 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Quote: |
I'd hate to see a 6'2" man in the "green zone", for I'd be afraid he got blown away by a puff of wind!!!
|
Woah I'm 6ft 2 and have a 35 inch waist and anyone who knows me will certainly say I'm not in danger of being blown away, in fact if anything I could still do with losing a bit of excess gut. I don't think I have an unrealistic view of all this but IMO 37 inches is pretty big unless you're over 6ft 6. Personally I'd like to slim down about another 2 inches and even then I wouldn't be ripped. After climbing for five weeks in the Dolomites I went from 36in to 34in without losing any weight.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
In first glance at Kramer's "tape measure" scale I was quite pleased, because my trousers which are 38" are feeling too large now, I thought I was in the green zone. Then I got out a tape measure, now I'm confused and "amber". Do all trouser manufactures make their trousers bigger than they say on the label just to make us feel less fat or am I missing something.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Swirly, The zones are for risk of cardiac problems, not as a guide for whether people are as fit as they could be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Hurtle wrote: |
| Kramer, thanks! In truth, that is why I do indeed try to stay on the case - healthy eating, exercise, an eye on cholesterol levels etc - if not religiously so. Do you have any views on daily aspirin? I do, but am not sure whether the jury is in or out on that, at the moment. (Enteric coated, obviously, and I have a cast iron gut anyway.) |
Too many people who don't need it take it in my opinion. Depends on your overall CV risk assessment (best performed by your friendly GP), but if you're at low risk, the downside of aspirin outweighs the upside. Gastric and duodenal ulcers can be completely silent right up until the point of fatal haemorrhage or perforation, although the risk of these is greater in the elderly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Kramer,
| Quote: |
Too many people who don't need it take it in my opinion.
|
Thanks. My GP feels the same about statins.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| peura wrote: |
| In first glance at Kramer's "tape measure" scale I was quite pleased, because my trousers which are 38" are feeling too large now, I thought I was in the green zone. Then I got out a tape measure, now I'm confused and "amber". Do all trouser manufactures make their trousers bigger than they say on the label just to make us feel less fat or am I missing something. |
Basically yes. I take a 33in waist in trousers now, but my true waist measurement is 37 inches.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hurtle, statins are a bit more complex. If you already have vascular disease or are high risk because of diabetes then they have a very useful role to play, however it is unclear whether they are cost effective in preventing heart disease or stroke in people who are otherwise well. They do have a significant incidence of side effects in my opinion.
The situation is not helped by the (I assume) drugs companies encouraging journalists to rubbish simvastatin, because it's not under patent any more and so they make no money from it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
Kramer, interesting, thanks. There's a woman in my Pilates class (who is at very high risk, as it happens) who had dreadful side effects - muscle problems - with hers. She is an ex-competitive gymnast, and the whole thing has been most upsetting for her.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Kramer wrote: |
| peura wrote: |
| In first glance at Kramer's "tape measure" scale I was quite pleased, because my trousers which are 38" are feeling too large now, I thought I was in the green zone. Then I got out a tape measure, now I'm confused and "amber". Do all trouser manufactures make their trousers bigger than they say on the label just to make us feel less fat or am I missing something. |
Basically yes. I take a 33in waist in trousers now, but my true waist measurement is 37 inches. |
Thanks. Hmm, not impressed. I thought at least with men's clothing sizes they related to something real rather than being completely arbitrary like women's sizes. Oh well, at least I'm still fairly sure my waist size has reduced (unless all my trousers have stretched simultaneously).
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
Hurtle, the problem is that if you are at high risk, there's no alternative with a comparable evidence base behind it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| Quote: |
My waist to hip ratio is: haha! OVER 90%!!! Am I fat? Or am I just small waisted???
|
 small bummed, rather.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
So with a waist size of 73cm and a habit of drinking green tea and eating meusli, presumably I will be immortal! Hurrah!! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
abc, there's only so much muscle you can put on round your waist. Agreed that it does give some thin but unhealthy people a false sense of security. But I promise you they have been pretty extensively researched and analysed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| abc wrote: |
| So come to the next puzzle: why is it consider "healthy" for men to have much bigger waist size than women? |
Perhaps because mens bodies are different shape to womens? Also when men put on weight they tend to deposit fat on their stomachs preferentially, whereas women tend to deposit it on their backsides.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Kramer, Apart from after the menopause, when women dump fat on their stomachs and lose it from their hips/thighs? Is that true?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
erica2004, I don't know about that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
erica2004, I wonder. Women tend to put on weight as they get older, but is it related to the menopause? If you eat more calories than you burn you put on weight, if you eat fewer calories than you burn, you lose it. I know nothing about "hormones" but I do wonder about the mechanism by which they would change the laws of physics. It's maybe like the oft-repeated mantra that women gain weight after having a hysterectomy. Post ergo non propter hoc. You might as well say that women gain weight after having a new kitchen installed, or a new fitted carpet, or having their teeth whitened. And why do we tend to put on weight as we get older? No obvious reason why that should be the case, other than eating like an active 35 year old but doing SFA.
