Breast Size Category Chart

Is this accurate?

  • Yes

    Votes: 79 53.4%
  • No

    Votes: 38 25.7%
  • It should be altered a little.

    Votes: 31 20.9%

  • Total voters
    148
Wow this is full of information that is all over the place.

In my practice, when we see patients, this is the chart we use which is standardized medically and does not consider all the wild variations of clothing manufactures. In other words, you cannot accurately rely on clothing manufactures as there is not an industry standard for calibration.

Instead, we measure our patients both with measuring tape and scales. We then cross reference that with the industry standardization for each category (US, UK, EU, JP). The most accurate, and easy to understand is the EU standard. Also, for those that do not know 1ml volume = 1cc cubic centimeter.

Again, and to be clear, there are industry standardization for size but there is not an industry standardization for calibration in textile manufacturing. That means that manufacturers loosely approximate size but don't have an "official sizing tool" which is why a US 38G from one manufacturer may be bigger or smaller than the same size from another US manufacturer. The issue exponentiates when you look at other manufacturers world wide.
 

Attachments

  • medRefChart_2024-01-10 Rev_24.png
    medRefChart_2024-01-10 Rev_24.png
    59.1 KB · Views: 256
according to that chart my wife has macromastia, I should tell her lol
The crass-man-answer: LOL. Yes you should!

The clinical answer: Generally we consider macromastia as anyone with an overall breast volume in excess of 1250cc AND who exhibits other secondary health issues (pain, tearing, etc). In this case, the chart shows the attending physician to consider when to ask about these other signs of macromastia if the patient does not volunteer them. Think of it like BMI. Just because you have a high BMI does not mean you are morbidly obese, in fact most body-builders have BMI ranges that suggest clinical morbitity if basing it on the numbers alone. And we all know that is incorrect.
 

Attachments

  • 2016-03-07-1457387813-3802365-PHOTO2-thumb.jpeg
    2016-03-07-1457387813-3802365-PHOTO2-thumb.jpeg
    18.1 KB · Views: 113
Wow this is full of information that is all over the place.

In my practice, when we see patients, this is the chart we use which is standardized medically and does not consider all the wild variations of clothing manufactures. In other words, you cannot accurately rely on clothing manufactures as there is not an industry standard for calibration.

Instead, we measure our patients both with measuring tape and scales. We then cross reference that with the industry standardization for each category (US, UK, EU, JP). The most accurate, and easy to understand is the EU standard. Also, for those that do not know 1ml volume = 1cc cubic centimeter.

Again, and to be clear, there are industry standardization for size but there is not an industry standardization for calibration in textile manufacturing. That means that manufacturers loosely approximate size but don't have an "official sizing tool" which is why a US 38G from one manufacturer may be bigger or smaller than the same size from another US manufacturer. The issue exponentiates when you look at other manufacturers world wide.
Where's this chart from?
 
Ok, that explains it. I was really surprised to see Hitomi there beyond Abbi.

Also, here is a picture comparing Abbi to Miosotis. Abbi actually looks a little bigger. It is really hard to compare a lot of the time though because boobs differ in shape. Abbi’s boobs definitely hang lower, but maybe Miosotis’s boobs are a little fuller?
It’s just hard to compare without them standing next to each other.
Two beautiful busty women who have set a standard for magnificent boobs!
 
Where's this chart from?
My clinical office. We get them every other year from the American Society of Plastic Surgeons; sometimes surgical supply companies drop them off too. This one is from ASPS March 2023, but it is the excel version of the actual poster. Really they hardly change from year to year so even older versions are still accurate. Really it is the line between what is defined as Macromastia that seems to fluctuate. The designation used to be much higher but with the prevalence of obesity and exposure to xenoestrogenic compounds, the rates of morbidity have increased.
 
Seems like younger models are getting bigger in average: Just compare them with the busty models from the 70s, 80s and even 90s, no contest... What do you guys think?
 
Top