DXA scan - worth the money?

astrampe

I am at my wits end with the annoying variety of "body fat persentage" scales, calculators, measurements out there - none of it gives me something even close to an average....I'm perimenopausal, so the scale is utterly unreliable....
Is the DXA scan really as accurate as people say it is?

astrampe

Bump....Anybody?

kazzsjourney

I had one done and definitely think it was worth the money. I had it done in April and am going back in febuary to have another one done My BF % was a LOT lower then online ones etc told me (I have loose skin which I think is why the dexa scan was so good for me to get a real picture)

astrampe

Thanks! I'm hoping for something like that - the stupid scale at the gym keep telling me its the same, as my weight is actually about 5lbs more, but I have so much more muscle definition and less inches.....And calipers shows 25%, with scales and gym body comp and calculators ranging from 25 to 30:sad:
Would be nice to see what it really is.....
And btw, great job, you look fabulous!:flowerforyou:

Chief_Rocka

I don't think there's a ton of value in knowing the specific number. The real issues are whether you're happy with what you see in the mirror, and how to make progress toward your goal.

etoiles_argentees

I don't think there's a ton of value in knowing the specific number. The real issues are whether you're happy with what you see in the mirror, and how to make progress toward your goal.

this.

drmerc

I thought so

amylahminute

If you need I know your true BF% to calculate your BMR/TDEE more accurately and arrive at the right calorie cut for you, then I say go for it. I learned thru a DEXA that all the estimation tools I'd been using were off by 7%.

BinaryPulsar

They are accurate, but I agree that I have no need for that level of accuracy for that cost. There are so many better ways I could spend that money. My fitness and bf% will fall where it may. I work hard, and I'm very fit. No need for me to try and achieve something unrealistic. I'm quite happy with my fitness level as it is and more than willing to keep at it. The number details are not all that important.

astrampe

They are accurate, but I agree that I have no need for that level of accuracy for that cost. There are so many better ways I could spend that money. My fitness and bf% will fall where it may. I work hard, and I'm very fit. No need for me to try and achieve something unrealistic. I'm quite happy with my fitness level as it is and more than willing to keep at it. The number details are not all that important.

I'm glad for you.....I, on the other hand, want to know the number - I am dealing with a lot of weird hormonal stuff, that makes it difficult to establish my TDEE amongst other things - my body don't react according to the the text book anymore...So without having to explain my reasons for that in detail, I do have a need for that level of accuracy.....

phildawson75

Unless there's a medical reason or you're possibily training as athlete, and its important to know exactly, I would say its a bit of waste of money. You'll end up with a load of stats which don't make any difference to your life. You can easily figure things like TDEE just by have a net of x and seeing if your losing/gaining and adjusting that value until you maintain. I'd say it would be better to get someone who knows how to use calipers to measure you. Even taking an average between measurements is goin to get a pretty good estimate tbh. If you measure say 25% and the test comes back 25.4% I can't see how useful that will be knowing the .4

BinaryPulsar

They are accurate, but I agree that I have no need for that level of accuracy for that cost. There are so many better ways I could spend that money. My fitness and bf% will fall where it may. I work hard, and I'm very fit. No need for me to try and achieve something unrealistic. I'm quite happy with my fitness level as it is and more than willing to keep at it. The number details are not all that important.

I'm glad for you.....I, on the other hand, want to know the number - I am dealing with a lot of weird hormonal stuff, that makes it difficult to establish my TDEE amongst other things - my body don't react according to the the text book anymore...So without having to explain my reasons for that in detail, I do have a need for that level of accuracy.....

I understand completely (and do not require you to tell me your reasons, I believe you that you know what you need for your own health). I almost came back to edit my post to say that I would do it if there was a medical need for it. And also if I could afford it. I have other medical things to deal with, so when I said there are better ways for me to spend my money I meant for my personal health needs right now (that was my final deciding factor not to do it). My response was only from my own exploration of deciding whether or not I would do this (and realizing that I needed to be ok with not knowing the number or even trying to lower it further). I'm sorry if you took offense by it because that was not in any way my intention (not saying you did). So, yes, they are accurate and if it is helpful to your health it is a good option. I have heard also of Bod Pod scans and they may be accurate (I do not know enough about it), they are a little less expensive, you could look into it. And there is also the hydro test. Which is probably not particularly pleasant, but not too bad either (my husband is a physicist and he says it is accurate). Those are some options. The other good thing about a dexa scan is that it can provide more info to you about other aspects of your health as well.

Here is a good article that talks about the different options and how to find a location for them and the cost comparisons. http://www.nerdfitness.com/blog/2012/07/02/body-fat-percentage/

Also, do not let the gym scale get you down. My husband is a physicist. That scale at the gym is a complete scam. It's like a fortune teller machine at a carnival. It measures how sweaty you are and how much water retnetion you have. It is scientifically impossible to measure your body fat by standing on metal plates. That was what I meant in my response and in response to you. You can see the changes in your mirror and body. The scale is wrong.

kazzsjourney

Yes I think it depends on the situation. The main reason I got mine does is I have lost over 180 pounds and have a lot of excess skin "just looking in the mirror" wont work for me as I cannot see a lot of the muscle etc so its hard to determine where I am at...and I will probably never be happy with the look...so I need that kind of information to work out where my body fat % etc is at It also gave me good info on approximately how much my excess skin weighs and it enabled them to give me a goal weight to aim for taking that all into account.

bluebird321

I had one once and it was not cheap. I now use hydrostatic body testing -- not as accurate as DXA, but good enough (and not as expensive).

JoyousRen

I had one once and it was not cheap. I now use hydrostatic body testing -- not as accurate as DXA, but good enough (and not as expensive).

I hate hydrostatic so much! It's worth the extra $50 to not try to suffocate myself. I'm planning on getting DXA scan again at the beginning of the year.

AllonsYtotheTardis

If I had the need for it, I would probably get it done. I don't need it -I have no real use for that information at this point, it's more curiosity. What I do like, for ME right now, is the crappy sensor on on my bathroom scale. Not because I have any faith in it's accuracy, but because I can see the trend is going down, not up. I've seen a 5% decrease since February, and I like that.

HeatherPH

I had one done about a fortnight ago and I loved it! It made me realise that my BF percentage on my Tanita scale is off by about 5% (and no matter how much I drink throughout the day and ensure I'm hydrated, I can't replicate that percentage on my scales), which is huge! It was also good to see my lean mass figures, and my bone density. The best bit, though, was getting an accurate estimation of my BMR and TDEE. I learnt that I have a much higher muscle mass than the average woman (from 15 years of karate), so the calculators are always off for me. Since adjusting my calorie level to the level specified by the doctor, I've lost 4lbs!

I'm in Australia and it was only $90, which I consider money well spent, but I'm not sure how much it'd be in the US. Still, I'd highly recommend it!

Edited to say: The doctor also sat down with me and talked in terms of kgs of body fat and gave me a range of how much I could lose to be considered 'lean'. Instead of just floundering towards some random goal weight, I love that I now how a specific number range in mind, and know it's going to be accurate for the amount of lean mass I have.

astrampe

Thanks, appreciate all the feedback....I have one booked for tomorrow - $100 CAD, not cheap, but it's my little Christmas present to myself...I really need some idea of what's going on - and as it's a well known secret that peri menopause has no answers:drinker: , I hope that the scan would at least give me some idea of what my BMR/TDEE etc should be....
I have lost a bunch of weight, started weight training and am a bit of a geek, so the numbers should be interesting...
BinaryPulsar, no offense taken, don't worry.... :flowerforyou: I'm lucky enough that I don't have any other medical issues, but I hate this not knowing what to aim for and what to expect, so I hope this would give me some direction....

BinaryPulsar

Great! That sounds wonderful! Thanks for updating us. Might as well pay for the best option, rather than end up paying for many different options that don't work as well.

astrampe

OK...so got the scan done - quick - the whole consultation took about 30 minutes, the scan itself 6.
Good news, bone density OK, so no worries there...BUT - bodyfat shows 42%,:sad: :sad: Where the guy with the calipers said 25% and my clever scale said 28%...The gym scale said 29 and the military calculator also 29....

It sucks, but now I know...Most important though, my RMR is 1398 and not 1550 as most calculaors showed me... Still suppose to eat 1730-1850 (which I have been doing for months now without any movement on the scale.....
Will go a little lower carb and see what happens.....

BattlingMaxo

I thought DXA scans for athletes why waste the money? Your mirror tells all.

BM

heybales

OK...so got the scan done - quick - the whole consultation took about 30 minutes, the scan itself 6.
Good news, bone density OK, so no worries there...BUT - bodyfat shows 42%,:sad: :sad: Where the guy with the calipers said 25% and my clever scale said 28%...The gym scale said 29 and the military calculator also 29....

It sucks, but now I know...Most important though, my RMR is 1398 and not 1550 as most calculaors showed me... Still suppose to eat 1730-1850 (which I have been doing for months now without any movement on the scale.....
Will go a little lower carb and see what happens.....

So another piece to this puzzle.

Knowing your LBM can give you the best estimated of your BMR, because in the studies that doesn't vary much at all, if based on LBM and not suppressed for other medical reasons.

Now the problem, BMR can be suppressed slightly, and RMR even more, and TDEE even more yet - by under eating for your level of activity.

So that was indeed the best test to know where the foundation of the math should be.

But, your calculation of a TDEE to take a deficit off of - how are you measuring that?

FitBit and BodyMedia devices use your BMR as a basis, BMR based on age, weight, height with Harris formula, as you found, that is off.
So their TDEE figures would be inflated too.

Using a HRM to calculate your exercise calories, how accurately is that setup so the margin of error is not large than it needs to be?

Here's the other thing to think about, what was your exercise routine and diet level that probably encouraged burning off LBM, more than weight loss alone would cause?

Also, I hope you got your measurements down on that day so that you can use some of the easier to estimate calculators, and no what the % of error is to always apply.

Like the body-fat estimates with 3 calcs here.

http://www.gymgoal.com/dtools.html

ArchyJill

OK...so got the scan done - quick - the whole consultation took about 30 minutes, the scan itself 6.
Good news, bone density OK, so no worries there...BUT - bodyfat shows 42%,:sad: :sad: Where the guy with the calipers said 25% and my clever scale said 28%...The gym scale said 29 and the military calculator also 29....

It sucks, but now I know...Most important though, my RMR is 1398 and not 1550 as most calculaors showed me... Still suppose to eat 1730-1850 (which I have been doing for months now without any movement on the scale.....
Will go a little lower carb and see what happens.....

Ah...sorry. But now you know! And when someone tells you they are 20% body fat (or some such number) you can rightly call BS (unless of course they are 20%). I've had it done a couple of times. Well worth it every time. I see it like measuring your food, until you've done it you're estimates are grossly inaccurate.

omma_to_3

Have you had RMR testing done? I got Bod Pod testing done for BF% and an RMR test in the lab on the same day. My RMR was higher than expected - and higher than the Bod Pod estimated based on my body fat percentage. Higher by about 10%.

heybales

Have you had RMR testing done? I got Bod Pod testing done for BF% and an RMR test in the lab on the same day. My RMR was higher than expected - and higher than the Bod Pod estimated based on my body fat percentage. Higher by about 10%.

Now there's the great combo, and excellent example that shows thinking your metabolism must be lower than normal is not correct either.

Of course you could suppress it, and even if suppressed, could it be higher than expected.

What a great discovery to eat more without issue.

emtjmac

What do you want it to do for you?

astrampe

So another piece to this puzzle.

Knowing your LBM can give you the best estimated of your BMR, because in the studies that doesn't vary much at all, if based on LBM and not suppressed for other medical reasons.

Now the problem, BMR can be suppressed slightly, and RMR even more, and TDEE even more yet - by under eating for your level of activity.

So that was indeed the best test to know where the foundation of the math should be.

But, your calculation of a TDEE to take a deficit off of - how are you measuring that?

Using a HRM to calculate your exercise calories, how accurately is that setup so the margin of error is not large than it needs to be?

Here's the other thing to think about, what was your exercise routine and diet level that probably encouraged burning off LBM, more than weight loss alone would cause?

Like the body-fat estimates with 3 calcs here.

http://www.gymgoal.com/dtools.html

Thanks for these Heybales... I did take measurements on that day, so will keep that as a baseline to measure progress... Just use your link above - and it works my bf out to 26.25%......I like that a lot more!:laugh:

I lost most of my weight (around 60lbs) over about two years - doing Weightwatchers (1500 cals including exercise) and running....Bad combination, I know that now - I'm 5.8 and started at 227lbs - 1500 was ridiculously low....Gained ten since last summer, but still wear the same size pants...(smaller top, but all my fat sits in my butt....) Started lifting heavy 3xper week together with running (which I love!)

I have played with numbers and it more or less makes sense now that I have "their" numbers... With 5x 40 minutes of exercise a week (roughly an average of 300cals per day - more on running days, less on weight days as per HRM) I started gaining at around 2100 - 2300.....The DXA guy gave me a TDEE of 2166 with moderate exercise and 1922 with light.....

I am almost finished with Chalean Xtreme, and will start P90X in a week or so - according to the DXA guy I should eat around 1733-1841 to still lose weight safely while doing that....

I've played with my HRM and two of the cardio workouts in P90X - burns between 430 (Kenpo X - kickboxing) and 500 (Plyometrics) per hour - so the weights would be less than that I think...

Does that make sense to you? Would appreciate it if you can tell me if I am on the right track....

I am not eating any calories back, exept in case of hunger:bigsmile: - which have not happened for the last week since I've upped my protein intake to 40%, 30% carbs and 30% fat...Hope that that too might make a difference to the crazy hormone things....

heybales

Thanks for these Heybales... I did take measurements on that day, so will keep that as a baseline to measure progress... Just use your link above - and it works my bf out to 26.25%......I like that a lot more!:laugh:

I lost most of my weight (around 60lbs) over about two years - doing Weightwatchers (1500 cals including exercise) and running....Bad combination, I know that now - I'm 5.8 and started at 227lbs - 1500 was ridiculously low....Gained ten since last summer, but still wear the same size pants...(smaller top, but all my fat sits in my butt....) Started lifting heavy 3xper week together with running (which I love!)

I have played with numbers and it more or less makes sense now that I have "their" numbers... With 5x 40 minutes of exercise a week (roughly an average of 300cals per day - more on running days, less on weight days as per HRM) I started gaining at around 2100 - 2300.....The DXA guy gave me a TDEE of 2166 with moderate exercise and 1922 with light.....

I am almost finished with Chalean Xtreme, and will start P90X in a week or so - according to the DXA guy I should eat around 1733-1841 to still lose weight safely while doing that....

I've played with my HRM and two of the cardio workouts in P90X - burns between 430 (Kenpo X - kickboxing) and 500 (Plyometrics) per hour - so the weights would be less than that I think...

Does that make sense to you? Would appreciate it if you can tell me if I am on the right track....

I am not eating any calories back, exept in case of hunger:bigsmile: - which have not happened for the last week since I've upped my protein intake to 40%, 30% carbs and 30% fat...Hope that that too might make a difference to the crazy hormone things....

Excellent change of program to include lifting.

Now, I will mention that some of those programs are indeed strength, some are just anaerobic cardio, some are intervals.

Guess what type of activity the HRM inflates calorie burns on? 3 guesses, first 2 don't count.
Calorie burn algorithms are only for steady-state cardio (3-5 min at level effort) in the aerobic zone, so about 90 to your Lactate threshold, below anaerobic efforts, usually around 150-160.

I do have a Garmin actually that blocks out the anaerobic HR readings and does no calorie burn on them, and found that compared to a Polar, the real lifting with sets and 1 min rests, burns about 1/4 to 1/3 what Polar reported.
Interval type sprint activity was about 1/2 to 2/3 what Polar reported.

That doesn't matter as much to you since you are doing TDEE minus deficit method, so that's good.
But using those adjusted figures, you might layout a week of eating level, minus what the exercise really is likely to be taking off the top, and what your body ends up with at the end of the day for everything else, and confirm that for at least a weekly avg, you end up above Katch BMR level, which is based on your known LBM/BF% now.

Also might confirm you are getting the best lifting workouts. If really lifting heavy to failure, you need a rest day the day after, no more than gentle cardio to just get blood flow into the muscles to aid repair. Anything more intense and it can't repair the same way it could with rest.

Rest is where the strength gains come from.

And any cardio more intense than Aerobic HR zone the day before lifting is going to leave you too tired to really lift as hard as you could.

The end result is plateau'd performance. At the beginning of such a program, bigger window for error, but that shrinks and the gains stop being as good if not done in good combo. So be careful of doing too much still.

FredDoyle

Thanks, appreciate all the feedback....I have one booked for tomorrow - $100 CAD, not cheap, but it's my little Christmas present to myself...I really need some idea of what's going on - and as it's a well known secret that peri menopause has no answers:drinker: , I hope that the scan would at least give me some idea of what my BMR/TDEE etc should be....
I have lost a bunch of weight, started weight training and am a bit of a geek, so the numbers should be interesting...
BinaryPulsar, no offense taken, don't worry.... :flowerforyou: I'm lucky enough that I don't have any other medical issues, but I hate this not knowing what to aim for and what to expect, so I hope this would give me some direction....

Where did you get it done for $100 CAD?

/Say GTA..crosses fingers...

astrampe

Thanks, appreciate a lot! Chalean Xtreme is a nice lifting program - I did not do the cardio side of it - substituted it with running twice a week....I started that with doing deadlifts with 2x 20lbs dumbells - after completing 90% of the program I am now deadlifting 2X 60lbs @ six reps failure... I know it's not much, but it's a huge improvement for me....

I am actually worried that P90X might have way too much cardio in it - will see how it goes and just keep my protein intake as high as I can... Haven't started the lifting side of that yet, so will see...

Won't bother too much with the calorie burn on the HRM - I log it on MFP as 1 anyways - I have a Garmin110, and it is nice for running, but I won't bank on it for the rest....

Will keep an eye on not going below my BMR....
Thanks again!

astrampe

Where did you get it done for $100 CAD?

/Say GTA..crosses fingers...

Sorry! Vancouver..... Was $80 plus tax.....