Interesting queston about where the weight is deposited, though. This does seem to be widely stated, and you do see quite a few older women with tummies that make you wonder when the baby's due. Maybe it does go on different places? I wonder if there is any scientific evidence for this? If I put on a few pounds it tends to go around my middle, but then I think it always did and you see plenty of fat teenagers round Tescos, with rolls of naked midriff everywhere.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| abc wrote: |
Swirly and Arno, I did not noticed the HUGE difference between male and female figures!  I thought there's no way a 6'2 person be under 32" waist. |
As Arno pointed out, you may not see anyone that shape but they do exist. I'm 6'3" and have a 31" waist, it was about an inch smaller during last season.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Quote: |
I'm 6'3" and have a 31" waist, it was about an inch smaller during last season.
|
My newly acquired son in law is much the same shape. A PE teacher. And a fine figure of a chap. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| rjs wrote: |
| abc wrote: |
| Swirly and Arno, I did not noticed the HUGE difference between male and female figures! I thought there's no way a 6'2 person be under 32" waist. |
As Arno pointed out, you may not see anyone that shape but they do exist. I'm 6'3" and have a 31" waist, it was about an inch smaller during last season. |
Lot's of people that shape in my gym. Unfortunately me not being one of them yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
maybe I missed it but is there a link to show what/where to measure to calculate this hip/waist ratio??
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
pam w, if women gain weight after hysterectomy, I suspect it's because they fail to adjust their eating habits during the period of inactivity following the operation and don't do anything about the resulting blubber.
And take your claws off your son-in-law - that sort of thing does nothing for family harmony.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
kitenski,
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| Quote: |
erica2004
, Apart from after the menopause, when women dump fat on their stomachs and lose it from their hips/thighs? Is that true?
|
I don't know much about it, but I've heard that it's to do with the lowering of female hormones due to menopause (or hysterectomy), which means that there is a higher balance of male hormones in the body. And men tend to put on weight on stomach rather than hips / thighs.
Also as you get older your metabolic rate slows down so even if you eat the same amount of food & do the same amount of exercise, it becomes easier & easier to put on weight - how annoying is that!
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| snowsparkle2 wrote: |
| Quote: |
erica2004
, Apart from after the menopause, when women dump fat on their stomachs and lose it from their hips/thighs? Is that true?
|
I don't know much about it, but I've heard that it's to do with the lowering of female hormones due to menopause (or hysterectomy), which means that there is a higher balance of male hormones in the body. And men tend to put on weight on stomach rather than hips / thighs.
Also as you get older your metabolic rate slows down so even if you eat the same amount of food & do the same amount of exercise, it becomes easier & easier to put on weight - how annoying is that! |
I have ALWAYS had a tendency to accumulate fat above hip level and when I lose weight it goes from my legs/hips first making the WH ratio worse  .
IMHO there is a lot of cr@p talked about the post-hysterectomy state. It was a changing point in my life which made everyone, including me, realise how unwell I had been, as over the time since I have gradually got slimmer (by 4 stones so far) and fitter and now am in better shape than I have ever been since my 20s. Am still working on it as I am not yet where I want/need to be - it's a slow process, but I am looking at it as a permanent and sustainable change in me, not a quick fix that could be temporary.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| snowsparkle2 wrote: |
| Also as you get older your metabolic rate slows down so even if you eat the same amount of food & do the same amount of exercise, it becomes easier & easier to put on weight - how annoying is that! |
I'm not sure how inevitable this is. There's no doubt that as we get older we tend to lose lean muscle mass, which would make our energy requirements decrease however AFAIK there is quite a bit of evidence to suggest that this loss can be slowed hugely by appropriate exercise. There is also a large cultural element, in that as people get older, they (mostly) tend to lead more sedentary lifestyles. It all seems to come back to exercising regularly, and including resistance work (weights), even (especially!) for women.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Kramer wrote:,
| Quote: |
there is quite a bit of evidence to suggest that this loss can be slowed hugely by appropriate exercise
|
That is so true - and I'm in the process of upping my regular exercise this summer. The trouble is that I guess you have to keep at it, or the fat piles back on even quicker........
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| Kramer wrote: |
| There is also a large cultural element, in that as people get older, they (mostly) tend to lead more sedentary lifestyles. It all seems to come back to exercising regularly, and including resistance work (weights), even (especially!) for women. |
Of course for those who develop health problems as they age, such as arthritis in the knees/hips, exercise will be far less easy and it comes down to a balance between the health benefits of the exercise and the pain & potential further joint damage from doing too much.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
Butterfly, I'm pretty sure that there was a paper last year that suggested that contrary to longstanding belief, continuing exercise does not significantly accelerate joint damage. I agree that arthritis does limit the type of exercise that you can do, but I don't think that it necessarily rules it out completely.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Kramer, I went for a 50 minute brisk walk last night. Will this do me any good if I keep it up, or do I need to work harder?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
Frosty the Snowman, were you sweaty and breathless at the end of it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
Not really......... I guess that is a no then!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Frosty the Snowman, it'll burn off calories, the only problem being that you're likely to compensate by eating more.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Do I have to be sweaty AND breathless? I'm now doing a half hour run three days a week. Afterwards I'm sweaty and my heart rate raised (but not so much that I can feel it without checking my pulse) but my breathing rate is not terribly high, although faster than normal. My calves know they've worked though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Frosty the Snowman, I don't know about the eating more argument. Very often I find that I eat more when I'm slobbing around doing nothing. Some exercise seems to regulate the appetite for the better. Also, you have to start somewhere - telling people that a long brisk walk, or a 30 minute bike ride, is doing them no good is just plain discouraging. The more exercise you do, the more you feel like doing. And the converse is also true.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
pam w, yes same here. Eating is mostly in the mind. Occupy the mind and the hunger goes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
Frosty the Snowman, surely there are other excercises to get you sweaty and breatheless in less time than 50 minutes 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rayscoops, however they need to last longer than a few seconds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
