My wrist measurement very much changed with weight loss. My right wrist used to measure ~6 1/2 inches, and now measures 5 3/4 inches. At my height, that would define me as small-framed. However, my right ankle measurement is currently 8 inches, which would suggest a medium frame... but that could change too with more weight loss, as I am carrying most of my excess fat in my stomach and legs. I have hard time believing I'm small-framed though... my shoulders are really wide, and my underbust measurement is 31 inches and unlikely to get any smaller (you can readily see my ribs at this point from both front and back, so I doubt there's much fat left to lose there).
I typically measure as a small-framed person, and that does sound about right for me. My wrist measurement is 5.75", my shoe size is a 6, and my ring size is a 5 (though I think it's actually be a bit smaller at this point), but my ankle measurement is 8.25" (assuming I've measured where I'm supposed to!). I have larger calves though so it would make sense that my ankle measurement would be larger as well.
basically just reconfirms I'm a large framed person - ankle is 9" (first thing in the morning when I have zero puffiness) and my thumb and forefinger don't touch - not even close - like an inch to go! Actual measurement is 6.66. Elbow girth test is really hard to do by oneself, but with that I get right at large frame, 2 2/3s (I think). All for my height of course.
But more, you can tell by looking at someone, can't you? (when they are close to their ideal weight especially). I can see in people's avatars even by their face alone sometimes what their frame size is. I volunteer at my son's 1st grade class every day and the differences in sizes with these 6/7 year olds is HUGE. Not just in height, but in every way. Girls and boys with teeny tiny butts/hips and then kids with big, solid frames. It's the same in my fitness classes - you can SEE frame size so easily -without measuring.
My wrist measures 5 3/4 inces. I have always considered myself as petite.
A few weeks back one of my gay (male) friends made a comment; I always thought you were a big boned girl but you are turning into a petite thing. -- Which is very true, and that is why I have still such a long way to go I looked fit and trim around 120 pounds even at 115.
Oh my goodness, now I am measuring my ankles
My ankles come out to medium frame, my wrists small, but to me, I look medium so I am going with that.
I am a medium framed person with a little bit smaller wrists than the rest of me
basically just reconfirms I'm a large framed person - ankle is 9" (first thing in the morning when I have zero puffiness) and my thumb and forefinger don't touch - not even close - like an inch to go! Actual measurement is 6.66. Elbow girth test is really hard to do by oneself, but with that I get right at large frame, 2 2/3s (I think). All for my height of course.
But more, you can tell by looking at someone, can't you? (when they are close to their ideal weight especially). I can see in people's avatars even by their face alone sometimes what their frame size is. I volunteer at my son's 1st grade class every day and the differences in sizes with these 6/7 year olds is HUGE. Not just in height, but in every way. Girls and boys with teeny tiny butts/hips and then kids with big, solid frames. It's the same in my fitness classes - you can SEE frame size so easily -without measuring.
LOL!! This just made it more confusing for me. I wonder if I am a series of random body parts put together
Here's what happens according to all the ways to detect frame size for me:
Wrist: 5.5" - small frame
Elbow breadth: 3" - large frame
Ankle: 8" - medium frame
There is no disputing the fact that some people have larger frames than others who are the same height.
A test of fingers and wrists makes no sense because some people have big frames and small hands or vice versa.
The measurements of ones wrists and ankles relative to their height is what is relevant.
Yet another reason that BMI as it relates to an individual is not a useful way to determine body fat percentage.
Now this kind of makes sense to me: wrist/ankles relative to height as an indicator of frame size. But again, I have to say, I'm just not sure this tells the whole story or makes "frame size" meaningful. I have very very broad shoulders and narrow hips. Also a broader ribcage. From the waist up, I look like a linebacker. But if you measured just my wrists and ankles relative to height, I'm sure I'd be considered small framed because it doesn't take into account my upper body size. If you just measured my shoulders and ribs, I'd be considered bigger, I am certain.
There is no disputing the fact that some people have larger frames than others who are the same height.
A test of fingers and wrists makes no sense because some people have big frames and small hands or vice versa.
The measurements of ones wrists and ankles relative to their height is what is relevant.
Yet another reason that BMI as it relates to an individual is not a useful way to determine body fat percentage.
You're absolutely right. I measured my ankles and wrists and it seems I have a medium frame. I always considered myself to have a larger frame but maybe as I continue to lose weight my "true" body frame/size will show.
And yes, BMI needs to be replaced with another system. It's completely inaccurate for someone like me who has a muscular build.
I looked fit and trim around 120 pounds even at 115.
7 1/2 for ankle...so I am a small medium 
