For Those Reaching or Over 40

DweamGoiL

DweamGoiL

New member
I recall losing weight in my 20's and at 137 lbs being a size 6. Later in life (mid 30's) lost weight again, went down to 160 and was a size 12. Now, at 40, I am again a size 12, but now weight 178 lbs.

I wanted to see if others have experienced the weird age/weight fluctuation over the years and what their take is on it from a personal perspective.

For myself, I can say that each time I lost weight it was through working out and eating right so it's not so much a matter of more muscle vs. fat. I do realize that as we age, these ratios do change, but I am so much heavier now as far as the scale, but much trimmer as far as my clothing...go figure!
 
Honestly I was overweight through my 20s and 30s, so being slim(er) in my 40s is so incredibly different for me. I know when I was in my early 20s, I weighed about 135 or so (and thought that was fat and I should lose weight) and it was easy to bounce back and forth between 125 and 135. Now it seems to take forever to lose 10 lbs ... and I'm sure that's age related, but also partially just the damage I've done to my body over the years.
 
I'm 5'4" - if I stand up straight. :)

Oh and btw, I'm a size 12 at 170. When I was down to the low 160s I could fit a 10 in some brands.
 
DweamGoiL said:
Later in life (mid 30's) lost weight again, went down to 160 and was a size 12. Now, at 40, I am again a size 12, but now weight 178 lbs.
Click to expand...


Two words can explain this phenomena: VANITY SIZING

A few months ago, I had to buy a new pair of jeans. I bought some Tommy Hilfigers, and as with all jeans today, they were prewashed and thus preshrunk. I tried them on, and the size that fit me was 33" waist (men's). So, I went home and dug a 10 year old pair of Levis out of the closet - size 34" waist, and the were TIGHT around the waist.

Vanity sizing, which in no way reflects reality, is a marketing tool targeted to countries with large populations of overweight people. It allows people to be 20 lbs heavier than they were 10 years ago, and fit into one size smaller today. Ingenious marketing, isn't it?

Of course, for women's clothing sizes, or men's sizes that use letters such as S M L XL, the size was always a bit arbitrary. I bought a 3-layer exercise suit a few weeks ago, and the first layer had to be L, the second layer S, and the outer layer M. These sizes mean nothing. However, men's pants which are measured by inches, should reflect reality, but they often don't. At least not in clothes which are targeted for the north american market. The european market is a bit closer to reality, at least certain labels are...
 
I am 50 years old.

I can say that UK clothes sizes have changed since the last time that I was slim in 1986.

I am a UK size 10 (in fact I have a pair of size 8 jeans that I can wear but are a bit tight). Even when I was a slim 18 year old - I wore size 12. I happen to still own some size 12 clothes from about that time that will not fasten properly and I certainly could not wear. The jury is out on whether I will get into them after I have the loose skin surgery that I want.

I have no idea when the clothing changed sizes. I was very big for a very long time and if you wear tents and very big things that always have elasticated waists - you really do not notice these things.
 
I have lost a lot of weight over the past half year. I really didn't notice it during the summer, because summer clothes are mostly adjustable, elastic, etc. But when it started getting cold, I was forced to buy an entire new wardrobe.

To identify some of this mayhem, consider the sizes I fit into right now:


S.T.I. Cardigan - M
S.T.I. V-Neck jumper - M
S.T.I. Zip-up jumper - S
Unknown name Cardigan - L
Polypro layer 1 - L
Microfleece layer 2 - S
Outer layer 3 - M
Diesel Jeans (slim fit) - 32" waist : good fit
Esprit Jeans (slim fit) - 32" waist : loose fit
Men's underwear (knit boxers) (Levis, D&G, Hilfiger, Armani, Matinique) - L : why L with a 32" waist???


There is no method to this madness. Being a man, I'd like to walk into a store, find size M and throw it into the basket, pay, go home, and have clothes that fit. 25% chance of success is the reality.
 
Two words can explain this phenomena: VANITY SIZING
Click to expand...
To a large extent,vanity sizing is a myth.

I used to work in the clothing industry. Our current sizing system was never meant to be a static fixed system. It was designed (during WWII, btw,if you're interested in that bit of trivia) so that a size 10/12 would be the size an AVERAGE woman would wear. As women got larger, a size 10/12 got larger, and then the system had to develop even smaller sizes (0 and 00) to accommodate the smaller sizes.

It's not vanity sizing - it's basing the range on an average.
 
So regarding men's pants, which are sized in inches, the average inch has gotten much longer over the past 10 years... coinciding with the growth of the average waist size in some countries.

I used a body tape measure, fairly tightly, around the waist where the top of the jeans rest. It measured 35". I went to the store and had to buy 32" waist jeans, because all the others were falling off. Perhaps Hilfiger has invented his own version of the inch, or his tape measure is stretched from so many years of use.

If this isn't vanity sizing, then somebody please buy Tommy a new tape measure for christmas.
 
AlphaX

Interesting theory, but I don't think that it's so much of a vanity sizing issue here. I had 2 pair of jeans from the fist time I weighed 160 in my closet. One pair fit me perfectly then and the other pair was tight and I had to go down to 157 to fit into them comfortably. Now, I can now fit into them both with room to spare at 172. I do recognize that I have packed on a lot more muscle this time around, but overall I think as we age, we tend to weigh more simply because our body composition changes over time.
 
Last edited:
DweamGoiL said:
I think as we age, we tend to weigh more simply because our body composition changes over time.
Click to expand...

The ego tends to weigh a lot more with age. For years, I told myself that I didn't have a problem with my weight (34 BMI). Doctors told me to lose weight, my wife told me to lose weight, I was out of breath doing light labour, but I did not have a problem in my own opinion. I simply attributed the extra weight and weakness to "aging" and told myself that it was OK. Finally, something snapped. What was it? My ego, of course.

I got my BMI down to 25.0 now, and I can clearly see that I do have extra fat on my stomach, thighs, and back. Rember the old "Special K" test? Yep, I can still pinch an inch... Hell, I can even pinch 2 or 3 inches in some places. This is not really OK.

I used to say that BMI doesn't apply to me because I am "big boned" (another one of those ego terms), or because I have large muscles. BS... it does apply; I don't somehow magically qualify for "BMI exemption". Even with my large bones and large muscles, at 25.0 BMI I can still pinch 2-3 inches of fat here and there. At 25.0, I am right on the borderline of oveweight, and when I look in the mirror now, I really believe it. Things would be different, of course, if I were a bodybuilder with less than 10% body fat and still had 25.0 BMI... But I am not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top