...
Do not feel bad, your math is exactly right! It just used an incorrect seed value in the cup size. Convert your JP sizes to EU sizes first. If one puts in the JP 15 band "O cup" you do get a Bq = 711 (rounded) so you have all the other elements in the right place. Just remember to calculate the bust weight off EU cup sizes.
However, Hitomi is actually a respectable Bq = 426 with her 32K EU size. **
Her Bp based on a calculated bust weight of 5.66kg is 11.998% (12%) using a weight of 47.17kg.
** Hitomi Tanaka has noticeable breast asymmetry so an accurate cup size value is even more up to scrutiny, as she may be using the larger cup and padding the smaller bust in her bras.
Wow, thanks Nimrod. All really good stuff. I appreciate the work you put into the reply. The weight of the breasts you come up with, though, still doesn't sound right. Hitomi did another SCORE video (several actually) last year in the Czech Republic. In one she's being interviewed (whose is off-camera) as she goes through a 'Bee House'. Hitomi tells us, again, that she's a Japanese 'O' cup so that's good but still says they weigh 7 kg and that she often has neck pains from them. What would be the result if we back-calculated from the breast weight? And, why do I care?
Also, from careful visual scrutiny I'm of the opinion that she doesn't use padding to equalize things. While there is asymetry, if you look closely at a number of her photoshoots, particularly those done by Daktari for Nadine, you can see that the difference, while noticeable, is not particularly so.
I was actually laying the groundwork for this discussion
way back in 2010. See the post here:
http://forum.bearchive.com/index.php?topic=9983228.msg10086778#msg10086778It is here where I talk about the range of breast density based on UN recognized base ethnic groups. There is a distinct difference in the density of breast tissue, and therefor its weight, if you isolate a specific group or population away from the overall average. As you can see there, women with strong SE Asian genetic roots have denser breasts. (less adipose and more glandular and connective tissues)
What does this mean for Hitomi? Well, using the base breast density for her ethnic background one would have to use a denser measure, thus yielding a heavier breast at that volume. Her factor
could be as low as say, 0.8 which would make her breasts 1.25 heavier ( 1/0.8 ) than her Bq calculated weight.
That was
5.66 Kg for the record, which X 1.25 yields
7.075 Kg.
Which is essentially what she has reported. (She said, 7 Kg)
So, why not use 7 Kg? you ask.Because, that is not how the Bq formula is set up.
Remember, because this is a ranking across ALL WOMEN,
you can not use ethnically specific density factors, but rather the average for all women.
Remember the Bq formula is set up to reduce confabulation by "backing into" the weight. Never use a stated weight. There is no way to know Hitomi's actual breast density without detailed measurements.
Remember it is possible that Hitomi does have near average breast density, hers would just be rather fatty for her ethnicity. Given her video and photo evidence, her breast do appear rather soft and fatty.
Additionally there is a small, but important line in my early discussion of the Bq formula that should be pointed out here again: (from back in 2016)
Step Two: Determine Bra Size to Volume and from that Determine Breast Weight:
Cup diameter in cm = (((cup size jumps beyond A + band size jumps beyond 32in)*0.847)+9.7)
Cd = (∆cup+∆band)*0.847cm + 9.7cm
• Thus a 32A bra has a diameter of 9.7cm as this would be (0+0)*0.847cm + 9.7cm = 9.7cm.
• Thus a 38D bra has a (2+3)*0.847cm+9.7cm = 13.935cm.
With the cup diameter (Cd) the volume of the cup (Cv) is easy:
Cup volume (Cv) = Cup diameter^3 *3.14159/12. This can be written as Cv = Cd^3*π/12
• Thus a 36D bra has a Cv of 13.935^3*π/12 = 708.4173cm^3
• The volume of the whole bra would be twice that or Cv * 2 assuming mostly symmetric breasts.
Total breast weight is then Cv/1000*1.8 which is the kg per cm^3 weight
Breast Weight (Bw) kg = Cv/1000*1.8
• Thus a 36D bra is designed to hold 2.56kg of total breast
• 1.8 kg/l is the result of the average density of breasts 0.9 kg/l times 2 breasts
These same values are confirmed by using the bra sizing wiki chart and a simple check shows that the formula produces results that match the chart.
It should be noted that in one of the referenced studies the team actually calculated the average density of breasts at 1.017 kg/l – however this was using average values for 1980, which were much smaller in terms of breast volume and were, at the time, noted by the team as being at the low end of the estimate of non-fat tissue. Therefore, the common 0.9 kg/l is still used here as it not only matches back to the standard bra size chart weights & volumes but also corresponds to a shift to greater average breast volumes.
We do not have symmetry on this individual. It fact, it is a well noted topic. I had previously postulated that she could be quoting the statistics for the larger, as they would be that much more impressive. Granted, she does not have freakishly dissimilar breasts but, as has been noted by others, one can readily see it.
As basic symmetry is one of the core necessary prerequisites of the weight calculation,
Hitomi is in a gray zone.
So, how much asymmetry does she have? Well I touched on the perception of breast asymmetry here:
http://forum.bearchive.com/index.php?topic=322600.msg10243754#msg10243754It is normal to have breasts that differ in volume up to 3% on the typical woman.
This amount is essentially imperceptible, even at very large sizes.
Think about a 2000cc implant next to a 1940cc implant
Breast asymmetry only becomes noticeable in the 5% to 8% range depending on breast size.
This also happens to be the typical natural breast volume change with female hormone cycles. (which makes sense) as it is the minimum to register visually. Outside of this range and the asymmetry becomes more profound and negatively impacts perceptions of health, fecundity, etc. - again these are generalizations for studies of perception, so take it with a pause.
Hitomi is distinctly noticeable. There are readily perceptible differences in width, height, fullness, projection, etc.
This is well outside even the minimum 5% visual registration range.
Due to the wide range of stated sizes, I will not attempt to pick one of her many posted sizes.
I will however analyze a basic silhouette to see if a range of 8% is even supportable.(see attached silhouette review)
I appears that Hitomi is
just inside the tolerable 8% limit at 7.79%. Why this is important has to do with the total breast weight calculation and not her attractiveness. (I need to say this, again) What this means is that, in the case of Hitomi, she has a wide possible range of total breast weight due to her high asymmetry.
That is why a mathematical average breast density is best to use in her case and to arrive at a breast weight through calculation. If anything, the mathematical approach removes compounding assumptions or introducing additional exaggerated values. Plus, I doubt we will ever get a clinically determined breast density for her.
In one final statement, which I mentioned years ago, and
I am pointing out here with the greatest delicacy, the applicability of the Bq does have limits in terms of who's stats can be feed into it.
Bq is understandably not applicable to:- Developing women who have not reached maturity
- Women of an age of over 55 to 60 when the medical proportions behind the Bq formula start to shift
- Women with atypical developmental or physical attributes - (small people, amputees, asymmetric development, etc.)
This was also established in some very early work I did creating a formula to determine the number of women of a particular size there are in the world. The core of that work is noted here:
http://forum.bearchive.com/index.php?topic=420036.msg428026#msg428026Hitomi is just inside the 8% asymmetry limit for inclusion in the Bq, so that I why I have not resisted including her. But, she is right on the line and just sneaks in. I have just never made much to do about the natural asymmetry bounds until now.
It is great that such a striking woman occupies such a rare position on the chart.