How big are your quads boys and girls.

 

Research seems to say that 60cm is desired, any less and greater risk for health.

 

Thigh circumference and risk of heart disease and premature death: prospective cohort study - PMC https://share.google/vCzD7Q2NOMKym5s4g

 

"Results A small thigh circumference was associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular and coronary heart diseases and total mortality in both men and women. A threshold effect for thigh circumference was evident, with greatly increased risk of premature death below around 60 cm. Above the threshold there seemed to be no additional benefit of having larger thighs in either sex. These findings were independent of abdominal and general obesity, lifestyle, and cardiovascular risk factors such as blood pressure and lipid concentration"

Edited October 30, 2025Oct 30 by martin-w

About 3 decades ago it was general body morphology that was considered an indicator for cardiovascular disease.  If you were apple shaped, that is you had most of your fat deposits above the waistline, you were higher risk.  If you were pear shaped, meaning your fat was more in the lower abdomen, hips, and thighs, you were were a lower risk.

5 hours ago, stans said:

About 3 decades ago it was general body morphology that was considered an indicator for cardiovascular disease.  If you were apple shaped, that is you had most of your fat deposits above the waistline, you were higher risk.  If you were pear shaped, meaning your fat was more in the lower abdomen, hips, and thighs, you were were a lower risk.

 

It's visceral fat that's the big deal.

The thigh circumference thing is an indicator of muscle mass, and we know that muscle mass is something we need to retain, holding back sarcopenia is to be advised.