Outcomes · Progress reports · continued

Waist circumference technique and its repeatability posts 31–60

Outcomes › Progress reports data table long read effect size DXA

This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1.

crossover_reviewTL3Regular26 Dec 2025#31

t.batista, post #26: I would keep waist circumference technique and the decision it usually gets used for separate in this thread. They are related and they are not the same question, and merging them is why the last one went badly. Go to post

Taking post #30 at face value and following it one step further.

Small correction to my own earlier position on waist circumference technique. I had the units the wrong way round, which changes the conclusion by an order of magnitude and therefore changes it entirely.

14 likes in reply to #26 7mo

k.batistaTL229 Dec 2025#32

Non-scale victories: muscle gain or maintenance, clothing fit, energy level, and capability (like climbing stairs without breathlessness) are measurements that scale-based weight misses.

28 likes 7mo

methods_marginTL3Regular31 Dec 2025#33

Seasonal patterns: some people report weight loss is slower in winter than summer. Body composition and activity changes might contribute. Noting the season is useful context.

On reflection I would soften that slightly.

0 likes 7mo

m.guerreroTL23 Jan 2026 · edited#34

I read post #32 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.

On waist circumference technique: the maintained page in the documentation commons covers the general case with citations and a review date, which is more reliable than any reply here including this one.

5 likes 7mo

dexa_twice_yearlyTL3Regular5 Jan 2026#35

Building on post #34 rather than restating it.

Adding the boring version of waist circumference technique, because the interesting version keeps getting posted and the boring one is usually right.

Check the ordinary explanations, in order, and stop when one of them accounts for what you are seeing. Most of the time the second one does.

20 likes in reply to #26 7mo

r.szaboTL28 Jan 2026#36

Collapsed as off-topic by two members at trust level 3 or above

Post #32 put the caveat in the right place and I want to underline it.

Nothing here is medical advice and a progress report is a description of what happened to one person under uncontrolled conditions.

g.pemberton_ukTL3Regional · UK11 Jan 2026#37

No notes. Posting so the count is not one.

2 likes 7mo

n.boatengTL213 Jan 2026#38

Rate of change matters more than the absolute number for most of the questions people ask about their own series.

Written from notes rather than memory, which is why the numbers are specific.

8 likes 6mo

f.demirTL2Regular16 Jan 2026 · edited#39

n.krastev, post #3: A note on how waist circumference technique gets discussed rather than on waist circumference technique itself: the confident posts get the replies and the careful ones get ignored, and the careful ones have been right more often. Go to post

For anyone finding this later: the short answer on waist circumference technique is that it depends on one thing, and the rest of the thread is people identifying which thing.

5 likes in reply to #3 6mo

a.iyerTL218 Jan 2026#40

v.bruun, post #12: A single scale used throughout beats a more accurate scale introduced halfway through. Consistency beats accuracy for a trend. I keep a log of this specifically because memory is unreliable about it. Go to post

Menstrual cycle: for people who menstruate, weight can shift by several pounds across the cycle due to fluid retention and other factors. Noting cycle phase when weighing reduces apparent noise.

Worth one more sentence than it usually gets.

15 likes in reply to #12 6mo

b.demirTL221 Jan 2026#41

f.demir, post #39: For anyone finding this later: the short answer on waist circumference technique is that it depends on one thing, and the rest of the thread is people identifying which thing. Go to post

Circumference measurements at marked sites are cheap, reproducible within a person, and more informative than they get credit for.

0 likes in reply to #39 6mo

a.lindholmTL223 Jan 2026 · edited#42

I read the earlier replies on waist circumference technique twice before writing this, because I had assumed the opposite and wanted to be sure I was disagreeing with what was said rather than what I expected.

31 likes 6mo

g.rasmussenTL225 Jan 2026#43

Noted, and I have changed what I was going to do on the strength of it.

16 likes 6mo

s.bruunTL228 Jan 2026#44

Adding the measurement that post #41 says would settle it.

Maintenance series are the ones this subcategory needs most and receives least. The interesting questions all change once loss stops.

Old habit: I write down the expected answer before I calculate it.

6 likes 6mo

k.dahlbergTL230 Jan 2026#45

n.boateng, post #38: Rate of change matters more than the absolute number for most of the questions people ask about their own series. Written from notes rather than memory, which is why the numbers are specific. Go to post

The arithmetic on waist circumference technique is the easy part and it is where the errors are, which is an uncomfortable combination. Show your working and someone will catch it.

