9st 12lb at 5’4” and size 4-6?

[OrganicAvocado]

Do they mean US size 6? The lady is in Wales.
I’m only 2 inches shorter and weigh 9st 6lb and wear size 10-12.
Well done to her for losing the weight though. Just confused by her clothing size.
uk.yahoo.com/news/22-stone-size-26-mum-060002422.html

Why do news reports always have to make it sensationalist - she's probably a 10-12 which is a perfectly good size and shape to be.Size 4-6 is unrealistic and not the target for 40+ women

I suppose the article saying she's size4-6 attracted all these comments though...

Unlikely. I’m 4 inches taller and 5lbs heavier and wear a 12. Even when I was 8st 5lbs I wore an 8-10. I’m narrow framed too, so it’s not it’s that. She may well be v muscular (I’m not) but I would think that almost 10st would show as bulkier than a 6 on that height, whether it was muscle or fat.

She looks great and is a healthy weight so why on earth does it matter what her dress size is?

It matters because it is stated in the article. If it weren’t then it wouldn’t. She has slimmed down massively. It’s great!

I once had a date with someone I met online who said they were 5’10” on their profile. Turned out he was only 5’3”. It mattered because it wasn’t true. Apart from that he was lovely. If he hadn’t put 5’10” on his profile I wouldn’t have had any issue with his height...
I’m not at all saying the lady in the article is lying about her size, but that the article is incorrect and probably US sizes. It matters to a lot of people who are trying to lose weight. A size 4-6 U.K. is not a healthy goal.

2 miles to the fridge and back?

How far away is your fridge?!

At 11 stone and 5'6 I'm a size 14, best friend at 5'4 and 11 stone is a 10. Im flabby and she's muscular

She has done great to lose weight, but she is absolutely not a size 4-6 at almost 10 stone, that is insane and ridiculous.

For reference I am 5'2, 7 stone 4 lb and a UK size 4.

She could potentially fit in some Primark size 6s, as Primark has very large sizing.

the clothing sizing is very misleading - back in the day - the vital statistics were bust/waist/hips and one aimed to be 36-22-36
BMI is ridiculous as a measure of healthy weight as it takes no account of skeletal size, muscles or fat etc.
And as for the clothing sizes now touted by shops I am anything between a 14, 12,10 depending on whether it is a top, jeans or dress.
that said I think you know when you are overweight (pinch more than an inch ) and I agree that the 4-6 size quoted is american sizes not UK.

I was this weight and height pre pregnancy (stubborn 12lb to lose now) and I was a 10-12

It matters because it is stated in the article. If it weren’t then it wouldn’t.

But you must know that journalists always go for what sounds most sensational. "I've gone from a size 26 to a size 6 in some things but a 10 in H&M and sometimes I need a 12 top depending on the fit ...' isn't a catchy headline, is it?

Most likely she would have said something along those lines, because I don't know anyone, no matter what their weight, who is a uniform size in every type of garment from every single retailer. The newspaper will have edited it to what they think people are most likely to click on. Size 26 to size 6 is a good headline.

Well I'm 5'4 and bang on 8 stone and I'm a solid size 10.

the vital statistics were bust/waist/hips and one aimed to be 36-22-36

When was this? I'm 5ft 10 & have never aimed nor desired to have a 22" waist

@SquirryTheSquirrel

It matters because it is stated in the article. If it weren’t then it wouldn’t.

But you must know that journalists always go for what sounds most sensational. "I've gone from a size 26 to a size 6 in some things but a 10 in H&M and sometimes I need a 12 top depending on the fit ...' isn't a catchy headline, is it?

Most likely she would have said something along those lines, because I don't know anyone, no matter what their weight, who is a uniform size in every type of garment from every single retailer. The newspaper will have edited it to what they think people are most likely to click on. Size 26 to size 6 is a good headline.

Exactly all she’s probably done is squeezed into one size four in one shop where clothes are quite large anyway and the garment itself was quite forgiving and used that as an example. I’m a size 6 in m and s cos their stuff is big. I’m not really a six. In old money I’m a 12.

Lol. old money. I don't know what is what anymore. I could be a size 4 in one and a size 8-10 in another store. And I've even been a size 0/2 in another.

i’m 5”4.

When I was ten stone, I was a size 10.

9.9 was my lightest and I was a size 8.

(Currently 18 stone and a size 18 )

Seems highly unlikely.

My DD is 5ft 3in weighs around 7 - 7.5 stone, never been heavier than 7.5, very toned.

She's always been a 6 or 8, never, ever been a 4. It's tiny.

@OrganicAvocado

CinnamonJellyBeans

Look at the photos of her post weight loss. Do you actually have the same proportions as her? Her limbs are very muscular and there is no excess fat, even on her face. Her BMI might be 23, but she looks like she carries more muscle than regular women. She says she spends a lot of time at the gym.

Well I have have never set foot in a gym, so clearly that makes a difference. I have BMI of 24.3, am 2 inches shorter and 6lb lighter. My measurements are 34-28-36. So no I don’t have a tiny waist but I’m certainly not carrying a lot of excess weight other than my mum tum. I’m quite active. I walk a couple of miles most days.

