Questions about body fat and frame

Options
2

Replies

  • zoom2
    zoom2 Posts: 934 Member
    Options

    BMI ≠ body fat. Read what you said above. You claimed above that the same woman with the SAME bodyfat % was healthy at one weight, but not another. If she is heavier, but is also carrying more muscle (which would explain higher weight and same BF %), then she will only appear "overweight" based upon BMI (which could in theory happen if she put on a ton of muscle). Her bodyfat % is still healthy. Height still has 0 bearing on body fat percentage. This is why it's a percent.
    Again, you're missing the point. 31% is BORDERLINE healthy. 30.9% is healthy, 31.1% is unhealthy. If someone is at a body fat that is right on the border of being over fat, AND overweight according to BMI, that's a potential health risk. Someone who is right on the border of being overfat but not overweight according to BMI has a less significant health risk. If we are talking these same scenarios with 20% body fat than I'd say it wouldn't matter one way or the other, but when someone is borderline either way, it can be an issue.
    [/quote]

    No...a 5' 120# woman with 31% bodyfat has the same *percentage* (note, we're not talking about the difference in actual weight) of bodyfat as a 5' 130# woman with 31% bodyfat. Her BMI is what has changed, not her percentage of body fat relative to her weight.

    31% is 31%...regardless of age, weight, gender, height, species. And accurate bodyfat readings are a far better measure of health and fitness than BMI.
  • victoria4321
    victoria4321 Posts: 1,719 Member
    Options
    Try using calipers or tape measure and see what results you get from that. Your bra size shouldn't matter with those tests.
  • zoom2
    zoom2 Posts: 934 Member
    Options
    The best measure, but a PITA and relatively $$ is a water displacement test in a lab. I know very few people who have gone to the trouble. The calipers are good, assuming the person doing the measurements is using the calipers correctly.
  • BinaryPulsar
    BinaryPulsar Posts: 8,927 Member
    Options
    I'm sorry you wasted your money on that scale. They are a scam (ask any scientist...a real scientist). They give you a number, but it is not your body fat %. Possibly it tests how sweaty you are. But, that scale is scientifically impossible to do what it claims to do. You should not be basing medical decisions or how you feel about yourself on that scale. It's no better than a carnival fortune telling machine. Just the fact that it has an athlete and non-athlete setting should be a big clue to anyone that it is nonsense.
  • zoom2
    zoom2 Posts: 934 Member
    Options
    Another thing to keep in mind with these scales is that they depend upon a person having ideal hydration and not being used immediately after a workout and consistently used under similar conditions. A lot of people don't use them as instructed...so even the best electronic impedance device can read way off.
  • BinaryPulsar
    BinaryPulsar Posts: 8,927 Member
    Options
    3. Nobody can really give any kind of informed suggestions because you didn't mention your weight. 31% body fat at 120 pounds is fine for someone 5' tall. 31% body fat at 130 pounds for someone 5' tall would be overweight. Of course, that's assuming that the body fat percentage from your scale is accurate, which it probably isn't.

    Wait, what...? A percent is a percent. Assuming that the # is correct (with any testing method), 31% is on the high end of healthy for any woman, regardless of height or weight. If a woman of a given height loses weight but her BF remains stable, then she has lost equal amounts of fat and muscle and water. If she loses weight and her BF drops, then she can assume that she has lost fat and retained muscle. Body fat percentage ranges are not height-specific. What is overweight/healthy/underweight is the same for a 5' woman as it is for a 6' woman.
    31% is borderline obese for a woman, it's the cutoff between normal and obese. 130 pounds for someone 5' tall is a BMI of over 25, which is in the overweight category. Therefore, someone with a borderline body fat percentage at a healthy weight per BMI is fine, but someone with a borderline body fat percentage with an overweight BMI should probably work on losing a few more pounds of fat. Not everyone is healthy at the high end of the range, just like not everyone is healthy at the low end of the range. That's why there is a range, to account for various builds and body types.

