Body Fat %: Why I try not to compare.

Options
half_moon
half_moon Posts: 807 Member
edited July 2015 in Fitness and Exercise
I recently got a fitness assessment and was told I am 45% body fat. This puts me in the higher range of females, and according to multiple sources, there is a pretty consistent image of what my body fat % usually looks like.

I guess I am just posting to show how every body type is different. I am in no way fit or at goal (in fact I am 25 pounds from goal) but this comparison should prove interesting.

What the internet says 45% looks like:

dhqcigazy0ud.jpg

What I look like today:

fn7u8891cgkx.jpg

I've got a long way to go, but I know that for me, I will set my goals based on what feels and looks good to me, for my body, and not worry about what averages are!

(I am 5'5" and 170 pounds, for those who are curious.)

What is your BF%? Is your shape close to the ones in the chart above?
«13

Replies

  • kami3006
    kami3006 Posts: 4,978 Member
    Options
    You would probably find mybodygallery.com interesting. Put in your stats and it shows other women of those same stats. Such a wide variation.
  • half_moon
    half_moon Posts: 807 Member
    Options
    kami3006 wrote: »
    You would probably find mybodygallery.com interesting. Put in your stats and it shows other women of those same stats. Such a wide variation.

    Yes I love that site! I wish it did body fat %, because so often I see people say, "don't go by weight. Go by BF!"

    But in my opinion, even that is so different for every person. Best bet is to go with what feels good!
  • kami3006
    kami3006 Posts: 4,978 Member
    Options
    I agree. I rarely weigh; just use measurements and photos.
  • arditarose
    arditarose Posts: 15,575 Member
    Options
    I don't know my BF but I think I look somewhere between 20-25%. I kind of wish I knew.
  • kami3006
    kami3006 Posts: 4,978 Member
    Options
    arditarose wrote: »
    I don't know my BF but I think I look somewhere between 20-25%. I kind of wish I knew.

    From all your pics, I agree with you. Gotta love recomp.
  • arditarose
    arditarose Posts: 15,575 Member
    Options
    kami3006 wrote: »
    arditarose wrote: »
    I don't know my BF but I think I look somewhere between 20-25%. I kind of wish I knew.

    From all your pics, I agree with you. Gotta love recomp.

    lol but there is a big difference between 20 and 25. My upper body is looking 22ish and lower body 25. Who knows?! Recomps be slow.
  • MamaBirdBoss
    MamaBirdBoss Posts: 1,516 Member
    edited July 2015
    Options
    They mis-measured if it was skinfold. An unathletic woman of your age and BMI will have a BF % around 35%. 45% is frankly absurd.

    BF *is* important to health, but only if it's accurate. For low-risk, a woman should be below 32% or 30%, depending on which measure you're going with.

    I'm likely hovering around 27%.
  • jimmmer
    jimmmer Posts: 3,515 Member
    Options
    If they didn't use something accurate, I'd say ignore it (ie unless it was a scan, or something)

    45% seems way off base...
  • shadow2soul
    shadow2soul Posts: 7,692 Member
    Options
    How did your assessment determine your BF%?
    It seems very wrong.
    ______________________________________________

    I've never had my BF% tested. Not within my budget to do so. My scale does give me a reading and while I don't know how accurate it is, it says 26-27% in normal mode currently and 22.4-23.5% in athletic mode. I think the normal mode might be close to accurate for me, but I could be wrong.
  • ncfitbit
    ncfitbit Posts: 1,058 Member
    edited July 2015
    Options
    I hate how difficult it is accurately track get BF% because that's the main thing I care about! I paid $80 for a bodpod test at the diet and fitness center at the local university a few months into using MFP and I was happy to learn that for me it was very, very close to my handheld Omron body fat monitor. So now I don't worry so much about the absolute number as much, but do use my handheld every few weeks to see how I'm doing. It's sensitive to hydration levels, but then so is the scale!

    BTW, there's no way you're 45%! I would say closer to 30.
  • jemhh
    jemhh Posts: 14,261 Member
    Options
    I don't think you are 45% either. Those charts are a bit frustrating because, other than the highest bf pictures, the women shown have a fairly proportional fat distribution. My fat distribution is so no even that there's no point in looking at them.

    But it sounds like you have a good attitude about the number anyway, OP :)
  • IsaackGMOON
    IsaackGMOON Posts: 3,358 Member
    edited July 2015
    Options
    How did they measure your body fat %?

    You don't look like you're 45% BF, not at all. I don't tend to go off of pictures (especially for myself) because of gyno which just makes it look like it's higher. Fat distribution can pretty much make pictures a bad comparison.
  • half_moon
    half_moon Posts: 807 Member
    Options
    It was tested with an Omron scale device, and is pretty close to what my % was two years ago at a different gym.

    I have no real choice to believe that it is true. Accepting that I am 45% body fat isn't easy, but why? Only because of all the photos I see online -- and I KNOW that I don't look like that.

    It can be hard to ignore what you look like and compare yourself to everyone else. But I must resist!
  • half_moon
    half_moon Posts: 807 Member
    Options
    Either that or I am a very tiny person trapped in a hefty body o__o
  • shadow2soul
    shadow2soul Posts: 7,692 Member
    Options
    half_moon wrote: »
    It was tested with an Omron scale device, and is pretty close to what my % was two years ago at a different gym.

    I have no real choice to believe that it is true. Accepting that I am 45% body fat isn't easy, but why? Only because of all the photos I see online -- and I KNOW that I don't look like that.

    It can be hard to ignore what you look like and compare yourself to everyone else. But I must resist!

    Just like scales that measure BF% those are known to be inaccurate; sometimes insanely so.
  • shadow2soul
    shadow2soul Posts: 7,692 Member
    Options
    Also if you go to Omrons website they say the best accuracy is first thing in the morning before you workout, eat, or drink. After that the accuracy decreases and even first thing in the morning they claim that it can still be up to 4% off
  • shadow2soul
    shadow2soul Posts: 7,692 Member
    Options
    They even have a chart showing that just their hand monitor would inflate the fat reading as the day went on.
  • Mischievous_Rascal
    Mischievous_Rascal Posts: 1,791 Member
    Options
    shadow2soul wrote: »
    Also if you go to Omrons website they say the best accuracy is first thing in the morning before you workout, eat, or drink. After that the accuracy decreases and even first thing in the morning they claim that it can still be up to 4% off

    This for sure, which would put you around the 35% mark, and pretty close to the model in the pic. :)
  • dakotababy
    dakotababy Posts: 2,404 Member
    Options
    45%? I seen that you have ab definition! Ill call BS. Try a second opinion.
  • yellowantphil
    yellowantphil Posts: 787 Member
    edited July 2015
    Options
    I’ve heard that DXA scans are the only way to accurately measure body fat. I wouldn’t trust the Omron scale. You say that you have to accept its reading, but why not accept that you just don’t know your body fat percentage? Hardly anybody knows for sure.

    Have you tried any other methods of measuring? You could try calipers (How to Measure Your Body Fat). Or there are formulas that estimate your body fat based on other measurements, like this one, where you measure your neck, waist, and hips. They aren’t necessarily accurate, but you could compare the numbers to what the Omron scale said.

Categories