OK - first off - I know I still have a long way to go .

And secondly - I have aLWAYS had a thicker than average waist - even at my slimmest

Here is my current dilemna :

I am at 195 - with measurments of 47- 38- 42

yup - that's right - my waist is almost as big as my hips !!!

my question is - for those of you have been successful with your losses -
did any of you have a disproportionately large waist - and how low did you have to get down to , to start seeing your waist come down ??

I am assuming that eventually , my hips will have to stop leaning out - I mean - there is bone structure there - and hopefull my waist loss will start kicking in

anyone recover from a disproportionate figure like mine ????

Your eventual shape depends a lot on your skeletal structure as well as where you store fat. I Was an "apple" and thought that if I lost enough fat I'd have a waist. Thinking back on my thinner (long time ago) teen body, I don't know why I thought I'd have a waist...I didn't have one then I'm no longer an apple, but I still have a thicker waist in relation to my hip and bust measurements than most women. I'm very short-waisted, and have virtually no space between my lower ribs and the top of my hip bones. There's nothing I can do about it- my stomach is flat, I've muscle definition everywhere, but waistbands are always tight.

On the other hand, you might be pleasantly surprised!

Mel

I'm just the opposite of you, my hips/legs have always been much bigger than average compared to my waist. My hips are still a size larger than my waist in clothing sizes, sometimes two. That said, I still lost tons of inches on my hips, the same as everywhere else. It's just that my proportions stayed much the same. It does seem that most women have a set figure type, regardless of their weight.

At least you are not "Apple" shaped, even if you are not hitting the ideal waist-to-hip ratio of under 0.8. I am sure you will look great when you tone up and lose the rest of the weight.

Your basic shape should be the same as it was before you gained the weight.

Your shape is your shape, and unfortunately, there is not alot you can do about that. There are things that I don't like about my shape, I have the biggest a** you have ever seen, regardless of how much I weigh. Lose the weight you need to lose and embrace your body!!

Sorry...chrmiller....that just hit too close to home! I am with you, I am hourglass, and genetically have a smaller waist when I am heavy or thin, but my behind and thighs are always larger in comparison.

You sound like an apple, given your measurements, and as everyone else has said, you can't change your genetic shape. Some people have bigger upper bodies, and others have bigger lower bodies, and we all sit around and envy the other.

I don't care for my butt and thighs, and I probably never will...but I do what I can to take the attention away from them by showing off my waist. Apples normally have GREAT legs...so my advice is to show off the GOOD things that nature gave you.

I agree with you. Everyone tells me I have great legs, even at my highest weight. I am an apple figure, so I always wear clothes that show off my legs, and cover my waist. But, I am the way I am. Everyone finds something wrong with themselves. We are our worst critics.

Starting weight-246
currently-237
goal-130

I'm the same shape I was when I was heavy -- just smaller .

This kinda scares me:
Is this a health ideal (based on heart attack likelihood, etc.), or some other "ideal?" LOL...just what we all need -- another ideal to live up to!

Heart attack risk, I believe.

but take a look at the women on Biggest Loser - they aLL looked like apples to me in the beginning - and many of them went on to have much smaller (proportional ) waists at the end. most of them had significant spare tires to start with

so I am hopeful....

although - got out my old weight and measurement charts - and at 166 pounds , I STILL had a waist of 35.... ouch - although - at those times in my life, I only dieted - never worked out

so I am just curious to see where this new adventure will take me - if all the hours pounding the stairmaster and elliptical will burn off any of that intrabdominal fat !

When you get down to goal, and if you have been exercising regularly and have reduced your body fat significantly, then your body does indeed become more properly proportioned...and you may not really look like an apple, or a pear any longer-but it will still always be your trouble zone.

For instance, if you really, really look at celebrities-you can tell what some of them would be if they gained weight.

The easiest ones to spot are the ones that have had weight issues...Kirstie Alley is an hourglass, and she has a large bone frame. She gains weight all over, but still maintains a waist even when heavy. She gains pretty evenly in her bust and upper arms...but also in her butt and legs. Oprah is an hourglass figure, Drew Barrymore is as well, as is myself. I have no trouble gaining definition and losing inches in my tummy, back and chest areas...but my upper arms and butt/legs have always given me equal trouble.

If you ever watched Bridget Jone's Diary, and see how Renee Zellwiger (sp?) looked when she had to put 20+ pounds on her frame-she is clearly an apple. She maintained great legs, but all of her excess weight in those films were concentrated in her face, upper arms, chest, and bust area-but when she is thin, she looks pretty proportioned.

ahhhh... that's who I'll look to for inspiration . Rennae with a weight gain is pretty much my body type . I am heavy from the top - and have almost boyish hips and legs


and I do know that your problem area is ALWAYS your problem area . I know I will always gain weight first in chin and tummy - and that it wll be the last to lose ( although the double chin went pretty early this time around )

and really - I AM pretty happy with my body type - I just want to know I can fit in a decent pair of jeans in the end - without my waist hoolding them up like a tent and having droopy drawers around my hips and thighs... not a pretty picture !

Sadly, not all of us have a "before you gained the weight" figure--having been overweight my entire life, I have no idea what my figure is, sans rolls

As for the 0.8 waist-to-hip ratio, while it does have something to do with heart health (see http://www.foodconsumer.org/777/8/Waist-to-hip_ratio_better_predicts_heart_attack.shtml), I have also read more than once that this is the genetically-implanted "ideal" from a man's perspective, basically. Studies on babies too young to even talk have shown that even they respond more positively to women with a ratio of .8 or lower. Whether overweight, normal weight, or underweight, men generally tend to prefer women at or below this ratio. The explanation for this is estrogen levels:
(the following is from "Perfect Body, Perfect Genes" available here)
"Women with WHR in the typical feminine range", observes Prof. Singh, "have optimal levels of estrogen, less susceptible to major diseases such as diabetes, cardiovascular disorders, risk for ovarian cancers, and ease of conception. Thus, WHR conveys important information to a man about the reproductive age of the woman, her health and status, and ease of conception at a glance. Also, pregnancy, even in the early stages, will increase WHR, it can be used to assess whether a woman is already pregnant or not. As the reproductive success of the man depends on finding a woman who is healthy, of reproductive age, and able to conceive, women with low WHR are preferred as romantic mates."

that study always makes me a little nuts.... although I am sure it's probably valid

I do find pear, and hourglass shapes much more appealing then apple.