All I know is my waist to hip ratio is absolutely perfect - .69 A great number.

Anonymous wrote:What OP is saying is 50% is maximum for waist to height ratio
for health purposes.
If you are less than that it is good for you.
If you are pear shaped it will be easier than if you are apple shaped.

It doesn't make sense for women at all. Men, maybe.

What OP is saying is 50% is maximum for waist to height ratio
for health purposes.
If you are less than that it is good for you.
If you are pear shaped it will be easier than if you are apple shaped.

Anonymous wrote:Cool, thanks OP. Mine is 0.72 for waist to hip. Waist to height is 0.40. Honestly, 50% for that would be pretty bad ... I’m 64 inches and am female, so having even a 31 inch waist would make me pretty fat.

How much do you weigh? What’s yr waist and hip measurement?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50% is pretty generous. Maybe in terms of health but in terms of looks 50% waist to height is gonna look a bit chunky

It is 50% or less

I am 68 inches tall
and 32 waist but even with 34 I don’t look chunky.
The point is belly fat is the worst kind of fat for your health.

You must be a man. A 34 in waist on a woman of any height would look chunky.

I'm not sure of source or validity of this but OP specifically stated this is about health predictors and has literally nothing to do with how attractive or not you find a woman. WTF not everything is about your looks

Well, this formula doesn't match other health predictors, which actually are in line with beauty standards.

Waist to hips is good too like PP mentioned.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50% is pretty generous. Maybe in terms of health but in terms of looks 50% waist to height is gonna look a bit chunky

It is 50% or less

I am 68 inches tall
and 32 waist but even with 34 I don’t look chunky.
The point is belly fat is the worst kind of fat for your health.

You must be a man. A 34 in waist on a woman of any height would look chunky.

I'm not sure of source or validity of this but OP specifically stated this is about health predictors and has literally nothing to do with how attractive or not you find a woman. WTF not everything is about your looks

Well, this formula doesn't match other health predictors, which actually are in line with beauty standards.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Source? Sounds ridiculous.
I'm never going to have 33" waist - I don't want to and I shouldn't.

heck, i am trying to get to 33" waist.

I have small frame, with BMI 19, so it makes no sense do go from 25" waist to 33".

Anonymous wrote:Source? Sounds ridiculous.
I'm never going to have 33" waist - I don't want to and I shouldn't.

heck, i am trying to get to 33" waist.

I have a 33 inch waist and am 5'8" with a BMI of 31. I hope this is true re: my health but I have to wonder.

*thick waisted

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:50% is pretty generous. Maybe in terms of health but in terms of looks 50% waist to height is gonna look a bit chunky

It is 50% or less

I am 68 inches tall
and 32 waist but even with 34 I don’t look chunky.
The point is belly fat is the worst kind of fat for your health.

You must be a man. A 34 in waist on a woman of any height would look chunky.

I'm not sure of source or validity of this but OP specifically stated this is about health predictors and has literally nothing to do with how attractive or not you find a woman. WTF not everything is about your looks

Exactly right. I’m an apple shape with a 50% ratio. I’m think waisted whether I’m a size 2 or 10, but I care about whether my body shape predisposes me to health issues. I’ll take my chunky waist and just be glad it’s not leaving me at higher risk for illness.