In place of a road map!

1…1617192122…26

Replies

  • EgyptianMushroom
    EgyptianMushroom Posts: 341 Member
    Bump!

    I think I've got this TDEE and BMR thing down!
    TDEE is 2011
    BMR is 1676
    Very active (6 work outs a week): 3005

    Crazy. :flowerforyou:
  • ladyraven68
    ladyraven68 Posts: 2,003 Member
    Okay, I have followed the map but fear I may have veered off course. When I input my numbers, horrible though they may be, it tells me I should have a goal weight of 107 lbs. with 30% body fat. Yikes! While short, just shy of 5'2", I have a larger frame and am very muscular. I would look terrible at 107 lbs. and I think it would be impossible to achieve that weight. Does this mean I have somehow gone awry in my calculations or do I just ignore this and forge ahead?

    Further, it gives me a Katch-McArdle BMR of 1106 and then tells me my calorie goal is below my BMR. However, when set for a goal weight of 130 (more reasonable, I think)it gives me a calorie goal of 2082 for moderately active, which is clearly not below 1106. Obviously I am missing something. Anyone willing to help me get a grasp on this. I also wonder if I should use "moderately active". I do Zumba 5x's/week and burn 400 cals. each time. Other than that I have very little activity. I truly spend most of the day sitting. Maybe better to use " lightly active"?

    Current info:
    Female
    Age 36
    62"
    226 (down from 260 1/3/12!)
    Body fat % per military calc. 66.6% (vomit!!!)

    Thanks in advance for any help.

    If that bodyfat % is correct, you currently have a low lean mass of approx 75lbs. If you maintain that lean mass and then have a BF of 30%, your weight will be 107lbs.

    You need to increase that lean mass. if you had a lean mass of 100lbs and a BF% of 30% you would weigh 142lbs.

    Protein - lots of!
  • LizKurz
    LizKurz Posts: 340 Member
    Heres a question I haven't seen answered.

    I went though, calulcated all my stats. Get a bmr of 1411. Now, right now, MFP has my calories set at like 12something and then I'm eating back exercise cals burned, something like 1900 a day. But I know from losing weight before, and keeping it off, at this weight, doing 600 cals 6x a week working out, that sounds low.

    So, I like tracking all my things in the app and don't want to mess that up, can I put my bmr in the calorie goal spot on the app profile and go from there?

    I'm not sure why MFP doesn't take these things into account, but I wish it did!

    So from your other posts, MFP probably says BMR my Mifflin calc is 1364.
    More chance for accurate Katch calc says 1411.
    As you lose weight and LBM stays the same, that will change, so measure again every 5lbs lost, to see what new BMR is.

    To setup MFP so it shows goal slightly above 1411, and adjust down as weight is lost, do the following.
    Tools - Diet/Fitness Profile
    Activity Level Active.
    Weight loss goal 1lb weekly.

    That should make the daily goal 1364 x 1.45 = 1978 - 500 = 1478.

    Now the app will show that as daily goal, and since you are believer in feeding the workouts, you are set.

    It will lower as weight is lost. But frankly, your LBM will change for the better then too, and BMR should go up, requiring further tweaking.

    Congrats, more LBM than avge gal your weight/height!

    Ok, so basically, even though I have 50 lbs to lose, I should set the goal for 1lb a week? Before, I kept it at 2lbs a week until I hit 15 lbs out ad then set it to 1lb a week cause I know when you get close, it gets harder. Took me about three months to lose that last 15 but it was worth it.

    And then what you're saying is every 5lbs, go back and use the calculator to calculate lbm, which will hopefully go up, as it was something like 106lbs.

    Yes?
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Ok, so basically, even though I have 50 lbs to lose, I should set the goal for 1lb a week? Before, I kept it at 2lbs a week until I hit 15 lbs out ad then set it to 1lb a week cause I know when you get close, it gets harder. Took me about three months to lose that last 15 but it was worth it.

    And then what you're saying is every 5lbs, go back and use the calculator to calculate lbm, which will hopefully go up, as it was something like 106lbs.

    Yes?

    Yes. Here's the rub. MFP doesn't respect a smart lower limit - BMR.
    MFP and you don't know the true starting place for the math - TDEE.

    So it's smarter to set the lower limit, and then whatever your true TDEE happens to be will show itself with the weight loss.

