# What is your Height vs What Length Pants do you Wear?



## drew1

I'm 5'8 and 162 lbs or so and always wear 32/30 with jeans. I tried on some Banana Republic dress pants in 32/30 but for some reason, they don't seem to cover my loafer that i was wearing.

Imagine you are wearing a loafer and the pants while you are standing up, doesn't cover it all so you can see your socks. Are those dress pants too short?

Someone told me he is not surprised that the length is not long enough because he is 6'1 and for Banana Republic, he wears 31 or 32 in length whereas i wear 30 in length?



> *ASK ANDY UPDATE:*
> Check out our comprehensive article about height vs pants inseam length. Also includes a height range chart and typical inseam length for each!!
> 
> Be sure to read all the great information below too.


----------



## Earl of Ormonde

Height has nothing to do with it, inside leg measurement is what matters. 

I'm 6' and I wear a 30" leg, sometimes a 32" depending on cut and style. Whereas my very leggy Swedish wife who is 5'11" has a 36" inside leg. 

"72 inches of therapy" as Julia Roberts expressed it in Pretty Woman, while nekkid in the tub with RG!


----------



## Jake Genezen

drew1 said:


> for some reason, they don't seem to cover my loafer that i was wearing. Like imagine you are wearing a loafer and the pants while you are standing up, doesn't cover it all so you can see your socks. Are those dress pants too short?


A reason I don't wear loafers is because they are shaped/cut lower than, say, laced shoes. I have my trousers altered so there is a break at the front, with a guardsman slant at the back.

With my laced shoes, the trouser break nicely (for my tastes, anyway); when I put on a pair of loafers, you can see some sock.

Some loafers, like apron loafers, are not shaped/cut as low as some others.


----------



## LeggeJP1

I'm 6'4", but most of my height is in my torso--jackets shorter than 32" look silly on me.

I wear 34/32 pants.


----------



## ostpl

6'6" Usually 34 inseam. Sometimes 36.


----------



## David_E

5'9" or 5'10", 30 inseam.


----------



## statboy

Earl of Ormonde said:


> Height has nothing to do with it, inside leg measurement is what matters. I'm 6' and I wear a 30" leg, sometimes a 32" depending on cut and style. Whereas my very leggy Swedish wife who is 5'11" has a 36" inside leg. "72 inches of therapy" as Julia Roberts expressed it in Pretty Woman, while nekkid in the tub with RG!


Height doesn't determine inseam length. But the correlation is probably in the 0.7 range. The OP clearly has long legs relative to his height. In the parlance of our statistical times, he's an outlier.


----------



## rudedog

I'm just under 5'7" and have a 30" inseam.


----------



## blairrob

Earl of Ormonde said:


> my very leggy Swedish wife who is 5'11" has a 36" inside leg


 pics or it didn't happen.

Moi- 6 '2", 180-185 lbs, 32" inseam.


----------



## jean-paul sartorial

I'm a shade over 5'8" and generally wear about a 30" inseam. It's obviously the inside leg that is more important than height, but like previously mentioned there is a correlation between the two. I don't view 5'8" and a 30" inseam as particularly out-of-the ordinary.


----------



## Matt S

I'm 5'9" and wear a 29.5" inseam and 42" outseam.


----------



## drew1

Is inseam the length?? I'm confused why so many of you are using that word. When i look at jeans/shoes, all i look is the 2 numbers such as 32/30 which is the waist size and length. Or is inseam the same thing as lenght??


----------



## jean-paul sartorial

If you wear 32/30 pants, 30" is the length of the inseam, not the total length of the pants. The inseam is the seam that runs from the hem of the pants up to the crotch, ie. the inner leg measurement.

You and I are roughly the same height and take the same inseam on our pants.


----------



## MikeDT

Measured today:-

Height 188cm
Weight 88.9kg
Waist 90cm
Inside leg 88cm


----------



## eagle2250

Height: 72"
Inseam: 30.5" (30", if I wear the trousers a bit low on the waist!)


----------



## Earl of Ormonde

statboy said:


> Height doesn't determine inseam length.


Read me again, I never said it did. I said, "Height has nothing to do with it" (i.e. trouser length), inside leg measurement is what matters.


----------



## neskerdoo

Earl of Ormonde said:


> Read me again, I never said it did. I said, "Height has nothing to do with it" (i.e. trouser length), inside leg measurement is what matters.


