Weight loss, belt notches and trouser size
Discussion
I've lost a lot of weight since the beginning of the year and have started buying new clothes. I am somewhat disappointed that my trouser size is only down to a 38" - it was previously 40" / 42".
I've lost 30Kg, and had to get new belts. All of my old belts went from the biggest hole to the smallest hole - A total of 5", and the replacements have gone from the biggest hole to the smallest but one - another 3"
I would have expected my trouser size to be no bigger than 36", maybe even 34", but whilst I can get a 36" pair of trousers on, I certainly couldn't spend a comfortable day in a pair. I assume the anomaly between belt notches and trouser size is due to the belt basically being used to push compressible belly fat around, but if anyone has a more scientific explanation I'd love to hear it.
I've lost 30Kg, and had to get new belts. All of my old belts went from the biggest hole to the smallest hole - A total of 5", and the replacements have gone from the biggest hole to the smallest but one - another 3"
I would have expected my trouser size to be no bigger than 36", maybe even 34", but whilst I can get a 36" pair of trousers on, I certainly couldn't spend a comfortable day in a pair. I assume the anomaly between belt notches and trouser size is due to the belt basically being used to push compressible belly fat around, but if anyone has a more scientific explanation I'd love to hear it.
popeyewhite said:
Over winter/autumn last year I lost about 2 stone but my belt only went down from 37" to 35". I looked a lot thinner and had much more defined abs but was surprised my belt had shortened so little.
The current fashion is for trousers to sit on the hip. For a lot of chaps, the lard action is going on above that. So a significant loss of weight may not manifest itself a huge reduction in belt size.Zio Di Roma said:
popeyewhite said:
Over winter/autumn last year I lost about 2 stone but my belt only went down from 37" to 35". I looked a lot thinner and had much more defined abs but was surprised my belt had shortened so little.
The current fashion is for trousers to sit on the hip. For a lot of chaps, the lard action is going on above that. So a significant loss of weight may not manifest itself a huge reduction in belt size.omniflow said:
I've lost a lot of weight since the beginning of the year and have started buying new clothes. I am somewhat disappointed that my trouser size is only down to a 38" - it was previously 40" / 42".
I've lost 30Kg, and had to get new belts. All of my old belts went from the biggest hole to the smallest hole - A total of 5", and the replacements have gone from the biggest hole to the smallest but one - another 3"
I would have expected my trouser size to be no bigger than 36", maybe even 34", but whilst I can get a 36" pair of trousers on, I certainly couldn't spend a comfortable day in a pair. I assume the anomaly between belt notches and trouser size is due to the belt basically being used to push compressible belly fat around, but if anyone has a more scientific explanation I'd love to hear it.
I'm with you here - over the past 12 months I've shrunk my belt size down about 8" , but my trouser size down 2" , via a combination of light exercise and improved diet. As you have said the belt originally forced some fat up - and you get roll-over, and push down on the trouser, and I'm glad to say this is very nearly all gone - at this point further weight loss will hopefully start to reduce the trouser size a little more - but in my 50's this is proving hard, but ultimately rewarding... I've lost 30Kg, and had to get new belts. All of my old belts went from the biggest hole to the smallest hole - A total of 5", and the replacements have gone from the biggest hole to the smallest but one - another 3"
I would have expected my trouser size to be no bigger than 36", maybe even 34", but whilst I can get a 36" pair of trousers on, I certainly couldn't spend a comfortable day in a pair. I assume the anomaly between belt notches and trouser size is due to the belt basically being used to push compressible belly fat around, but if anyone has a more scientific explanation I'd love to hear it.
Keep it up...
Psycho Warren said:
Also the fatter you are the more "vanity sizing" they do on the clothes like commonly found on womens clothes. Very much brand dependent too.
Yep. Measure your old trousers to check they are actually the size on the label. Levi were famous for vanity sizing where a 34" comes up like a true 36" so that when you buy a British manufactured pair of trousers you question why the same size is tighter! It's just that reputable British tailors tend not to cheat. Far East etc I don't think there's a lot of interest in quality control.23.7 said:
It's not just trousers, jackets look ridiculous and shoes too. I dropped a shoe size, whoever thought of putting you feet on a diet!
I have to tighten my watch strap one notch every time. Clear indentations on it marking my last two diets over six years. I only ever try to lose a couple of stone, or enough to take me back to defined abs, but like you suggest it's interesting where else fat mass/water etc is lost around the body during dieting.
Gassing Station | Health Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff