If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Facing the truth
I thought I was doing a good job, going from 174 to 158 pounds
currently. I thought my size 36 pants were even feeling a little loose. Well, then my wife purchased some new size 36 underwear (my old ones were falling apart). Ooops! Too tight. Size 38 underwear are my size. That's only two inches from the definition of obesity for men (40 inches) - and a full six inches from my college waistsize. I have to admit I am discouraged. Apparently my old size 36 underwear gradually stretched out over time so they weren't tight. This weight loss business is very hard for me. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Facing the truth
Brad Sheppard wrote:
I thought I was doing a good job, going from 174 to 158 pounds currently. I thought my size 36 pants were even feeling a little loose. Well, then my wife purchased some new size 36 underwear (my old ones were falling apart). Ooops! Too tight. Size 38 underwear are my size. That's only two inches from the definition of obesity for men (40 inches) - and a full six inches from my college waistsize. I have to admit I am discouraged. Apparently my old size 36 underwear gradually stretched out over time so they weren't tight. This weight loss business is very hard for me. They're supposed to be tight. Why do you think they're called "whitey tighties"? Like Igor, I'll admit to continuing to wear a larger size than my actual hip size would require. Dally |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Facing the truth
Brad...Brad...Brad,
Underwear actually run larger than actual waist sizes. I've bought like three different brands and none of them fit the same. Don't get discouraged because of underwear. Just find some that are comfortable for you and wear them. I'm surprised your wearing 36" pants at 158 pounds. I'm 38" right now but remember wearing 34" and 36" at a weight of around 189 or so. I wonder if you have wider hips than me? I can't believe anyone has wider hips than me...lol. By the way you've done awesome going from 174 to 158. How tall are you and how old are you? Again great job, Paul 300/197/175 "Brad Sheppard" wrote in message om... I thought I was doing a good job, going from 174 to 158 pounds currently. I thought my size 36 pants were even feeling a little loose. Well, then my wife purchased some new size 36 underwear (my old ones were falling apart). Ooops! Too tight. Size 38 underwear are my size. That's only two inches from the definition of obesity for men (40 inches) - and a full six inches from my college waistsize. I have to admit I am discouraged. Apparently my old size 36 underwear gradually stretched out over time so they weren't tight. This weight loss business is very hard for me. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.644 / Virus Database: 412 - Release Date: 3/26/04 |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Facing the truth
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Facing the truth
Paul wrote to Brad:
I wonder if you have wider hips than me? I can't believe anyone has wider hips than me...lol. How really divine to hear the guys comparing hip sizes? -- Walking on . . . Laurie in Maine 207/110 60 inches of attitude! Start: 2/02 Maintained since 2/03 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Facing the truth
"SnugBear" wrote in message .4... Paul wrote to Brad: I wonder if you have wider hips than me? I can't believe anyone has wider hips than me...lol. How really divine to hear the guys comparing hip sizes? -- Walking on . . . Laurie in Maine 207/110 60 inches of attitude! Start: 2/02 Maintained since 2/03 It would be if their hip sizes weren't about the same as my waist size! My hip size is still over 40"! Most of the weight is on my waist and hips though. Tonia 221/190/130 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Facing the truth
On Sun, 28 Mar 2004 09:18:53 -0600, "That T Woman"
wrote: It would be if their hip sizes weren't about the same as my waist size! My hip size is still over 40"! Most of the weight is on my waist and hips though. 40" isn't all that big. Women are supposed to have big hips :-). When I was in college my measurements were 40-25-40 -- and this seemed very popular with the guys :-). Now -- at 157 lbs, but menopausal and with different fat distribution patterns, I'm like 45-29-38. (I'm really not all that busty, but I'm both large boned and muscular.) Chris |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Facing the truth
On Sun, 28 Mar 2004 16:08:27 GMT, Chris Braun
wrote: 40" isn't all that big. Women are supposed to have big hips :-). When I was in college my measurements were 40-25-40 -- and this seemed very popular with the guys :-). Now -- at 157 lbs, but menopausal and with different fat distribution patterns, I'm like 45-29-38. (I'm really not all that busty, but I'm both large boned and muscular.) Um... just noticed this typo! My bust measurement is really 42, not 45. Still big, but not outrageous :-). Chris |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Facing the truth
"Chris Braun" wrote in message ... On Sun, 28 Mar 2004 16:08:27 GMT, Chris Braun wrote: 40" isn't all that big. Women are supposed to have big hips :-). When I was in college my measurements were 40-25-40 -- and this seemed very popular with the guys :-). Now -- at 157 lbs, but menopausal and with different fat distribution patterns, I'm like 45-29-38. (I'm really not all that busty, but I'm both large boned and muscular.) Um... just noticed this typo! My bust measurement is really 42, not 45. Still big, but not outrageous :-). Chris I'm 5'4" and small boned so my 190 pounds that makes me over 40 inches in the hips also makes me look like a wide load. When I get down to 130 I hope to be about 34-26-38. But I'll probably be 32 in the bust. I do measurements on the last day of the month and last month I lost a cumulative 8.75" from arms, bust, waist, hips, thighs and calves. I don't think I'll be doing that good this month because I've only lost a single pound all month. I'll report the cumulative total loss (if any) on Wednesday. Tonia 221/190/130 |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Facing the truth
On Sun, 28 Mar 2004 15:55:33 -0600, "That T Woman"
wrote: I'm 5'4" and small boned so my 190 pounds that makes me over 40 inches in the hips also makes me look like a wide load. When I get down to 130 I hope to be about 34-26-38. But I'll probably be 32 in the bust. By contrast: Just this morning I did some measurements because I was trying to figure out if I was wearing the right bra size. The measurement just below my bust -- around the rib cage -- is 34", and I haven't a bit of fat in that area. So clearly I've got a way bigger frame than you. I do measurements on the last day of the month and last month I lost a cumulative 8.75" from arms, bust, waist, hips, thighs and calves. I'm sort of sorry I haven't been tracking measurements all this time. I just measure occasionally when I'm trying to determine my size when I'm ordering something by mail. It would be fun to know how much I've lost. Lots, I know -- probably 10" in the waist alone (with the leftover flabby skin to attest to it :-( ). I don't think I'll be doing that good this month because I've only lost a single pound all month. I'll report the cumulative total loss (if any) on Wednesday. Maybe you'll be surprised :-). Sometimes measurements change when weight doesn't. BTW, I bought a pair of size 8 pants today that fit perfectly. A fluke, I know, but still gratifying :-). Chris 262/155/ (145-150) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|