Bone Mass?

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Rachael Reynolds - 16 Jul 2005 10:02 GMT

I'm a bit confused. Just got some Tanita Innerscan scales and they have a
bone mass function. The booklet that comes with it says for women, bone
mass estimates are:

Less than 110 lb

4.3 lb

110-165lb

5.3lb

165lb and up

6.5lb

Anyone know what these numbers might mean? Surely my whole skeleton weighs
more than 5.3lb? Or doesn't it?

Rachael
176/114/<119

Reply to this Message

Carol Frilegh - 16 Jul 2005 12:56 GMT

> I'm a bit confused. Just got some Tanita Innerscan scales and they have a
> bone mass function. The booklet that comes with it says for women, bone
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
> Rachael
> 176/114/<119

Let me know when ther's a scale that weighs your boobs separately.
Since I started exercise fiive years ago, mine have increased in size
and weight and I'd be glad to contibute to an augmentation clinic. LOL!

Signature

Diva
*****
The Best Man For The Job Is A Woman

Reply to this Message

jayjay - 17 Jul 2005 00:10 GMT

> Let me know when ther's a scale that weighs your boobs separately.
> Since I started exercise fiive years ago, mine have increased in size
> and weight and I'd be glad to contibute to an augmentation clinic. LOL!

<<<raising hand>>>

Pass some my way. I've only lost mass. Had a temporary gain from hormones
a couple months ago and loved it. First time in years I actually filled in
a B cup. Currently back to the A cup .. pretty sad.

Reply to this Message

Berna Bleeker - 17 Jul 2005 00:20 GMT

jayjay schreef:

>>Let me know when ther's a scale that weighs your boobs separately.
>>Since I started exercise fiive years ago, mine have increased in size
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> a couple months ago and loved it. First time in years I actually filled in
> a B cup. Currently back to the A cup .. pretty sad.

I wish I could fill an A cup. I have to buy A cups in a *smaller size*,
and use a bra extender to make it fit around my chest. :-(

Berna (101.5/66.9/64 kg)

Signature

( )_( ) Berna M. Bleeker-Slikker
/ . . \ berna.bleeker@gmail.com
\ \@/ / http://www.volksliedjes.nl

Reply to this Message

Chris Braun - 17 Jul 2005 02:12 GMT

>jayjay schreef:
>>
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>
>Berna (101.5/66.9/64 kg)

I can kind of relate. I used to be very busty (44 EEE) when I was
heavy -- and even before that when I was young I had a rather large
chest. But I lost a lot from that area. It seems my right bra size
now is 38B (at least in Victoria's Secret bras). This is a bit of an
unusual size, as 38 is kind of large for a B cup, but I have a rather
wide rib cage and smaller ones sometimes don't fit around me too well,
and the cups on smaller ones tend to be too close together. I sort of
miss having bigger breasts, but not enough to worry about it. And
it's a lot easier to get clothes that fit :-).

Chris
262/130s/130s
started dieting July 2002, maintaining since June 2004

Reply to this Message

Her Subj. - 18 Jul 2005 06:24 GMT

I never fully understood why women preferred larger breasts. Is it
because it aids in the creation of the "hourglass" silhouette? Or is it
because men have been "conditioned" to prefer large breasts as it
biologically alludes to fertility?

I myself adore my tiny titties (!). I am currently a 34A and have
always been on the small side. I noticed that since I have been
exercising, they have decreased a bit and appear a little more like
knobs than they do breasts! A small chest not only means less weight,
it also means no backaches and, as Chris noted, clothes fit much
better! (Designers love long, boyish figures.)

My two cents.

HS

> > Let me know when ther's a scale that weighs your boobs separately.
> > Since I started exercise fiive years ago, mine have increased in size
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> a couple months ago and loved it. First time in years I actually filled in
> a B cup. Currently back to the A cup .. pretty sad.

Reply to this Message

Berna Bleeker - 18 Jul 2005 07:49 GMT

Her Subj. schreef:

> I never fully understood why women preferred larger breasts. Is it
> because it aids in the creation of the "hourglass" silhouette? Or is it
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> it also means no backaches and, as Chris noted, clothes fit much
> better! (Designers love long, boyish figures.)