    BMI ≠ body fat. Read what you said above. You claimed above that the same woman with the SAME bodyfat % was healthy at one weight, but not another. If she is heavier, but is also carrying more muscle (which would explain higher weight and same BF %), then she will only appear "overweight" based upon BMI (which could in theory happen if she put on a ton of muscle). Her bodyfat % is still healthy. Height still has 0 bearing on body fat percentage. This is why it's a percent.

    No to mention being small and overfat is a bigger health risk

    How so?

    Also, people often do the math wrong. A person at a low weight and 15% body fat has less muscle and less fat than someone at a higher weight with 15% body fat. Most people think only the muscle changes. But, that is a misunderstanding of math. I'm just using 15 as an example.
  • BinaryPulsar
    BinaryPulsar Posts: 8,927 Member
    Options
    I think those scales are crap. Mine shows a ridiculously low body fat percent for me at like 18%. There is no way I'm that low since I'm not muscular at all. It would be nice though.

    As someone else said, the weight is accurate on the scale. I only really look at that. I don't think there is any good way to really measure body fat percent.

    Yeah, most people don't realize that looking in the mirror is more accurate than those scales. If a person is over fat, they will see excess fat on their body, not firm, defined, muscles and a slender body. Common sense is a good thing.
  • Emma_Problema
    Emma_Problema Posts: 422 Member
    Options
    Honey, I hate to break it to you, but if you really are at a healthy weight, your breasts are not made of fat. Breasts are made of breast tissue and can often be surrounded by fat. The more fat stored, the more fat on the boobies. That's why some people lose weight in their chest area and others don't. It depends on how much breast tissue you have initially, which is genetic. I've fluctuated 30 lbs and my boobs haven't changed. It's because they aren't fat.

    Also, I'm in the same boat at about 31% bf based on calculators on the internet. Ones that I trust. And if you look at my pics I would hardly say I'm really "fat". But I have a bit more body fat than I'd like. Also, the categories don't go from "normal" to "obese". Just because you're a little over doesn't turn you from normal into an obese person. It means you have a little excess fat for desirable health. Don't worry about it. Just lift and run and bring your body fat down. And really, don't get mad if someone insinuates that you're "fat". You shouldn't ever have to defend your body. Especially not to someone on the internet.

    I'd also like to point out that BMI was created to roughtly estimate a person's body fat based on weight and height....well not even that as it wasn't created for individuals, but it's how we use it now. Therefore arguments about what your BMI is if you know your body fat percentage are completely irrelevant. The person who is telling you that your BMI makes a difference between whether you should lose weight or not if you already know your body fat % has no idea what they're talking about. People who rely on BMI are often talking out of their *kitten*.

    All this being said, screw numbers. Base your ideal weight or body fat % on how you look and feel. All the rest is bull$hit.
  • victoria4321
    victoria4321 Posts: 1,719 Member
    Options
    3. Nobody can really give any kind of informed suggestions because you didn't mention your weight. 31% body fat at 120 pounds is fine for someone 5' tall. 31% body fat at 130 pounds for someone 5' tall would be overweight. Of course, that's assuming that the body fat percentage from your scale is accurate, which it probably isn't.

    Wait, what...? A percent is a percent. Assuming that the # is correct (with any testing method), 31% is on the high end of healthy for any woman, regardless of height or weight. If a woman of a given height loses weight but her BF remains stable, then she has lost equal amounts of fat and muscle and water. If she loses weight and her BF drops, then she can assume that she has lost fat and retained muscle. Body fat percentage ranges are not height-specific. What is overweight/healthy/underweight is the same for a 5' woman as it is for a 6' woman.
    31% is borderline obese for a woman, it's the cutoff between normal and obese. 130 pounds for someone 5' tall is a BMI of over 25, which is in the overweight category. Therefore, someone with a borderline body fat percentage at a healthy weight per BMI is fine, but someone with a borderline body fat percentage with an overweight BMI should probably work on losing a few more pounds of fat. Not everyone is healthy at the high end of the range, just like not everyone is healthy at the low end of the range. That's why there is a range, to account for various builds and body types.

