How accurate is this fat% monitor likely to be ?

Graelwyn75

I saw a personal trainer today for a fitness assessment and he took my height, weight, measurements etc, then used an electrical impedance machine called bodystat 1500 on me to get my bodyfat%, lean mass, water percentage etc. It put me at 12% bodyfat, which is pretty much what the intermittent fasting site estimator put me at, and at a BMR of 1790 calories which I find difficult to believe.

I was 14Ibs lighter this time last year, yet about 17-18% bodyfat. I started doing some weights and strength training about 6 months ago having gained weight anyway from eating poorly.

So, how far off is this machine likely to be ?

http://www.bodystat.com/products/bodystat-1500/

bfinup

If your pictures are an indicator, it's probably pretty close to on point in regards to your body fat. While you may have been lighter with a higher body fat, lifting has increased your bone density and resulted in some muscle growth.

I think you're at too low of a body fat and would probably recommend upping your calories instead if eating at a 20 percent deficit. You won't bulk up, so you won't need to worry about that... Unles you're eating an exhrobanent amount of calories above maintence


Check this article in regards to body fat percentage.
http://www.builtlean.com/2010/08/03/ideal-body-fat-percentage-chart/

shutupandlift13

Bioelectrical impedance results can be very skewed based on water intake, food intake, and just not very accurate in general.

12% is very low for a female. 17-18% might be a healthier BF%. Are you having any issues with your current BF% as far as normal functions of your body are concerned?

Graelwyn75

Bioelectrical impedance results can be very skewed based on water intake, food intake, and just not very accurate in general.

12% is very low for a female. 17-18% might be a healthier BF%. Are you having any issues with your current BF% as far as normal functions of your body are concerned?

No, still get my periods every month. I do get tired a fair bit, due to the intensity of my workouts, presumably. But other than that, no issues really.

BusyRaeNOTBusty

I think you look more than 12% in your profile pictures. Those things aren't great.

shutupandlift13

Bioelectrical impedance results can be very skewed based on water intake, food intake, and just not very accurate in general.

12% is very low for a female. 17-18% might be a healthier BF%. Are you having any issues with your current BF% as far as normal functions of your body are concerned?

No, still get my periods every month. I do get tired a fair bit, due to the intensity of my workouts, presumably. But other than that, no issues really.

That's good to hear. Some women can function at a lower BF% than others, 12% is on the low end of the minimum range.

Graelwyn75

If your pictures are an indicator, it's probably pretty close to on point in regards to your body fat. While you may have been lighter with a higher body fat, lifting has increased your bone density and resulted in some muscle growth.

I think you're at too low of a body fat and would probably recommend upping your calories instead if eating at a 20 percent deficit. You won't bulk up, so you won't need to worry about that... Unles you're eating an exhrobanent amount of calories above maintence


Check this article in regards to body fat percentage.
http://www.builtlean.com/2010/08/03/ideal-body-fat-percentage-chart/

Yes, the trainer wants me to be eating around 2500-3000 or something like that. I have been eating quite a lot actually, in spite of my setting here. I have been consistently over my goal, consuming 2000-2200 calories a day, sometimes as high as 2500. I find myself unable to eat at a deficit since I started strength training. And thanks for the article link, will check into it.

Graelwyn75

I think you look more than 12% in your profile pictures. Those things aren't great.

That is fair enough. I will most likely be using a bodpod and calipers to compare, for more accuracy, though an ex female competitor who is now a trainer at the gym, did not seem surprised by the number herself, a number she was previously when in competition. The only images on my profile, bodywise, from recent times are the last 4, where I am in my gym gear.

BusyRaeNOTBusty

I think you look more than 12% in your profile pictures. Those things aren't great.

That is fair enough. I will most likely be using a bodpod and calipers to compare, for more accuracy, though an ex female competitor who is now a trainer at the gym, did not seem surprised by the number herself, a number she was previously when in competition. The only images on my profile, bodywise, from recent times are the last 4, where I am in my gym gear.

I'm not great judging, I'd guess 15ish (which is a good thing).

Graelwyn75

I think you look more than 12% in your profile pictures. Those things aren't great.

That is fair enough. I will most likely be using a bodpod and calipers to compare, for more accuracy, though an ex female competitor who is now a trainer at the gym, did not seem surprised by the number herself, a number she was previously when in competition. The only images on my profile, bodywise, from recent times are the last 4, where I am in my gym gear.

I'm not great judging, I'd guess 15ish (which is a good thing).

Yes, I definitely like to have accuracy, or as accurate as I can get, so I think multiple methods is probably my best bet.
Thanks for your input

BusyRaeNOTBusty

Why? None of the methods are all that accurate. My bathroom scale tells me 36%. A trainer w/ calipers told me 19%. I'm pretty sure I'm somewhere around 23%.

ahmadfahmy

I saw a personal trainer today for a fitness assessment and he took my height, weight, measurements etc, then used an electrical impedance machine called bodystat 1500 on me to get my bodyfat%, lean mass, water percentage etc. It put me at 12% bodyfat, which is pretty much what the intermittent fasting site estimator put me at, and at a BMR of 1790 calories which I find difficult to believe.

I was 14Ibs lighter this time last year, yet about 17-18% bodyfat. I started doing some weights and strength training about 6 months ago having gained weight anyway from eating poorly.

So, how far off is this machine likely to be ?

http://www.bodystat.com/products/bodystat-1500/

have the personal trainer do the test again using calipers

Graelwyn75

I saw a personal trainer today for a fitness assessment and he took my height, weight, measurements etc, then used an electrical impedance machine called bodystat 1500 on me to get my bodyfat%, lean mass, water percentage etc. It put me at 12% bodyfat, which is pretty much what the intermittent fasting site estimator put me at, and at a BMR of 1790 calories which I find difficult to believe.

I was 14Ibs lighter this time last year, yet about 17-18% bodyfat. I started doing some weights and strength training about 6 months ago having gained weight anyway from eating poorly.

So, how far off is this machine likely to be ?

http://www.bodystat.com/products/bodystat-1500/

have the personal trainer do the test again using calipers

Yes, I plan on getting that done, though probably with one of the resident trainers, and using more than 5 points, preferably.