Body Fat Percentage???

Azdak

I have done thousands of body fat measurements over the last 27 years, mostly with skinfolds. One thing I have noticed since I got back into the fitness business last year is that, for females, 40% body fat is not all that unusual anymore.

I find that many people have a poor sense of their body size or what is appropriate for them. Many people think only in terms of scale numbers, or they get caught up in past scale weights. I see people who think that at age 50, they should weigh the same as they did at 17, and others who bristle at the idea that, at 35%-40% body fat, they could stand to lose a few pounds.

And I see way too many fitness professionals who just throw numbers around without putting them in context or without corroborating their calculations with the body of the person sitting in front of them.

Trying to compare scale weights with other people based on their height is not productive. There are too many differences in body shape, frame size, muscle mass, etc.

As a fitness professional, I am ultimately guided by science and consensus health recommendations. Along with that, I take the individual's personal desires into consideration, as long as they are realistic and do not pose a health risk. For individuals who are overweight and have associated medical issues (e.g. hypertension, diabetes), it is also important to inform them that, from a health standpoint, the first 5%-10% of weight lost is a lot more important than the last 5%-10%.

My main goal is to provide people with the most accurate information, put it into the appropriate context, help them set their personal goals and then help outline a plan to meet them.

I find it is especially important to get a reasonably good estimate of lean body mass, because that really determines everything else. It is especially important because almost all of the general health information available in general medical offices and the popular press is derived from broad-based population guidelines or the inappropriate application of group statistical measurements like the BMI.

I find that there are as many people out their whose estimate of their "ideal" weight is too high as there are people whose "ideal" is too low.

Azdak

Don't get your BF% done on a scale. They use Bio-electrical impedance, and depending on your hydration levels, they can be very very off. If you want to really know with accuracy, get a bod pod measurement or a hydrostatic measurement. Or maybe if you know the person is really experienced, a caliper test.

The problem I have is that the average person these days is so overweight, most will not fit the standard calipers. And a bod pod is out of the question.

We use a top-end commercial tanita scale which has its pros and cons. For people under 30% or so I have found it to match my skinfold results almost exactly. Most of the time, my initial readings pretty closely match the body I see in front of me (and after 27 years and thousands of assessments, I can eyeball someone and be almost as accurate as the scale).

I just measured a woman last night who lost 25lbs in 3 months doing some wacky diet (GM diet) and 1 hr of cardio a day. Of the 25lbs lost ( I had measured her previously on the tanita scale), it showed that 10lbs was LBM, which is what you'd expect on that type of crash program.

Where I (and some clients) get frustrated is with the retests. We can't really control for hydration status so they can be variable. What is really frustrating is that I have spoken with Tanita reps at a number of trade shows and they don't really have any suggestions other than to take daily readings and average them out.

Baaahhh! The whole point of professional equipment is so that you DON'T have to do stuff involving standard deviations and averages. Why are MRI machines so expensive?! A half percent MfE would be so nice to have.

I can't speak for the technology behind MRIs or DEXA, but every other method for estimating body fat is an estimate of an estimate. Techniques such as hydrostatic weighing, bod pod, calipers, etc. really determine body density. The equation that translates body density to body fat % has its own error factor.

The only accurate way to measure body fat is to render the person into their various components and weigh each part.

Unfortunately, it can only be done once.

You can also make the argument that test-retest consistency is more important than actual "raw" accuracy. I mean, from a practical standpoint, there really is little significance between 10% and 15% body fat, or 25%-30% etc.

edorice

I have done thousands of body fat measurements over the last 27 years, mostly with skinfolds. One thing I have noticed since I got back into the fitness business last year is that, for females, 40% body fat is not all that unusual anymore.

I find that there are as many people out their whose estimate of their "ideal" weight is too high as there are people whose "ideal" is too low.

You're right, seeing 40% bodyfat is not unusual at all these days. However, is that a good thing? Seeing a 500 pound man is not unusual these days either.

On your other point about people under or over estimating their ideal weight; i have been seeing that too. I keep seeing thin people that want to lose ten more pounds or twenty more pounds when really they should consider making themselves stronger. These same people are dieting down to nothingness. In their older years they may be plagued with frail bones and a weak heart. But they think nothing of that now.

SHBoss1673

Don't get your BF% done on a scale. They use Bio-electrical impedance, and depending on your hydration levels, they can be very very off. If you want to really know with accuracy, get a bod pod measurement or a hydrostatic measurement. Or maybe if you know the person is really experienced, a caliper test.

The problem I have is that the average person these days is so overweight, most will not fit the standard calipers. And a bod pod is out of the question.

We use a top-end commercial tanita scale which has its pros and cons. For people under 30% or so I have found it to match my skinfold results almost exactly. Most of the time, my initial readings pretty closely match the body I see in front of me (and after 27 years and thousands of assessments, I can eyeball someone and be almost as accurate as the scale).

