After high school I weighed 330lbs. I wore a 6x shirt and size 56 pants. I got a job and started going to the gym and changed the way I ate. In two months I was down to 265 pounds, wore a size 3x shirt, and 46 pants.
At my current weight (421 after a successful first week) I wear a size 52 pants and a 4x shirt.
I weigh almost 100 pounds more than I did then, so why am I physically smaller in size? My best guess is that I retained a lot of muscle from the first time I lost weight since weight lifting was a major part of that change.
I don't know if men's clothing is the same way, but with women's clothing there has been a huge change in the way things are labeled due to what is called vanity sizing. Meaning that clothing manufacturers know it makes women happy to wear a size 10, so that is what the tag says, even though if you compared that size 10 dress or pants to a size 10 from 20 or 30 years ago, the new size 10 is huge in comparison.
When I lost weight a couple of years ago (down to 198), I had jeans that were a size 14 that fit fine. But I had an jeans from over 15 years ago that are a size 16 that I couldn't even get up all the way (forget about trying to get them buttoned and zipped).
I don't know if men's clothing is the same way, but with women's clothing there has been a huge change in the way things are labeled due to what is called vanity sizing. Meaning that clothing manufacturers know it makes women happy to wear a size 10, so that is what the tag says, even though if you compared that size 10 dress or pants to a size 10 from 20 or 30 years ago, the new size 10 is huge in comparison.
When I lost weight a couple of years ago (down to 198), I had jeans that were a size 14 that fit fine. But I had an jeans from over 15 years ago that are a size 16 that I couldn't even get up all the way (forget about trying to get them buttoned and zipped).
Maybe they do vanity sizing for men too?
They don't vanity size for men LOL. I was having a discussion about the craziness of women's clothing the other day.
For men, if you wear a 38 you wear a 38 and may be able to squeeze into a 36 if you like skinny jeans lol. We don't have Juniors, Plus, Miss, etc... I wear the same brand names now as I did then. Roc-A-Wear, Sean jean, and a few others.
I do happen to have one of my shirts from back then and its HUGE.
My wife also pointed out that she didn't think I weigh as much as I do. The last time I lost weight, my mom said she was concerned that I was getting too small. She thought I was around 200, but at that time was 280. I'd lost only 50 pounds but I was weight lifting for 2 hours each day, in addition to 30 minutes of cardio. I was also working security at the time and using the stairs instead of the elevator and did a ton of walking because I worked on a college campus.
Could it be that because of my size, I'm building muscle while losing fat, so I look more lean even though I weigh a lot?
I don't know how much muscle you could have put on in 8 months though ... maybe 20 lbs if you're genetically blessed to put on muscle easily. 20 lbs of muscle is probably equal to about 50 lbs of fat - volume wise. This could account for a big part of the difference because you don't lose much muscle when you stop working out if you're gaining weight.
That said - based on the numbers - it doesn't make a lot of sense. Maybe your fat is distributed differently - or maybe there was an error in the scale weight.
I'm sorry but even in men's clothes "vanity" sizing is alive and well...and trust me I've been around enough ready-to-wear men's collections to see this first hand... even in pant and suit sizes that appear to be "standardized" by waist and chest sizes there is variation from brand to brand and even within a brand itself... and once you get into S,M,L,XL, and beyond... well then all bets are off...
Last edited by TripSwitch; 02-13-2013 at 02:05 PM.
They don't vanity size for men LOL. I was having a discussion about the craziness of women's clothing the other day.
Don't be so sure. My husband is a 34, and a 34 waist in one brand can be larger or smaller than a 34 waist in another. Additionally, the cut of the pants can be completely different even though the number is exactly the same. All of my husband's older pants are 36's and everything he buys new is usually a 34. He's got one pair of 32's that he's quite proud of fitting into, but if you lay them on top of his old 36's, they are virtually the same size.
Men like a smaller number, just like women do, and manufacturers aren't stupid. Not many men are actually going to pull out a measuring tape and check the waist measurement of the pants against the number on the tag and clothing people know that.
I don't know how much muscle you could have put on in 8 months though ... maybe 20 lbs if you're genetically blessed to put on muscle easily. 20 lbs of muscle is probably equal to about 50 lbs of fat - volume wise. This could account for a big part of the difference because you don't lose much muscle when you stop working out if you're gaining weight.
That said - based on the numbers - it doesn't make a lot of sense. Maybe your fat is distributed differently - or maybe there was an error in the scale weight.
I've always had muscle tone. I've never been all fat. I don't know how much muscle I put on, but I went from benching 95lbs (bar included) to benching 275 in just over 2 months.
I weighed the almost exactly the same on multiple scales. I never thought about fat distribution. I gain most of my weight in my legs. I've never had a really big stomach. I've always been more wide than thick, if that makes any sense. In other words, my front and back don't stick out as much.
Don't be so sure. My husband is a 34, and a 34 waist in one brand can be larger or smaller than a 34 waist in another. Additionally, the cut of the pants can be completely different even though the number is exactly the same. All of my husband's older pants are 36's and everything he buys new is usually a 34. He's got one pair of 32's that he's quite proud of fitting into, but if you lay them on top of his old 36's, they are virtually the same size.
Men like a smaller number, just like women do, and manufacturers aren't stupid. Not many men are actually going to pull out a measuring tape and check the waist measurement of the pants against the number on the tag and clothing people know that.
You could be right, but I've tried on a pair of 56 recently and they are big on me. Way too big to wear.
I've always had muscle tone. I've never been all fat. I don't know how much muscle I put on, but I went from benching 95lbs (bar included) to benching 275 in just over 2 months.
I weighed the almost exactly the same on multiple scales. I never thought about fat distribution. I gain most of my weight in my legs. I've never had a really big stomach. I've always been more wide than thick, if that makes any sense. In other words, my front and back don't stick out as much.
That is an impressive increase, though most strength gains are neurological.
Seems like the most likely cause is muscle and/or distribution of fat then.
You should put some pictures up on your blog. Sounds like you're ideally suited to be a bodybuilder.
That is an impressive increase, though most strength gains are neurological.
Seems like the most likely cause is muscle and/or distribution of fat then.
You should put some pictures up on your blog. Sounds like you're ideally suited to be a bodybuilder.
I will be adding pics soon. I'm still getting it all together on my blog. People have always told me I should play football. Bodybuilding never crossed my mind though. LOL. I do want to try boxing though.
Also, this week past week for example. I was only comfortable benching 135 without a spot 10x. Yesterday I jumped to 155 without a spot without a problem. At that rate, I should be at 195 by the end of week 4 and 275 by the end of month 2.
I can understand the mental explanation as well. In my mind, I think of it as only trying to lift 10 more pounds per arm than I lifted before. I don't think of it as lifting 135 or 275 pounds.
Last edited by 427pounder; 02-13-2013 at 05:26 PM.
Forgive the thread hijack--because I'm not sure about men's sizing--but I was bummed to discover that while I wear a 26" waist jean now, I still fit in some old 29" waist Levi's from the Eighties. (Actual waist size 25.5".)
BTW, carry-over from your other thread--congrats on your week 1 weight loss, 421!
Question About Size and Weight
