To think size 18 is plus size and not 'hardly plus size'

[sanddownthatwall]

The poster, with a very large following, is saying a size 18 isn't really plus size by much, and that 'most people (in the UK), are above a Size 16?

Really? I don't know that many people above a size 16. I really don't. I know lots and lots of size 12/14 and thought that was about average? It's usually the first sizes to sell out

www.instagram.com/p/ChiDp-1Mos3/?igshid=MDJmNzVkMjY=

What on earth do you base this on?

I'm 5'9" and if I were a 14 I'd be overweight by BMI. Obviously people's frames are different, and what's true for me might not be true for everyone, but a blanket statement that a size 14 will definitely be a healthy weight at a given height is just nonsense.

A size 14 is also hugely variable in different shops, which is another reason this statement is nonsense.

If someone wants to assess whether they are a healthy weight, the most reliable way (not perfect, but then nothing is) is to look at their BMI, and to look at their waist to height ratio. Not listen to randoms on the Internet confidently stating that "dress size [X] is healthy if you are [Y] tall".

She won't look fat at that size bmi calculator is a load bull shit to me it doesn't even take into account muscle mass you can see whether or not a person is over weight or obese by looking at there body in person bmi calculator means fuck all I hate those things.

Bmi is one of the tools to be used on combination with others such as waist measurements and common sense...

BmI calculator is a way to encourage eating disorders.

How is that any different to using waist measure for example?

BMI is a really rough guide, it shouldn't be taken as gospel.. it doesn't take shape into account.
I'm 5ft 7 and it says I could be 8.5 stone and be healthy! I'm sure some could but I have a wide skeleton, wide hips and shoulders. I got to 9.5 once and my periods stopped, bones stuck out so I couldn't sit/lie fown properly, looked grey and my face looked like a skull. I look fine from 10 stone - 13 stone.

That's why it has the wide range. To account for different bodies. If you then combine it with other things like waist measurement you can get a good picture of risks. Eg. Healthy bmi but waist measurement over recommend cm? Probably storing fat on the middle and that brings x and y risks like fatty liver etc.
Neither are a good indicator just by themselves.

BMI is a really rough guide, it shouldn't be taken as gospel.. it doesn't take shape into account.

It tries to take everything into account, that is why the healthy range is so wide.

Yes, but it's a millions times better than listening to some randomer on the Internet saying that "dress size [X] is healthy if you are [Y] tall".

The BMI healthy range is wide, precisely to account for differences in frame between different body types.

I agree. Looking at a range of indicators based on actual measurements (not dress sizes) is the best way to get a rounded view.

I hate it when people trot out this shit about BMI not taking muscle mass into account.

The vast majority of pro athletes are in the health weight range, despite having high muscle mass. Your average woman who runs a few times a week, does some lifting at the gym, and pilates is not going to develop the kind of muscle mass that will skew her BMI.

I train regularly, including strength training, and my muscle mass does nothing at all to skew my BMI or waist measurement.

I just can’t believe that this isn’t hyperbole - I am 5’6 and usually 8.5 and look slim but not with protruding bones! Yes everyone is different but I wonder if people have genuinely lost sight of what we are supposed to look like at a healthy weight. There isn’t supposed to be excess fat coverage anywhere.

I know its a total MN cliche, but I do think that as a society we are getting less good at recognising what a healthy weight looks like.

Exactly we are all different, that was the point of my post. You look good at that weight, I'd look ill. Is it healthy to not have periods and not be able to lie on my side or front in bed because my pelvis is so stuck out?

And yes I didn't say it was a useless guide, just a rough one and not to get too bogged down in the numbers at either end of the scale.

I'm sorry this is bull shit. I'm 5'8" and I would look ill if I was 8.5 stone, certainly with protruding bones and underweight in terms of BMI.
Women do naturally store fat in certain areas so some 'roundness' and 'softness' is completely normal.
The ridiculously underweight, supermodel-esque heroine chic of the 90s has had an equally detrimental affect on people's perception of what a healthy weight is which the body positivity movement has been trying to dismantle. Yes, sometimes it can go too far the other way but overall I don't think it's a bad thing.

thr poster I was responding to said she looks best 10-13 stone. That’s a 3 stone spread it’s a huge amount of weight!

I said "fine" not best, as in I don't look too thin at 10 stone and still look slim at 13 stone. Wide hips so massive thigh gap, wide shoulders so collar bones showing etc.

I’m not trying to be a dick I just absolutely can’t believe someone can look “slim” at 13 stone

I think I have a similar shape, possibly not so dramatic. I’m an hourglass at eleven stone and a skinny rectangle at nine. (All my width is hips and shoulder bones.)

I could live with that until I developed a muffin top.

Okay I can see why it might be hard to picture so heres a few pics. I have been a variety of weights (too many times 🙄😆) but here is how I look at 11.5 stone

And at 20 stone (can't find any body pics but face doesn't look how you'd expect) I'm 5ft 7

Ok thank you for photos!!!! You are right/ I am wrong but in my defence that’s very unusual!

Yeah it could be, I've always tried to never let the number on the scales get to me, think I must have a massive skeleton 😂 So yeah I would look awful at 8.5.

Is that a typo? I think you had broken scales because 20 stone is morbid obesity for that (well a lot of them if not most) height. You are just 1 cm higher than me.