Body Fat Issue

chinagirl3343

I took a MedGem Metabolism Test on Monday evening. Based on the information given my body fat ratio was calculated as 23%. The was a huge shock as I used a hand held device a few weeks before and it said I was 13.9%!!! There was a +3 lb difference on Monday which I believe to be water weight. I had not worked out before taking it like I did with the hand held.

What can explain the difference? Which percentage should I trust more? I am 5 ft 6in and 117-121 depending on the time of day.... Can that small of a weight fluctuation be the reason for the 10% difference???!!

smarionette

Hand held devices are notoriously inaccurate. Just a note, essential fat for a woman is 12%, so the reading of 13.9 should have raised some red flags.

KathleenMurry

3 lbs will not make a 10 % difference. Your height and weight doesn't mean much to us unless we can see pictures of your body.

Both methods of determining your BF are likely inaccurate. What I do is take the handheld, my scale, the online calculations and average them all out. I don't want to fork out the cash to get properly tested at the university.

tonynguyen75

23% is quite healthy for a female. Go with that.

bokodasu

13.9 would give you 103 lbs of FFM, and 23 would give you only 92. Both sound unlikely, but there's no way to know without other measurements. Neither is exceptionally accurate, but I'd just do calipers, average the three, and call it a day. (Unless you are rich and really want to get a DEXA scan, then you should do that.)

chinagirl3343

I am starting to care about the BF% but not nearly enough to pay for the DEXA scan. Not happening! teehee!

I like the idea about averaging the scale, handheld, online and calipers. I had not thought of that. Thanks y'all!!

MzManiak

1. Hand held devices are a bit inaccurate
2. You worked out BEFORE using the device, making it even more inaccurate
3. Probably used them at different times of the day/ before or after eating- more inaccuracies

You don't have a picture posted, so can't estimate your body fat... but if you were at 13% body fat, there wouldn't be any question about it.

QuietBloom

Both sound kind of unlikely. I use this tape measure test. It seems pretty accurate for me. You have to pick a method and just stick with it to watch for changes.

http://www.fat2fitradio.com/tools/cbbf/

KathleenMurry

You don't have a picture posted, so can't estimate your body fat... but if you were at 13% body fat, there wouldn't be any question about it.

This is so true - If you were anything below 15% you would definitely know. You'd have a beautiful six pack and well defined muscles. This isn't possible at 23%.

Another good way to determine your body fat, if you can see your body honestly (seriously, a lot of people look in the mirror and see something different than what is really there) this website has pictures of women at different body fat percentages and you can kind of gauge where you're at by comparing yourself.

http://www.builtlean.com/2012/09/24/body-fat-percentage-men-women/

jwdieter

I am starting to care about the BF% but not nearly enough to pay for the DEXA scan. Not happening! teehee!

I like the idea about averaging the scale, handheld, online and calipers. I had not thought of that. Thanks y'all!!

Bodpod and hydrostatic can be 1/4 or less the cost of DEXA.

Averaging in a huge anomaly is pointless. Just drop the 13% if the other estimates are coming in the 20s.

Portugueselove

Both sound kind of unlikely. I use this tape measure test. It seems pretty accurate for me. You have to pick a method and just stick with it to watch for changes.

http://www.fat2fitradio.com/tools/cbbf/

Wow, thanks for recommending that website. At the gym they pinched me to check my body fat, and there it was 27.5% and on this website it was 30% which is not much of a difference. And surprisingly I am under the Healthy Range. Woohoo.

rlinaresv

Bump

j6o4

At 13.9% bodyfat for a female, you would have abs or atleast a noticeably tone stomach.