite a difference.

It may also be worth pointing out that I don't have long fingers. My palm is quite a bit longer than my middle finger.

According to both of those tests, I have a medium to large frame. This is news to me, considering how petite I've always been!

zoodoo613
07-12-2011, 07:52 AM
I do love an online test. But, like all tests, I don't get consistant results. I think I'm large framed. By the measurement guideline, I'm large framed. I fit into the shortest category, but my wrists are still big by the tallest. But my thumb and finger can just barely touch, which would indicate I'm medium. But this just seems like an absurd measure. My thumb and finger touch around my wrist because I have big hands too. And they're flexible. My wrist and hand girth (I guess this is a measure used for gloves) are the same as my 6'1" husbands. Admittedly he's small framed, but still. My elbow width says I'm large...I think. I feel like I'd need calipers to actually get a good measure.

Oh shoot! I just noticed the part about indext finger. I'm not even close. It's my thumb and middle finger that reach. OK, that settles it, I'm large framed. :D

cantgetenoughchoc
07-12-2011, 08:46 AM
Hmm, I'd quite confidently say I'm small framed, or at the most medium framed. I'm definitely not large framed. Yet my index finger and thumb are no where near touching. But I do have small hands. But surely they've considered this when making the test?
I might find a tape measure and see what that says...

myfishpajamas
07-12-2011, 09:08 AM
Hmm...well, my wrists are really small, but I have always been busty and also had large hips, thighs, and a large butt. So, even if my "frame" is small (which it would be according to those wrist charts), I think 150 is about as good as it is going to get for me because of all of my assets. Like I think I will be happy and feel good about myself at 150 even if I'm "supposed" to be 115-120 or whatever. Online BMI calculators also tell me I'm supposed to weigh between 115 and 135, but that's just based on age and height and such. When trying to calculate my goal weight, I based it on what I know about my body, and I know, for example, that I will always be a C cup or bigger no matter how much I weigh, so I have to understand that part of my goal weight should include that.

April Snow
07-12-2011, 09:33 AM
Like a couple of other have said, my wrists do get smaller when I lose weight (going by watches and bracelets). Right now, my wrists are 6.5 which isn't that big for my height but I can't wrap my fingers around them because I have short fingers.

I probably average out to medium frame because parts of me like my wrists and ankles are not that big but I do have broad shoulders and a broad rib cage.

zoodoo613
07-12-2011, 09:54 AM
Like a couple of other have said, my wrists do get smaller when I lose weight (going by watches and bracelets). Right now, my wrists are 6.5 which isn't that big for my height but I can't wrap my fingers around them because I have short fingers.

I probably average out to medium frame because parts of me like my wrists and ankles are not that big but I do have broad shoulders and a broad rib cage.

I was trying info on frame size based on shoulders and rib cage, but didn't have much success. I was always under the impression that I had broad shoulders, because my mom, who has very narrow shoulders, always told me so. I now realize I should take almost everything my mom has ever said with a grain of salt, and wonder where my shoulders stack up. And I don't think my rib cage is all that broad, but it is fairly deep.

April Snow
07-12-2011, 10:06 AM
zoodoo -

this is a personal question so feel free not to answer! lol! But what band size bra do you wear? I'm hovering in between a 42 and 44 at my current weight. Even when I lost over 40 lbs a couple of years ago (down to low 220s), that had me in a 42. I think I'll need to get down to about where you are to be down to a 40. So I think that puts my rib cage on the broader side, but I am also including deepness too, of course.

April Snow
07-12-2011, 10:09 AM
I forgot to answer the hunger question. Personally, I do not force myself to eat when I'm not hungry but I do start to feel very tired when my calories get too low. Since I'm on a very low carb plan, the hunger suppression can be very strong. So I try to make slight tweaks of not eating more often, but maybe having a little bit extra when I do eat, like an extra ounce or two of chicken, etc. It is not so much that I feel stuffed when I eat, and it's easier for me than trying to add in an extra snack. That gets my calories back up to a level that I feel good and energetic on.

myfishpajamas
07-12-2011, 10:29 AM
zoodoo -

this is a personal question so feel free not to answer! lol! But what band size bra do you wear? I'm hovering in between a 42 and 44 at my current weight. Even when I lost over 40 lbs a couple of years ago (down to low 220s), that had me in a 42. I think I'll need to get down to about where you are to be down to a 40. So I think that puts my rib cage on the broader side, but I am also including deepness too, of course.

