Honestly, I think measurements tend to be more of a hindrance than a help with NBE. Too many times, I've read about newbies claiming to have achieved extraordinary growth in a short amount on the basis of their measurements. I've also come across experienced members who express doubt and discouragement about their lack of progress because their measurements have stayed static.

I think pictures are the gold standard when it comes to tracking NBE development. There is much I think that pictures can reveal about NBE progress that measurements don't provide data on. I don't mind if other members make use of a tracking log for their measurements. However, I won't be making use of such a tool.

I don't understand the overstated results either, maybe it's the excitement of trying to fit in, I've always agreed with you flame on photo documentation.

Even an supplement section, alert for refills, etc, too much to ask for?

Could you please clarify? I'm not quite following what you're stating here.





http://transgendercare.com/medical/resources/tmf_program/default.asp

When it comes to breast growth this is something to consider even though transition isn't in your future.


Often during transition, the breast area values (numbers) do not show much change. At first glance, one may feel that not much change is happening. Usually, more changes are occurring than you realize. Keep in mind that your muscles are diminishing as fat is redistributing itself towards a normal female form. The change in breast size is seen by looking at the numeric differences between the chest, bust and rib cage measurements. Additionally, the overall decrease in one's frame size (size decrease due to overall loss of muscle mass) is seen in these measurements.

The true degree of breast growth in the transgendered woman is often hidden by the fact that the chest wall diminishes as quickly as the breasts enlarge. Therefore, the overall breast measurement may stay the same even though it has enlarged by an inch or more because the chest wall has diminished by that amount.


So the changes happening, or not happening my in fact be giving you the idea there isn't any growth. This is why measurement would be a good indication in terms of your growth!.

Same reference

Correct if I'm wrong, isn't your cup size determined between the difference of the band and over bust?

I've just measured the same way since the beginning, which has been from the outside end of the breast and over the nipple to the middle of the sternum. I've never really fussed about sizing that much, why I dunno?. However I've come to the conclusion it's the wrong approach for the aforementioned post. Thus the reason for the proposal, you can't deny the logic about the rib cage and muscle loss being a determining size of breast growth.

So maybe this kind of tool can give new hope and possibly prevent people giving up on NBE when there IS actual growth!

Get those measuring tools out people, respectively of course!, I'm just part of the team not the competition!

I'm generally with Flame on this ( and I'm one of those who have moaned about apparent lack of growth!)

However, I have a complete record of measurements above, round the max, and underband, plus each boob to the centre, and distance between nipples, taken every two months first thing in the morning going back to September 2010. Some of them go up and down a bit but realistically there is no change from 2 years ago, although I can see SHAPE changes still happening. I've also got near enough identical pictures taken at the same time as the measurements ( see my pictures thread), which say much the same thing.

The one thing I am absolutely certain of is that using bra sizes as an OBJECTIVE measure of growth is a complete waste of time. IMO getting the first one is potentially a bit hit and miss, but once you found one that you are comfortable with, then when you find it has got too small... go up a size! The numbers/letters on the label are only an approximate way ( depending on manufacturer and style ) of getting one roughly the same.

I'm generally with Flame on this ( and I'm one of those who have moaned about apparent lack of growth!)

However, I have a complete record of measurements above, round the max, and underband, plus each boob to the centre, and distance between nipples, taken every two months first thing in the morning going back to September 2010. Some of them go up and down a bit but realistically there is no change from 2 years ago, although I can see SHAPE changes still happening. I've also got near enough identical pictures taken at the same time as the measurements ( see my pictures thread), which say much the same thing.

The one thing I am absolutely certain of is that using bra sizes as an OBJECTIVE measure of growth is a complete waste of time. IMO getting the first one is potentially a bit hit and miss, but once you found one that you are comfortable with, then when you find it has got too small... go up a size! The numbers/letters on the label are only an approximate way ( depending on manufacturer and style ) of getting one roughly the same.

It's good to hear from you Pansy, I wish I had documented like yourself, however I'm just lazy I guess, I've obtained 1 bra in the whole process and it wasn't a good experience. So I still don't wear a bra, but my thinking was purely from the growth standpoint, and hey if it's a sound bra measuring tool that actually is user friendly and universal, then why not?, make it work for all the reasons listed.

As a senior and tenured member and an excellent contributor I think you still have a lot to offer to the new members. I really feel for you that you've hit a stall, I can only offer my help in any way I can for whatever's that worth.


I still think it would be a good tool, (maybe not for you or me) but for others!


Thanks!

I'm generally with Flame on this ( and I'm one of those who have moaned about apparent lack of growth!)

