Took body measurements/ fat percentage.. can someone explain to me the results?!!

0Leena0

I went today to measure my weight and fat percentage at the clinic but I honestly was really shocked when I saw my results specially the fat percentage i feel it is too high.

age: 28
height: 164cm

body measurements:

---

bust:95 cm
waist: 79-80 cm
butt+hips: 107cm
arms: 31-32 cm

Lietchi

These machines don't actually measure fat, they make an estimation based on sending an electrical current through your body, measuring resistance. Results are far from reliable and can vary simply based on a different level of hydration.

You might try measuring yourself and entering the data here:
http://www.gymgoal.com/dtool_fat.html
It's not necessarily entirely reliable either, but it can be interesting to compare the results.

Lietchi

PS: even if your bodyfat level is high, don't despair Your worth is not defined by these numbers.

MaltedTea

🤓 These things are so fascinating, no? Thank you for sharing. Like @Lietchi suggested, get some different variations of body fat/lean mass measures.

But even with this one set of data points...

This is you, objectively speaking, at ONE point in time.

It's changeable, if you so choose.

Yet a goal (like, body recomposition for example), along with a plan to get there in a healthy, sustainable way is always gonna be the best way to go.

There are lots of workout programs here in MFP and, of course, the food logging tools. Both, along with the ability to ask questions in the forums while having discussions with your healthcare team will keep you on track for whatever you decide your goal is 🙌🏿

sijomial

I can use a similar commercial standard unit at my gym and if my hydration and other conditions are consistent generally it gives a "reasonable" number and a "reasonable" trend over time. Generally.....

But last time I used it my numbers were weight up 1lb (yep, true) fat down 6lbs and muscle up 7lbs - in a week!!
Clearly that's ludicrous and impossible to be a true massive change in body composition.

As I'm familiar with my trend and my approximate levels I know with some certainty that scan was the anomaly and I should simply discard that data as being a false reading.

Think you should regard a single reading as poor quality data unless you have some corroboration that it might be within the realms of reasonable. BIA devices need care in their usage (did the clinic offer any advice in how you should have prepared for the test?) and even when used with care you can still get weird and wonderful results for no apparent reason.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

kshama2001

At 5' 4.5" and 145 pounds, 43% BF does sound high. Would you mind posting a picture?

Also, what sort of clinic is this?

ninerbuff

If you're 42% bodyfat, you'd certainly know it. That can't be hidden well.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

0Leena0

Lietchi wrote: »

These machines don't actually measure fat, they make an estimation based on sending an electrical current through your body, measuring resistance. Results are far from reliable and can vary simply based on a different level of hydration.

You might try measuring yourself and entering the data here:
http://www.gymgoal.com/dtool_fat.html
It's not necessarily entirely reliable either, but it can be interesting to compare the results.

thanks for the link i did try it and get 35% XD

0Leena0

kshama2001 wrote: »

At 5' 4.5" and 145 pounds, 43% BF does sound high. Would you mind posting a picture?

Also, what sort of clinic is this?

the clinic has a device called Inbody, which is similar to this



excuse me but I have not take any pictures of myself since I was young since I'm not comfortable with my looks, I'm pear-shaped so most of the fat is stored in my thighs however i will try to find 3D body scanning tool it might help

AnnPT77

kshama2001 wrote: »

At 5' 4.5" and 145 pounds, 43% BF does sound high. Would you mind posting a picture?

Also, what sort of clinic is this?

Yeah. I'm female, 5'5", and last I weighed in the lower 140s, I was in the upper 20s BF% - maybe 28%-ish or so? . . . but I'm possibly a little more muscular than average, having been pretty active for a couple of decades now (far short of bodybuilder, though). While 43% is theoretically possible, the 35% sounds more probable, without seeing you - more like what I'd expect from an average woman of fairly average activity (noting that average activity is not super high).

There are sites with photos of people (female as well as male) at varying body fat percents. I don't have a link (maybe someone does, or do a web search), but that might give you some visual comparison. Each individual's fat distribution is different, but it should give you some additional indication of whether 35% or 43% is more probable for you.

Either way, it's just data. It's not a measure of your worth as a human! Any of us starts from where we are (even though that may be different from where we wish we could start). You can make progress in a positive direction, if you choose, no matter how you define "positive". Deciding to work toward your goals, consistently, persistently, thoughtfully, starting wherever you start - that's a good trait.

springlering62

You are 5’4” and 145 pounds. It’s possible but supposedly anything outside a DEXA scan and some other arcane expensive scan are very often inaccurate. Our bathroom electronic scales, those handheld jobbies at the gym, just estimate based on electrical impulses or some such black magic.

After losing 70 or so, and getting down to about 150’ish at 5’7”I treated myself to a DEXA scan. I wanted to bask in my “official” success. Like a diploma of You Go Girl.

I burst out into tears when my scan showed about 30% body fat. I was so sure I was better than that, and it felt as if some soulless machine had just called me fat, after all my work.

My next scan, a year later, I was down to about 140 and I think I was in the 23%’ish range, still higher than I thought, but much improved.

Ironically, for something I was so, so invested in at that very moment, it means so little now I can’t even remember the numbers.

What ultimately matters is how I/we feel at this moment. Healthier? Slimmer? Confident? Bad *kitten*?

At one point I dropped yet another fifteen or twenty pounds. I felt none of the above, but I bet I would have had a banging DEXA score. Instead, I chose to put some weight back on because I looked and felt unhealthy at too low a weight.

It’s just an arbitrary number on some machine. I don’t know why we buy into it so much.

I would, however, recommend that you consider some weight training/recomp.

springlering62

You are 5’4” and 145 lbs.

When I lost 70, and reached 150 at 5’7”, I treated myself to a DEXA scan.

I was sure I was rocking it and couldn’t wait to get the scan results. They were going to be my golden diploma of You Go Girl.

My BF% was about 30%. I burst into tears. It felt as if all my hard work had been negated, like a soulless machine was thumbing it’s nose at me. Forget I’d lost seventy pounds. I felt fat and failed.

My husband comforted me all evening, pretty much the only time he’s said anything about my weight to my face. (Poor guy is too smart to fall into the trap of “does this dress/weight/whatever make my *kitten* look too big”.)

A year later, ten more pounds down, still a glutton for punishment, a second DEXA reported I was “only” down to 23%’ish. Still disappointing.

You know what? It’s a year later again. Those numbers that meant so so so much to me in that moment? I can’t even remember them now. Thats how important they are in the great scheme of things.

What matters is how you and I feel. Healthy? Slim? Confident? Bad *kitten*?

I dropped another fifteen or twenty pounds. I no longer felt any of the above. I would probably have trounced a third DEXA scan, but to what point? I was tired, too thin, lost muscle. I made a decision to add a few pounds back to return to healthy.

We can get too invested in artificial milestones.

Recognize that those devices aren’t a whole lot more accurate than your electronic bathroom scale or that handheld jobbie at the gym that read electrical impulses or some such other black magic. If you’re OCD like me and got to know an exact number to salve your (meaning, my) ego, throw down the money for a DEXA or the other arcane and expensively accurate test.

If you’re genuinely worried about your BF% or know in your heart of hearts that a little toning (call off the toning dogs, fellow MFPers, ok?) might do you a bit of good, check into weightlifting/recomp.

MaltedTea

https://www.builtlean.com/body-fat-percentage-men-women/

viajera99

I think the drawings on the built lean page are more accurate than the photos, tbh. Look at the 25% and 30% female photos, for example. Frankly, they look like they are reversed. But the drawings above the photos seem about right.

Greg Doucette on YT has a series of videos where he analyzes photos and estimates body fat percentages. It's a good way to get a sense of what different BF% really look like.

age_is_just_a_number

Body fat % is notoriously difficult to determine with any kind of accuracy.
I use the healthstatus website calculator https://www.healthstatus.com/calculate/body-fat-percentage-calculator/
It used four different algorithms. I also have a bioimpedence scale. I then take the average of the five.
But I don’t dwell on it, it is just a number.
What really matters is how you feel.

0Leena0

viajera99 wrote: »

I think the drawings on the built lean page are more accurate than the photos, tbh. Look at the 25% and 30% female photos, for example. Frankly, they look like they are reversed. But the drawings above the photos seem about right.

Greg Doucette on YT has a series of videos where he analyzes photos and estimates body fat percentages. It's a good way to get a sense of what different BF% really look like.

age_is_just_a_number wrote: »

Body fat % is notoriously difficult to determine with any kind of accuracy.
I use the healthstatus website calculator https://www.healthstatus.com/calculate/body-fat-percentage-calculator/
It used four different algorithms. I also have a bioimpedence scale. I then take the average of the five.
But I don’t dwell on it, it is just a number.
What really matters is how you feel.

actually none of these photos is similar to me .. my face is small and does not have any fat on it, since im pear shaped you can see that i hold most of the fat in my thighs , a little bit above navel area and in my arms a little as well , but thanks for sharing the YT and the link i will see them


one thing is that i dont dwell or want to dwell it just that i started since late 2019 with really large weight , i have been exercise regulary but around april 2021 i kinda stopped working out i felt down but i kept walking and dancing sometimes as well as watching my calorie intake, i have never been in the 60's before (weight) so i thought i lost a good amount i should not carry much fat now but then the shock of the scale XD

panda4153

I find that these types of measurements and scans are better if you can follow the trend. As a one time scan it’s pretty meaningless, but if you can go back at regular intervals and track your trend that is more helpful, and meaningful.

richardgavel

Well, there is the one guaranteed precise method to determine body fat, but you can only do it once, an autopsy. 😜

lynn_glenmont

I find it hard to imagine someone with a BMI of 24.5 and a waist-to-hip ratio barely above normal with 43% body fat. I'm not going to say it's impossible, but I might be thinking it. Maybe it could be done if you didn't/couldn't move at all, so nearly all of your muscles atrophied? Barring that, I'm inclined to think that for whatever reason (hydration level, etc.), you just got a really false reading from that machine.

One thing is that you mention you carry your excess weight low (pear-shaped), and that particular machine is going to be biased by that -- my understanding is that the current it's using to "measure" your fat only gets up to hip or waist level before returning to the platform, and then its algorithm makes assumption about the rest of your body. Just like the handheld impedance devices are biased toward measuring your fat in your arms, shoulders, and chest.

ETA: The second paragraph above might be wrong -- I just noticed the bars extending down from the interface unit (keyboard & screen). Are those part of the testing system as well? I haven't seen a model like that. The one I have used just tests using the platform you stand on.

nooshi713

I have found those In Body scans dramatically overestimate body fat percentage. It doesn’t sound accurate based on your other measurements/numbers.