I just wanted to put my two cents in - I weigh more than you but only wear a 40 band size in my bra, so I'm thinking you might have a broader rib cage? A 40 is a good band size for me.

krampus
07-12-2011, 10:38 AM
I'm super small framed, no question - I'm about 130 and almost 5'5 and I can't find any bones anywhere without pushing and prodding hard. The space between my front hip bones is about 9 inches and I have narrow shoulders and wear a size 6 shoe. It's a drag because medium/large framed people at my height and weight have bangin' beach bodies, but I know I'd have to be 110 or less to look the same.

As for hunger, I'd say trust your instinct for now if you don't have a history with eating disorders or anything and are a fairly "healthy" and "normal" eater.

berryblondeboys
07-12-2011, 10:43 AM
zoodoo -

this is a personal question so feel free not to answer! lol! But what band size bra do you wear? I'm hovering in between a 42 and 44 at my current weight. Even when I lost over 40 lbs a couple of years ago (down to low 220s), that had me in a 42. I think I'll need to get down to about where you are to be down to a 40. So I think that puts my rib cage on the broader side, but I am also including deepness too, of course.

Bra band size is so individual. I prefer to have my bra band tighter than wwhat is recommended for bra sizing sites because having it tighter there takes the weight off the shoulders (which I am very sensitive too). My mother in law, on the other hand, likes her bra bans loose. She has a 31" rib cage, but buys a 36" band. I have a 36.25" rib cage, and buy a 38" band.

So, first thing you shoudl do is measure your rib cage - level all the way around, directly under your breasts. That will give your actual rib cage size.

And, Ihave a large rib cage (deep) and almost no fat left around there. At my biggest, (275 lbs) I wore a 40" band. I never gained much in my back.

April Snow
07-12-2011, 10:45 AM
I just wanted to put my two cents in - I weigh more than you but only wear a 40 band size in my bra, so I'm thinking you might have a broader rib cage? A 40 is a good band size for me.

Yes, I do think I have a broad rib cage, and it's also that I carry more weight in the upper half of my body. I'm (relatively!) small on the bottom - my waist is big but my hips are small so as long as there is some give in the waist, I can wear XL or even a few pairs of L pants and shorts.

envelope
07-12-2011, 10:59 AM
My wrist are just over 5.5 inches. I have been told all of my life that I am larger framed. Would be interested to see statistics on what is considered large, mdm, small framed.

I can only speak for myself here...If I found myself 1 day under 1200, I might not eat anything else. If it happened again, I would eat a little more, unless I was feeling under the weather.

This is hillarious!!! I was looking at these charts totally confused. :?: I could not figure out why my whole life I had been told I was large frame (even when I was thin) when the charts show I am small framed. :dunno: I just discovered that when using my husbands tape measurer that the side I was using measures 10th of a foot. My wrist is not just over 5.5 inches, it is just over 5.5 tenths of a foot. Flip the tape measurer over and I got 6 3/4 of an inch.

berryblondeboys
07-12-2011, 11:07 AM
This is hillarious!!! I was looking at these charts totally confused. :?: I could not figure out why my whole life I had been told I was large frame (even when I was thin) when the charts show I am small framed. :dunno: I just discovered that when using my husbands tape measurer that the side I was using measures 10th of a foot. My wrist is not just over 5.5 inches, it is just over 5.5 tenths of a foot. Flip the tape measurer over and I got 6 3/4 of an inch.

Is that a metal tape measure? if so, better to use a string to measure around your wrist and then measure that against the metal tape measure or a ruler. You really need a thin fabric tape measure to get an accurate enough measurement (the thinner the better as it gets JUST the wrist bones and not the fleshy stuff around it).

envelope
07-12-2011, 11:29 AM
berryblonde - it is a lightly coated fabric tape measurer made to measure fiber glass. :)

zoodoo613
07-12-2011, 11:40 AM
zoodoo -

this is a personal question so feel free not to answer! lol! But what band size bra do you wear? I'm hovering in between a 42 and 44 at my current weight. Even when I lost over 40 lbs a couple of years ago (down to low 220s), that had me in a 42. I think I'll need to get down to about where you are to be down to a 40. So I think that puts my rib cage on the broader side, but I am also including deepness too, of course.

Ooh, I love seeing people's responses!

Right now my ribcage below my breasts is about 35.5. I have, and wear, bras size 36DD, 38D, and 40D. One of the 38Ds is actually the tightest of them. My chest include bust, while wearing a bra, is 42-43. Charts would have me wearing a much bigger cup size, but they always seem huge. Maybe my breasts are short just like me. :D

April Snow, I should add that you're WAY taller than I am, so you comparisons are going to be skewed.