    BMI ≠ body fat. Read what you said above. You claimed above that the same woman with the SAME bodyfat % was healthy at one weight, but not another. If she is heavier, but is also carrying more muscle (which would explain higher weight and same BF %), then she will only appear "overweight" based upon BMI (which could in theory happen if she put on a ton of muscle). Her bodyfat % is still healthy. Height still has 0 bearing on body fat percentage. This is why it's a percent.

    No to mention being small and overfat is a bigger health risk

    How so?

    Also, people often do the math wrong. A person at a low weight and 15% body fat has less muscle and less fat than someone at a higher weight with 15% body fat. Most people think only the muscle changes. But, that is a misunderstanding of math. I'm just using 15 as an example.

    Look up "obesity paradox". For some unknown reason when obese people develope chronic diseases caused by being fat their survival outcome is a lot better and so is their recovery. An obese type 2 diabetic does much better in treatment than a normal weight type 2. The big issue for the smaller people is being overfat gives them the same health risks for diseases that overweight people get since they're metabolically unhealthy but lifestyle changes don't help as much.
  • Jeneba
    Jeneba Posts: 699 Member
    Options
    Sorry for the bad news but..... I am 5'1" and at 100 lbs my body fat is around 22%, so while I think the scale may be erring on the high side, it doesn't seem all that unreasonable to me. After my injury, I am about 105 to 107 lbs (weighing in right now would just make me morbid because I have only yesterday been given the OK to go back to the gym) & I would expect my body fat to be around 25% or higher.... This is just the way I am made. Like you, I eat a low fat non-processed lacto-ovo vegetarian diet. When I am not injured, I do 1/2 hour of cardio 6 days a week, abs for at least 10 minutes every day, heavy lifting 3 days a week.

    I guess the point is..... we should always strive to be healthy and trim, but we need to stop comparing ourselves in pernicious ways to other people....

    :heart:
  • zoom2
    zoom2 Posts: 934 Member
    Options
    Here's a perfect illustration of why the same woman with the same body fat percentage is likely to be healthier at the heavier weight:
    http://www.leighpeele.com/body-fat-pictures-and-percentages (scroll to the bottom)

    Even at relatively high body fat a lot of us have blood work that tells a different story than our exterior and body fat % would suggest. My most recent lipids profile was done when I was 20#s overweight and easily 27% body fat.
    Cholesterol: 154
    HDL: 70
    LDL: 77
    Triglycerides: 36
    BP is generally ~ 100-110/60-70

    Those #s were during marathon training during a year when I logged >1800 miles. There are a LOT of low body fat folks who can't touch that.
  • tigersword
    tigersword Posts: 8,059 Member
    Options
    Honey, I hate to break it to you, but if you really are at a healthy weight, your breasts are not made of fat. Breasts are made of breast tissue and can often be surrounded by fat. The more fat stored, the more fat on the boobies. That's why some people lose weight in their chest area and others don't. It depends on how much breast tissue you have initially, which is genetic. I've fluctuated 30 lbs and my boobs haven't changed. It's because they aren't fat.

    Also, I'm in the same boat at about 31% bf based on calculators on the internet. Ones that I trust. And if you look at my pics I would hardly say I'm really "fat". But I have a bit more body fat than I'd like. Also, the categories don't go from "normal" to "obese". Just because you're a little over doesn't turn you from normal into an obese person. It means you have a little excess fat for desirable health. Don't worry about it. Just lift and run and bring your body fat down. And really, don't get mad if someone insinuates that you're "fat". You shouldn't ever have to defend your body. Especially not to someone on the internet.

    I'd also like to point out that BMI was created to roughtly estimate a person's body fat based on weight and height....well not even that as it wasn't created for individuals, but it's how we use it now. Therefore arguments about what your BMI is if you know your body fat percentage are completely irrelevant. The person who is telling you that your BMI makes a difference between whether you should lose weight or not if you already know your body fat % has no idea what they're talking about. People who rely on BMI are often talking out of their *kitten*.

    All this being said, screw numbers. Base your ideal weight or body fat % on how you look and feel. All the rest is bull$hit.
    tigerpalm.jpg
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3066051/
    Shows people with BMI's higher than 25 have a higher risk of death, regardless of body fat percentage. Meta analysis performed on 19 long term studies, with 1.5 million subjects.

    http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0033308
    Study (just published a few months back) shows that BMI generally UNDERESTIMATES body fat levels on the average American, study conducted on 14,000 people.

    As for the "obesity paradox," here's an abstract of a review that puts forth the hypothesis that the paradox is more a cause of medical advances than any specific protective ability of obesity.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23017304

    I mean, if you're going to tell me I have no idea what I'm talking about, you should at least have some scientific information to prove your point, rather than baseless insults.
  • nexangelus
    nexangelus Posts: 2,080 Member
    Options
    While the most accurate measurements are the most expensive, there is the caliper method which might be slightly more accurate than the scales. I use calipers to measure my "rolls" each month. I am happy with how this is progressing. I have heard the scales are not the best method to use.
  • Aviva92
    Aviva92 Posts: 2,333 Member
    Options
    Someone can be 110lbs and be 30% bodyfat. Its common when someone does a lot of cardio and no resistance training.

    if someone is 110 and 30% bodyfat, but not short, then i'm calling bull**** on bodyfat % meaning jack ****. seems like a great way to shame thin people though. also, i don't know that any method of measuring body fat % is all that accurate to begin with. i'll stick to BMI.
  • Capt_Apollo
    Capt_Apollo Posts: 9,026 Member
    Options
    I'm sorry you wasted your money on that scale. They are a scam (ask any scientist...a real scientist). They give you a number, but it is not your body fat %. Possibly it tests how sweaty you are. But, that scale is scientifically impossible to do what it claims to do. You should not be basing medical decisions or how you feel about yourself on that scale. It's no better than a carnival fortune telling machine. Just the fact that it has an athlete and non-athlete setting should be a big clue to anyone that it is nonsense.

    this
  • Aviva92
    Aviva92 Posts: 2,333 Member
    Options
    I'd also like to point out that BMI was created to roughtly estimate a person's body fat based on weight and height....well not even that as it wasn't created for individuals, but it's how we use it now. Therefore arguments about what your BMI is if you know your body fat percentage are completely irrelevant. The person who is telling you that your BMI makes a difference between whether you should lose weight or not if you already know your body fat % has no idea what they're talking about. People who rely on BMI are often talking out of their *kitten*.

    I guess I'm the person who you say is talking out of my *kitten*. She doesn't know her body fat percent in the first place for your argument to make any sense. Those scales for body fat % are crap. I sort of think that the tape measure method is crap too though. The only measurement that someone knows for sure is weight.
  • AZKristi
    AZKristi Posts: 1,801 Member
    Options
    25-30% is considered healthy for young women, so you really are pretty close that.

    Based on your size, I suspect that gaining just a few pounds of muscle would lower your BF% into that range. If I was at that point in my journey, I would be eating at maintenance and doing lots of weight lifting and high intensity interval training to increase lean body mass. Just make sure you are getting enough protein and all of the essential amino acids. If you are not opposed to milk protein, try a post-workout shake with a good whey protein and almond milk.
  • missmegan831
    missmegan831 Posts: 824 Member
    Options
    Try using calipers or tape measure and see what results you get from that. Your bra size shouldn't matter with those tests.

    Well said Victoria!!! I agree... I had a scale like that say I was 39% body fat and when I went and got measured turned out I was 31% so I think using calipers or a tape measure would give you more accurate results.
  • emtjmac
    emtjmac Posts: 1,320 Member
    Options
    I don't trust any readings from digital scales. I've used a $10 analog scale from Walmart for the last 74 pounds and I've been happy with it.
  • Aviva92
    Aviva92 Posts: 2,333 Member
    Options
    I don't trust any readings from digital scales. I've used a $10 analog scale from Walmart for the last 74 pounds and I've been happy with it.

    for weight, my digital scale seems very accurate. it gives me pretty much exactly the same number as the doctors scale at my gym, but i like that it does it in 1/5th of a pound increments.

Categories