I think he was partially agreeing with you, subject to the qualification in his next sentence. Perhaps had his period been a comma... Or had he started off with "It is true that..." Read him again and see what you think.


----------



## Saltydog

Earl of Ormonde said:


> Height has nothing to do with it, inside leg measurement is what matters. I'm 6' and I wear a 30" leg, sometimes a 32" depending on cut and style. Whereas my very leggy Swedish wife who is 5'11" has a 36" inside leg. "72 inches of therapy" as Julia Roberts expressed it in Pretty Woman, while nekkid in the tub with RG!


Sorry, and with all due respect, but I just lost all interest in discussing clothing! Other images keep running through my mind.


----------



## 10gallonhat

5'7" and I always have my pants tailored because 30" (the shortest inseam most brands offer) is too long for my liking.

Every brand will fit differently though, for example I don't wear Ralph Lauren pants or shorts because even if I have them altered so the inseam is shorter, the crotch area (whatever it's called) is always too baggy, like it's made for someone with a 12" shlong going commando, and baggy pants look ridiculous on anyone over the age of 16.

Edit: I think it's good to have all your nice pants tailored anyway so you can get the exact length you want that works with your height and your shoes. The issue about the pants being perfect for laceups and too short for loafers isn't a big deal because loafers are casual anyway, so it doesn't matter if a sliver of sock or ankle is showing.


----------



## Earl of Ormonde

blairrob said:


> pics or it didn't happen.


Later. She's got one on her facebook of when she was about 16 (about 1980), standing next to a shortish female friend in a kitchen in a summer house both in very short shorts and her comment about herself is, "even then I had legs that ended where most other people have armpits" 

Keep dreaming guys!


----------



## blue suede shoes

5'11" 185 lbs. 36/32 pants Some 36" waist pants are too tight and I cannot wear them while others have plenty of room in the waist and crotch. Figure it out; I've been trying to.


----------



## JLibourel

I was 6'3", but I think I've shrunk with age down to about 6'2". Ideally, I like a 32.75-inch inseam. Usually, I have to settle for 32 inches.


----------



## BamaCPA

Earl of Ormonde said:


> Whereas my very leggy Swedish wife who is 5'11" has a 36" inside leg. "72 inches of therapy" as Julia Roberts expressed it in Pretty Woman, while nekkid in the tub with RG!


Sir - on another forum I frequent this would earn you a very hearty - "PIC FOUL" but I'll let it pass here.

FWIW - my wife and yours have similar traits it appears.


----------



## Earl of Ormonde

BamaCPA said:


> "PIC FOUL"


Not 100% sure what that implies but am I wrong in assuming it's due to me not having included a photo?


----------



## PatentLawyerNYC

About 6' and about 32" inseam.


----------



## Andy

Here's a related question for the tailor's: Why do we go by inseam and not out-seam? The inseam can produce varied results since it really doesn't take in to account the pants rise, or construction. Some trouser maker's construct the crotch differently. 

The out-seam measurement would be a constant!


----------



## zbix

5'8" and 28.5" inseam


----------



## 10gallonhat

Andy said:


> Here's a related question for the tailor's: Why do we go by inseam and not out-seam? The inseam can produce varied results since it really doesn't take in to account the pants rise, or construction. Some trouser maker's construct the crotch differently.
> 
> The out-seam measurement would be a constant!


That's something I've wondered for a long time. It seems like it would make a lot more sense.


----------



## Earl of Ormonde

Andy said:


> The out-seam measurement would be a constant!


How so? With different waisted models. I don't see that crotch design is anymore extraordnary than waistband design. But I don't know enough about the subject...so I'll just shut up


----------



## CuffDaddy

Andy said:


> Here's a related question for the tailor's: Why do we go by inseam and not out-seam? The inseam can produce varied results since it really doesn't take in to account the pants rise, or construction. Some trouser maker's construct the crotch differently.
> 
> The out-seam measurement would be a constant!


Hmm, I think this is a bit backwards. Regardless of a trouser's rise, most of like to wear our trousers so that the fork of the pants comes almost to our crotch, minus an inch or four(variable person to person, but generally consistent for any given man). So that number is pretty constant. But some people will wear different pants at different heights (almost anyone who wears both traditional dress pants and jeans does this), so the rise can be different from one pair to another. The outseam would be anything _but_ constant.

It would certainly be useful, though, for manufacturers to provide outseam information as well, along with leg circumfrence/diameter at, say, 6" below the fork. There are plenty of trousers with "correct" waist and length measurements that I cannot/will not wear because the rise is wrong, or because the legs are not the right width. Oh, well. This is why I direct a greater and greater percentage of my clothing budget towards bespoke or MTM items.


----------



## coynedj

5'11", 33" inseam. Even longer for jeans, which are expected to fit differently.


----------



## Todd6060

CuffDaddy said:


> Hmm, I think this is a bit backwards. Regardless of a trouser's rise, most of like to wear our trousers so that the fork of the pants comes almost to our crotch


Actually I agree with Andy. I wear the waist of the pants at the same place regardless of the length of the rise.


----------



## Wildblue

6' 2" with long legs, I wear 35-36" inseams. I can sometimes get away with 34" inseams, but the cuffs pull up quite a bit when I sit down. (an effect that doesn't happen nearly as much for shorter-legged people)

Rather frustrating when shopping and it seems that almost all pants have 32", 34", or sometimes 30" inseams.


----------



## Orgetorix

I'm 6'0" and a 31" inseam is usually about perfect on me. Good luck finding that OTR, though.


----------



## 4dgt90

i'm between 5'7" and 5'8" and had the same problem as I needed a 29" inseam, I always had to go to the tailor... that is until I discovered LLBean and Lands End khakis who will hem them for free in 0.25" increments.

I agree about the casualness of the loafers and it being okay to see a sliver of sock... not ankle though, those pants are way too short at that point.



a!!!!1 said:


> 5'7" and I always have my pants tailored because 30" (the shortest inseam most brands offer) is too long for my liking.
> 
> Every brand will fit differently though, for example I don't wear Ralph Lauren pants or shorts because even if I have them altered so the inseam is shorter, the crotch area (whatever it's called) is always too baggy, like it's made for someone with a 12" shlong going commando, and baggy pants look ridiculous on anyone over the age of 16.
> 
> Edit: I think it's good to have all your nice pants tailored anyway so you can get the exact length you want that works with your height and your shoes. The issue about the pants being perfect for laceups and too short for loafers isn't a big deal because loafers are casual anyway, so it doesn't matter if a sliver of sock or ankle is showing.


----------



## 4dgt90

CuffDaddy said:


> Hmm, I think this is a bit backwards. Regardless of a trouser's rise, most of like to wear our trousers so that the fork of the pants comes almost to our crotch.


i like showing off my mooseknuckle too


----------



## 10gallonhat

tdecast said:


> i'm between 5'7" and 5'8" and had the same problem as I needed a 29" inseam, I always had to go to the tailor... that is until I discovered LLBean and Lands End khakis who will hem them for free in 0.25" increments.
> 
> I agree about the casualness of the loafers and it being okay to see a sliver of sock... not ankle though, those pants are way too short at that point.


Ankle for when you're not wearing socks. If you are wearing socks and your legs are still showing, there's definitely a problem, lol.

How short do LLBean and Lands End inseams go?


----------



## drew1

hey everyone. Today i went shopping and looking for pants. The guy who was helping me thought i wore something like 29/30 but i told him i wore 32/30. What is strange about this was he was around 6'0 or so and told me he wore 29/30.... I would estimate he is 6'0 and 150lbs. I'm 5'8 and 162lbs. How in the world does he wear 29/30 and i wear 32/30.


----------



## deanayer

5'11" 185-190 lbs and I wear 36" waist 33.5" inseam


----------



## godan

tdecast said:


> I always had to go to the tailor... that is until I discovered LLBean and Lands End khakis who will hem them for free in 0.25" increments. QUOTE]
> 
> At 5" 7', I take a 27 1/4" inseam from both LLB and LE in khakis, and the same length in LE wool pants, including their tailored fit. This has worked for at least ten years, even though both companies have probably changed sourcing of some of their models in that time. My tailor has found that another quarter inch brings Bills M3's to the same slight break I prefer.


----------



## Grayson

5'9" with a 32" inseam. I never thought my legs were long for my size until I gave some suits to my brother-in-law, who is the same height and weight as me... the suits looked completely different on him. 