ETA again. April Snow, my build is the opposite of yours. I used to consider myself hourglass, but now I wonder if I'm pear. My waist and stomach are comparatively small, but my hips, thighs, butt are big.

berryblondeboys
07-12-2011, 11:44 AM
berryblonde - it is a lightly coated fabric tape measurer made to measure fiber glass. :)

Lol OK, didn't even know there was such a thing! Cool - learned something new!

zoodoo613
07-12-2011, 12:11 PM
Lol OK, didn't even know there was such a thing! Cool - learned something new!

I'm a land surveyor and I'm used to what we called a "cloth tape" when I was in the field, 100' on a reel. We use tenths of feet (hundredths, actually) as standard, and that's what I thought of. Funny how we all jump to our own images.

runningfromfat
07-12-2011, 01:22 PM
I've always been somewhat confused by the whole frame thing. I have small hands/feet/wrists and according to my wrist size I fight squarely in the "small" frame category. However, my fingers are nowhere near touching around my wrist because my hands are so small... I also have a smallish ribcage (around 32.5-33" at the moment and I'm guessing it'll easily get close to 30" by the time I'm done losing weight).

However, I have very broad shoulders too, which doesn't seem to quite match. But I wonder if that is more to do with lifting then my actual frame? I've always been pretty muscular too and at my lowest (140) I never felt remotely fat. However, for my frame size it says I should be more in the range of 121 - 125 lbs, which seems really, really small to me! Looking back at pictures from that time there's no way in the world that I'd say I would've still needed to lose another 20lbs!! :dizzy:

ETA: One thing that's strange, though, is that even though I'm still 47 lbs above my goal, I can already feel my ribs/hip bones poking through. I still have plenty of weight that's hanging around my lower belly/thights/upper arms but it's crazy already feeling those bones!

berryblondeboys
07-12-2011, 03:03 PM
I've always been somewhat confused by the whole frame thing. I have small hands/feet/wrists and according to my wrist size I fight squarely in the "small" frame category. However, my fingers are nowhere near touching around my wrist because my hands are so small... I also have a smallish ribcage (around 32.5-33" at the moment and I'm guessing it'll easily get close to 30" by the time I'm done losing weight).

However, I have very broad shoulders too, which doesn't seem to quite match. But I wonder if that is more to do with lifting then my actual frame? I've always been pretty muscular too and at my lowest (140) I never felt remotely fat. However, for my frame size it says I should be more in the range of 121 - 125 lbs, which seems really, really small to me! Looking back at pictures from that time there's no way in the world that I'd say I would've still needed to lose another 20lbs!! :dizzy:

ETA: One thing that's strange, though, is that even though I'm still 47 lbs above my goal, I can already feel my ribs/hip bones poking through. I still have plenty of weight that's hanging around my lower belly/thights/upper arms but it's crazy already feeling those bones!

Now I am large framed by whatever measure you use and I weigh 197 and you can feel my individual ribs and hip bones without having to search for them - run your hand across my back and you'll feel them. Same with my chest. However, I still have a lot of blubber in the gut, upper arms and thighs.

BeachBreeze2010
07-12-2011, 03:50 PM
I am 5'1" and pear shaped. At 187 lbs today I am a size 16 to 18 pant and a size Medium shirt. I wear a size 38D bra on the tightest hook and it's a bit loose. I am probably a 36C. My wrist is exactly 5.5" and my fingers just meet (I have very small hands - I wear a size 5 ring). I have proportionally shorter arms and legs and a longer torso. By all of that, I would say that I should be on the lower side of the weight range for me which is about 110lbs. (The outlier has always been that I wear a size 9 shoe)

But, I build muscle really easily and have always looked like I have a larger build because of it. I'm sure the extra muscle on my legs makes me look larger built as well. If I lean out and keep lifting, I think 125lbs will put in a size 2 or 4 pants and small to extra small shirt. It would be ridiculous to go lower than that on the scale. I may decide I am done when I reach 135. I would be a size 6 or so.

I am always amused that some people consider themselves at goal weight or close to it when they are under 200lbs. I am still morbidly obese at that weight. We all are really so different.

As for the hunger question: I have been averaging about 1000 to 1200 calories a day even on days I exercise. I was worried about it at first, but because of my size I have accepted that I am a small person and need to eat accordingly. Ironically, the less I eat over time, the less I want food. Once I stabilized my blood sugar by cutting out all of the excess carbs and my stomach got "used" to eating less, I feel better with less food. My greek yogurt in the morning really does fill me up. A half chicken breast and some veggies leaves me stuffed at night.

I have recently had a time period where my calories went really low for about a month (600 to 800) due to a personal crisis. I was worried about starvation mode at one point because the weight loss slowed down. When I ate back to 1000 calories/day, it came back to normal losing in whooshes and stalls. I don't know if I believe in starvation mode or not. I take thyroid medicine so maybe that skewed it and kept my metabolism going?

