Page 1 of 1

What is your waist-to-hip ratio?

Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2011 1:56 am
by casual_cyclist
According to this article: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14483512/ns/health-fitness/

The best way to predict heart attack risk and other obesity-related diseases is a measurement that divides the circumference of your waist by your hips.

If you’re a woman, the waist-to-hip ratio should come out as no more than 0.8. Men have a little more wiggle room: a healthy waist-to-hip ratio for them is 0.95.


I don't have a tape measure so I can measure mine yet. I do know that before I started cycling, my waist was more than 100 cm, which just by itself is a fairly serious risk factor. At a guess now, I would say that it is maybe 94 cm based on my trouser size. Anyway, it's a big improvement. Still a way to go though (at a guess).

Re: What is your waist-to-hip ratio?

Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2011 9:07 am
by MichaelB
Even though my BMI is higher than is ideal, my WHR is actually OK - I have child bearing hips !!!!!

And I'm a bloke !!! :D

Re: What is your waist-to-hip ratio?

Posted: Sun Apr 17, 2011 11:47 am
by Aushiker
casual_cyclist wrote:I don't have a tape measure so I can measure mine yet. I do know that before I started cycling, my waist was more than 100 cm, which just by itself is a fairly serious risk factor. At a guess now, I would say that it is maybe 94 cm based on my trouser size. Anyway, it's a big improvement. Still a way to go though (at a guess).

94 cm waist size is considered the goal waist size for men. Much more important I believe that weight measures. This Australian government website has more on the topic.

Andrew

Re: What is your waist-to-hip ratio?

Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2011 7:08 am
by greyhoundtom
Does my bum look big in this?

I have difficulty seeing the correlation between hip and waist size as a genuine guide to a healthy body shape, as most obese people also carry a fair amount of blubber around their hips.

But then according to the experts blubber below the waist does not matter, only a fat gut is a problem. :?

As far as i’m concerned just another excuse by an overweight nation to dodge the issue of obesity.

Tom

Re: What is your waist-to-hip ratio?

Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2011 10:40 am
by Aushiker
greyhoundtom wrote:Does my bum look big in this?

I have difficulty seeing the correlation between hip and waist size as a genuine guide to a healthy body shape, as most obese people also carry a fair amount of blubber around their hips.

Which means that their waist to hip ratio will not be in the healthy range ...

Andrew

Re: What is your waist-to-hip ratio?

Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2011 10:45 am
by Comedian
Ok... if I measured it right... hip 89 and belly 80??

Re: What is your waist-to-hip ratio?

Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2011 1:22 pm
by gtfpv cycler
i'm not sure how to do this . is hip - around the centre of your backside and crotch . and waist above this but under your gut , and your gut would be around your belly button , is that right . ??????
dont most mens hips and also waist start decreasing in size before thier gut .

Re: What is your waist-to-hip ratio?

Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2011 1:24 pm
by gtfpv cycler
i'm not sure how to do this . is hip - around the centre of your backside and crotch . and waist above this but under your gut , and your gut would be around your belly button , is that right . ??????
dont most mens hips and also waist start decreasing in size before thier gut . i'm pretty sure i'm shrinking allover . my chest for example is reducing along with my gut . atthis stage the proportions may be the same though .

Re: What is your waist-to-hip ratio?

Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2011 2:46 pm
by simonn

Re: What is your waist-to-hip ratio?

Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2011 10:33 pm
by casual_cyclist
greyhoundtom wrote:I have difficulty seeing the correlation between hip and waist size as a genuine guide to a healthy body shape, as most obese people also carry a fair amount of blubber around their hips.

Have you seen a fat person with a narrow waist? I haven't.

greyhoundtom wrote:But then according to the experts blubber below the waist does not matter, only a fat gut is a problem. :?

No. Research indicates that abdominal fat increases the risk of disease and this is not correlated to body weight. Although the chances are that a person with high abdominal fat will fit into the "overweight" or "obese" categories, a person with a "normal" body weight can still have dangerously high levels of abdominal fat.

greyhoundtom wrote:As far as i’m concerned just another excuse by an overweight nation to dodge the issue of obesity.