    That 1lb is based on Sedentary, and unless you wear a BodyMediaFit or FitBit, you don't have decent estimate of real TDEE that would be used for the math to show how much loss may be. You don't need those though, unless just curious what it could be.
    Here's the part though, after a couple weeks of same weight loss, you now know what true TDEE is.
    lbs lost in week * 3500 / 7 + daily eating avg = TDEE.
    Suggest weighing the morning after a rest day from exercise, so fluid levels are balanced back out by then, and no fluctuations based solely on water weight or glucose/water stores.
    The only problem to this method of guessing TDEE, is if your body is storing on more energy in the muscles, then you are getting artificial gain and don't know what true fat loss is.

    And correct on getting new LBM figure. You'd ate to be trying the method and end up suppressing a potentially higher BMR at some point.
  • LizKurz
    LizKurz Posts: 340 Member
    Ok, so basically, even though I have 50 lbs to lose, I should set the goal for 1lb a week? Before, I kept it at 2lbs a week until I hit 15 lbs out ad then set it to 1lb a week cause I know when you get close, it gets harder. Took me about three months to lose that last 15 but it was worth it.

    And then what you're saying is every 5lbs, go back and use the calculator to calculate lbm, which will hopefully go up, as it was something like 106lbs.

    Yes?

    Yes. Here's the rub. MFP doesn't respect a smart lower limit - BMR.
    MFP and you don't know the true starting place for the math - TDEE.

    So it's smarter to set the lower limit, and then whatever your true TDEE happens to be will show itself with the weight loss.

    That 1lb is based on Sedentary, and unless you wear a BodyMediaFit or FitBit, you don't have decent estimate of real TDEE that would be used for the math to show how much loss may be. You don't need those though, unless just curious what it could be.
    Here's the part though, after a couple weeks of same weight loss, you now know what true TDEE is.
    lbs lost in week * 3500 / 7 + daily eating avg = TDEE.
    Suggest weighing the morning after a rest day from exercise, so fluid levels are balanced back out by then, and no fluctuations based solely on water weight or glucose/water stores.
    The only problem to this method of guessing TDEE, is if your body is storing on more energy in the muscles, then you are getting artificial gain and don't know what true fat loss is.

    And correct on getting new LBM figure. You'd ate to be trying the method and end up suppressing a potentially higher BMR at some point.

    Excellent, thanks!
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Bump!

    I think I've got this TDEE and BMR thing down!
    TDEE is 2011
    BMR is 1676
    Very active (6 work outs a week): 3005

    Crazy. :flowerforyou:

    Yep, so you could eat at future TDEE of 2011, knowing your current TDEE is 3005 - almost 2 lbs a week loss!

    Just confirm your workouts added together for the week doesn't burn more than 2345, which is the daily goal minus BMR * 7. If so you need higher daily goal.
  • fragilestrength
    fragilestrength Posts: 26
    I wish I could figure out my numbers...I know how to do the math, it's just depending on which method I use my body fat percentage is different. boo
  • purplesparklies
    purplesparklies Posts: 20 Member
    Never mind my earlier post. I think I have figured out where I was going wrong. I was measuring my waist below the navel as I saw recommended herein and re-measured according to fat2fit recommendation. Huge difference! Makes much more sense now!


    Thanks!
  • purplesparklies
    purplesparklies Posts: 20 Member
    Okay, I think I've got good numbers to work with now but I have a question about TDEE. If TDEE can be calculated by using recommended cals. + 20%, isn't that the TDEE for your goal weight? So, for someone like me who is a hella long way from goal weight, thus I'm carrying a lot of extra weight, wouldn't my actual TDEE be significantly higher as I am having to work much harder at the everyday activities of life?

    Numbers I'm getting:
    Female
    36
    62"
    C.w. 225
    Fat % 53.3 (15,41,52)
    Goal weight of 140 with 25% body fat
    BMR = 1401
    Rec. cals. For mod. Activity 2148 ( seems like SO much)
    TDEE = 2578

    Sound reasonable? :)
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Okay, I think I've got good numbers to work with now but I have a question about TDEE. If TDEE can be calculated by using recommended cals. + 20%, isn't that the TDEE for your goal weight? So, for someone like me who is a hella long way from goal weight, thus I'm carrying a lot of extra weight, wouldn't my actual TDEE be significantly higher as I am having to work much harder at the everyday activities of life?

