Someone help me determine my BF% based on my calories

peacemongernc

I've been trying to predict my BF% from my maintenance calories... is that possible?

Based on my weight loss over the past 90 days, I believe my maintenance calorie need is about 1925 a day. I've lost about 2 pounds in the last 90 days and my average daily calories during that time has been 1838.5.

I'm 66" tall and currently weigh 178 pounds. I'm pretty muscular, but have too much fat and a lot of lose skin.

I also suspect that my metabolism is fairly efficient based on my history, but I don't know. I've never had it tested.

In the last 90 days I haven't been to the gym NEARLY as often as I should, and for the past 30 days I haven't been at all. I have a job where I stand around a lot. My biggest source of exercise is that I paddle with 2 dragon boat teams regularly, and have just started paddling with a third group, so I have at least 3 intense paddling workouts for an hour a week per team. By intense, I mean I burn about 450 calories an hour... some of you may not consider that very intense.

Based on my best guess, this would put me at just under 30% body fat, if my metabolism is close to normal.

Is that right?

3laine75

I don't think you can work it out based on calories.

Have you tried some of the online calculators - I'd love a real test (dexa or water displacement) but they're too expensive so I make do with calculators.

vismal

You cannot determine body fat based on calories taken in.

FIT_Goat

Well, we can attempt to use the Katch-McArdle BMR calculation (which uses lean body mass to calculate BMR.

BMR = 370 + 21.6 * LBM

(1925 / 1.2) = 1604.2 = 370 + 21.6 * LBM

1234.2 = 21.6 * LBM

57.13 kg = 125.7 lbs = LBM

If you currently weigh 178... that would be 70.6% LBM and 29.4% Fat.

If you use a higher multiplier for TDEE (I used 1.2, but they range all the way up to 1.9 for extremely active--which wouldn't fit) like 1.375, you'll get a higher BF% after the calculations (41%).

Of course, all of these calculations are estimates. It is as inaccurate as most other ways to gauge body fat percentage. It is dependent on a lot of things that you may not know for sure. For example, if your TDEE is not correct then this will be off. If your activity multiplier isn't accurate, this will be off. Even if those are perfect, this can still be off because it's just represents what the BMR for an average person with that LBM would be. You may not be average.

There is also the "Sterling-Pasmore" Equation. Which use BMR = LBM * 30.36 (or in lbs *13.8). Those would be less kind... giving 34.7% BF% and 43% BF% depending on TDEE multiplier.

So... between 29.4% and 43%... possibly higher... also possibly lower (although unlikely). We can attempt it. We don't get anything useful. For myself, I get values close to what my other measurements (impedance, tape, and BMI based) only if I assume a multiplier near 1.575 (and I am not that active). Even that gives me a range of 20%-26% ... which is hardly useful.

h7463

Hi there!
Nope, there is no way to predict body fat this way. I suggest, you see a experienced healthcare provider or fitness center where you can get a complete fitness evaluation, including your body composition. Use the results as base line, and repeat it a few months later. Keep up with your nutrition and exercise.
As you said, BF is a percentage of the complete package. During weight loss, you will most likely also lose some lean muscle mass, which will slow down the drop numbers for overall fat loss as well. Add some serious resistance training to build up muscles.

Good luck! :flowerforyou:

Sarauk2sf

You cannot determine body fat based on calories taken in.

^^this.

peacemongernc

Thank you all for your help! I've been wanting to do a DEXA scan for years, but keep putting it off for various reasons. I guess I just need to go ahead and have it done.

My trainer used calipers and came up with less than 28% BF a few months ago, and I just can't believe that. It just doesn't seem possible given my maintenance calorie level. If that is accurate, it would mean I have the WORST and slowest, most efficient metabolism anywhere. That sounds depressing.

But I started wondering more about it because even when I was going to the gym for an hour 5 days a week, I always kept my activity level set on sedentary, and my weight loss using that setting was pretty much dead on for the calories I was eating. Which seems like it would mean either I really do have a very slow metabolism or a significantly higher BF% than anyone working with me ever suspected.

I think my first trainer thought my BF % was just shy of 50% when I started working with him and I weighed 304 pounds. But even then, I kept my activity level set on sedentary, and I was working out hard at least 5 days a week.

I guess I'm really going to make the appointment and get the DEXA scan... no other way to know!!

Thanks!
Shannon

ThePhoenixIsRising

I'm 70" 150 lbs with 2170 cals to maintain my weight and work out 2-3 hrs a week. My bf% is 25-26% I am willing to bet the 28% isn't too far off for you.

peacemongernc

I'm 70" 150 lbs with 2170 cals to maintain my weight and work out 2-3 hrs a week. My bf% is 25-26% I am willing to bet the 28% isn't too far off for you.

That would be awesome if it is true. I hate that I can let so much importance get wrapped up in a number. I know that whatever I am, is what I am, and either I need to work harder to make it better or be happy where I am. But it is just about impossible for me to not get all caught up in wondering about numbers!! That's part of why I keep putting the scan off... I keep wondering how I'll deal with it if the number is something like 40%! It is what it is. I want to be objective about it before I do it so it doesn't turn into some embarrassing, silly, anxiety producing stupid thing. But it is time to lay it to rest and just find out.

But I really hope you are right!!!!!!

VelveteenArabian

Try not to get so anxious over the number. It's a number. Though I can't understand why you'll think your body fat is going to be particularly low when you're not working out and replacing the fat with muscle. Whatever the result is, realize that it's the product of your effort. If you want your body fat % to be lower, you'll have to work harder towards that.

Sarauk2sf

I'm 70" 150 lbs with 2170 cals to maintain my weight and work out 2-3 hrs a week. My bf% is 25-26% I am willing to bet the 28% isn't too far off for you.

That would be awesome if it is true. I hate that I can let so much importance get wrapped up in a number. I know that whatever I am, is what I am, and either I need to work harder to make it better or be happy where I am. But it is just about impossible for me to not get all caught up in wondering about numbers!! That's part of why I keep putting the scan off... I keep wondering how I'll deal with it if the number is something like 40%! It is what it is. I want to be objective about it before I do it so it doesn't turn into some embarrassing, silly, anxiety producing stupid thing. But it is time to lay it to rest and just find out.

But I really hope you are right!!!!!!

I would question why you need to know it (other than curiosity).

Will the results change the way you see yourself in the mirror? Will it change your health markers? Will you change what you do? Will it change how your clothes fit?

Don't get me wrong, I understand the curiosity - I have had hydrostatic and other estimates done before myself, but the number is not really that meaningful in the main and can screw with your mind.

Keep doing what you can to decrease your BF% (if you want), preferably while doing things to maintain muscle mass. The results should not change that.

Mr_Knight

I've been trying to predict my BF% from my maintenance calories... is that possible?

Based on my weight loss over the past 90 days, I believe my maintenance calorie need is about 1925 a day. I've lost about 2 pounds in the last 90 days and my average daily calories during that time has been 1838.5.

I'm 66" tall and currently weigh 178 pounds.

A math problem, cool! Yes, absolutely you can do what you're asking for, as long as you accept that there's a plus/minus tagged onto the result. Here we go....

First thing to realize is that your metabolism doesn't treat excess fat like normal tissue - think of yourself as a skinnier person wearing a no-maintenance fat jacket. That's not exactly true, but for the level of accuracy we're working with here, it's close enough.

At your height, if you were 120 pounds and 17% body fat, with 3x weekly exercise, your TDEE would be right around 1850. This is close enough to your 1838.5 maintenance number.

At that 120 pounds, 17% BF, you would have 100 lbs of lean body mass. You actually weigh 178 pounds. So you have roughly (178-100 = 78) lbs of body fat. 78/178 -> 43% body fat.

Double checking this with the Katch-McCardle TDEE formula, we input 43% body fat and 178 pound weight and it gives a projected TDEE of 1878 calories -- pretty damn close.

Hope that helped!

peacemongernc

I'm 70" 150 lbs with 2170 cals to maintain my weight and work out 2-3 hrs a week. My bf% is 25-26% I am willing to bet the 28% isn't too far off for you.

That would be awesome if it is true. I hate that I can let so much importance get wrapped up in a number. I know that whatever I am, is what I am, and either I need to work harder to make it better or be happy where I am. But it is just about impossible for me to not get all caught up in wondering about numbers!! That's part of why I keep putting the scan off... I keep wondering how I'll deal with it if the number is something like 40%! It is what it is. I want to be objective about it before I do it so it doesn't turn into some embarrassing, silly, anxiety producing stupid thing. But it is time to lay it to rest and just find out.

But I really hope you are right!!!!!!

I would question why you need to know it (other than curiosity).

Will the results change the way you see yourself in the mirror? Will it change your health markers? Will you change what you do? Will it change how your clothes fit?

Don't get me wrong, I understand the curiosity - I have had hydrostatic and other estimates done before myself, but the number is not really that meaningful in the main and can screw with your mind.

Keep doing what you can to decrease your BF% (if you want), preferably while doing things to maintain muscle mass. The results should not change that.

It won't change a single thing. That's what I meant by saying it was silly et al. Mostly it is curiosity. Partly I'm seriously wondering if my metabolism is much slower than normal. Partly I wonder how close I am to some sort of "ideal" weight. I think a big part of it is wondering how much of the hanging skin is fat that I can work away and how much of it is damage from a life time of obesity that I'll have to deal with. People are always saying things to me about how I don't need to lose more weight that everything left is "just skin". Well, I know that isn't true.

I've got awesome muscle definition across my arms and back, mostly from all the paddling I've been doing. The pictures I've seen online of women who supposedly are 35 to 40% BF look soft and squishy. I haven't seen anyone with arms and back like mine at that % BF. But my stomach hangs and my thighs hang and jiggle. My calves are like my arms... lots of definition.

It would be convenient to be typical just so I could look online at some pictures and calculators and figure it out while sitting at my desk... that's all. I've been so big for so long I just don't feel like I have a good handle on what i look like, what normal is (who even knows anymore cause EVERYONE seems to be so big!!!), or what I'm aiming for. I'll keep heading toward it anyway, even if I don't always do it consistently. If I live long enough I guess I'll get there.

I'm not gaining weight, and I think I'm building muscle, so I want to be pleased with that. I'm sure I have all sorts of OCD issues... I guess the question is whether it would be easier/cheaper to get the DEXA scan or to get therapy. I think I might prefer the DEXA. LOL!

Thanks for your insights!

peacemongernc

I've been trying to predict my BF% from my maintenance calories... is that possible?

Based on my weight loss over the past 90 days, I believe my maintenance calorie need is about 1925 a day. I've lost about 2 pounds in the last 90 days and my average daily calories during that time has been 1838.5.

I'm 66" tall and currently weigh 178 pounds.

A math problem, cool! Yes, absolutely you can do what you're asking for. Here we go....

First thing to realize is that your metabolism doesn't treat excess fat like normal tissue - think of yourself as a skinnier person wearing a no-maintenance fat jacket. That's not exactly true, but for the level of accuracy we're working with here, it's close enough.

At your height, if you were 120 pounds and 17% body fat, with 3x weekly exercise, your TDEE would be right around 1850. This is close enough to your 1838.5 maintenance number.

At that 120 pounds, 17% BF, you would have 100 lbs of lean body mass. You actually weigh 178 pounds. So you have roughly (178-100 = 78) lbs of body fat. 78/178 -> 43% body fat.

Double checking this with the Katch-McCardle TDEE formula, we input 43% body fat and 178 pound weight and it gives a projected TDEE of 1878 calories -- pretty damn close.

Hope that helped!

That's pretty much what I was coming up with. I'm hoping it isn't really that high! But I think my trainer's estimation of 28.9% sound WAY low. As I said in my last post. I just don't look anything like the pictures of the women on line who supposedly are 40%+ BF. I'm going to call on Tuesday and schedule a DEXA scan just to see. Now I'm even more curious than I was before.

Thank you for your input!