I am concerned too. I am concerned that we have been lied to by the weight loss industry and weight loss drug companies that "normal" BMI is healthy. For an individual, the evidence is not there. This is a public health issue and it is very serious. There is a reason why the government is running the "Measure Up" campaign targeting waist measurement and not a BMI related campaign... there is little evidence supporting BMI as a measure of health but there is evidence supporting using Waist-to-hip ratio and waist circumference. Waist-to-hip ratio and waist circumference are superior to BMI.

Because I am concerned about my health and want to reduce my risk of developing cardiovascular disease I have been researching this. Here one study I found: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc1014730

This is what it says:
In practical terms, the relationship between BMI and all-cause mortality remains uncertain.... Waist-to-hip ratio and waist circumference are superior to BMI in predicting all-cause mortality, the rate of death due to cardiovascular disease,2,3 and the association between obesity and myocardial infarction.4 The waist-to-hip ratio, in particular, shows a low measurement error and high precision, and it is without bias over a wide range of ethnic groups.5 Since the waist-to-hip ratio is clearly a better predictor of total mortality than BMI, it is likely to be associated with death from obesity-related cancers. Standardized measures of central obesity should be included in future population studies.


Here is another study: http://ftp.utalca.cl/profesores/gicaza/Respaldo%20FONIS%20RCV/Marrugat/InterHeart%20Lancet%202004.pdf

This is what it says:
Body-mass index was related to risk of myocardial infarction, but this relation was weaker than that of abdominal obesity (waist/hip ratio), with body-mass index becoming non-significant with the inclusion of waist/hip ratio in the multivariate model (data not shown). Before multivariate adjustment, abdominal obesity (top vs lowest tertile) doubled the risk of acute myocardial infarction, but the effects were substantially diminished after adjustment for other risk factors, especially apolipoproteins.


Here is what the World Health Organisation says: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs311/en/
BMI provides the most useful population-level measure of overweight and obesity as it is the same for both sexes and for all ages of adults. However, it should be considered a rough guide because it may not correspond to the same degree of fatness in different individuals.

So BMI is a good measure for populations but NOT a good measure for individuals.

Another study: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2894715/
Although BMI is the most common method to define overweightness and obesity in both epidemiological studies and major clinical trials, clearly this method does not necessarily reflect true body fatness.


It is clear that excess fat, particularly abdominal fat, increases risk of disease. It is also equally clear that BMI is not useful for measuring body fat in individuals. Fat and abdominal fat can be measured with a tape measure but not with scales because scales treat fat and muscle the same. We need a way to measure our risk factors that actually works and is supported by research. There is no point reaching a "normal" BMI if real risk factors are not reduced.

Re: What is your waist-to-hip ratio?

Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2011 10:40 pm
by casual_cyclist
According to the Measure Up website, I have reduced my risk from "Greatly increased risk" (more than 102 centimetres) to just less than "Increased risk" (94 centimetres). Next goal is under 90 cm.

I am pretty horrified that by my mid 30s I had managed to eat myself into the "Greatly increased risk" category.

Re: What is your waist-to-hip ratio?

Posted: Thu Apr 21, 2011 12:30 am
by casual_cyclist
Interesting post about BMI vs weight-to-height ratio at Livestrong:

http://www.livestrong.com/article/93638-whtr-the-new-determinant-health-risk/

New research shows that the WHtR, not BMI, is the most accurate assessment tool for health risk. People with the most weight around their waists are at greatest risk of diseases such as heart disease and diabetes. Therefore, since you can't change your height, you should take special care to keep your weight and in particular, abdominal girth in a healthy range by eating nutritiously and exercising regularly.

Re: What is your waist-to-hip ratio?

Posted: Thu Apr 21, 2011 9:20 am
by simonn
I would bet that the majority of people who are close to their ideal BMI also have close to ideal W2HR as well.

Re: What is your waist-to-hip ratio?

Posted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 5:20 pm
by mekore
greyhoundtom wrote:Does my bum look big in this?

I have difficulty seeing the correlation between hip and waist size as a genuine guide to a healthy body shape, as most obese people also carry a fair amount of blubber around their hips.

But then according to the experts blubber below the waist does not matter, only a fat gut is a problem. :?

As far as i’m concerned just another excuse by an overweight nation to dodge the issue of obesity.

Tom


The most dangerous fat is abdominal fat, which resides in the abdominal cavity, not those below the skin. The abdominal fat messes with your metabolism more, directly increasing the risk of diabetes, and heart diseases, etc. Look for 'metabolic syndrome' if you wanted to know more :mrgreen: