Christopher Snowdon has a piece in the Spectator.
It got me thinking, not about CRUK and their obsession with people’s health but his statement that “‘Overweight’ is a term that has no medical significance.”
So what weight should I be?
Naturally there are all sorts of tables and charts floating around but without even trying to find them, I can guarantee there is no conformity or “international standard”.
I have never worried about my weight. The earliest I remember was that I weighed in at around ten stone when I was fifteen. I stuck at that weight for around another fifteen years and then started gaining a little in my thirties. I think I peaked at around thirteen stone a while ago and have ebbed and flowed between eleven and thirteen ever since. But is this where I should be, and more importantly – why?
I will be honest – I do keep a little eye out for my weight. The only reason I do so is to monitor my waist size. The reason for that is simple – if the waistline expands a bit then half my trousers won’t fit me any more and I would have to go and buy some new trousers and I fucking hate shopping, particularly for clothes.
Some years ago I was on holiday in West Cork. I visited Bantry on market day and happened to pass a stall selling leather goods. I’m not an impulse buyer, but a belt caught my eye and I decided to buy it. It was harness grade leather and I was assured it would last longer than I would. Hah!
I have worn that belt virtually every day since. It is still as good as new, apart from small marks where the buckle has pressed against the strap. So I can say with confidence that judging by those marks, my waist has varied by about two inches in all that time. The only time I began to worry was when I developed a thing for Mars Bars and decided to quit them again as a shopping trip for trousers loomed.
I have asked Doc in the past what weight I should be and he just shrugged and said whatever weight I was.
Sound like a good definition of ideal weight?