Of note - I modeled clothing in my 20's, though technically I'm a few inches short of a typical model's frame. The extra leg length gives the illusion I'm much taller in photos... until I'm standing next to someone anyway!


----------



## Benjamin E.

So far, I've got the shortest, at 5' 6" and ~26". I never have to worry about inseam length when buying pants.


----------



## 10gallonhat

drew1 said:


> hey everyone. Today i went shopping and looking for pants. The guy who was helping me thought i wore something like 29/30 but i told him i wore 32/30. What is strange about this was he was around 6'0 or so and told me he wore 29/30.... I would estimate he is 6'0 and 150lbs. I'm 5'8 and 162lbs. How in the world does he wear 29/30 and i wear 32/30.


He wears a 29 because he's skinnier than you are, and he wears the same length because he probably wears his pants too short and you wear them too long.



Benjamin E. said:


> So far, I've got the shortest, at 5' 6" and ~26". I never have to worry about inseam length when buying pants.


Where are you buying pants with a 26"?


----------



## Benjamin E.

a!!!!1 said:


> Where are you buying pants with a 26"?


Nowhere; they simply don't exist. I probably should have said I don't have to worry about them being too short. I actually prefer to get them long so I have extra fabric for repairs and alterations and such. I turned a regular pair of trousers into fishtails that way.


----------



## Broadus

5' 8" / 29" inseam


----------



## dcjacobson

6' 4", 36" inseam on a long-rise.



> Here's a related question for the tailor's: Why do we go by inseam and not out-seam?


I bought some flannels from JAB (don't get started; for the price they were quite well made), and JAB goes by out-seam.

Good luck,
Don


----------



## iam.mike

Purposely bumping an old thread to share news of a new article we just published about this very topic.

https://askandyaboutclothes.com/length-of-trousers/
I assume most here would lean toward agreeing with the standard Ask Andy position being:


> Here at Ask Andy, we believe a trouser hem should cover the shoe and that the socks should not be shown when one walks. rule that a trouser hem should cover the shoe and that the socks should not be shown when one walks.


However, I'm curious if our younger members toy with wearing a no-break length trouser, or even something more 'high-water' from time to time, if the situation calls for it.

Thoughts?


----------



## Fading Fast

6'1" and 32.5"-33" inseam is perfect. But as noted above, inseam is not really driven by height, it's all about leg length and where your waist is / where you "sit" your pants (high or low on your waist).


----------



## Troones

mikel said:


> Purposely bumping an old thread to share news of a new article we just published about this very topic.
> 
> https://askandyaboutclothes.com/length-of-trousers/
> I assume most here would lean toward agreeing with the standard Ask Andy position being:
> 
> However, I'm curious if our younger members toy with wearing a no-break length trouser, or even something more 'high-water' from time to time, if the situation calls for it.
> 
> Thoughts?


I agree with Andy which is why all my new trousers from now on will be 30" inseam rather than the 29" I've been wearing. Looking at yourself in a mirror and walking/going about your daily business are two different things entirely. The 29" looks right while standing, but when I walk, I can feel my pant cuffs get caught up in my shoe laces, and when walking past a mirror, I glance at myself and can see some sock.

I'd much rather have a bit too much break rather than what's going on now with most of my trousers.


----------



## eagle2250

Although I doubt that I qualify as one of our younger members, I will tell you that I suscribe to the AAAC standard and try to go about with my trouser hems just brushing the tops of my shoes. Standing at 72"s with a 30.5" inseam, the wife generally hems my pant legs at 31", which results in a bit of a break in the crease(s).


----------



## Howard

6 feet and I wear a 40/30 now, before I was a 38/30.


----------



## Mathematicus

mikel said:


> However, I'm curious if our younger members toy with wearing a no-break length trouser, or even something more 'high-water' from time to time, if the situation calls for it.
> 
> Thoughts?


Never crossed my mind (I'm 28).

What I find particularly outrageous about this "style" is that it is often described as "Italian style". As an Italian citizen, I can assure that no *serious *tailor in Italy would hem your trousers with no break; more importantly, they would never let you out of their workshop with trousers which do not touch the back of the shoe, 1cm above the heel.

This look, which I personally loathe more than pineapple on pizza, seems instead the only way British tailors are able to hem trousers. Since I live in UK I have resigned to have trousers hemmed by my wife (even if this means longer turnaround), as every alteration tailor I met was adamant in making silly short hems.

(For the records, I'm 5'9'' and my trousers need to be 32'' (with slanted hem) in length)


----------



## iam.mike

Mathematicus said:


> Never crossed my mind (I'm 28).


Appreciate you providing your pov!


Mathematicus said:


> which I personally loathe more than pineapple on pizza


Have to agree with you here. I love pineapple, but never on pizza. Plus, we Italians would likely get our nationality stripped from us if we at a pizza with pineapple on it ic12337:


----------



## OldMetairie

6’0 32


----------



## David J. Cooper

I am 6'4" and wear my pants at 31". I am 63 years old, my torso is a bit out of balance, but I also like to show a bit of sock above my shoes.


----------



## Vecchio Vespa

I was once 6’ but am now, at age 70, 5’10”. Since high school I’ve had a 29” inseam and worn my trousers with no break. This leads me to conclude that my settlement has occurred in my hips and spine. 

I’m ok with ham and pineapple on my pizza but prefer plain cheese.


----------



## fishertw

While I'm 5'11'', I have gained in girth over the past 20 years. I used to wear a 34 at times in length when I was a 30-32 waist. Now with a 39 waist, I'm barely a 31. I have no particular insight for this except that it seems to be true with me.


----------



## Peak and Pine

I would imagine folks here are about as excited to read my stats as I am to read their's, but for the record...

I am not sure of my inseam.
Honest.
I yank on a new pair of pants, stand in front of a full-length mirror, sideways and_ in stocking feet, _holding a yard stick to the floor while rolling up the bottoms until they are 2 1/4' from the floor, then mark. This is a personal measurement. It ensures when shod that the pant, no matter what the rise or fabric, will always fall at the same precise point, pant after pant, which is with a slight break. Quite slight. About half the time, after drawing the horizontal line at the mark, I will mark up 1/2" at the front and down 1/2" at the rear, to create a slanted cuff.


----------



## Peak and Pine

And might I point out to our Italian and Italian-American friends that you lost the patent on pizza sometime back, around the time this country was discovered (Columbus or Mussolini, I get my Italians mixed up) and might have kept it longer if you'd spelled it correctly and since peetsa has been in the public domain few have been made tastier than with ham and pineapple, the True Hawaiian. Columbus would have loved it, munching away while making the trains run on time.


----------



## Dhaller

Depending on the brand, I kind of oscillate between 32/32 and 32/34.

I'm 6'1".

I hope you're going to plot all these responses and crunch a best fit to get an equation.

Serious trousers (like those from suits, and dress trousers generally) I always have tailored anyway, so I imagine those are "true inseam", but I don't really know that exact number (and I'm too lazy to check right now... apologies!)

Off course, one must be wary of "vanity" sizing; I see this in jeans a lot (where I usually have a 34" inseam). I kind of have a private ambition to never allow my waist size to exceed my inseam, so I tend to "prefer" thinking "32/34" than "32/32".

DH


----------



## CDuff

I am 5'-11" and wear 32/32 in jeans and 32/34 in chinos - purely because I like to roll them up to create a cuff.


----------



## RODRIGO LOPEZ

Im 5´11", and usually wear a 30, I am not fond of cuffs


----------



## Hebrew Barrister

statboy said:


> Height doesn't determine inseam length. But the correlation is probably in the 0.7 range. The OP clearly has long legs relative to his height. In the parlance of our statistical times, he's an outlier.


Agreed.

I'm 5'10, and many 30in inseams are too long on me. Especially jeans. I tend to think I'm perhaps a bit of an outlier, only in the other direction.


----------



## Guest

I have a hard time finding pants because I'm 5'2", plus size and have a 26 inseam. The companies assume that because you're 6 feet wide you must be 6 feet tall so the inseam is always too long.


----------



## AlphaOmega

Famously, Michael Phelps (6'4") has a shorter inseam than Hicham El Guerrouj (5'9").

"He has an extended trunk and relatively short legs, a distinct advantage in the water. The inseam of his pants is reportedly 32 inches (81 centimeters), shorter than that of Hicham El Guerrouj, the great Moroccan runner, who is 5 feet 9 inches (175 centimeters) but all legs."

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2004/08/olympic-gold-good-genes/


----------



## Dhaller

Fun statistic: the average ratio of height to inseam (for men) is 2.2:1.

At 6'1" with a 32" I'm a 2.28:1, I'm slightly long-torsoed (funny, people always remarked on my long legs, but they really aren't... I'm just fairly lean, so it's an illusion?)

DH


----------



## Fading Fast

Dhaller said:


> Fun statistic: the average ratio of height to inseam (for men) is 2.2:1.
> 
> At 6'1" with a 32" I'm a 2.28:1, I'm slightly long-torsoed (funny, people always remarked on my long legs, but they really aren't... I'm just fairly lean, so it's an illusion?)
> 
> DH


I'm 6'1", lean and with a 32.5-33" inseam and I get the same comments. Also, people always guess I'm taller than I am.


----------



## fishertw

A little off topic but still relevant I hope. I have added weight as I have aged and have changed from a 30 waist /32 or 33 length at age 25 to an almost 40 waist at 73, yet have decreased trouser length to a 29 or 30 in most trousers. It seems as I have aged, I have grown wider but with shorter legs. I have also lost about 1.5 inches in height as I was 5'11 and now barely 5'9. 

I'd be interested in whether any of our more mature members have had a similar experience.


----------



## EclecticSr.

fishertw said:


> A little off topic but still relevant I hope. I have added weight as I have aged and have changed from a 30 waist /32 or 33 length at age 25 to an almost 40 waist at 73, yet have decreased trouser length to a 29 or 30 in most trousers. It seems as I have aged, I have grown wider but with shorter legs. I have also lost about 1.5 inches in height as I was 5'11 and now barely 5'9.
> 
> I'd be interested in whether any of our more mature members have had a similar experience.


You bet, 6'-1" to about 5'-11" +, 32" inseam to 31.5". I'm a fair bit older than you.
Gained weight after quitting smoking about 16 yrs. ago. I could lose it if I put my mind to it, I've done so in the past. I have in the past 6-8 years accumulated clothing that takes me through the weight gain /loss stages. Lot of good it does these days with less opportunity wear. But, I'm hopeful.


----------



## fishertw

EclecticSr. said:


> You bet, 6'-1" to about 5'-11" +, 32" inseam to 31.5". I'm a fair bit older than you.
> Gained weight after quitting smoking about 16 yrs. ago. I could lose it if I put my mind to it, I've done so in the past. I have in the past 6-8 years accumulated clothing that takes me through the weight gain /loss stages. Lot of good it does these days with less opportunity wear. But, I'm hopeful.


I'm in the same boat but got rid of a lot of good items as I gained weight after quitting smoking 25 years ago. I've gone from a 38 to a 44/46 jacket and 30 to 40 trousers. During Covid, I have lost a bit of weight due to not eating lunch out with friends several days a week.


----------



## Vecchio Vespa

I was once a shade under 6' and as 72 draws near I am about 5'9 1/2". At 70 my sitting at a desk physique had a 28 1/2" inseam, and that is still the case. When working I would fluctuate between about 195 and 190. Now I am at 152. Jacket went from 44" to 41", and waist from 38" to 34". When I was at my fittest in school it was 28". Sigh. I wish I had the discipline (and time) to do more than walking, limited running, and light weights.


----------



## mhj

I'm way off the charts. Currently 5'8" shrunken from 5'10", weight today is 200 lb up recently from 190. I wear a 42" waist which are getting snug. I had a kidney transplant in 2019 and shortly later most of my trousers started getting short on me by an inch and half or so. If I let the cuffs down the length is about right. No idea why I would get taller at the age of 69. Also my waist size seems quite large for my weight from comparing to others posting their stats here. What I think is that my thighs are too skinny and my weight is mainly in the abdomen. Prednisone can do strange things to you too.


