Fat Loss vs Scale Weight Loss

Flyntiggr

I don't have time to engage in more dribble right now, so bumping for later....

teasie0616

Bump!

tigersword

Calipers are mostly accurate, body fat scales are very inaccurate, studies have shown that they tend to over or underestimate by about 10%. I have a body fat scale and it's number is about 15% over where my own caliper test, online calculators, and my doctor's caliper tests all are. He and I both agreed the scale was a waste of money.

The only way to be 100% accurate with body fat is through hydrostatic weighing. Since that's relatively unavailable and prohibitively expensive, calipers are your best bet, although the YMCA body fat formula gets really close also.

ItsMeTime

OK..tracking body fat is good, (I dont but may get measured by a trainer today because we are really slow- i work at a gym) and I may start. But I have been very healthy and fit before and know what a good weight/dress sizeis for me. Tracking body fat and using that as your guide for realistic weight loss goals is great for someone who has always been over weight as they have no other frame of reference.

Having said that, I have seen you also post two inaccuarate and potentially dangerous things on this thread. First, you begin by saying you want to lose 100% body fat. As a woman (this explains why we need more essential body fat) you have fat through your midsection that actually holds your essential organs in place. If you lose that fat, your organs will shift position causing very serious damage. Rework your goal so you aren't going for something unrealistic or dangerously unhealthy.

Second, you mentioned "scale gain" as a result of muscle gain. I have found that people allow themselves to believe this and it keeps them from discovering the real cause of weight gain and resolving it. If you are lifting reguarly and effectively, you will gain muscle. But, if you will aqlso be losing fat in the process. With a substantial amount of fat to lose and little muscle to speak of initially, your muscle gain will not outweigh your fat loss- especially in a short amount of time like a few days or a week. If you are properly mixing cardio, strength training, and healthy eating, you will lose weight while building muscle. It will not be until you near your goal that you will notice the "scale weight" getting stagnant while you continue to slim down. If you are gaining "scale weight" initially or while you still have a lot of fat to lose, do not plame the weight lifting. It is something else.

AZackery

Calipers are mostly accurate, body fat scales are very inaccurate, studies have shown that they tend to over or underestimate by about 10%. I have a body fat scale and it's number is about 15% over where my own caliper test, online calculators, and my doctor's caliper tests all are. He and I both agreed the scale was a waste of money.

The only way to be 100% accurate with body fat is through hydrostatic weighing. Since that's relatively unavailable and prohibitively expensive, calipers are your best bet, although the YMCA body fat formula gets really close also.

Calipers can be off as well. Another thing about calipers, they weren't designed to take measurements on obese people. So, how would someone that's 350 pounds with a high body fat percentage get tested with a caliper?

I know that the Accu-Measure caliper shows one site to test yourself and get a body fat percentage and that's not right.

Hydrostatic testing can be off as well. The results a person gets depends on how much air they expel.

servilia

You wrote:

"Say Jane Doe looks at her 250lbs scale weight and says she wants to lose 100 pounds. Will that be healthy and realistic? Lets see.

I know the answer will be no, it's not healthy or realistic. But, I want to show why. Above, I've stated that a person's pounds of fat is not the amount they need to lose. And Jane Doe's pounds of fat is 100 and she wants to lose 100 pounds of scale weight."

Ummm YES it is healthy and realistic. She obviously won't lose only fat. When someone is really obese, they usually also have more muscle than someone of their height and bone structure need, it's just hidden under the fat so you can't tell. It's not ALWAYS a bad thing to lose some muscle, unless you're already near or at a normal weight. Plus don't forget all the water the person in your example can lose.

Í'd just like to add that 5lbs of fingers is not heavier than 5lbs of feathers. I know, I'm an English teacher AND a scientist.

monoxidechick

Ok it sounds like you are really trying to inform and help people, but it also seems like you are just finding information online someplace or piecing together what you hear from different threads and trying to explain it in your own words. If you are providing your oppinion or your understanding of something, you should probably express it this way. I am not sure that you fully understand some of the things that you are explaining and giving advice for. You seem to be going back and forth on your thoughts and suggestions and adding your own outragious numbers or incorrect words where they may cause misunderstanding for others. If you found a good article or a good website that explains what you are trying to say, please include that if you want it to be taken seriously. You demand explanations for qeustions that you ask, but then tell people to go look things up. It would be nice to have a place where you found your information as a starting place to look things up. Just trying to understand where you are coming from and getting your information from. I dont want to read your information and pass on incorrect information to others or believe it myself. Thank you for the time you are taking to try to inform others of the information you have come accross and may use yourself.

AZackery

Having said that, I have seen you also post two inaccuarate and potentially dangerous things on this thread. First, you begin by saying you want to lose 100% body fat. As a woman (this explains why we need more essential body fat) you have fat through your midsection that actually holds your essential organs in place. If you lose that fat, your organs will shift position causing very serious damage. Rework your goal so you aren't going for something unrealistic or dangerously unhealthy.