I would say that we are all so different and to do what works for you. Like a previous poster said, if you find eating less leads to binges or snacking and ultimately a higher calorie intake for the day, you might raise your morning calories. Or if you are having other side effects. For example, I know when I am not eating enough because I get insatiably thirsty. Or my stomach starts cramping when I do eat. If you are doing fine with what you're doing - keep it up! Don't change because of a website. You know what works best for you. :)

berryblondeboys
07-12-2011, 04:14 PM
I am always amused that some people consider themselves at goal weight or close to it when they are under 200lbs. I am still morbidly obese at that weight. We all are really so different.


And we all have different types of goals. My goal of 175 is not my ideal weight - the one a doctor would set for me, but I feel it's an attainable weight. When I get there, I'll see if I want to do more or not. Actually, it will be more like this: I'll see where I eventually stall out with doing what I'm doing. Basically, I'm not willing to go to the gym or workout for more than an hour a day and I'm not willing to go down below about 1200-1300 calories. Once I can't l lose with that effort, I am done with this journey and will work on maintenance.

Other people here want to go from flab body to fab body. Some others just want to get from really heavy to 'not quite so heavy'. It's all movement in the right direction, and that's all that really matters as losing ANY weight is still healthier than losing none or gaining. And of course, some people don't even really need to lose pounds, but just need to tone up!

zoodoo613
07-12-2011, 04:25 PM
I am 5'1" and pear shaped. At 187 lbs today I am a size 16 to 18 pant and a size Medium shirt. I wear a size 38D bra on the tightest hook and it's a bit loose. I am probably a 36C. My wrist is exactly 5.5" and my fingers just meet (I have very small hands - I wear a size 5 ring). I have proportionally shorter arms and legs and a longer torso. By all of that, I would say that I should be on the lower side of the weight range for me which is about 110lbs. (The outlier has always been that I wear a size 9 shoe)

But, I build muscle really easily and have always looked like I have a larger build because of it. I'm sure the extra muscle on my legs makes me look larger built as well. If I lean out and keep lifting, I think 125lbs will put in a size 2 or 4 pants and small to extra small shirt. It would be ridiculous to go lower than that on the scale. I may decide I am done when I reach 135. I would be a size 6 or so.

I am always amused that some people consider themselves at goal weight or close to it when they are under 200lbs. I am still morbidly obese at that weight. We all are really so different.

Amused is what you call it? :D Being short, I'm always a little frustrated by how much further I have to go to get there, where ever there is, than so many people.

And speaking of all being so different: In 1997, I was at my goal weight, 135. I was running a lot, and was quite muscular. I was a size 12. I could never dream of being a 2 or even a 6.

BeachBreeze2010
07-12-2011, 05:36 PM
Reading back through my post, I realize that it could've been taken a way that I really didn't mean it!! I'm sorry!!

I wasn't referring to anyone in particular with that comment. I see lots of ladies on here that are almost 6' tall or just a lot taller than me (everyone seems tall from my perspective) that have that goal. I don't mean to belittle the goal at all!! My thought couldn't be further from that!! I think it's great - it just highlights our body differences. That's all I meant. My amusement isn't that the goal is "wrong" but just that it's so different because we are so different. I could say jealous or frustrated that it seems so hard for me to have to go so much further, but I'm trying to be positive and smile about it. I only brought it up because we were talking about body frame and how it changes our journeys.

I use it to remind myself that I am a little person (short and small framed) and the calorie requirements that I hear all the time really don't apply to me as much. My 11 year old daughter weighs 95lbs and is just my height. I wouldn't feed her 1800 calories/day even as a growing child.

Again, I'm sorry if that came accross poorly!

berryblondeboys
07-12-2011, 05:51 PM
Reading back through my post, I realize that it could've been taken a way that I really didn't mean it!! I'm sorry!!

I wasn't referring to anyone in particular with that comment. I see lots of ladies on here that are almost 6' tall or just a lot taller than me (everyone seems tall from my perspective) that have that goal. I don't mean to belittle the goal at all!! My thought couldn't be further from that!! I think it's great - it just highlights our body differences. That's all I meant. My amusement isn't that the goal is "wrong" but just that it's so different because we are so different. I could say jealous or frustrated that it seems so hard for me to have to go so much further, but I'm trying to be positive and smile about it. I only brought it up because we were talking about body frame and how it changes our journeys.

I use it to remind myself that I am a little person (short and small framed) and the calorie requirements that I hear all the time really don't apply to me as much. My 11 year old daughter weighs 95lbs and is just my height. I wouldn't feed her 1800 calories/day even as a growing child.

Again, I'm sorry if that came accross poorly!

Oh, I didn't take it poorly, because it's true! We are all so very different.