Your body fat percentage, your feelings about it.
Replies
-
I cried after I received my DEXA bf% estimate. I laugh about it now. I am choosing to blame my lady hormones. Stupid lady hormones...
While I think a bf% goal may be better than an arbitrary weight goal, I see this becoming problematic for people as well. What is considered a healthy bf% (one below the point where evidence suggests increased health risks) is way higher than what it seems most people think (particularly when adjusting for age AND/OR fat distribution). It is so easy to get too wrapped up in any kind of arbitrary goal.
So, not only is a more accurate estimate useful SO IS more information regarding healthy goals. Vanity goals are fine, but too often people will proclaim their arbitrary vanity goal as being "healthier" than another when there is no evidence to support the claim. I think there is a wider range of healthy body fat goals than most people realize and it is really helpful to keep things in perspective. In other words, no crying after you get your average bf% estimate and it falls within the very healthy range but isn't as low as the vanity goal arbitrarily set by those around you on MFP just because you've got a lot of "junk in your trunk"
.
On my DEXA report (from my doctor) the following information is given. I'll bet many people will be shocked by these ranges.
"Health Standards represent the percentage of body fat that generally does not increase your risks for health problems."
Health Standards
Men <40 8-22%
Men >40 10-25%
Women <40 20-35%
Women >40 25-38%
Fat distribution matters as well, so one would want to look at Android (trunk fat) Gynoid (lower body fat) ratio and not JUST average bf.
Slightly off topic, but does this mean a woman over 40 should not have a BF% under 25? That's news to me.
No, I don't think it does. They suggested that lower could be achieved healthily by athletes and/or people who are involved in long term training of some kind. So, I would think someone who is lean with a good amount of muscle mass would easily not have any increased health risks at a lower body fat percentage than the "health standards" range suggests.0 -
Thanks for posting this SS. While I still have a sneaky little bf% goal, I am trying to focus on strength goals instead.0
-
Ha ha, I am just that person who has moved on from weight to BF% goals. I'm 45 yrs with a supposed BF % of 23 (by scale) but I don't look like someone with that %. My issue with comparing pictures is that the ones that I've seen are of non-saggy, young people...when you get a bit older, doesn't general skin tone make a difference to the appearance BF%? For me I guess that as long as the number is going down though, it doesn't matter what the actual number is.0
-
i recently had the dexa scan done for the first time. i expected to be 26-27% (based on the stupid omron handheld device and visual estimate of myself and from our wonderful moderators), the scan results turned out to be 33.6%.
obviously higher than i thought or would like to be, but after a brief moment of disappointment, i shrugged it off as another data point to plot in my excel spreadsheet for tracking.
it's actually served as a great motivator for me. i had gotten a little complacent after reaching a lot of my goals and let some of the weight creep back up (about 8lbs). this kind of gave me a wake up call that there's still work to be done.0 -
I also recently had a dexa scan done, it was my second scan. I didn't know what to expect for my first one, so I just used that number as a baseline to track progress. At the time I wanted to find out my lean mass so I could set my macros more accurately. Knowing an 'accurate' number didn't make me feel differently about myself. BF% is just one of a number of things I use to motivate myself.
I did use my results from the second scan to get confirmation that I'm on the right track exercise-wise and diet-wise. Of the weight I lost, almost all of it was fat and I managed to retain almost all of my muscle mass. Even taking into account that there is a margin of error, I figured those to be good results.
Honestly the mirror and progressing in my exercise routines are enough to make me happy with myself, but I lurve my spreadsheets.0 -
SS, you have never estimated my bf%, but here is why I would be bummed: I have seen that picture that floats around, with women's bodies at various bf%. I think my body looks closest to the 30% lady, but I have this sneaking suspicion that my perception of my body is off -- that I am actually bigger in reality than I think I am. So if I found out my bf% were 5 or 10 or whatever percent higher than my personal best guess, then my suspicion would be confirmed that I am not as slim as I think I am. :sad:0
-
While I would like the idea of being a certain BF%; I go mostly by the what the mirror shows.
Yes I still weigh myself and take measurements every now and then, but my clothes and the mirror are my true reflection of progress.
I was trying to figure out exactly how to verbalize my feelings on the matter. Then I read the above. Yeah - that's me.0 -
Nowadays, I rely on eyeballing BF%, measurements, scale and what I see in the mirror as well as progress I am making in the gym - they do not tell the whole story individually, but combine to get a good gauge as to what is going on.
This is exactly why I happily continue to weigh and measure myself without any guilt or anxiety. I use all the data I am able to collect to get a multifaceted picture of my fitness, health, and and appearance. The numbers help me to accurately see what is in the mirror, which can be difficult sometimes. Especially when changes to the body start happening more slowly, when you are at a generally healthy fitness level, having that hard data can also be fantastic motivation. For me, it is the delta between the measurements that matters.
I will admit though, if I had a scan and found out, for instance, that my lean body mass was incredibly low for my weight, it probably would change my program. I love both running and lifting, but I would probably put more of my exercise hours into lifting than I currently do to combat that low muscle mass issue.
Like someone else said, more information is almost never a bad thing.0 -
Nowadays, I rely on eyeballing BF%, measurements, scale and what I see in the mirror as well as progress I am making in the gym - they do not tell the whole story individually, but combine to get a good gauge as to what is going on.
This is exactly why I happily continue to weigh and measure myself without any guilt or anxiety. I use all the data I am able to collect to get a multifaceted picture of my fitness, health, and and appearance. The numbers help me to accurately see what is in the mirror, which can be difficult sometimes. Especially when changes to the body start happening more slowly, when you are at a generally healthy fitness level, having that hard data can also be fantastic motivation. For me, it is the delta between the measurements that matters.
I will admit though, if I had a scan and found out, for instance, that my lean body mass was incredibly low for my weight, it probably would change my program. I love both running and lifting, but I would probably put more of my exercise hours into lifting than I currently do to combat that low muscle mass issue.
Like someone else said, more information is almost never a bad thing.
I think the issue is, is that it can be sometimes. Either because it is inaccurate, or because it makes you feel worse about yourself but there is nothing you can be doing that you are not already doing.0 -
Hmm. For me personally I figured I was around 27-25%, the visual estimate was 30%. While that's kind of a downer, it's not exactly stressing me out. It's not like I magically become more fat because my perception was off; far as I can tell I'm the same weight I was before the estimate as I was after. I'm still just as sexy. Also still 'fat'.
Really all it means is that I'll need to lose maybe 5-10 more pounds than I thought to get where I want to be. I'm not entirely sure 5 pounds is worth shifting my entire self image/getting upset over.
Addendum: I suppose it did encourage me to get back on track and stop eating 300 calories over my goal every day, but I'm hardpressed to consider that a negative.
Further Edit: (I have a lot of feelings, okay?) I will say that hearing that I'm probably around 30% now gave me some real perspective into my goals. I wanted to A. Get into a healthy BMI so my doctor will stop talking crap and B. Maybe get to 20% body fat. But now I see that I am where I am, and I'm not unhappy with how I look (pretty pleased, actually), so perhaps 20% isn't the goal for me after all. Perhaps while I do think women around that BF are stunning for me, personally, I'm stunning at a higher percentage.
Tl;DR: I certainly wasn't upset or crushed, but it has made me thoughtful. Thoughtful is good.0 -
I think people tend to attach too much of their identity to it. It's easy to fall into trying to be a certain number, it's like you lose the obsession with weighing a particular number and replace it with an obsession about a particular body fat percentage instead, but it's still basing our judgement of ourselves on being a particular number/measurement, rather than on being a human being.
I also think there's a lot of pressure to be super lean, i.e. that 18% body fat is better than 28%... but both of those are in the healthy range, 23% is right in the middle of the healthy range (these numbers are for women but the same applies for men, but with different numbers, i.e. low end of the healthy range is seen as better than the high end of the healthy range)............ there's an attitude that, say, deciding to stay at 25% body fat because that's how you like your body to look, is somehow "giving up" or "not being the best you that you can be", and a lot of people consider women who lack visible muscle definition without looking fat to be "skinny-fat" as though the only healthy way for a woman to be is to have visible muscle definition. So all these influences really push people into thinking that they have to be ultra-lean or have a very low body fat percentage, to be acceptable, and pressure to keep on cutting below the levels of body fat that they actually might prefer if they looked at it objectively. There's also the idea that people should sacrifice everything else they might like about their bodies (e.g. boobs, hip fat, etc) to get visible abs.... visible abs are presented as the holy grail of fitness, when it's actually just one part of the whole person, and there are plenty of extremely fit, very attractive, very healthy men and women who don't have visible abs. Given all this, and all the value judgements on being ultra-lean, it's probably not surprising that a lot of people would be upset to find they have 5% more body fat than they think, even though that value is still in the healthy range, and they look the same in the mirror and they like how they look.
