Body Fat %
Replies
-
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »JeffseekingV wrote: »I'm not rich so I can't afford to have multiple DEXA scans done at $150 a pop. I'd probably advocate ONE scan and then immediately do a bioimpedence scale, calipers, hand held bioimpedence etc... then compare the two for reference.
It's not really the accuracy perse as long as it's consistent. If it's consistent, then the DELTA change in bodyfat is what is important.
When the reliability of these scales is in question even the delta is not a great measure. Tape measures and callipers are reliable. Also note that when reliability is in question you have no external validity. For cost, tape measures and callipers win every time.
They might not give an accurate absolute reading but as long as they are consistent in their error, that's fine with me.
I've stepped on the scale like 3-4 times in a week and it showed about the same BF%0 -
-
JeffseekingV wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »JeffseekingV wrote: »I'm not rich so I can't afford to have multiple DEXA scans done at $150 a pop. I'd probably advocate ONE scan and then immediately do a bioimpedence scale, calipers, hand held bioimpedence etc... then compare the two for reference.
It's not really the accuracy perse as long as it's consistent. If it's consistent, then the DELTA change in bodyfat is what is important.
When the reliability of these scales is in question even the delta is not a great measure. Tape measures and callipers are reliable. Also note that when reliability is in question you have no external validity. For cost, tape measures and callipers win every time.
They might not give an accurate absolute reading but as long as they are consistent in their error, that's fine with me.
I've stepped on the scale like 3-4 times in a week and it showed about the same BF%
That's more consistent than I've got with my scale. They tend to be affected by things such as hydration levels, temperature and sweat. I stopped using my scale's BI a while ago since I knew it had me off by over 8% BF. It's not life of death but being an engineer I really like having tools that are properly calibrated.0 -
If you had that problem, then yeah I'd probably switch. Which calipers/method have you used?0
-
don't rely on a home scale for that. not accurate.0
-
JeffseekingV wrote: »If you had that problem, then yeah I'd probably switch. Which calipers/method have you used?
I have the GNC calipers and I use the Navy method for tape. Navy method has me slightly higher than the calipers. The only problem with the calipers is that you need to be consistent and know the right spot but if you grab a trainer at the gym they should be able to help you for free.
The Navy method can be found here: fitness.bizcalcs.com/Calculator.asp?Calc=Body-Fat-Navy0 -
I got a EatSmart Precision scale that differentiates between athletic and non-athletic readings. The non-athletic setting says I'm at 23% and the athletic one says 16.9% I had a BodPod test done and came in at 16.3%, so I'm pretty satisfied with that scale. (I know that both tests may not be totally correct, but they're both close enough for me to have a trend to track.)0
-
This content has been removed.
-
Calipers are really the only way to go. They are the accurate (for home use) and so cheap that there is no good excuse to not use them.
I have one of those silly scales that supposedly measure a million things. It says 10.5% while the calipers say 7%.0 -
__drmerc__ wrote: »My DEXA and handheld bf impedance thingie were within 1-2%
I don't think they are as inaccurate as most here lead you to believe
I agree.They might not be 100% accurate but they (at least mine) are pretty good.0 -
squirrelone wrote: »Calipers are really the only way to go. They are the accurate (for home use) and so cheap that there is no good excuse to not use them.
I have one of those silly scales that supposedly measure a million things. It says 10.5% while the calipers say 7%.
How do you know which is accurate?0 -
This content has been removed.
-
__drmerc__ wrote: »My DEXA and handheld bf impedance thingie were within 1-2%
I don't think they are as inaccurate as most here lead you to believe
That is good. Is it new? My scale is about 10 years old.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
__drmerc__ wrote: »My DEXA and handheld bf impedance thingie were within 1-2%
I don't think they are as inaccurate as most here lead you to believe
It depends on how close you are to the models they have programmed into the algorithm. If you are close to what they have, and on the top or bottom since electricity takes the path of least resistance, then you will be closer to the gold standard. Those of us who are not within a reasonable distance to their model for age, sex and height will be off considerably.