I like having small breasts, but I'd like them to be a *little* bit
bigger, so I'd fit into a standard bra. What I need is a 85AA, but they
don't make those; and 85A's are very hard to find, and the cups are
still a little too big. Only a few months ago my sister told me about
bra extenders; before that, I hadn't worn bras in about 30 years - I
just couldn't find one that would fit.

Berna (101.5/66.9/64 kg)

Signature

( )_( ) Berna M. Bleeker-Slikker
/ . . \ berna.bleeker@gmail.com
\ \@/ / http://www.volksliedjes.nl

Reply to this Message

jake - 31 Jul 2005 22:11 GMT

> Her Subj. schreef:
>
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
>
> Berna (101.5/66.9/64 kg)

I have some info that offers *a small chacne-* of a solution. I have
been struggling with non-fitting bras, too.

At Blokker, they currently sell silicone stuffing for €7, but the
smallest cup size is B. I am a small B, and they don't fit me. But
bereasts can vary so m,uch in shape, that they might for others much better.

Or you could try H&M for separate "chicken fillets", also made from
silicones. Those cost €15. Worth a try.

Other than that,I beleive you are not far form Amsterdam. In the
Paleisstraat there is a shop (called Palazzo, iirc), that is supposed
to be a specialist shop for bras. You never know, they might have your
size. And I am told that in the USA, more different sizes are sold then
in Europe. maybe ou copudl find some suitabel things online.

Reply to this Message

Berna Bleeker - 01 Aug 2005 00:05 GMT

jake schreef:

> I have some info that offers *a small chacne-* of a solution. I have
> been struggling with non-fitting bras, too.
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> size. And I am told that in the USA, more different sizes are sold then
> in Europe. maybe ou copudl find some suitabel things online.

Thanks for the tips! I'll check them out (esp. that shop in the
Paleisstraat). In the meantime, I have solved the problem by buying bras
in a smaller size (75 or 80A) and using a bra extender to make it fit
around my chest. Maybe that would work for you too?

Berna (101.5/66.1/64 kg)

Signature

( )_( ) Berna M. Bleeker-Slikker
/ . . \ berna.bleeker@gmail.com
\ \@/ / http://www.volksliedjes.nl

Reply to this Message

Beverly - 16 Jul 2005 19:27 GMT

Those numbers seem a little low for bone weight. Most sites I found gave
estimates just slightly below 20 pounds.
http://ks.essortment.com/boneshumanskel_nnh.htm

Reply to this Message

joanne - 16 Jul 2005 22:10 GMT

> Anyone know what these numbers might mean? Surely my whole skeleton weighs
> more than 5.3lb? Or doesn't it?

These numbers are not how much your bones actually 'weigh' (as in scale
weight) nor how dense they are (you need special doctor tests for
that), it is telling you how much 'mineral content' it detects in your
total weight. *Their numbers* then correspond to how much bone mass
they think a healthy woman should have. Remember that the Tanita scales
are getting readout info from sending impulses up thru your feet, so
all its info is really a guesstimate at best, not like its always the
actual truth. Their bodyfat testing component can waver all over the
place depending on time of day, hydration levels, and even if you have
sox on! ;-) If you have any concerns about actual bone density and your
risk of osteoporosis get a DEXA scan thru your doctor.

joanne

Reply to this Message

Rachael Reynolds - 16 Jul 2005 22:35 GMT

>> Anyone know what these numbers might mean? Surely my whole skeleton
>> weighs
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>
> joanne

Thanks yes, I've had a bone density scan coz my Mum has very bad
osteoporosis. I'm not peri menopausal yet but thought it worth checking.
As in Beverley's post, I now see that my bones should weigh about 30lb.
So I'm guessing that the number in the Tanita charts must be assuming a lot
of fluid!

I'm only curious, I know the Tanita measurement is very "unstable". For my
first 2 stone of weight loss, my body fat percentage on my old "body fat"
scales didn't shift a single fraction of a point!

Rachael

Reply to this Message