I'm really trying to escape the mentality of judging my body by numbers/measurements, and going purely by what I look like in the mirror. I'm not even that aesthetically minded (i.e. given a choice between a 300lb+ deadlift and 28% body fat, versus 18% body fat and a no better deadlift than I have now, I'd choose the 300lb+ deadlift and 28% body fat by far) but the whole "judge yourself by numbers" mentality is still very easy to fall into....... I'm not a set of numbers, I'm a human!! And the reason why I said 28% in the example I just gave, is because it's the top of the healthy range. I wouldn't want to be more than that for health reasons (and I'm bearing in mind that my estimate that my current bodyfat is probably somewhere between 23 and 25% could be out by 5% and for that reason and the fact I store body fat centrally I'm planning doing a cut to be sure I'm really in the healthy range) but at the same time I don't like the changes in my body that happen when i go below what accumeasure says is 22% body fat. So I'm not going to go below that, and it doesn't really matter what my *actual* body fat percentage is at what accumeasure says is 22%.... it's the amount of body fat that i don't want to have less than. And the amount I have now is the amount I don't want to have significantly more than unless it's going to give me a better wilks score with no health risk.0 -
A higher estimate would mean I wouldn't have to eat so much ****ing protein. Can some one tell me I'm 50% body fat please?0
-
I agree that it should be all about the mirror and how you feel and not the numbers. Everyone is different and ranges are based on stats of 'average populations' so not applicable to everyone.
I measure mine on a hand foot BIA which I have at work and it comes up at around 30%. I look like the 30% pictures. I carry it in my breasts and belly. I like my breasts, but not so much my belly..
Although ~30% BF might be considered high by some, I'm by no means overweight and I have some nice definition happening in my arms now. It's taken about 2 years of some type of resistance training 3 x a week to get there with the most dramatic changes since doing heavier weights, which I am very grateful to Sara and Sidesteel for...wouldn't have considered heavy weights before finding this group.
Anyway it shows me that I don't have to knock myself out over the numbers like I thought I did.
Happy at 30%
0 -
A higher estimate would mean I wouldn't have to eat so much ****ing protein. Can some one tell me I'm 50% body fat please?
You are 50% body fat
0 -
This has been a really wonderful discussion! Thanks everyone! I do think that people place too much importance on the numbers. They decide that scale weight numbers aren't working (bmi is crap), so they shift to BF%. But, I have never seen an accurate way to measure BF%, to be honest (and I wouldn't fork over the cash on it). I'm happy with the results in the mirror. My husband is extremely happy, and I've known him since I was 18 and had two children and I've been through many stages of my life (I'm 35 now) with him and he is an extremely honest person (when it comes to this) since the very beginning, so I trust what he says. Like "do I look fat in this?" comes with a ridiculously honest scientist answer, I've always said I want honesty (and I do).0
-
hmmm...numbers....
I remember seeing ads from Nike about how we are measured...
Weight, tape measure, BMI, now BF%....and unfortunately people take those things to heart.
Self confidence doesn't come from those numbers it comes from within.
When/if I request with a pic that my BF% be esitmated or checked by anyone it will not make me feel "bad" about myself. It will just be another fork in the road where I have to choose what I want to do with that information but I can guarantee I wont be feeling bad about myself or insulted or mad at the person(s) who gave me the information...
I truly wish others could get to the point where they realize it's all about how you really feel about yourself...and if you feel good and are confident nothing...no numbers, no stats, no measurment will make or break you.
I think as others have said the most important thing is "How do I feel when I ....?" that blank could be look in the mirror, go to the gym, leave the gym after a workout, make a personal record on lifting...anything and with any luck that answer is
I feel pretty damn good...I have earned this and there is more to come because I am going to continue to work hard and acheive my goals only to set new one's whatever those goals are....
Cheers to you all and esp Sara and SS for the extra work they do and information they make available to us all.:drinker:0 -
I think people tend to attach too much of their identity to it. It's easy to fall into trying to be a certain number, it's like you lose the obsession with weighing a particular number and replace it with an obsession about a particular body fat percentage instead, but it's still basing our judgement of ourselves on being a particular number/measurement, rather than on being a human being.