However, I have a complete record of measurements above, round the max, and underband, plus each boob to the centre, and distance between nipples, taken every two months first thing in the morning going back to September 2010. Some of them go up and down a bit but realistically there is no change from 2 years ago, although I can see SHAPE changes still happening. I've also got near enough identical pictures taken at the same time as the measurements ( see my pictures thread), which say much the same thing.

The one thing I am absolutely certain of is that using bra sizes as an OBJECTIVE measure of growth is a complete waste of time. IMO getting the first one is potentially a bit hit and miss, but once you found one that you are comfortable with, then when you find it has got too small... go up a size! The numbers/letters on the label are only an approximate way ( depending on manufacturer and style ) of getting one roughly the same.

It's good to hear from you Pansy, I wish I had documented like yourself, however I'm just lazy I guess, I've obtained 1 bra in the whole process and it wasn't a good experience. So I still don't wear a bra, but my thinking was purely from the growth standpoint, and hey if it's a sound bra measuring tool that actually is user friendly and universal, then why not?, make it work for all the reasons listed.

As a senior and tenured member and an excellent contributor I think you still have a lot to offer to the new members. I really feel for you that you've hit a stall, I can only offer my help in any way I can for whatever's that worth.


I still think it would be a good tool, (maybe not for you or me) but for others!


Thanks!

I've been following this thread with interest. I've found the whole issue of measurement very difficult. From time to time over the last year I've made measurements similar to those suggested in the reference cited by Lotus. I haven't kept a log but my impression is that they don't seem to tell me very much. I think I find myself in agreement with Flamesabers and PansyMae on this, both of whose opinions I respect as I do yours, Lotus. There are moreover numerous suggested techniques for assessing bra size based on measurements, but they provide wildly different results, most however suggesting for me sizes which don't seem to appear in stores

A first difficulty I have in measurement is in judging consistent tape tension, particularly over the bust, and in selecting and standardizing the point at which to hold ones breath, both of which have a great influence on results. In the reference, I am puzzled by the reference to shrinking frame size. I have always regarded this as a measure of skeletal development and thus substantially immutable in an adult, although hormone treatment of an m-to-f adolescent may well suppress an increase in frame size that would otherwise occur. All the techniques for assessing frame size seem definitely related to the size of bony parts of the body such as the wrist or elbow. Yet another difficulty is varying rib cage shape. It seems that women at least usually have a rib cage that tapers downwardly, whereas my above bust measurement is about 39.5 inches and my below bust measurement about 42 inches or a little less, a substantial flare: this may be aggravated by my diastasis. Bust measurement is about 45 inhes or a little less which according to some sizing systems gives a respectable cup size. Taking a different approach, my wife has long considered herself to be a 36B, in my judgement far too small, and she has recently bought at least one 36C. Possibly as a result of using too small a size she has a lot of side boob, but the volume of her breasts is clearly much greater than mine eve though my nipples and areolae are larger than hers. Another widely quoted pricipal of bra sizing is that for each 2 inch increment in band size (and mine is at least 42"), there is a one cup size decrease for the same breast volume. On that basis, breasts that would fill the cups of a 36C would only fill the cups of a 42AA bra, so I would require something with substantially smaller cups seeing that I would not nearly fill the cups on a 36C. What gives?

Even photographs have their difficulties. It is difficult to maintain cosistency in body stance and viewpoint, and I often feel that changes are felt rather than seen, e.g .new interactions with body movements..

Sorry to maunder on, but the whole subject remains very confusing to me.

Even photographs have their difficulties. It is difficult to maintain cosistency in body stance and viewpoint, and I often feel that changes are felt rather than seen, e.g .new interactions with body movements..

I agree pictures don't tell the whole story. I've even started a thread a while back about noticing one's breasts more often in daily life:

http://www.breastnexus.com/showthread.php?tid=12520

With that said, I think it's fair to say I'm one of the loudest advocates for picture-taking for NBE.

Ok,
We'll put it to bed then.

As a senior and tenured member and an excellent contributor I think you still have a lot to offer to the new members. I really feel for you that you've hit a stall, I can only offer my help in any way I can for whatever's that worth.

Thanks, i appreciate the sentiments.

I don't think I have much to offer that I haven't already said dozens of times, and I get tired of the sound of my own voice ( as do others, from a comment made some while ago).

Actually I don't think I've hit a stall, as such, I think I just reached my maximum size, age being the major factor probably. Increasing to 6 x500mg per day, or stopping PM completely for several months just alters the fat content, and hence volume, but there is never any of the itching, tenderness, aches and pains of growth any more and hasn't been for a couple of years.

As I say, thanks for the offer but short of silicone ( and I never would), I don't think there is anything to be done.