ItsMeTime, I can see that you have came on here with the intention to be messy and haven't taken out the time to understand what I was saying, if you did, you wouldn't be saying that I was implying that I want to lose all the fat in my body. I've made it clear that the essential fat for both genders are a requirement. I've also shown what I was talking about, when it came down to losing 100% pounds of body fat. Reread my post and get an understanding, instead of trying to come on here and start a fight with me, because you didn't like what I have said muscle vs fat on the other thread you were on. I know that you all have created a second thread, so why are you here?

Second, you mentioned "scale gain" as a result of muscle gain. I have found that people allow themselves to believe this and it keeps them from discovering the real cause of weight gain and resolving it. If you are lifting reguarly and effectively, you will gain muscle. But, if you will aqlso be losing fat in the process. With a substantial amount of fat to lose and little muscle to speak of initially, your muscle gain will not outweigh your fat loss- especially in a short amount of time like a few days or a week. If you are properly mixing cardio, strength training, and healthy eating, you will lose weight while building muscle. It will not be until you near your goal that you will notice the "scale weight" getting stagnant while you continue to slim down. If you are gaining "scale weight" initially or while you still have a lot of fat to lose, do not plame the weight lifting. It is something else.

My advise to you is to go back and read my post again to understand what I'm talking about. Better yet, feel free to search the internet or get with a personal trainer that's educated about body fat percentage and pounds of fat to see if what I have stated in my original post is right. I'm not going to fight with you.

Azdak

Calipers are mostly accurate, body fat scales are very inaccurate, studies have shown that they tend to over or underestimate by about 10%. I have a body fat scale and it's number is about 15% over where my own caliper test, online calculators, and my doctor's caliper tests all are. He and I both agreed the scale was a waste of money.

The only way to be 100% accurate with body fat is through hydrostatic weighing. Since that's relatively unavailable and prohibitively expensive, calipers are your best bet, although the YMCA body fat formula gets really close also.

Yes and no. Calipers can be a good choice with the right body and in the hands of an experienced operator. I find the most of the people I measure today are too big to accurately measure with calipers. Individuals with a lot of visceral fat and atypical body types also cannot be accurately measured with calipers.

At our fitness center, we have a Tanita commercial body fat scale. As someone who has done thousands of skinfold caliper measurements over the past 28 years, I was initially very skeptical. It has its issues, but overall, it has proven to be useful and as accurate as could be expected under the circumstances.

When I first started, I double-checked some of the members I tested using calipers (those under 35% body fat). Out of 12 people, 11 were within 0.1 or 0.2% agreement with the Tanita scale. While comparing tests over time is where you mostly run into problems with bioimpedance, I have noticed that more often that not, we see pretty consistent numbers there as well.

So while I still would never use bioimpedance as a first choice, a quality instrument can serve a useful purpose. And, again, given the fact that increasing numbers of people cannot be measured with calipers, the methodology cannot be dismissed out of hand.

AZackery

Calipers are mostly accurate, body fat scales are very inaccurate, studies have shown that they tend to over or underestimate by about 10%. I have a body fat scale and it's number is about 15% over where my own caliper test, online calculators, and my doctor's caliper tests all are. He and I both agreed the scale was a waste of money.

The only way to be 100% accurate with body fat is through hydrostatic weighing. Since that's relatively unavailable and prohibitively expensive, calipers are your best bet, although the YMCA body fat formula gets really close also.

Yes and no. Calipers can be a good choice with the right body and in the hands of an experienced operator. I find the most of the people I measure today are too big to accurately measure with calipers. Individuals with a lot of visceral fat and atypical body types also cannot be accurately measured with calipers.

At our fitness center, we have a Tanita commercial body fat scale. As someone who has done thousands of skinfold caliper measurements over the past 28 years, I was initially very skeptical. It has its issues, but overall, it has proven to be useful and as accurate as could be expected under the circumstances.

When I first started, I double-checked some of the members I tested using calipers (those under 35% body fat). Out of 12 people, 11 were within 0.1 or 0.2% agreement with the Tanita scale. While comparing tests over time is where you mostly run into problems with bioimpedance, I have noticed that more often that not, we see pretty consistent numbers there as well.

So while I still would never use bioimpedance as a first choice, a quality instrument can serve a useful purpose. And, again, given the fact that increasing numbers of people cannot be measured with calipers, the methodology cannot be dismissed out of hand.

Thank you Azdak.

Scott613

I'm getting my bodyfat percentage down to "looks good naked" whether it's 25% 15% 10 % or lower I don't care. All that matters is looking good naked....oh and being healthy. so far 13% isn't looking too bad on me.

ThePhoenixRose

I'm getting my bodyfat percentage down to "looks good naked" whether it's 25% 15% 10 % or lower I don't care. All that matters is looking good naked....oh and being healthy. so far 13% isn't looking too bad on me.

I like this^^^! I may have to change my goal to "Looks good naked" Or maybe even "looks great naked"!! Of course, I may not be able to post my after pics here then...

schobert101

Quote "Although, Jane weighs 250lbs, it doesn't mean that she has to lose 100lbs of scale weight. She can lose 100% of 60 pounds of fat and get down to 190 pounds of scale weight and have a lean look. "


Ummm, no she can't. Although I understand what you are trying to say (and yes I read your whole post) and overall I agree that following body fat% is desirable most of your calculations are flawed because it is impossible to lose just fat without muscle. In the quote above you imply that Jane can lose 60# of fat and she will have a lean look at 190 pounds. That won't happen because when she loses weight she losed BOTH fat AND muscle. Its unavoidable. When she gets to 190 pounds she will look better but not lean because her body fat % will still be high"......it will be better than when she was 250 pounds but it won't be a lean look.

Scott613

Quote "Although, Jane weighs 250lbs, it doesn't mean that she has to lose 100lbs of scale weight. She can lose 100% of 60 pounds of fat and get down to 190 pounds of scale weight and have a lean look. "


Ummm, no she can't. Although I understand what you are trying to say (and yes I read your whole post) and overall I agree that following body fat% is desirable most of your calculations are flawed because it is impossible to lose just fat without muscle. In the quote above you imply that Jane can lose 60# of fat and she will have a lean look at 190 pounds. That won't happen because when she loses weight she losed BOTH fat AND muscle. Its unavoidable. When she gets to 190 pounds she will look better but not lean because her body fat % will still be high"......it will be better than when she was 250 pounds but it won't be a lean look.

WRONG!!!!! if Jane Doe is over 6' tall she can look lean at that weight however, if she is 4'11'' she will look like an oompa loompa.

AZackery

Quote "Although, Jane weighs 250lbs, it doesn't mean that she has to lose 100lbs of scale weight. She can lose 100% of 60 pounds of fat and get down to 190 pounds of scale weight and have a lean look. "


Ummm, no she can't. Although I understand what you are trying to say (and yes I read your whole post) and overall I agree that following body fat% is desirable most of your calculations are flawed because it is impossible to lose just fat without muscle. In the quote above you imply that Jane can lose 60# of fat and she will have a lean look at 190 pounds. That won't happen because when she loses weight she losed BOTH fat AND muscle. Its unavoidable. When she gets to 190 pounds she will look better but not lean because her body fat % will still be high"......it will be better than when she was 250 pounds but it won't be a lean look.

Schobert101, fat loss and scale weight loss aren't the same thing. You are looking at Jane losing 60 pounds of scale weight, which I haven't said that. I have said 60 pounds of fat.

I know that you are familiar with the saying that two people can weigh the same and one look smaller than the next person.

For example: Person A weighs 200lbs with a 18% body fat percentage and Person B weighs 200lbs with a 35% body fat percentage.

Which one would look lean to you and why?

servilia

Schobert101, fat loss and scale weight loss aren't the same thing.

They ARE the same thing if the person lost ONLY fat (which is not possible by the way). That's what you keep assuming in your examples, that a person is going to lose only fat.

You are looking at Jane losing 60 pounds of scale weight, which I haven't said that. I have said 60 pounds of fat.

But you also said that Jane is losing ONLY fat. In which case, 60lbs of fat loss = 60lbs of what you call "scale weight" loss

ghlm

Look good naked is a great goal! And when we lose weight, for our health, to look good or whatever," surely we lose not just fat, but also muscle and water? Obviously, if we want to look less fat (not just be less heavy) it's in our best interests to lose weight fairly slowly (ie not a super-low-cal diet) so that not too much of the weight loss is simply muscle wastage.

AZackery

Servilia, if you don't mind me asking, how do you track your weight loss and how do you tell how much pounds of fat you have lost?

I track my body fat percentage/pounds of fat and inches loss. That's how I see how much pounds of fat I'm losing.

The same way that I'm tracking my progress, is the same way that a lot of personal trainers track their clients' loss. There's a reason why personal trainers track their clients body fat percentage. They could just track their clients scale weight.

A personal trainer may not tell their clients how much pounds of fat they have lost. They might just tell their clients the amount of scale weight and body fat percentage they have lost. A client should ask their personal trainer to explain their loss in detail.

meerkat70

Just a quick word to the wise: It's generally not sensible to presume that everyone who disagrees with you simply hasn't taken the time to read your posts, or has failed to understand what you've said.

myofibril

A person can lose 5 pounds of scale weight in 5 hours, but they can't lose 5 pounds of fat in 5 hours.

How can I lose 5 pounds in 5 hours - please tell me. I'd really like to know!

....Is it the same as 5 lbs of rice?

Ask any competitive athlete who has had to make a weight class how to lose X amount of scale weight quickly and they will tell you they "sweated it out." In other words they manipulated their water balance through the use of various methods (saunas, carb cycling, diuretics)

In addition, it is perfectly natural for someone's scale weight to fluctuate by this amount in a single day due to water loss, food in the GI tract etc.

Is it possible to lose 5 lbs of scale weight in 5 hours? Yes. Does that equate with success if your goal is body recomp (change the % of lean mass to fat mass you have) No. Why? Because the goal is fat loss and barring invasive surgery you cannot lose that amount of fat in 5 hours as the OP stated.