    Numbers I'm getting:
    Female
    36
    62"
    C.w. 225
    Fat % 53.3 (15,41,52)
    Goal weight of 140 with 25% body fat
    BMR = 1401
    Rec. cals. For mod. Activity 2148 ( seems like SO much)
    TDEE = 2578

    Sound reasonable? :)

    That is the math done all correctly.

    Only concern is with the range of loss you mention.
    Did the fat2fit.com give a warning that it was too much? I thought I saw an 80lb drop for someone give that warning, meaning you select an in-between goal weight for now, or else you would be undercutting the desired effecting by still netting too low.
    When you get to within 5lbs of that in-between goal weight, you redo the calcs hoping you have less BF%, and put in true goal weight, and get new daily figure.
  • wordpainter09
    wordpainter09 Posts: 472 Member
    Hello,
    I did my calculations on Fat2Fit radio and it gave me 2217 to maintain my weight of 135. Not sure if I'm supposed to add 20 percent more to that? I'm 5'5... just starting metabolism repair and a weight program, running 5x per week and eating at maintenance after a LONG time of undereating.
    Gotten some great help on these boards in the past and any feedback would be appreciated.

    Starting March 1, I upped my calories to 1600, 1800, 2000 and about 3 weeks ago today I began eating around 2200-2500 per day.

    I have a Body Media Fit monitor that tells me how much I burn.

    I never eat above my burn! (well, maybe two or three days in the whole month by a few hundred calories) But most days, I leave enough room for a small deficit.

    Yet, I have gained 5.8 pounds since March 1.

    I know this is expected for someone who has undereaten as long as I have.

    What I want to know is, can anyone give feedback or help on how long I can expect this to go up? My maintenance level seems right based on the Fat2Fit calculators, my TDEE and my Body Media Fit.
    I'm not eating more than I burn, and I'm not trying to lose right now, just maintain.
    But I'm gaining.
    SO FRUSTRATED.
  • poofycat
    poofycat Posts: 28 Member
    Can someone help me with this? I think I might have it, but I don't know...

    I am not on any plan right now, but I am going to start on Monday. Yeah, I know, Monday...

    I'm 46
    62"
    326 lbs:sad:
    65% BF

    BMR shows 1489. I have a sedentary job and haven't started exercising, so 1607. So then I do 1607X1.2=1928. So I should eat 1928 a day? And what do I do when I start exercising?

    Can someone help me with this?

    I saw where someone said for a woman, they should measure an inch above the navel. Is this correct? I can't find the post to check it. If that's so, then my body fat is worse-68%. BMR would be 1391, but the other numbers stay the same. I get the warning at the bottom of the fat2fit page that my goal calorie level is below my BMR, which I don't understand as BMR is 1391 and sedentary calorie level is 1607?

    I have a fitbit and it tells me when I have burned extra calories. I usually burn extra most days, sometimes 200-300. Should I stick with the 1607, then add any calories the fitbit says I have burned? I don't know how consistent I will be when I first start exercising, so I am wondering if just using the table will be correct.

    Do I use the 1607X1.2 and then add the fitbit calories? Help!
  • wordpainter09
    wordpainter09 Posts: 472 Member
    Can someone help me with this? I think I might have it, but I don't know...

    I am not on any plan right now, but I am going to start on Monday. Yeah, I know, Monday...

    I'm 46
    62"
    326 lbs:sad:
    65% BF

    BMR shows 1489. I have a sedentary job and haven't started exercising, so 1607. So then I do 1607X1.2=1928. So I should eat 1928 a day? And what do I do when I start exercising?

    Can someone help me with this?

    I saw where someone said for a woman, they should measure an inch above the navel. Is this correct? I can't find the post to check it. If that's so, then my body fat is worse-68%. BMR would be 1391, but the other numbers stay the same. I get the warning at the bottom of the fat2fit page that my goal calorie level is below my BMR, which I don't understand as BMR is 1391 and sedentary calorie level is 1607?

    I have a fitbit and it tells me when I have burned extra calories. I usually burn extra most days, sometimes 200-300. Should I stick with the 1607, then add any calories the fitbit says I have burned? I don't know how consistent I will be when I first start exercising, so I am wondering if just using the table will be correct.

    Do I use the 1607X1.2 and then add the fitbit calories? Help!

    The Fat2Fit calculations are meant to be used on their own, without adding the Fitbit calories back in.

    That being said, the website is a general guideline, and the fitbit actually measures your activity daily. If your Fitbit gives you a much higher/lower number, it might be better to go with that and subtract a deficit from that -eg if your Fitbit says you burn 2700, try eating 2200 for a 500 cal deficit.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Can someone help me with this? I think I might have it, but I don't know...

    I am not on any plan right now, but I am going to start on Monday. Yeah, I know, Monday...

    I'm 46
    62"
    326 lbs:sad:
    65% BF

    BMR shows 1489. I have a sedentary job and haven't started exercising, so 1607. So then I do 1607X1.2=1928. So I should eat 1928 a day? And what do I do when I start exercising?

    Can someone help me with this?

    I saw where someone said for a woman, they should measure an inch above the navel. Is this correct? I can't find the post to check it. If that's so, then my body fat is worse-68%. BMR would be 1391, but the other numbers stay the same. I get the warning at the bottom of the fat2fit page that my goal calorie level is below my BMR, which I don't understand as BMR is 1391 and sedentary calorie level is 1607?

    I have a fitbit and it tells me when I have burned extra calories. I usually burn extra most days, sometimes 200-300. Should I stick with the 1607, then add any calories the fitbit says I have burned? I don't know how consistent I will be when I first start exercising, so I am wondering if just using the table will be correct.

    Do I use the 1607X1.2 and then add the fitbit calories? Help!

    The page for the BF estimate is pretty clear.

    Note: Men should take their waist measurement at the navel. Women should measure the natural waist circumference at the point of minimal abdominal circumference, usually located about halfway between the navel and the lower end of the sternum (breast bone).

    The warning occurs because if you ate at the sedentary level with light exercise, you'd be likely going under your current BMR.

    But then again, you need to redo measurements with site instructions, but you have idea right.

    If you still want to follow this method, you know your existing FitBit estimated TDEE though, you can skip this estimate, you have a better one.

    FitBit Weekly avg of TDEE / current weight Katch BMR = your personal multiplier.

    Goal weight Katch BMR (plug goal weight into current weight field) * your personal multiplier = your daily eating goal.

    Done. You just did what fat2fit.com was going to do.

    Now, the protection they were also going to do, that daily eating goal should be above your BMR by a decent amount that would take care of real exercise workouts on avg. So just confirm.

    You may be safer to just take that FitBit weekly avg TDEE minus 500 or 750 or 1000, whatever keeps you decently above your current weight BMR.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Hello,
    I did my calculations on Fat2Fit radio and it gave me 2217 to maintain my weight of 135. Not sure if I'm supposed to add 20 percent more to that? I'm 5'5... just starting metabolism repair and a weight program, running 5x per week and eating at maintenance after a LONG time of undereating.
    Gotten some great help on these boards in the past and any feedback would be appreciated.

    Starting March 1, I upped my calories to 1600, 1800, 2000 and about 3 weeks ago today I began eating around 2200-2500 per day.

    I have a Body Media Fit monitor that tells me how much I burn.

    I never eat above my burn! (well, maybe two or three days in the whole month by a few hundred calories) But most days, I leave enough room for a small deficit.

    Yet, I have gained 5.8 pounds since March 1.

    I know this is expected for someone who has undereaten as long as I have.

    What I want to know is, can anyone give feedback or help on how long I can expect this to go up? My maintenance level seems right based on the Fat2Fit calculators, my TDEE and my Body Media Fit.
    I'm not eating more than I burn, and I'm not trying to lose right now, just maintain.
    But I'm gaining.
    SO FRUSTRATED.

    If you put goal weight and current weight the same, that TDEE level is your actual maintenance level, depending on if you get the right one.

    I'd trust your BMF for your daily TDEE though, even though running will be underestimated and you'll actually burn more than that. So you could probably eat at that TDEE level, and still have small deficit.

    I'll let others comment on time taken for metabolism repair since we've talked already.
  • poofycat
    poofycat Posts: 28 Member
    Thank you!
  • wordpainter09
    wordpainter09 Posts: 472 Member
    The BMF underestimates running? How so? I thought its supposed to be accurate. And thanks for the heads up on the calculations.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    The BMF underestimates running? How so? I thought its supposed to be accurate. And thanks for the heads up on the calculations.

