Measuring BF
Ironandwine69
Posts: 2,432 Member
What method do you guys use?
And why?
Ps.Thanks:-)
And why?
Ps.Thanks:-)
0
Replies
-
Past (while losing weight):
6 monthly BodPod scans - reasonably believable but then got one that was clearly wrong (visibly leaner and more vascular, bigger arms/quads/lats + smaller waist but BF% reported as up.... Hmmm.)
Omron 4 point BIA scales - reasonably believable trend but with the expected erratic data points. Then it broke.
At maintenance:
I don't bother, mirror and occasional use of tape measure is fine as I don't have any particular BF% or aesthetic goals.
As for the why - it was interesting and gave me another tracking metric in addition to weight, strength, size.
Now it's just not interesting enough to invest the time, money & effort, goals have changed to performance related targets.1 -
Past (while losing weight):
6 monthly BodPod scans - reasonably believable but then got one that was clearly wrong (visibly leaner and more vascular, bigger arms/quads/lats + smaller waist but BF% reported as up.... Hmmm.)
Omron 4 point BIA scales - reasonably believable trend but with the expected erratic data points. Then it broke.
At maintenance:
I don't bother, mirror and occasional use of tape measure is fine as I don't have any particular BF% or aesthetic goals.
As for the why - it was interesting and gave me another tracking metric in addition to weight, strength, size.
Now it's just not interesting enough to invest the time, money & effort, goals have changed to performance related targets.
So if you had to pick one, what do you think it's more accurate the scans or the scale?0 -
Have mine done by a sports coach at my gym. He uses calipers and logs measurements on the 7 site skin fold test calculator. Have no clue how accurate it is as people on here seem to think I'm less than 20% BF!! I wish .....
0 -
DXA (previously known, as: DEXA) scan's most, accurate!2
-
If you have a bit of time, here's a multi-part series on body fat measurement. It goes over how various methods work and talks about the error rates:
http://weightology.net/weightologyweekly/index.php/free-content/free-content/volume-1-issue-3-the-pitfalls-of-body-fat-measurement-parts-1-and-2/the-pitfalls-of-body-fat-measurement-part-1/
1 -
DEXA, because every other method available to me gives me results with variable accuracy.0
-
Ironandwine69 wrote: »Past (while losing weight):
6 monthly BodPod scans - reasonably believable but then got one that was clearly wrong (visibly leaner and more vascular, bigger arms/quads/lats + smaller waist but BF% reported as up.... Hmmm.)
Omron 4 point BIA scales - reasonably believable trend but with the expected erratic data points. Then it broke.
At maintenance:
I don't bother, mirror and occasional use of tape measure is fine as I don't have any particular BF% or aesthetic goals.
As for the why - it was interesting and gave me another tracking metric in addition to weight, strength, size.
Now it's just not interesting enough to invest the time, money & effort, goals have changed to performance related targets.
So if you had to pick one, what do you think it's more accurate the scans or the scale?
For trending then the Omron (BF508) but you had to use common sense to understand (or just ignore) some wild data points, but being at home could get loads of data points to correlate a trend. One time purchase made it economical - if it hadn't broken that is! Actual trend numbers were believable.
Wasn't impressed with the BodPod, relatively inexpensive and convenient but if you are only getting 6 monthly data points then it needs to be accurate and it clearly wasn't. The actual numbers also seemed high when comparing to sample pictures. Wouldn't recommend it.
BTW - also have some 2 point BIA bathroom scales and they are comical, more than double estimated BF%.
0 -
I use the mirror and photos. Unless I was competing in a bodybuilding competition and it became important to track progress where the mirror and photos may not be able to detect minute changes, maybe I would consider another method.
For me, if I see lack of definition/fat in areas I don't want... I typically keep cutting. Then once my body gets very lean and I am still not happy with my size/muscle development, I will consider bulking. It's not very scientific but it works for me. If device said 18% or 45% it wouldn't pay it attention if I liked what I see in the mirror.0 -
I use photos along with my weight logged0
-
Ironandwine69 wrote: »Past (while losing weight):
6 monthly BodPod scans - reasonably believable but then got one that was clearly wrong (visibly leaner and more vascular, bigger arms/quads/lats + smaller waist but BF% reported as up.... Hmmm.)
Omron 4 point BIA scales - reasonably believable trend but with the expected erratic data points. Then it broke.
At maintenance:
I don't bother, mirror and occasional use of tape measure is fine as I don't have any particular BF% or aesthetic goals.
As for the why - it was interesting and gave me another tracking metric in addition to weight, strength, size.
Now it's just not interesting enough to invest the time, money & effort, goals have changed to performance related targets.
So if you had to pick one, what do you think it's more accurate the scans or the scale?
For trending then the Omron (BF508) but you had to use common sense to understand (or just ignore) some wild data points, but being at home could get loads of data points to correlate a trend. One time purchase made it economical - if it hadn't broken that is! Actual trend numbers were believable.
Wasn't impressed with the BodPod, relatively inexpensive and convenient but if you are only getting 6 monthly data points then it needs to be accurate and it clearly wasn't. The actual numbers also seemed high when comparing to sample pictures. Wouldn't recommend it.
BTW - also have some 2 point BIA bathroom scales and they are comical, more than double estimated BF%.
I have one of those scales at home, but I'm not sure I trust the numbers at all. It gives me a BF% of anywhere from 32% to 36%, which based on the mirror and pictures, I find kind of hard to believe. How much (approximately) was the Omron, if you don't mind my asking?0 -
I use the mirror and photos. Unless I was competing in a bodybuilding competition and it became important to track progress where the mirror and photos may not be able to detect minute changes, maybe I would consider another method.
For me, if I see lack of definition/fat in areas I don't want... I typically keep cutting. Then once my body gets very lean and I am still not happy with my size/muscle development, I will consider bulking. It's not very scientific but it works for me. If device said 18% or 45% it wouldn't pay it attention if I liked what I see in the mirror.
That's what I've always used to, mirror and pictures.
I used to have one of those pinching calibers years ago but I didn't trust it's accuracy. I tend to hold most of my fat on thighs and behind.
0 -
If you have a bit of time, here's a multi-part series on body fat measurement. It goes over how various methods work and talks about the error rates:
http://weightology.net/weightologyweekly/index.php/free-content/free-content/volume-1-issue-3-the-pitfalls-of-body-fat-measurement-parts-1-and-2/the-pitfalls-of-body-fat-measurement-part-1/
Thank you for this. I will read it shortly1 -
I use 9 site caliper readings - but I focus on the readings, not the bf % calculated.0
-
Ironandwine69 wrote: »Past (while losing weight):
6 monthly BodPod scans - reasonably believable but then got one that was clearly wrong (visibly leaner and more vascular, bigger arms/quads/lats + smaller waist but BF% reported as up.... Hmmm.)
Omron 4 point BIA scales - reasonably believable trend but with the expected erratic data points. Then it broke.
At maintenance:
I don't bother, mirror and occasional use of tape measure is fine as I don't have any particular BF% or aesthetic goals.
As for the why - it was interesting and gave me another tracking metric in addition to weight, strength, size.
Now it's just not interesting enough to invest the time, money & effort, goals have changed to performance related targets.
So if you had to pick one, what do you think it's more accurate the scans or the scale?
For trending then the Omron (BF508) but you had to use common sense to understand (or just ignore) some wild data points, but being at home could get loads of data points to correlate a trend. One time purchase made it economical - if it hadn't broken that is! Actual trend numbers were believable.
Wasn't impressed with the BodPod, relatively inexpensive and convenient but if you are only getting 6 monthly data points then it needs to be accurate and it clearly wasn't. The actual numbers also seemed high when comparing to sample pictures. Wouldn't recommend it.
BTW - also have some 2 point BIA bathroom scales and they are comical, more than double estimated BF%.
Thanks0 -
Ironandwine69 wrote: »Past (while losing weight):
6 monthly BodPod scans - reasonably believable but then got one that was clearly wrong (visibly leaner and more vascular, bigger arms/quads/lats + smaller waist but BF% reported as up.... Hmmm.)
Omron 4 point BIA scales - reasonably believable trend but with the expected erratic data points. Then it broke.
At maintenance:
I don't bother, mirror and occasional use of tape measure is fine as I don't have any particular BF% or aesthetic goals.
As for the why - it was interesting and gave me another tracking metric in addition to weight, strength, size.
Now it's just not interesting enough to invest the time, money & effort, goals have changed to performance related targets.
So if you had to pick one, what do you think it's more accurate the scans or the scale?
For trending then the Omron (BF508) but you had to use common sense to understand (or just ignore) some wild data points, but being at home could get loads of data points to correlate a trend. One time purchase made it economical - if it hadn't broken that is! Actual trend numbers were believable.
Wasn't impressed with the BodPod, relatively inexpensive and convenient but if you are only getting 6 monthly data points then it needs to be accurate and it clearly wasn't. The actual numbers also seemed high when comparing to sample pictures. Wouldn't recommend it.
BTW - also have some 2 point BIA bathroom scales and they are comical, more than double estimated BF%.
I have one of those scales at home, but I'm not sure I trust the numbers at all. It gives me a BF% of anywhere from 32% to 36%, which based on the mirror and pictures, I find kind of hard to believe. How much (approximately) was the Omron, if you don't mind my asking?
@A_Rene86
If I recall (it was a few years ago..) they were about £70 but think that model is superseded.
The BF511 looks very similar (not very stylish!).
1 -
Ironandwine69 wrote: »Past (while losing weight):
6 monthly BodPod scans - reasonably believable but then got one that was clearly wrong (visibly leaner and more vascular, bigger arms/quads/lats + smaller waist but BF% reported as up.... Hmmm.)
Omron 4 point BIA scales - reasonably believable trend but with the expected erratic data points. Then it broke.
At maintenance:
I don't bother, mirror and occasional use of tape measure is fine as I don't have any particular BF% or aesthetic goals.
As for the why - it was interesting and gave me another tracking metric in addition to weight, strength, size.
Now it's just not interesting enough to invest the time, money & effort, goals have changed to performance related targets.
So if you had to pick one, what do you think it's more accurate the scans or the scale?
For trending then the Omron (BF508) but you had to use common sense to understand (or just ignore) some wild data points, but being at home could get loads of data points to correlate a trend. One time purchase made it economical - if it hadn't broken that is! Actual trend numbers were believable.
Wasn't impressed with the BodPod, relatively inexpensive and convenient but if you are only getting 6 monthly data points then it needs to be accurate and it clearly wasn't. The actual numbers also seemed high when comparing to sample pictures. Wouldn't recommend it.
BTW - also have some 2 point BIA bathroom scales and they are comical, more than double estimated BF%.
I have one of those scales at home, but I'm not sure I trust the numbers at all. It gives me a BF% of anywhere from 32% to 36%, which based on the mirror and pictures, I find kind of hard to believe. How much (approximately) was the Omron, if you don't mind my asking?
@A_Rene86
If I recall (it was a few years ago..) they were about £70 but think that model is superseded.
The BF511 looks very similar (not very stylish!).
Thank you @sijomial. That's not a bad price at all, especially considering what I paid for my terribly inaccurate one!
And sorry to threadjack you, @Ironandwine69 0 -
Ironandwine69 wrote: »Past (while losing weight):
6 monthly BodPod scans - reasonably believable but then got one that was clearly wrong (visibly leaner and more vascular, bigger arms/quads/lats + smaller waist but BF% reported as up.... Hmmm.)
Omron 4 point BIA scales - reasonably believable trend but with the expected erratic data points. Then it broke.
At maintenance:
I don't bother, mirror and occasional use of tape measure is fine as I don't have any particular BF% or aesthetic goals.
As for the why - it was interesting and gave me another tracking metric in addition to weight, strength, size.
Now it's just not interesting enough to invest the time, money & effort, goals have changed to performance related targets.
So if you had to pick one, what do you think it's more accurate the scans or the scale?
For trending then the Omron (BF508) but you had to use common sense to understand (or just ignore) some wild data points, but being at home could get loads of data points to correlate a trend. One time purchase made it economical - if it hadn't broken that is! Actual trend numbers were believable.
Wasn't impressed with the BodPod, relatively inexpensive and convenient but if you are only getting 6 monthly data points then it needs to be accurate and it clearly wasn't. The actual numbers also seemed high when comparing to sample pictures. Wouldn't recommend it.
BTW - also have some 2 point BIA bathroom scales and they are comical, more than double estimated BF%.
I have one of those scales at home, but I'm not sure I trust the numbers at all. It gives me a BF% of anywhere from 32% to 36%, which based on the mirror and pictures, I find kind of hard to believe. How much (approximately) was the Omron, if you don't mind my asking?
@A_Rene86
If I recall (it was a few years ago..) they were about £70 but think that model is superseded.
The BF511 looks very similar (not very stylish!).
Thank you @sijomial. That's not a bad price at all, especially considering what I paid for my terribly inaccurate one!
And sorry to threadjack you, @Ironandwine69
You can threadjack it, it's all about sharing knowledge.2 -
I get my PT to do 7-site skin fold on me every few months.
At the moment it puts me at 16.6% which seems stupid low, so I'm focusing on the fact that it dropped 2.6% from November to March. (I want to see my abs just a little bit, so this is my main metric for now...)
I have too many bits of metalwork in my ankles for the scales to work on me... The metal conducts too fast and makes the results inaccurate.
I'm sticking with skin fold for now as it's zero cost to me! My PT just does it on me as part of a session that I'm paying for anyway, or sometimes will just do it in a few minutes when I'm in the gym anyway even if I'm not having a session that day. It's something that I want to know, but not enough to throw money at it!0 -
I use a tape measure and the Navy BF Calculator http://www.linear-software.com/online.html
Also use mirror and progress photos. Though I don't trust my perception.
Finally a Taylor Smart Scale. We needed a new scale and this one was on sale for about the same price as a non-BF Bluetooth scale so we got it. It has an athletic mode that seems to be in line with the Navy formula. In the non-athletic mode BF is higher.
For my purposes the tape measure and Navy formula are enough. I don't need anything super-accurate.
1 -
I go to the YMCA and they have calipers and on of those hand-held measuring devices. I've only used the hand-held one and one of the trainers said she'd measure with the calipers and we could take the average.0
-
DXA scans and hydrostatic testing.
While they have their own inaccuracies, I believe that these methods of measurement are the most accurate and consistent of all the methods currently available.
There are 2 mobile companies that I use which only charge $45 for DXA scsns and $39 for hydrostatic tests.
I think that hydro is more accurate than DXA, which is known for higher BF measurements but DXA scans provide more info, including bone density and weight, visceral adipose fat ratios and differential body part bf/lbm measurements which can be useful info.1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions