Active Low-Carber Forums

Active Low-Carber Forums (http://forum.lowcarber.org/index.php)

- Atkins Diet (http://forum.lowcarber.org/forumdisplay.php?f=98)

- - smaller sizes (http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=188151)

I've got a question. Has anyone noticed that you can wear smaller sizes with this WOE? Years ago, I weighed what I do now, and couldn't even squeeze into a size 10 pants. But as it is now, these size 10 shorts are getting loose now. Anyone else experience this. It does feel good though. ;)

Not to make you feel less elated or anything but...

Many brands have been making the sizes larger now.... this makes us want to wear their brands because they know women would be more likely to buy a brand that they can wear a smaller size in.

I see size 0 at Abercrombie that compares to my size 3's that I kept and size 00 is like a size 1 used to be.... in order to get what a size 0 used to be, you have to get a size 000 at Abercrombie...its all a big marketing ploy, but it works so who can blame them.

Oh well, it still makes me feel good.

Yeah, this vanity sizing thing is a love/hate relationship.

I have lost more inches than previuos times before. same clothes too, i could never get rid of my skinny things, thank god i didn't!!! :D

Yeah...I kept all of mine that were in good shape as well.,,,the straight leg jeans are coming back in style and I have over 30 pairs of them in sizes 3 and 5.

I think what really makes it where you actually wear a smaller size at the same weight is muscle since it weighs more than fat... if you are working out now and were not when wearing the same thing before then you will be smaller at the same weight now.

I bought a pair of shorts at Old Navy (size 3) that are literally falling off me. Some stores I go to I can barely fit into a size 5. That's so depressing that I don't even know what true size I am.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cpreece

I don't even know what true size I am.

Doesn't help with the clothing sizing, but a tape measure is a great indication of whether you've changed (or just the manufacturers).

Guess you could always carry one with you when shopping in a new place, and measure the sizes, rather than just looking at the number.

Does anyone know if vanity sizing is also a rule in men's clothing ?

Which makes you wonder what the heck the wedding dress industry is THINKING, because their sizing is the totally opposite!

I took a fried wedding dress shopping and she was in tears because the size dress she had to wear was three sizes larger than her usual size! It didn't matter that she looked great, all she could think of was the size.

Fracture according to this article Men's sizes have been standardized since the Civil War.

This is an interesting article:

Silliness reigns when it comes to women's clothing sizes

By KARIN RONNOW, Chronicle Staff Writer

I hate trying on clothes. I have no patience for it.

But the truth is, these days, if I don't try them on, I have no idea whatsoever what will fit me.

Case in point: Last summer I bought a pair of shorts from a mail-order company in a size I thought would fit me. But when they arrived, they fell right off my hips. I had to send them back.

Then one day this winter, I slipped and fell, with a full-body splash, in an icy puddle. I was soaked and needed something else to wear. I dashed to a nearby department store, grabbed a stack of pants in "my size" and hit the dressing room.

But as I tried them on, one after another, they were all huge. My patience quickly grew thin.

Then the saleswoman brought me a pair of Ralph Lauren jeans. I laughed out loud before trying them on -- I haven't worn that size since I was in junior high. But they fit. And I bought them.

And from where Ralph Lauren stands, that's precisely the point.

Welcome to the world of "vanity sizing."

These days, as women get larger and taller, clothiers have decided to ignore the half-century-old sizing standards and label big clothes with small sizes. The idea is that women will be so flattered that the size 6 fits that they'll spend more money for the "smaller" clothes.

"Vanity sizing has become a huge selling tool," according to wordspy.com. "In general, the pricier the clothes, the smaller the sizes must read. Sadly, this silliness is proven to sell clothes."

And it is silliness, time-consuming, money-grubbing silliness.

Now, maybe vanity sizing appeals to women who yearn to fit into a smaller size without actually losing any weight. But for the rest of us, it has made shopping a royal pain.

Furthermore, it's insulting. It reminds me of women who lie about their age -- c'mon, who cares really? Be proud of who you are.

Maybe it just makes me so mad because my patience is running really thin lately, given the state of world affairs. I know my irritability threshold is abnormally high.

But men can walk into a store, pick up a size 16x32 shirt and go home knowing it will fit -- why can't we?

Men's sizes, in fact, have been standardized since the Civil War, when the military generated a set of standard male sizes in order to mass produce uniforms, according to the National Institute of Standards and Technology.

After the war, the sizes became the norm. Simple enough.

Not so for women's clothes.

In the 1920s -- with the emergence of industrial production and chain stores -- manufacturers began churning out ready-to-wear women's clothing. But the clothes never really fit well. So beginning in 1937, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's National Bureau of Home Economics embarked on a project to measure 15,000 women. It took a few more such surveys, but by the mid-1950s the standards were set.

But not for long.

"With the passing of time, the standards became outdated. Both American men and women were becoming heavier," according to the NIST Web site. "Manufacturers discovered the advantage of appealing to women's vanity. They began selling bigger clothes labeled with smaller size numbers."

Bingo: vanity. We threw the whole thing out the window.

The federal government is said to be gearing up for another national sizing survey, but I bet no one will use it.

A whole generation of teenage girls have grown accustomed to the vanity sizing. And, human nature being what it is, many women won't give up their size-6 self images without a fight.

And that means I'm doomed to spend way too much time and mental energy finding a pair of pants that fit.

It appears that, at least for now, silliness reigns.

red

Quote:

Originally Posted by Randy B.

I do agree that clothes sizes are messed up, but I also know that I am smaller at my current weight than I was previously at this weight. I have seen other discussions regarding this before. People who LC seem to be "Denser" :) We lose more fat and less muscle, thus are smaller at higher weights :D Have you compared your measurements now to those from the last time you weighed this weight?

Think of it this way, back before the "big changeover", the smallest size you could buy was a 6. Now, the smallest size is a 0. When my mom was a teenager in the late 60's she was 5'9, 138 pounds and a size 14/12. Now, my little cousin who is a size 6/8 can wear my moms old clothes. Plus size clothes are the same way. There is the regular size 14 and 16, then there is the canadian plus size 14 and 16, which a 14 is a regular 16 and a 16 is more an 18. Then there is american plus sizes, which fit even bigger. Then there are "miss" sizing, where a 14 and 16 are more like a 10 and 12. But now they have miss/junior plus sizing, for which I have no idea which numbers mean what. Arghhh! Why can't they just put the bust or waist measurements on all pieces of clothing!

Quote:

Now, the smallest size is a 0

At Abercrombie they have size 000, as well as 00 and 0.... some other places also have these sizes as well....also they now have not only small, med and large, but now extra small as well as extra large....they had to come up with these smaller sizes because they made the small sizes bigger.