I also think there's a lot of pressure to be super lean, i.e. that 18% body fat is better than 28%... but both of those are in the healthy range, 23% is right in the middle of the healthy range (these numbers are for women but the same applies for men, but with different numbers, i.e. low end of the healthy range is seen as better than the high end of the healthy range)............ there's an attitude that, say, deciding to stay at 25% body fat because that's how you like your body to look, is somehow "giving up" or "not being the best you that you can be", and a lot of people consider women who lack visible muscle definition without looking fat to be "skinny-fat" as though the only healthy way for a woman to be is to have visible muscle definition. So all these influences really push people into thinking that they have to be ultra-lean or have a very low body fat percentage, to be acceptable, and pressure to keep on cutting below the levels of body fat that they actually might prefer if they looked at it objectively. There's also the idea that people should sacrifice everything else they might like about their bodies (e.g. boobs, hip fat, etc) to get visible abs.... visible abs are presented as the holy grail of fitness, when it's actually just one part of the whole person, and there are plenty of extremely fit, very attractive, very healthy men and women who don't have visible abs. Given all this, and all the value judgements on being ultra-lean, it's probably not surprising that a lot of people would be upset to find they have 5% more body fat than they think, even though that value is still in the healthy range, and they look the same in the mirror and they like how they look.
I'm really trying to escape the mentality of judging my body by numbers/measurements, and going purely by what I look like in the mirror. I'm not even that aesthetically minded (i.e. given a choice between a 300lb+ deadlift and 28% body fat, versus 18% body fat and a no better deadlift than I have now, I'd choose the 300lb+ deadlift and 28% body fat by far) but the whole "judge yourself by numbers" mentality is still very easy to fall into....... I'm not a set of numbers, I'm a human!! And the reason why I said 28% in the example I just gave, is because it's the top of the healthy range. I wouldn't want to be more than that for health reasons (and I'm bearing in mind that my estimate that my current bodyfat is probably somewhere between 23 and 25% could be out by 5% and for that reason and the fact I store body fat centrally I'm planning doing a cut to be sure I'm really in the healthy range) but at the same time I don't like the changes in my body that happen when i go below what accumeasure says is 22% body fat. So I'm not going to go below that, and it doesn't really matter what my *actual* body fat percentage is at what accumeasure says is 22%.... it's the amount of body fat that i don't want to have less than. And the amount I have now is the amount I don't want to have significantly more than unless it's going to give me a better wilks score with no health risk.
Good points as usual.
I am trying to balance the whole strength/lifting v BF thing myself at the moment. The scale also matters to me due to trying to meet a certain weight class if I am to compete.
It does not matter what actual BF% I am - I know I am in a healthy range just by looking in the mirror. I can also easily gain 12lb+ and still be in a healthy range (especially as I store my fat in my *kitten*). I do want to be lean, but I also want to be strong, and while you can have both, the leaner I get, the more my lifts suffer. It is a balance and one I am currently struggling with. After being on the rather chunky side for a good few years I am enjoying having a low enough BF% to show muscle and to have a relatively flat stomach. However, I also am very passionate about lifting and want to make progress in the gym.
It's a hard balance, and one I am currently trying to work through.0 -
You cannot measure body fat percentage directly, which is why a bunch of complicated formulas exist to make an estimate based on a collection of metrics. I have been lifting now for about 3 months and have made some...
HUGEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE gains.
The scale shows very little progress, but I have lost about 20 mm in skinfold measurements. A skinfold measurement taken by a caliper is a direct measurement unlike theoretical estimates that establish body fat %. I'm no weight-loss guru, but here is my advice:
1) Use the 30 day trend tool in your progress bar. Weigh yourself how ever much you like, but the trend line is what matters.
2) Forget body fat percentage. You will never know the exact percentage.
3) Take hard measurements with tape and calipers.
4) Take progress pictures.
If you have a goal, the only way to track progress is through metrics. Everything else is bull ****. Body Fat calculations are mostly bull ****. The number the mods give you is going to be a good estimate + or - 3%, but that doesn't change what you see in the mirror. What matters is the relative change from picture to picture. If you gave me 10 pictures, I could assign the first picture as a value of 100, and give you a relative number of progress on each picture thereafter. It is basically the same idea, but without the pretension of trying to "know" the exact body fat composition of the person in the picture.
Come up with your goal and track progress. Neander has some great advice about the goal part. Once you have that down, figure out how you are going to measure progress. Forget absolute numbers. Progress is all that matters.0 -
Thank you! I kind of feel like this was meant for me to read today. I do judge myself harshly based on things like BF%, weight, and even something stupid like how big my thighs are. I can look in the mirror today and think I look great, tomorrow my scale my not change any and I will start beating myself up.
So, thanks for the positive reinforcement!0
