Fitness Minutes: (57,011)
4,787 1/23/14 10:47 P
I didn't believe that "size 6" either. She didn't look like a size 6 to me at all.
I am 5'2" and weigh 154 and wear a size 14 petite.
Fitness Minutes: (36,342)
2,545 1/23/14 8:02 P
JAMIRBLAZE makes another good point. If I try on a 4 and it's too small and I try on a 6 and it's too big does that mean a size 5 will fit?
Oh, no it doesn't! Because even numbers are womens sizes and odd numbers are junior sizes and let's not forget about Misses sizes and then there is that weird 0,1,2,3 that Chicos uses and the 0,1,2,3 that is also being used in place of L, XL, 2XL, 3XL. And then Old Navy has their own weird system where there XS Tees are too big for me and my DD and let's not forget the standard S,M, L sizes and the short, average, long and petite sizing too!
The sizing is definitely all over the place. This really came home for me when I was out shopping with a friend who is about the same height as I am but definitely more fit and much closer to a healthy weight than I am at the moment. She was pulling dresses in 12s and 14s. The same sizes I would pull if I were to pull the same dresses. Sometimes it's body shape, she's a bit hippier proportionately than I am, and sometimes it's the clothing.
Remember this is a reality TV show. Size numbers can be altered to be smaller. So a 5'8 140 lb woman may be "fitted" with a size 4 for TV Then go to the mall and need to purchase a size 16! No standard sizing for clothing so manufactures/designers can place whatever number they choose on a garment.
Fitness Minutes: (72,834)
1/23/14 3:52 P
Online Now • ))
I gave up on comparing myself by sizes. I range anywhere from a 4 to a 10 and I think that's absurd. Just last week I was shopping for a baselayer shirt for hiking. I tried on a large and it was uncomfortably tight, but the xs fit fine. Biggest Loser is fun to watch, but they can control what a person's size is by shopping at the right store.
Fitness Minutes: (82,255)
1/23/14 1:09 P
I found where the garment is manufactured is a part of the sizing issue as well. I used to wear clothes from this one store who changed their manufacturer from China to Malaysia and what was a size 10 from China is a 12 to 14 from Malaysia.
Weird but true......no standardization whatsoever.
Fitness Minutes: (301,028)
1/23/14 11:41 A
BUNNYKICKS brings up a very good point. When I was young, size 0,00 or 000 didn't exist. the smallest size you could be when I was a teen was size 2/3. And if you were that size, you were called Olive Oil and told to eat one of Whimpy's burgers.
There is absolutely NO standardization in women's clothing. So, a designer really can put in any size number they want into their pants, shirts or dresses. I too agree that a size 6 really can be anything.
Take Marilyn Monroe. She may well have worn a size 12 to 16, BUT those were sizes from the 1950s ! Sizes from then are not the same as today.
Height and shape make a huge difference, along with body fat %. I'm 5'6," 142 lbs on the scale this morning and wear anywhere from a 2 to an 8, but in most things a 4 and a XS-S. I have mostly an hourglass shape, but am slightly more hippy than busty. I also lift fairly heavy, do ST 2-3 times a week and have a body that easily adds muscle. If I wanted to wear Spanx to suck in the loose skin on my tummy/hips all of the time, I probably would be more consistently a 2, if I could get the item over my quads and calves - both of which are muscular. Someone my height and shape could be a bigger size if they have more body fat than I do - which is part of the reason I started doing more ST last year.
Please don't be fixated on numbers. It's all very random and frustrating, especially if you are doing any discount shopping. I especially love when I try on one size and it's too tight, and the next size up is too loose.
I am a past fan of BL but less so these days as it bores me lol. Still, I watch it when I remember it is on. I did note they mentioned a size 6 that I thought had to be incorrect just from my visual impression, but t'is hard to tell on TV.
But as for sizing these days, it is all over the place and vanity sizing is rampant, so any manufacturer of clothing can call anything a size 6 or a size zero (always makes me laugh because that would mean the wearer was taking up no physical space at all and thus did not exist in the physical world).
Aside from the original topic on this thread but responding to some comments made, I think this season the show is not so unrealistic in the amount of weight contestants have lost weekly and overall. In the past they were dropping insane amounts at every weigh-in and were at much lower weights when they reached the "makeovers."
It does seem reasonable to me that people who pretty much make it their job to go to a location away from home and career and focus only on exercising and "dieting" (because they ARE on "diets") all day, every single day under the guidance of a medical team and physical trainers are bound to lose a lot of weight if they have a lot of weight to lose.
Fitness Minutes: (13,947)
1/23/14 8:50 A
I was just talking about this with my son! I started to get frustrated with myself because i was still in my size 14 jeans, but my smart 13 year old reminded me that this is a tv show and they can pretty much do and say whatever they want and that I probably shouldn't buy into it. I love that kid!
1/23/14 8:36 A
Try not to compare yourself to the show's standards - It's unrealistic and ridiculous, not to mention unhealthy to lose the amount of weight they're pushing for in the amount of time. It's all about ratings. As people mentioned, sizes also depend on the designers. There's no standard. I wouldn't worry about the size as much as losing slow and steady and exercising for health. You'll know when you get there, if you're at a healthy weight for you.
Fitness Minutes: (6,555)
1/23/14 8:24 A
LadyCJM made a really good point. Your size is more about body measurements than about weight (reason #1 why I think a scale is a useless POS, what does a scale tell me about how clothes will fit?!?). I've been at 155# about 3 times in my life so far and each time my measurements get smaller. First time, it was a 42" hip, 30" waist. Second time it was a 40" hip and 28" waist. Now I'm at a 38" hip and 25" waist. Body composition really does matter. And buying tops and pant would be soooooo much easier if it was done by chest, waist, inseam, and hip measurements rather than random numbers.
Edited by: LEC358 at: 1/23/2014 (08:26)
Fitness Minutes: (36,342)
2,545 1/23/14 1:55 A
I'm 5'6" and weigh 148#s and wear a size 4 pant and a small top. Dresses are a size 6. I have an "hourglass" figure ...10 inches between waist and bust/hip measurements. My DD weighs a couple of pounds more and is an inch shorter and wears a size 6 pant and a small or medium top.
I think it really depends on your shape, the style of clothes you wear,and how you like them to fit. Height also makes a difference. Sizes are so variable, a size 4 in one brand is the same as a size 6 in another.
I try not to get hung on sizes. I never thought I wear single digit sizes..ever! I read that Marilyn Monroe wore a size 12..she was beautiful and curvy. Who knows what size she would wear now?
It would be nice if they sized womens clothes like they do mens... I'll take a 26 waist with a 36 hip and a 30 inseam please ......
Edited by: LADYCJM at: 1/23/2014 (01:56)
Fitness Minutes: (74,443)
3,293 1/23/14 1:41 A
I wear a 10/12 and I weigh a lot more than you do!
Sure, height makes a big difference. So do proportions. I have short legs and a ridiculously long torso (petite pants, tall tops) so I weigh more than someone my height would who has longer legs--I'm not fatter, there is just more of me. Those of us who are more muscular/athletic also tend to weigh more. Being top heavy can also mean that you weigh more without actually being bigger all over. Frame/skeleton size makes a difference too.
Or maybe you just like to wear your clothes loose!
1/23/14 1:37 A
I didn't fit in a size 6 when i was 125 pounds lol. That of course was about 30 years ago.... i suspect clothing sizes have changed somewhat. We never had Size 0 back then..... everything has shifted...
Also, wouldn't surprise me if the show "lied".... oh, i'm sure the outfit had a "size 6" label on it but manufacturers can put whatever label they want on their clothes - a lot of the labelling is "vanity sizing" and not really very comparable to the actual sizing you'd expect at your local department store.
Which... I find irritating, as it only adds to that whole false ideal... no longer can we just strive for a "healthy body weight" - we have to expect that we'll also "Fit a size 6! so! proud!" and if we don't... guess we fail! Yeahh it doesn't sit well with me at all. "Reality TV" could use a bit more reality.
Fitness Minutes: (19,884)
75 1/23/14 1:20 A
I hope this is an ok forum to put this in... Just something I was thinking about late at night when procrastinating on doing my reading for my class... I love watching The Biggest Loser. I know there are issues with the show (unrealistic for most people, etc.) but I still enjoy it. I just watched my Tivo'd Makeover week episode from last night.... Don't worry, I won't give anything away if you haven't watched yet. But one thing I don't get... The clothes sizes they say they are wearing! Take Rachel. According to the web site, she is 151. They said the dress she put on is a size 6. Um... I'm 155 and I am a size 12. Maybe 10 if I'm lucky. Is it a height thing? She doesn't look that tall in the photos compared to everyone else... But maybe height really does make a difference (I'm 5' 4"). Or is it because they are toned? This isn't the first season I've noticed this. I'm looking forward to the day I can fit in a size 6!