    It knows arm swing movement means a step. It knows up and down more is running.
    On mine through experiments it never used heat coming off me for anything meaningful. Sweat was not used either. (testing between cool gym with fan on flat treadmill, and outside 95 F on hills - turnover was exactly the same, level of effort was not)
    And biggest issue, it couldn't tell the difference between 130 AHR, and 160 AHR outside.
    I got the exact same calorie estimate. Which even for the gym was low. Perhaps doing 85-90 turnover fooled it for running, or I'm really smooth runner - doubtful.

    Much more accurate for non-exercise stuff. Actually study on that. Missed it with exercise, unless it was an arm ergometer, then over estimated. And from experience, chainsawing is huge overestimate.

    Just saying, if you have a HRM, remove the BMF during the workout so you can log your own workout calorie burn.
  • terrellc1
    terrellc1 Posts: 231 Member
    I have been stuck for a really long time...pretty much losing and gaining the same 2-3 pounds. This week I have been off of work and upped my exercise by a LOT...and ended up gaining 6-7 pounds. It's very frustrating.

    So I am giving this a go. Let's hope this works.
  • wordpainter09
    wordpainter09 Posts: 472 Member
    The BMF underestimates running? How so? I thought its supposed to be accurate. And thanks for the heads up on the calculations.

    It knows arm swing movement means a step. It knows up and down more is running.
    On mine through experiments it never used heat coming off me for anything meaningful. Sweat was not used either. (testing between cool gym with fan on flat treadmill, and outside 95 F on hills - turnover was exactly the same, level of effort was not)
    And biggest issue, it couldn't tell the difference between 130 AHR, and 160 AHR outside.
    I got the exact same calorie estimate. Which even for the gym was low. Perhaps doing 85-90 turnover fooled it for running, or I'm really smooth runner - doubtful.

    Much more accurate for non-exercise stuff. Actually study on that. Missed it with exercise, unless it was an arm ergometer, then over estimated. And from experience, chainsawing is huge overestimate.

    Just saying, if you have a HRM, remove the BMF during the workout so you can log your own workout calorie burn.

    Wow.. interesting info. Thank you! I'll be on the lookout for an HRM.
  • huntindawg1962
    huntindawg1962 Posts: 277 Member

    On mine through experiments it never used heat coming off me for anything meaningful. Sweat was not used either. (testing between cool gym with fan on flat treadmill, and outside 95 F on hills - turnover was exactly the same, level of effort was not)
    And biggest issue, it couldn't tell the difference between 130 AHR, and 160 AHR outside.
    I got the exact same calorie estimate. Which even for the gym was low. Perhaps doing 85-90 turnover fooled it for running, or I'm really smooth runner - doubtful.

    Now I have seen the opposite on my BMF Link. When I am outside on cold days, the burn rate goes up somewhat. When I was snowmobiling this past winter it registered a lot of burn. I was skeptical thinking "I was not pushing the machine like a Biggest Loser episode would snowmobile- where did that burn come from?" - Until I looked snowmobiling up on and low and behold, there is a burn for that as cardio here on MFP. They were within 100 calories of each other (database to BMF reading). Then the next day I felt it in the waistline with all the twisting and leaning we were doing.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Now I have seen the opposite on my BMF Link. When I am outside on cold days, the burn rate goes up somewhat. When I was snowmobiling this past winter it registered a lot of burn. I was skeptical thinking "I was not pushing the machine like a Biggest Loser episode would snowmobile- where did that burn come from?" - Until I looked snowmobiling up on and low and behold, there is a burn for that as cardio here on MFP. They were within 100 calories of each other (database to BMF reading). Then the next day I felt it in the waistline with all the twisting and leaning we were doing.

    I'll bet it's a workout. I'd imagine almost constant muscle tension. Not sure how you could relax anything much while actually moving.

    As many have commented too, their daily drive on bumping road makes a higher estimate too. Good to know decent estimate.
  • jmaguil4
    jmaguil4 Posts: 19
    Okay I am seriously stressing myself out trying to figure out these calculations. Can someone tell me if I am on the right track pleasee? No, Math is and will never be my strongest subject lol, I am currently trying to survive Intro to Probability and Stats! Thank you!

    21 yo female
    5'3 and 165 lbs
    BF:31.8%
    BMR: McArdle: 1479
    Moderately active: 2232

    So basically I set MFP to 2232 and not eat back my exercise cals back, right? Will that put me at a 1-2 lbs loss weekly? Once again, thanks for the help!! =)
  • isazzzz
    isazzzz Posts: 95
    Here are my vitals:

    Female
    19
    60 inches
    103 pounds
    BF 22.3%

    According to the Katch McArdle formula, my BMR is 1155 calories. This is the lowest number I've EVER seen so far apart from the other sites I have used. How accurate is Fat 2 Fit?

    I work out about 5-6 days a week so I can either consume 1693 cals for light exercise or 1908 for moderate activity. So do I consume these amt of cals without creating a deficit?? I'm now consuming 1200 a day as per MFP's advice.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    21 yo female
    5'3 and 165 lbs
    BF:31.8%
    BMR: McArdle: 1479
    Moderately active: 2232

    So basically I set MFP to 2232 and not eat back my exercise cals back, right? Will that put me at a 1-2 lbs loss weekly? Once again, thanks for the help!! =)

    You nailed it right on.

    As to how much loss to be exected? Redo the calc with current weight as goal weight - now the table is your current TDEE at selected activity level.

    Current TDEE - eating goal = daily deficit * 7 / 3500 = potential weight loss weekly.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Here are my vitals:

    Female
    19
    60 inches
    103 pounds
    BF 22.3%

    According to the Katch McArdle formula, my BMR is 1155 calories. This is the lowest number I've EVER seen so far apart from the other sites I have used. How accurate is Fat 2 Fit?

    I work out about 5-6 days a week so I can either consume 1693 cals for light exercise or 1908 for moderate activity. So do I consume these amt of cals without creating a deficit?? I'm now consuming 1200 a day as per MFP's advice.

    Some body types can mess up the BF calc. But check out their Calculators section, there is a Covert Bailey with more measurements.

    And they may all have problems when you appear to be at healthy weight already, because thin and flabby will look the same way as thin and muscular.

    Are you sure you are trying to lose weight, or lose fat and gain muscle?
    You should put in your current weight as goal weight too. You have no weight to lose except vital organ functions screeching to a halt if you do this wrong.

    Because the Katch BMR calc is based on Lean Body Mass, the other sites you have used is based on age/weight/height, potentially more inaccurate outside healthy weight, but you are not. But since you are kinda at goal weight, that is only 10 less calories than say MFP BMR estimate.

    And then you are at the levels of being Moderate and Very Active working out that often. 5-6 days a week is NOT Lightly Active. Between the other 2 levels would be more correct.

    As you can see from your BMR, eating at MFP suggested 1200 is correct right now, the problem would be killing your metabolism by not eating your exercise calories.

    You can't make muscle on suppressed metabolism, and you are very likely with that routine to be burning it up, especially so if you are NOT eating them back.

    But yes, if using the fat2fit method, you eat at that Mod to Very Active level every day no matter what, but do NOT eat back exercise in that case.

    So don't shoot yourself in the metabolism by doing it wrong.
  • Spanaval
    Spanaval Posts: 1,200 Member
    This is interesting. Based on my stats, Fat2Fit is measuring my BF% at 32.5, which is well into the obese category. Something is screwy when the 'obese' person wears size 4/6 clothing. Generally, these things put me at around 25%.
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    This is interesting. Based on my stats, Fat2Fit is measuring my BF% at 32.5, which is well into the obese category. Something is screwy when the 'obese' person wears size 4/6 clothing. Generally, these things put me at around 25%.

    Ya, try the Covert Bailey calc on their Calculator page.
  • Spanaval
    Spanaval Posts: 1,200 Member
    Ya, try the Covert Bailey calc on their Calculator page.

    That's better. 26%.
  • isazzzz
    isazzzz Posts: 95
    I just did the Covert Bailey tool.

    Sex: female
    Age: 19 years old
    Wrist: 6.5 inches
    Waist: 28 inches
    Hip: 32 inches
    Forearm: 8 inches
    Thigh: 21.5 inches
    Calf: 13.5 inches

    I know I'm at a healthy weight. I'm just looking to tone up and lose fat in certain areas like my belly pooch, tummy, arms, basically everywhere. Since I can't spot reduce, the only way I can lose this fat is if I lose it overall, through cardio.

    The previous BF tool I used on fat 2 fat said I was 22.3 %. Now this one says i'm 15.7%...that can't be correct. That's way too low!!

    I'm starting on the 30 day shred today! hehe wish me luck :)
This discussion has been closed.

Categories