This vanity practice is hardly new amongst women’s fashion stores. Women have always known that a size 14 say, in a fashion store aimed at the more mature women is likely to be far more forgiving in term of cut than that in a shop aimed at trendy teenagers. What is intriguing is that fashion houses are now blatantly feeding the vanity of male customers by understating the true size of a pair of jeans by a whopping six inches. With rising levels of obesity, to collude with a man’s refusal to accept that he is at least six inches fatter than ever before, is questionable from an ethical standpoint.

Kate Winspur, Melbourne, Australia

I've noticed this happening for years when I was in the US. I have stayed the same weight for the last 5 years, but have dropped 1-2 dress sizes depending on where I shop. The worst culprits are definitely the Gap and H&M. I have shrunk down from a US size 4 to a 2 or 0, when my weight is exactly the same! I find it annoying, because if they keep doing this all the clothes will become too big for me!

Arielle, Edinburgh,

Vanity sizing has been around for a few years now. Many stores changed their size 8 from a '34' to a '36' and introduced a size 6, which is really the old size 8, to try and convince larger sized women to shop in trendy young stores.

But now I see some have introduced a size 4, what was the point?

claire cittern, wokingham, berks

My backside has remained the same size for the last fifty years but my frontside is more akin to that of a very pregnant woman. I like to wear briefs but the designers assume that male backsides are similar to womens and thus those for a 40 inch waist have a huge backside. My waist is about 42 inches but I buy M&S 36-39 inch briefs and even then they are "bloomers" and BHS pants are even worse. The irritating thing, apart from the shape, is that they are sold in packs of four or five and once you have tried one on the pack is not returnable in case is has become infected with some disease or other. If you doubt this buy a selection and lay one on top of the other to see how the designer caters for an ever increasingly pendulous backside.

John Hollamby, St Julians, Malta

My waist size (according to the tape measure) has remained the same since I was 18. At that time I used to buy a size 8, which fitted fine. 18 years later I am having to buy a size zero, which over the last year has now also got larger so am having to search for a double zero. What size are they going to come up with next. Why can't they just sell clothes according to their measurements as it would make life far easier for everyone. By the way I am only 5 feet tall so being this size is perfectly normal!

Vickie, london, uk

I think LS has it right. The actual measure of a pair of trousers around the waist is dependent of where they sit. If you looks carefully it's the "hip" younger labels that alledgedly do the vanity sizing according to this article. It's exactly the kind of brand that goes for ultra-low riding hipsters, i.e. jeans that stop well short of the narrowest point of the waist.

Sure, sizes do vary a bit and often people own a pair of jeans a size up or down that fits them. However, the article mentions are pair of French Connection jeans which are 4 inches too big for the labelled size 8. Does the author honestly believe that a woman in this day and age could be fooled into believing she's two dress sizes smaller than she actually is?

SL, Ireland,

Surely if the label says "waist 30" but the jeans are low rise style the "waist" of the jeans is likely to measure 34 because they actually sit on the hips, which are broader at that point than the waist, which is still 30. If you had to provide the exact measurement of the item people would not know what to pick up as depending on "rise" they may need a 36 or a 30.

LS, New Delhi,

Interesting that the size 12 and size 16 jeans checked were sized "correctly" or closer to their stated size than the smaller sizes are. My sister, who doesn't appear too much bigger than me, always says that she can't buy clothes...perhaps this is why: proportionally she's only a size or two larger, but the sizing isn't proportionate. I guess I'll listen the next time she says it's unfair!

Elizabeth, Toronto, Canada

Size switching has been going on in the States for well over a decade, at least--and is getting worse. I used to be able to just grab a pair of jeans in my size right off the rack--not any longer. It seems, on this side of the big pond, that there are no longer any standards--and certainly no sense of honor--in the American fashion industry...sorry to see it's spread to the UK, as well.

Nancy, Adirondack mtns, USA NY

H&M?! I've always found their sizes to be absolutely tiny. You have to buy a size up, because they've mistranslated the European sizes.

Starling, Lancaster,

Don't be such spoilsports, let people have their delusions, it's about all Brown and his red fascists will allow us soon anyway.

Neil Murphy, cromer,

Have your researchers taken into account the fact that the "waistband" of most jeans currently are cut to ride at a level well below the body's waistline? In some cases just inches above the hipline?

A dressmaker size that fits a 25-inch waist/34 inch hips, measures 27-28 inches at a few inches below the waistline---easily the place that the waistband most jeans are now cut to ride. Men also wear their jeans low these days. High-waisted (that is to say pants sitting at the true waist) look astonishingly out-of-date to our eyes now---though soon they will cycle back in, to be sure.

Size deflation is a fact of the industry, but your article may be exaggerating the true extent.

Amy O'Hair, San Francisco , CA

This story looks like rubbish!

The waist measurement of modern jeans is a bit theoretical. Compared with 10 years ago, the waistband of today's jeans sits several inches lower, it's more on the hips.
So obviously on a slim person, where the hips are wider than the waist, the waistband *has* to be several inches wider for modern jeans to fit.

Anne Smith, Brighton,

Does it matter? Surely, what is important is whether the jeans fit you - not what size they are claimed to be...? If they look good on you, who cares what the label says!

Anna, Copenhagen, Denmark

These retailers should be reported to the Trading Standards offices nearest to their head offices and prosecuted.

Amelie, London, England

I think it is about time we had standard sizing across all shops, so that people knew that for example a size 8 in any shop would have, by law, to have a 26 inch waist.

10 years ago I took a size 10. Now, with a waist size 4 inches bigger I take a 6 or and 8! A French Connection 8 won't even stay up round my hips, and a Next size 6 just about fits. Ridiculous.

Julie, Shrewsbury,

Cyd, that is exactly what I thought when reading this article. If jeans are styled to fit across the hip bones, then clearly the 'waist band' will measure substantially more than the body measurements for a given size will indicate.

Ann, Plymouth, UK

As almost all trousers and jeans at the moment are hipsters, one would expect the measurable size of the top of the garment to be bigger than the stated clothes size, as hips should measure more than the size of the waist surely?

Cyd Mansell, antibes, france

Who cares? I've always loved Gap jeans because they fit me around the hips where other makes don't. I assumed it was because they were made for the American market!

Susan, London, UK

perhaps this has something to do with the fact women, especially the younger generation don't wear jeans around the waist anymore, they wear them on the hips, and while the style of jeans has changed, the sizes havent changed to represent this. my waist, the part that goes 'in' in the middle is 26 inches, but in topshop i buy a 30 inch waist as they are cut so low.

gd, norwich,