Body fat %
Options
Replies
-
Interesting.0
-
-
1
-
Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Even calipers have their issues, and they are a far cry better than impedance scales.
To give you a personal example: due to loose skin from when I was morbidly obese, calipers tend to show me at around 11% bodyfat, even if I don't let the springs put any real pressure on the skin, and I use the fattiest parts of an area for a given fold. Here's a picture I took this morning as a before for starting my current cut. If I'm 11%, I'll kiss your *kitten*.
Now, what calipers are good for is trend tracking. Just like with tape measurements, you have to be consistent with placement, method, pressure applied, etc., but using them once every couple of weeks will give you a good idea of what your subcutaneous fat is doing.
Wouldn't loose skin tend to give you a higher %bf reading instead of a lower one, or am I misunderstanding?
No, because due to the skin being stretched, the subcutaneous fat is more dispersed, giving a lower density for the same mass, therefore allowing the calipers to close more than they would if the fat were held in place normally.
ETA: if I were to let the calipers function as intended and close via spring power for 2 seconds, the calcs put me at 8.6%, and lol.
I think this might be different for men vs. women.
I have loose skin, but fat isn't dispersed under it, at least not in any of the caliper testing areas. It tends to cling more, if that makes sense. I don't know if women ever lose that layer of fat in quite the way men can.
0 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Even calipers have their issues, and they are a far cry better than impedance scales.
To give you a personal example: due to loose skin from when I was morbidly obese, calipers tend to show me at around 11% bodyfat, even if I don't let the springs put any real pressure on the skin, and I use the fattiest parts of an area for a given fold. Here's a picture I took this morning as a before for starting my current cut. If I'm 11%, I'll kiss your *kitten*.
Now, what calipers are good for is trend tracking. Just like with tape measurements, you have to be consistent with placement, method, pressure applied, etc., but using them once every couple of weeks will give you a good idea of what your subcutaneous fat is doing.
Wouldn't loose skin tend to give you a higher %bf reading instead of a lower one, or am I misunderstanding?
No, because due to the skin being stretched, the subcutaneous fat is more dispersed, giving a lower density for the same mass, therefore allowing the calipers to close more than they would if the fat were held in place normally.
ETA: if I were to let the calipers function as intended and close via spring power for 2 seconds, the calcs put me at 8.6%, and lol.
I think this might be different for men vs. women.
I have loose skin, but fat isn't dispersed under it, at least not in any of the caliper testing areas. It tends to cling more, if that makes sense. I don't know if women ever lose that layer of fat in quite the way men can.
What do you mean by dispersed or not dispersed?0 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Even calipers have their issues, and they are a far cry better than impedance scales.
To give you a personal example: due to loose skin from when I was morbidly obese, calipers tend to show me at around 11% bodyfat, even if I don't let the springs put any real pressure on the skin, and I use the fattiest parts of an area for a given fold. Here's a picture I took this morning as a before for starting my current cut. If I'm 11%, I'll kiss your *kitten*.
Now, what calipers are good for is trend tracking. Just like with tape measurements, you have to be consistent with placement, method, pressure applied, etc., but using them once every couple of weeks will give you a good idea of what your subcutaneous fat is doing.
Wouldn't loose skin tend to give you a higher %bf reading instead of a lower one, or am I misunderstanding?
No, because due to the skin being stretched, the subcutaneous fat is more dispersed, giving a lower density for the same mass, therefore allowing the calipers to close more than they would if the fat were held in place normally.
ETA: if I were to let the calipers function as intended and close via spring power for 2 seconds, the calcs put me at 8.6%, and lol.
I think this might be different for men vs. women.
I have loose skin, but fat isn't dispersed under it, at least not in any of the caliper testing areas. It tends to cling more, if that makes sense. I don't know if women ever lose that layer of fat in quite the way men can.
What do you mean by dispersed or not dispersed?
Well, I'm sort of wondering what Gallowmere means, because when I pinch my fat layer for the caliper test, I get a nice solid layer. It's not... dispersed.
My loose skin droops below the testing points or in other places.0 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Even calipers have their issues, and they are a far cry better than impedance scales.
To give you a personal example: due to loose skin from when I was morbidly obese, calipers tend to show me at around 11% bodyfat, even if I don't let the springs put any real pressure on the skin, and I use the fattiest parts of an area for a given fold. Here's a picture I took this morning as a before for starting my current cut. If I'm 11%, I'll kiss your *kitten*.
Now, what calipers are good for is trend tracking. Just like with tape measurements, you have to be consistent with placement, method, pressure applied, etc., but using them once every couple of weeks will give you a good idea of what your subcutaneous fat is doing.
Wouldn't loose skin tend to give you a higher %bf reading instead of a lower one, or am I misunderstanding?
No, because due to the skin being stretched, the subcutaneous fat is more dispersed, giving a lower density for the same mass, therefore allowing the calipers to close more than they would if the fat were held in place normally.
ETA: if I were to let the calipers function as intended and close via spring power for 2 seconds, the calcs put me at 8.6%, and lol.
I think this might be different for men vs. women.
I have loose skin, but fat isn't dispersed under it, at least not in any of the caliper testing areas. It tends to cling more, if that makes sense. I don't know if women ever lose that layer of fat in quite the way men can.
What do you mean by dispersed or not dispersed?
Well, I'm sort of wondering what Gallowmere means, because when I pinch my fat layer for the caliper test, I get a nice solid layer. It's not... dispersed.
I thought he was talking about the fat being spread over the (internal) surface area of the skin. With loose skin you'd have the fat spread over more surface area than without loose skin. If you took a 1 ft square piece of paper and spread 1 cup of Crisco over it and then took a 6" square piece of paper and spread 1 cup of Crisco over it, the layer of Crisco on the bigger paper would be thinner than on the smaller piece of paper.
I have to think this through some more.0 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Gallowmere1984 wrote: »Even calipers have their issues, and they are a far cry better than impedance scales.
To give you a personal example: due to loose skin from when I was morbidly obese, calipers tend to show me at around 11% bodyfat, even if I don't let the springs put any real pressure on the skin, and I use the fattiest parts of an area for a given fold. Here's a picture I took this morning as a before for starting my current cut. If I'm 11%, I'll kiss your *kitten*.
Now, what calipers are good for is trend tracking. Just like with tape measurements, you have to be consistent with placement, method, pressure applied, etc., but using them once every couple of weeks will give you a good idea of what your subcutaneous fat is doing.
Wouldn't loose skin tend to give you a higher %bf reading instead of a lower one, or am I misunderstanding?
No, because due to the skin being stretched, the subcutaneous fat is more dispersed, giving a lower density for the same mass, therefore allowing the calipers to close more than they would if the fat were held in place normally.
ETA: if I were to let the calipers function as intended and close via spring power for 2 seconds, the calcs put me at 8.6%, and lol.
I think this might be different for men vs. women.
I have loose skin, but fat isn't dispersed under it, at least not in any of the caliper testing areas. It tends to cling more, if that makes sense. I don't know if women ever lose that layer of fat in quite the way men can.
What do you mean by dispersed or not dispersed?
Well, I'm sort of wondering what Gallowmere means, because when I pinch my fat layer for the caliper test, I get a nice solid layer. It's not... dispersed.
I thought he was talking about the fat being spread over the (internal) surface area of the skin. With loose skin you'd have the fat spread over more surface area than without loose skin. If you took a 1 ft square piece of paper and spread 1 cup of Crisco over it and then took a 6" square piece of paper and spread 1 cup of Crisco over it, the layer of Crisco on the bigger paper would be thinner than on the smaller piece of paper.
I have to think this through some more.
That is correct. When you have a larger surface area (more skin) but the same amount of stuff to fill it, the density goes down. Hell, that's what causes skin to be loose to begin with, well other than the obvious elasticity problems.
Believe me, pulling a skinfold on a male who is 30% bf who has good skin elasticity can be a pain in the butt, and requires decent hand strength. The fat beneath is nearly dense enough that it will make you question for a second if you didn't grab the muscle.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 983 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions