Body Fat %: Why I try not to compare.

Options
2

Replies

  • shor0814
    shor0814 Posts: 559 Member
    Options
    I doubt the Omron is correct based on your photo alone. 45% body fat would mean that almost 1/2 of your body is fat and unless the leg muscles and arm muscles are really just bands of fat masquerading as muscle and you have some slick body shrinking spandex underneath then no, you aren't 45% body fat.

    Impedance measurement is notoriously unreliable as a accurate measure. I have a similar scale and the only thing I use the body fat % for is to see the change in values and progress.

    You don't have to accept 45% if it is wrong.
  • TheVirgoddess
    TheVirgoddess Posts: 4,535 Member
    Options
    I don't think your reading is accurate, either. My rough guess would be around 35%.

    I use a combination of calipers and a body fat scale (used over months to gauge progress) to get a rough estimation.
  • half_moon
    half_moon Posts: 807 Member
    edited July 2015
    Options
    Not sure -- two years ago at a completely different gym with a different electroscale I got 48%. I was around the same weight.

    I do have muscle though. It estimated it was 24% muscle I think? I will have to look back. I can deadlift 125 and back squat near 120. Not amazing but I do have something back there! :)

    Edit: 23% muscle.
  • jimmmer
    jimmmer Posts: 3,515 Member
    Options
    half_moon wrote: »
    Not sure -- two years ago at a completely different gym with a different electroscale I got 48%. I was around the same weight.

    I do have muscle though. It estimated it was 24% muscle I think? I will have to look back. I can deadlift 125 and back squat near 120. Not amazing but I do have something back there! :)

    Edit: 23% muscle.

    These methods of measurement aren't even remotely accurate and can give you wild swings.

    Comparing 2 inaccurately carried out measurements gives you no basis to draw any conclusions.

    If I weighed myself on two, different, uncalibrated bathroom scales 2 weeks apart, what useful conclusions can I draw from a comparison of two totally suspect pieces of data? None.
  • MamaBirdBoss
    MamaBirdBoss Posts: 1,516 Member
    Options
    dakotababy wrote: »
    45%? I seen that you have ab definition! Ill call BS. Try a second opinion.

    I look like I have ab definition in clothes, but it's fat pooches. LOL.
  • MamaBirdBoss
    MamaBirdBoss Posts: 1,516 Member
    Options
    half_moon wrote: »
    Not sure -- two years ago at a completely different gym with a different electroscale I got 48%. I was around the same weight.

    I do have muscle though. It estimated it was 24% muscle I think? I will have to look back. I can deadlift 125 and back squat near 120. Not amazing but I do have something back there! :)

    Edit: 23% muscle.

    Electroscale is utterly unreliable.
  • MamaBirdBoss
    MamaBirdBoss Posts: 1,516 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!

    Why would you believe that 45% is true if it's not? You're using something that's absurdly inaccurate--far worse than skinfold, even.
  • half_moon
    half_moon Posts: 807 Member
    Options
    I suppose because the numbers were extremely close together using two different methods at two different locations. I mean, it doesn't bother me that much. I will just track progress from that 45%.
  • half_moon
    half_moon Posts: 807 Member
    Options
    In high school I got 47% and that was with calipers.
  • DavPul
    DavPul Posts: 61,406 Member
    Options
    0.0% chance that the OP is 45% body fat. But even remotely close. She would have to be 3 feet tall or something.

    *checks thread to find out method used to derive measurement*

    Omron scale? Lolololololol. Spend $14 and get some calipers from Amazon. The 3 point measurement you can perform on yourself isn't the most accurate method, but it'll be close enough to measure progress. If you have a friend you can have them measure more areas. It'll still be a bit ballparky, but way better than what you seem to be trusting.

  • DavPul
    DavPul Posts: 61,406 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.

    I can help you with that but I'm gonna need more pictures. And NOT the ones you keep sending me when you get drunk.. Those aren't helpful for....measurement purposes.
  • MamaBirdBoss
    MamaBirdBoss Posts: 1,516 Member
    Options
    half_moon wrote: »
    In high school I got 47% and that was with calipers.

    If you were the same size, it's done wrong.

    Choosing a wrong starting point will make you try to go for a weight loss that's neither healthy nor, likely, possible without severe consequences.
  • vickihuk
    vickihuk Posts: 29 Member
    Options
    I got mine measured 4 week ago and I was 32%. Hoping to be around 23% in 6 weeks - my trainer said this is easily doable if I'm focused?!
  • Fitnessflexibility
    Fitnessflexibility Posts: 795 Member
    Options
    I just got mine done Friday, I'm 5'4" and 149 right now and I'm at 29%
    I started 6 months ago. I lost a little over 20lbs and hope to loose 10 more
  • marthaelisa80
    marthaelisa80 Posts: 1,572 Member
    Options
    For me I take pics showing my stomach to see the different phases I go through. I'm 29% as of now. I find my clothes can hide my progress. I started with 35% and been doing Jillian Michaels. This is after my second child I am 35 years old. 0006ekaks7xq.jpg
  • MamaBirdBoss
    MamaBirdBoss Posts: 1,516 Member
    edited July 2015
    Options
    vickihuk wrote: »
    I got mine measured 4 week ago and I was 32%. Hoping to be around 23% in 6 weeks - my trainer said this is easily doable if I'm focused?!

    Hmmmmmmm. I seriously, seriously doubt that. That would be an insane amount of fat to drop in 6 weeks. That's like, what, 15lbs? More? And to preserve muscle mass as a woman when you're sub-25%...you can't do 2lbs a week of fat loss then.
  • MamaBirdBoss
    MamaBirdBoss Posts: 1,516 Member
    Options
    BTW, I was about 29% in the "after" picture in my profile and am 27% now. On the left is about 32%.
  • MamaBirdBoss
    MamaBirdBoss Posts: 1,516 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.

    20-22%.
  • MamaBirdBoss
    MamaBirdBoss Posts: 1,516 Member
    edited July 2015
    Options
    shadow2soul wrote: »
    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.

    I'm betting about 26%. So pretty accurate for you.
  • DavPul
    DavPul Posts: 61,406 Member
    Options
    MamaBirdBoss wrote: »
    arditarose wrote: »
    I don't know my BF but I think I look somewhere between 20-25%. I kind of wish I knew.

    20-22%.

    Jokes aside, I'd put her slightly higher than that but we're splitting hairs at that point. The OP does have the most important concept right; the actual BF% doesn't matter. AR looks great how she is and if she's happy, then it doesn't matter if someone says that she's 19% or 45%. Just like the OP isn't 45% but she has the right idea. "Whatever, I'm going to lose an few more pounds and I'll stop when I'm satisfied with how I look". That's the right way to think about it.

    Comparing bf% is the new age version of "How much you bench?"

Categories