I'm reading other "sizes" and don't get it
 

So I keep coming across posts where people are saying "I wear a size 8" and their ticker says they weigh 150. "Size 12 is falling off of me" and their ticker says 158.

I am busting out of my 12's right now (which is part of what got me wanting to do WW because I REFUSE to upsize again). And I am at 163.

Is it a height thing? (Im short 5'2). Is it an exercise thing? I am SO out of shape that my exercise right now is just walking. I smoke, have asthma, and am overweight so a crazy burn workout of 30 mins of cardio about kills me.

Im starting to worry that I am counting points for nothing because am I really going to lose? Or am I just doubting because it's easier to doubt and fall back into old habits than stick with the plan? Oi!

it has a lot to do with body-shape and muscle mass!!
1. body shape.. on my highest weight, I had to wear 16 pants but I could easily pull off 12 tops!
2. muscle has more dense mass than fat so, if people are fit/excersise, they have higher body weight but they can be extremely lean!

grrrkgrrrl

It's a big mix of things. I've seen people at 200 getting into 16's and others wearing 20's. I have a skinny friend, 120 ish pounds, who's in a size 4 because she has wider hips where other people at school who are 120 can go smaller. It all depends!

I think the same thing when I watch the Biggest Loser. All those girls who have weights near mine or near where I was even a couple years ago at my lowest all had these nice backs/mid-sections and, even at 146, I was still lumpy, rolly and had serious muffin top. Part is they're taller than me (I'm just under 5'2", too) and so their weight is distributed differently. I think it also has to do with muscle and resistance training. They do a lot of work that specifically targets those areas. Cardio is necessary but resisitance training in some form (machines, free weights, bands, kettlebell, etc) is, as well.

I just wrote basically the same thing you did on another thread. And I do exercise and do weights -- you can see the muscles in my shoulders and upper arms and thighs. I don't totally understand it either. I suspect at least some of these other things are involved:

1) bone structure (I'm pretty sure my PELVIC BONE all by itself will not fit into a size six, and my shoulders rival those of a defensive lineman)
2) clothes size inflation (I buy my work clothes from higher-end stores that don't do vanity sizing)
3) age (I'm 42, OK? Parts move around ... OK, downward)
4) lycra? Which is to say, I see a lot of ladies in the malls that probably say they fit in a size four but: just because you can do it doesn't mean you should. :D

I'm sure that only nos. 1-3 apply to our classy ladies here on the forum though.

I think its alot of height/body shape. 1 am 5' and 157lbs and my size 12s fit like a dream at the moment. I wear a size medium up top, or large if its button down. (because of the boobies) I am not a pear shape, more of an hour glass shape. I carry 0 weight in my middle, a lot on my hips thighs and but, and alot on my boobs. I will in all likelihood never fit into anything smaller than a 6 on the bottom because my *** will never be that small. Its just the shape pf my body.

Also muscle makes a big difference. a person at 150lbs with less body fat and more muscle is going to wear a smaller size than a person with the same height, weight, and body shape that has more fat and less muscle. Because pound for pound, muscle has less mass than fat does.

i think it depends a lot on what type of jeans they are, and personal preference on how to wear them. I know i was a size 12 until 175, but they looked like body paint.

Mostly it's how our bodies are proportioned. When I was over 300 the highest I ever went was a 24. Now at 266 I am an 18. I DOUBT I would every fit into a size 6 though. I remember at 190 being a 12....large. That was in high school.. I did lose a LOT of weight when I was preg. with my first, but I never really knew what those numbers were...I think in the 150s

LOL I am loving that reason #4 :D

I do think some if it is how I carry my weight (Imagine 2 spaghetti noodles holding up a meatball). ALL of my weight is in my belly area. Though it has started spreading to my thighs and butt. My arms are as skinny as all get out and from mid-thigh down I look like a beanpole. When I was a 7/8 I could buy regular but now that I am in 12's I am having to buy petite because normal ones are too long.

Thanks for all the replies ladies :)

I'm with you - I've thought "WTF! no fair!" on many occasions. I run, bike, and weight train among other activities, and I'm still a perfect size 14 at 5'4" 158. In the past I couldn't squeeze into a 12 until I was below 150. Go figure.

LOL @ lycra. SO true.

It definitely has to do with proportions. I'm 5'7" and hovering around 199. I JUST got back into my 12's.

Couldn't have said it better. Besides,there's no fashion police checking your size tag. Who cares what other people are wearing?

Wear what fits and flatters YOU, and cut the tag out if it bugs you.

A.

I think it depends on your body type and your height. For example, I'm the same height as 3Beans (5'4"), but she said at 158 she's in 14s. Even when I was at my highest weight, 168, my size 12s were loose. I'm a rectangle shape and I gain/lose pretty evenly all over.

I'll ditto that "so true" - I'm 5'7" and at 197 my 18s were getting tight and I was going to be in 20s soon.

I am 5'3 and can wear a size 8 at 150 and a size 6 at 140. I have a friend who is in her 130's and wears a size 8 or 10. I think it's because when I am at a lower weight, it means that I am doing a lot of running and my lower half is in great shape. I wouldn't put much thought into pant size. Plus, I agree with other posters that sizes are way inflated.