There's your answer then OP. You have a rectangular body shape and your waist is making you a size 10. She is an hourglass with slimmer mid section. She may carry weight on her legs you can't see in the photo.

@Sunnygold

Off topic but it’s impossible to lose that much weight without having an apron of skin. She’s obviously has surgery that wasn’t mentioned in the article.

Depends when you lose it.

I lost ten stone between the ages of 22 and 24. No lose skin at all.

I’ve put it all on again all these years later, ten stone in two years. I’m going back down again but i’m 41 this time, so doubt i’ll be as lucky.

@bunnybuggs

the clothing sizing is very misleading - back in the day - the vital statistics were bust/waist/hips and one aimed to be 36-22-36 BMI is ridiculous as a measure of healthy weight as it takes no account of skeletal size, muscles or fat etc. And as for the clothing sizes now touted by shops I am anything between a 14, 12,10 depending on whether it is a top, jeans or dress. that said I think you know when you are overweight (pinch more than an inch ) and I agree that the 4-6 size quoted is american sizes not UK.

Who did? The 50s starlet 'ideal' was 36, 24, 36 but in my day, kate Moss era, everyone actually just aimed to be very very slim.Thankfully a wider range of body shapes are seen to be attractive now.

The photo of her lower body looks like she could easily be a very small size, as you can see the muscle definition very clearly - she obviously does a lot of lower body working in lifting and I suspect she runs regularly, too.

I'm not as sure about her upper body shot, as it does seem to involve PS going by the change in background from textured on one side to absolutely smooth on the other. I vaguely wondered whether she's had surgery to tidy up and the use of longer sleeves and patterns to distract the eye and guide it towards her slimmest part - her waist - are part of that.

I think what they actually did was quote her largest UK size that fitted her bust as the starting point and the smallest size she can get into on her lower half as the end point - from ordering stuff online, I know you frequently have to pick US sizes for things from China, too - they might not say it's a US size, you go from the measurements in the size guide. I wouldn't be surprised if the 22 stone thing was when she was 9 months pregnant, either.

Whether she's had surgery or not, she's done amazingly well and I'd definitely be interested in the diet and exercise plan she had over and above that of somebody who has never had to make such a dramatic change of lifestyle, whether or not her 'supplements' were vitamins or weight loss medication. And stuff like this feature may very well be useful to her in setting up in business and becoming more financially independent, so if the press want to be slightly hyperbolic in the sizing, I can see why - I also think it might be a slight 'fuck you' to the ex, for which I applaud her, as it is so common that controlling partners are complete arses when their victims try to do something for themselves that might result in them being more physically attractive, healthier, more confident and less dependent/grateful for the scraps of attention.

I don't want to bring her down at all. None of this changes the fact that she went from supermorbidly obese to not in face of the end of her marriage and lockdown. She is incredible in how dedicated she has been and I hope if she does become a PT that her business does brilliantly. If I could do half as well as her, I'd be extremely pleased with myself.

just to clarify :

The specific proportions of 36–24–36 inches (90-60-90 centimeters) have frequently been given as the "ideal", or "hourglass" proportions for women since at least the 1960s (these measurements are, for example, the title of a hit instrumental by The Shadows).
admit I didn't know that about the Shadows it just goes to show how fashions change and what is admired in one decade is anathema in another.
Apologies I did say 22 when I meant 24 !

Jealousy is a ugly emotion.

She's muscular with a small waist so it's feasible. I'm similar height and weight and a pretty soft 12-14!

The thing is that everyone is differently built. DD and I are within a few lbs of one another- she's 8stone0, 5'4', and a size 8.
I'm 7st12, 5'0" and a size 8/10, but mostly 10. I have slightly more muscle, and rather more norkage, I've had three pregnancies, am an hourglass whereas she's oblong/athletic build.

This woman has obviously worked very hard to get down to an healthy weight- well done to her
Think of the difference that has made to her health and long-term fitness.

There's your answer then OP. You have a rectangular body shape and your waist is making you a size 10. She is an hourglass with slimmer mid section. She may carry weight on her legs you can't see in the photo.

But even when I truly was a size 8 and had a 26 inch waist, I was smaller all over, not just my waist, and a stone and a half lighter.
I am size 10 in jeans now (to accommodate my hips) but 12 in tops. If my waist was currently 26” then I’d still not fit into general “size 8” clothing unless super stretch material to cover my bum or big boxy tops to accommodate my boobs. There’s a difference between having a small waist and wearing size 4-6 clothes. My super skinny but muscular (sporty) 5’ tall 12-year-old wears some size 6 women’s clothing. She’s still wearing age 10-11 kids clothes. Size 4-6 on a 41-year-old 4 inches taller than her?

Newsflash: you can't tell someone's weight by looking at them. I'm 5'6" and wear size 10-12 at 11.5 stone! I have a heavy build so it seems reasonable to me that some people have a light build.