----------



## fishertw

mhj said:


> I'm way off the charts. Currently 5'8" shrunken from 5'10", weight today is 200 lb up recently from 190. I wear a 42" waist which are getting snug. I had a kidney transplant in 2019 and shortly later most of my trousers started getting short on me by an inch and half or so. If I let the cuffs down the length is about right. No idea why I would get taller at the age of 69. Also my waist size seems quite large for my weight from comparing to others posting their stats here. What I think is that my thighs are too skinny and my weight is mainly in the abdomen. Prednisone can do strange things to you too.


mhj, I agree that medical issues can cause issues for us. I had spinal fusion surgery a couple of years ago which stabalized my height for a while but in the last year due to added spinal compression my height has erroded again. Best of luck to you


----------



## EclecticSr.

mhj said:


> I'm way off the charts. Currently 5'8" shrunken from 5'10", weight today is 200 lb up recently from 190. I wear a 42" waist which are getting snug. I had a kidney transplant in 2019 and shortly later most of my trousers started getting short on me by an inch and half or so. If I let the cuffs down the length is about right. No idea why I would get taller at the age of 69. Also my waist size seems quite large for my weight from comparing to others posting their stats here. What I think is that my thighs are too skinny and my weight is mainly in the abdomen. Prednisone can do strange things to you too.


I can not imagine having to through what you have, I know only one other person who has gone through a kidney procedure, she is doing fine some 8 years on. The advances in science and medical procedures are a blessing. The important thing to remember is, not how well our trousers fit but, that we can comment on how they fit.

Stay well.


----------



## mhj

EclecticSr. said:


> I can not imagine having to through what you have, I know only one other person who has gone through a kidney procedure, she is doing fine some 8 years on. The advances in science and medical procedures are a blessing. The important thing to remember is, not how well our trousers fit but, that we can comment on how they fit.
> 
> Stay well.


Thank you for your good wishes. The transplant is really not as bad as it sounds, it's better than not getting it when you need one. I felt 30 years younger after recovering.


----------



## eagle2250

mhj said:


> I'm way off the charts. Currently 5'8" shrunken from 5'10", weight today is 200 lb up recently from 190. I wear a 42" waist which are getting snug. I had a kidney transplant in 2019 and shortly later most of my trousers started getting short on me by an inch and half or so. If I let the cuffs down the length is about right. No idea why I would get taller at the age of 69. Also my waist size seems quite large for my weight from comparing to others posting their stats here. What I think is that my thighs are too skinny and my weight is mainly in the abdomen. Prednisone can do strange things to you too.


Just a thought, but what types of exercise do you engage in? My wife and I walk five miles a day, generally five days a week...this keeps the legs pretty well toned. However, as long as you walk 30 to 40 minutes, you will enjoy the benefits. We go the extra distance primarily to burn extra calories. We also used to regularly go to our local Planet Fitness three days a week, but the pandemic has temporarily put a halt to that. Good luck with your health and fitness goals.


----------



## ran23

I walk about one hour a day, but the the 'weight gain' on my new meds are really doing their thing.


----------



## coynedj

I'm 5'11" and would prefer a 33" inseam, but it isn't easy to find that off the shelf, so I go with 34". My waist size is also 33", but Banana Republic seems to think I'm a 32".


----------



## eagle2250

ran23 said:


> I walk about one hour a day, but the the 'weight gain' on my new meds are really doing their thing.


I know from personal experience that meds can certainly complicate our weight loss/management efforts, but continue the fight...your health is worth the added effort! Good luck, my friend.


----------



## mhj

eagle2250 said:


> Just a thought, but what types of exercise do you engage in? My wife and I walk five miles a day, generally five days a week...this keeps the legs pretty well toned. However, as long as you walk 30 to 40 minutes, you will enjoy the benefits. We go the extra distance primarily to burn extra calories. We also used to regularly go to our local Planet Fitness three days a week, but the pandemic has temporarily put a halt to that. Good luck with your health and fitness goals.


Exercise is one of my weak points. Between the virus and the cold weather I don't get out much.


----------



## eagle2250

mhj said:


> Exercise is one of my weak points. Between the virus and the cold weather I don't get out much.


Having worked from the Federal Building @1240E. 9th Street for 4+ years and living in Strongsville, OH, I am well aware of the cold weather to which you refer. A quality treadmill is a good foul weather option for getting in your cardio! Good luck in your effort.


----------



## mhj

eagle2250 said:


> Having worked from the Federal Building @1240E. 9th Street for 4+ years and living in Strongsville, OH, I am well aware of the cold weather to which you refer. A quality treadmill is a good foul weather option for getting in your cardio! Good luck in your effort.


I worked in the Fed Bldg at one time too for DFAS.

It hasn't gotten any warmer.


----------