0 likes in reply to #38 6mo

a.reyesTL4 Admin2 Feb 2026 · edited#46

t.nardone, post #29: Self-reported intake is optimistic in a consistent direction, and saying so in your own report is more credible than not. If anyone has run this properly I would rather read that than my own guess. Go to post

Worth stating the null on waist circumference technique before we explain it: the observation may be nothing. That possibility deserves a sentence and usually does not get one.

23 likes in reply to #29 6mo

r.serranoTL24 Feb 2026#47

Collapsed as off-topic by two members at trust level 3 or above

If a pattern survives a rolling-mean treatment it is worth explaining. Most do not, and that is the useful finding.

owen.bradyTL4 Moderator7 Feb 2026#48

Picking up post #45: that is the part I would want checked first.

Where the waist circumference technique discussion usually stalls is that nobody wants to say "I do not know" and everyone is willing to say "it varies". Those are the same sentence with different clothes on.

3 likes 6mo

c.inglethorpeTL3Regular9 Feb 2026 · edited#49

I read post #45 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.

What I can speak to on waist circumference technique is narrow, so I will keep it narrow rather than generalising from it. Beyond that boundary I do not know.

32 likes 6mo

r.molnarTL211 Feb 2026#50

A single scale used throughout beats a more accurate scale introduced halfway through. Consistency beats accuracy for a trend.

I would want to see it done twice before believing it once.

16 likes 5mo

j.habermannTL3Regular14 Feb 2026#51

electrolyte_notes, post #13: An honest declaration on waist circumference technique: I have a prior here and it is strong enough that you should weight what I say downward. Stating it rather than hiding it. Go to post

Waist circumference technique was covered in the wiki last year and the page has a review date on it, which is a better starting point than my memory of a thread.

1 like in reply to #13 5mo

d.nwosuTL216 Feb 2026#52

Post #50 put the caveat in the right place and I want to underline it.

The number people quote for waist circumference technique is a central estimate presented without its interval, and the interval is wide enough that the estimate is nearly uninformative on its own.

7 likes 5mo

k.farrugiaTL3Regular18 Feb 2026#53

The arithmetic in post #52 is right; the assumption feeding it is the part to check.

The best progress reports here read as records rather than as arguments, and that difference is visible within a sentence.

I would put a moderate confidence on that and no more.

17 likes 5mo

k.okaforTL221 Feb 2026#54

baseline_drift, post #2: Nothing here is medical advice and a progress report is a description of what happened to one person under uncontrolled conditions. Go to post

Filing a mild objection to the consensus on waist circumference technique. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit.

33 likes in reply to #2 5mo

LeitermanTL3Regular23 Feb 2026#55

Ridgeway, post #19: I think the waist circumference technique question is answerable and has not been answered, which is a more optimistic position than most of this thread. Go to post

Post #52 is the version of this I will quote in future. One addition.

I would be cautious about generalising from the waist circumference technique example above. It is a good example. It is one example.

0 likes in reply to #19 5mo

c.balogunTL225 Feb 2026 · edited#56

Following, with nothing to contribute beyond having asked the same thing elsewhere.

3 likes 5mo

r.marsdenTL3Regular28 Feb 2026#57

Non-scale victories: muscle gain or maintenance, clothing fit, energy level, and capability (like climbing stairs without breathlessness) are measurements that scale-based weight misses.

The step people skip is the one I have spelled out.

11 likes 5mo

a.amankwahTL22 Mar 2026#58

Practical experience of waist circumference technique, offered as one case with the conditions stated, not as a general finding. Conditions first, because they are what make it interpretable.

25 likes 5mo

VThorvaldsenTL3Regular4 Mar 2026#59

Isaksen, post #27: I read post #23 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite. Seasonal patterns: some people report weight loss is slower in winter than summer. Body composition and activity changes might contribute. Noting the season is useful context. Take the reasoning and check the arithmetic; I do not always get it right. Go to post

Confirming post #57 from a second method, which matters more than confirming it from a second person.

Maintenance series are the ones this subcategory needs most and receives least. The interesting questions all change once loss stops.

Worth reading the earlier posts in this thread before acting on mine.

0 likes in reply to #27 5mo

s.achebeTL26 Mar 2026#60

a.iyer, post #40: Menstrual cycle: for people who menstruate, weight can shift by several pounds across the cycle due to fluid retention and other factors. Noting cycle phase when weighing reduces apparent noise. Worth one more sentence than it usually gets. Go to post

Adding a small correction to the waist circumference technique summary above rather than a disagreement with it. The substance holds; one of the figures is out by a factor that matters.

1 like in reply to #40 5mo