I just measured a woman last night who lost 25lbs in 3 months doing some wacky diet (GM diet) and 1 hr of cardio a day. Of the 25lbs lost ( I had measured her previously on the tanita scale), it showed that 10lbs was LBM, which is what you'd expect on that type of crash program.

Where I (and some clients) get frustrated is with the retests. We can't really control for hydration status so they can be variable. What is really frustrating is that I have spoken with Tanita reps at a number of trade shows and they don't really have any suggestions other than to take daily readings and average them out.

Baaahhh! The whole point of professional equipment is so that you DON'T have to do stuff involving standard deviations and averages. Why are MRI machines so expensive?! A half percent MfE would be so nice to have.

I can't speak for the technology behind MRIs or DEXA, but every other method for estimating body fat is an estimate of an estimate. Techniques such as hydrostatic weighing, bod pod, calipers, etc. really determine body density. The equation that translates body density to body fat % has its own error factor.

The only accurate way to measure body fat is to render the person into their various components and weigh each part.

Unfortunately, it can only be done once.

You can also make the argument that test-retest consistency is more important than actual "raw" accuracy. I mean, from a practical standpoint, there really is little significance between 10% and 15% body fat, or 25%-30% etc.

both MRI and DEXA are direct measurement. Fat shows up with different hue's than bone, lean tissue, and blood, and therefore a computer can grab it and measure the volume, and since fat (like all tissue) is a constant density, % can be derived.

Hydrostatic and Air displacement are both around 2 to 2.5 % MfE If I remember my numbers correctly (it's been a while), I think hydrostatic is slightly more accurate of the two, but also requires you to get dunked in a giant pool of water and hold your breath.

Azdak

Okay, so I am 5'7'' and 198 pounds. I am not huge, I have a bit of a belly and I think my thighs are huge, but I am tall, and I fit into a size 12. Yesterday a trainer at my gym figured out that my bod fat percentage is over 40!!! Is there anyone else out there who is about my height? Because I know that being this tall I would look ill anywhere under 150 (I have been under, and I did look gross) I just can't see how I can have that high of a percentage of body fat, that basically means that almost 100 lbs of me is fat!! And my ideal weight is only 30lbs away... If anyone is willing to share their Body Fat percentage (AND HEIGHT , LOL), please do , so I can get a better understanding of what's out there? THANKS!!!

At 198lbs and 40% body fat, that suggests a "fat free mass" of about 119lbs. I have measured a lot of people over the years and I would say that no more than 5% fall into that category. So, chances are that figure is not unreasonable, even if you have a larger frame. I am not saying that to be mean, but just to give you a more factual perspective.

The flip side is that, however discouraging that number may seem, it has limited relevance to your situation. If you are trying to improve your body composition, and you say your "goal" weight is 30lbs away, then your body fat % today doesn't mean much. Is that going to change your approach? I would think not.

And keep in mind that body fat %, esp at the beginning of a program, is a moving target. By that I mean that, if you lose weight and you follow an exercise program, your body composition will change. And the farther you are from your "ideal" body fat %, the more inaccurate the numbers can be. As you lose weight and your body changes, you will get a more realistic picture of what your "ideal" weight should be. I would not get fixed on any particular scale number at this point.

Azdak

I have done thousands of body fat measurements over the last 27 years, mostly with skinfolds. One thing I have noticed since I got back into the fitness business last year is that, for females, 40% body fat is not all that unusual anymore.

I find that there are as many people out their whose estimate of their "ideal" weight is too high as there are people whose "ideal" is too low.

You're right, seeing 40% bodyfat is not unusual at all these days. However, is that a good thing? Seeing a 500 pound man is not unusual these days either.

On your other point about people under or over estimating their ideal weight; i have been seeing that too. I keep seeing thin people that want to lose ten more pounds or twenty more pounds when really they should consider making themselves stronger. These same people are dieting down to nothingness. In their older years they may be plagued with frail bones and a weak heart. But they think nothing of that now.

The people I work with who are usually the most surprised are the women with a low FFM who actually look comparatively lean, but who show up as 28%-35% body fat.

It actually leads to good discussions because it allows me to really push the idea that they need to hit the weight room. Esp the women in their 40s. They are much more motivated by the risk of osteoporosis and sarcopenia than by fat thighs.

stormywxs

Measurement is imprecise. What you need to focus on is BF loss. It doesn’t matter where you start – use it as a benchmark so you can see where you are the next time you measure. BF loss is your goal I assume?

Try to keep the conditions (methods, hydration, time of day …..) the same each time you measure so your comparisons are meaningful. I agree scales aren’t necessarily accurate but they are convenient and practical for most of us. Good luck and don’t let numbers make you feel bad. How you feel and look are better measurements than any device can give you. Good luck.

edorice

I have done thousands of body fat measurements over the last 27 years, mostly with skinfolds. One thing I have noticed since I got back into the fitness business last year is that, for females, 40% body fat is not all that unusual anymore.

I find that there are as many people out their whose estimate of their "ideal" weight is too high as there are people whose "ideal" is too low.

You're right, seeing 40% bodyfat is not unusual at all these days. However, is that a good thing? Seeing a 500 pound man is not unusual these days either.

On your other point about people under or over estimating their ideal weight; i have been seeing that too. I keep seeing thin people that want to lose ten more pounds or twenty more pounds when really they should consider making themselves stronger. These same people are dieting down to nothingness. In their older years they may be plagued with frail bones and a weak heart. But they think nothing of that now.

The people I work with who are usually the most surprised are the women with a low FFM who actually look comparatively lean, but who show up as 28%-35% body fat.

It actually leads to good discussions because it allows me to really push the idea that they need to hit the weight room. Esp the women in their 40s. They are much more motivated by the risk of osteoporosis and sarcopenia than by fat thighs.

Woo hoo, thats me!
Do you really see women that are motivated about the risks of osteoporosis over fat thighs? Because the women that I know my age are still in it for the vanity.

mlb929

I will apologize if I repeat any information give above.

My husband uses one of those fancy pants scales on his high school wrestlers as a state requirement. I'm not sure the details, but I do know that you have to be hydrated to get an accurate reading. If you are dehydrated in the least bit, the scale accuracy fails.

I also know that there are differences for men/women and athletic builds. I would question whether all the settings were correct.

This link was previously posted on MFP and I really enjoyed seeing the calculations: http://www.halls.md/ideal-weight/body.htm

WhiskeyBravo

I too am 5'8" weigh around 190 and my BF is around 31 or 32 %

tinasullens

BMI calculators are NOT reliable because there are too many things to take into consideration. They could calculate an athlete as being obese based on their weight to height ratio (muscle weighs more than fat overall).

The best way, short of doing the hydrostatic body fat test, is to do the waist to hip ratio. Read more about it here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waist-hip_ratio

I am a .75 according to this calculation; which is right on target.

There is such a thing as "skinny fat". I've been there too. Read more about it here: http://www.alive.com//4209a12a2.php

My lower body is where I have the most probs and what causes my body fat percentage to be higher when taken at a gym using the calipers. It's close to being pretty accurate though for an overall body fat percentage.

I was once at 130 lbs. and 30% body fat, I'm only 5'4" tall (short). LOL! It is possible to still weigh the same or close to what you do now but have lower body fat percentage simply by adding more lean muscle mass to your body. Add in more strength training to your workout routine.

jtotheno

Thanks for the info and the links guys, And Tina, according to that link about the waist to hip ratio, I am exactly perfect in that way, lol. Made me feel good to see that! I am a 0.7, which is supposed to be the most attractive in women Guess I am perfectly proportioned, and that is why I don't look "obese", even though I have a BMI of 31.

Firepatriot911

Go with what you know to be a proven and consistant method. For me, its using the U.S. Army standard. There are standards and directions for both M and F. Simply search AR 600-9. This is the publication with directions. Nothing fancy, only a pencil, a tape measure and the ability to read a chart (B-5 or B-6) to determine an accurate BF.

There is a logrithimic formula that has been computed, and data made into an easy to read chart.

Its consistent for Americas Bravest..therefore its consistent enough for me.

Wishing everyone the best !

Alison_84

I am 5'6", 156 pounds and wear a size 8 or 10 in some things (Canadian sizing). My BMI is 25.1 (overweight) and my body fat percentage, according to my at-home scale, is around 28%.

Lisa__Michelle

I am 5'6 and currently weigh 185.5 lbs. My body fat % is 34.7 and my BMI is 29.9. Now even though my BMI states that I am hanging by a thread in the overweight category, my body fat percentage says that I am quite in the obese category. I think I would trust the body fat % over the BMI because body fat is what is harmful in excess because it is around your organs and BMI is just an estimate for anybody.

Azdak

It can't be said enough: BMI is a valid tool for use in evaluating large, diverse populations. BMI should not be used to evaluate individuals, since it cannot discriminate between "healthy" and "non-healthy" mass.

Lisa__Michelle

It can't be said enough: BMI is a valid tool for use in evaluating large, diverse populations. BMI should not be used to evaluate individuals, since it cannot discriminate between "healthy" and "non-healthy" mass.

I agree completely! BMI is interesting to see where you MIGHT be but if someone wants to know about their own specific health, they need to look at their own Body Fat. BMI only takes in consideration an age, weight, sex, and height. It doesn't consider muscle weight, water weight, organ weight, and fat weight.