Here is a paper that shows that BIA tends to be off around the 5% range from DEXA.
jap.physiology.org/content/64/2/529
ETA Note that they seem to use BMI as their fat estimation since they are close to that.0 -
Double.0
-
JeffseekingV wrote: »
How do you know which is accurate?
Calipers are the tried and true method.0 -
squirrelone wrote: »JeffseekingV wrote: »
How do you know which is accurate?
Calipers are the tried and true method.
The paper I linked above shows calipers to be more accurate; however, they use the seven fold test that you normally get at a gym. GNC calipers claim to be within the same level of error or better. Not sure but they do put me closer to the tape measure method than my scale.0 -
squirrelone wrote: »JeffseekingV wrote: »
How do you know which is accurate?
Calipers are the tried and true method.
calipers are only as accurate as the person doing the measurements are. The best way to confirm one of your methods by getting a verified measurement done and compare it to your methods.
If you are really 7.5%, post a picture, I'd really like to see that.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
JeffseekingV wrote: »squirrelone wrote: »JeffseekingV wrote: »
How do you know which is accurate?
Calipers are the tried and true method.
calipers are only as accurate as the person doing the measurements are. The best way to confirm one of your methods by getting a verified measurement done and compare it to your methods.
If you are really 7.5%, post a picture, I'd really like to see that.
You are correct, calipers can be an issue if you don't do them properly since even a small move can make a difference. That's why I use both tape and calipers. I generally get about 0.5 - 1% higher on tape.0 -
__drmerc__ wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »__drmerc__ wrote: »My DEXA and handheld bf impedance thingie were within 1-2%
I don't think they are as inaccurate as most here lead you to believe
It depends on how close you are to the models they have programmed into the algorithm. If you are close to what they have, and on the top or bottom since electricity takes the path of least resistance, then you will be closer to the gold standard. Those of us who are not within a reasonable distance to their model for age, sex and height will be off considerably.
Here is a paper that shows that BIA tends to be off around the 5% range from DEXA.
jap.physiology.org/content/64/2/529
ETA Note that they seem to use BMI as their fat estimation since they are close to that.
Study shows exactly what I said, about 1-2%. Did you even read it? or just not understand it?
"The BIA, skinfold fat, and hydrostatic methods were all found to be reliable (Rxx = 0.957–0.987) with standard errors ranging from 0.9 to 1.5% fat"
" The standard errors of estimate for the two BIA models ranged from 4.6 to 6.4% fat compared with 2.6 and 3.6% fat for the sigma 7 equations. "
Oh, sorry, I was skimming. Good catch I normally don't mistake those measurements.
ETA I also believe that was the tetrapolar since it is more accurate than LL HH methods.0 -
JeffseekingV wrote: »calipers are only as accurate as the person doing the measurements are.
This is very true. Which is why I would always advise getting someone who knows what they are doing, to help.0 -
Is this something where YMMV or is my scale just really inaccurate?0
-
Is this something where YMMV or is my scale just really inaccurate?
It depends on how close you are to the models in the algorithm used. This is why certain people find them more inaccurate than others.
Here is an article that explains a bit more about the different types and their accuracies.
formulamedical.com/fORMULA%20FOR%20LIFE/measurement&diaries/BIA.htm0 -
0
-
I can lose weight slowly and have taken off lots of body inches. Body Fat % barely reduces in comparision to those metrics....
Once a month the nutritionist uses a Tanita scale at the women's studio. I just keep eating well and know it will all come together over time.0 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »JeffseekingV wrote: »I'm not rich so I can't afford to have multiple DEXA scans done at $150 a pop. I'd probably advocate ONE scan and then immediately do a bioimpedence scale, calipers, hand held bioimpedence etc... then compare the two for reference.
It's not really the accuracy perse as long as it's consistent. If it's consistent, then the DELTA change in bodyfat is what is important.
When the reliability of these scales is in question even the delta is not a great measure. Tape measures and callipers are reliable. Also note that when reliability is in question you have no external validity. For cost, tape measures and callipers win every time.
I don't think these scales are accurate, even for a point of reference. I have lost nearly 30 lbs and 3 dress sizes, but according to the scale, my body fat % hasn't changed. I just don't pay any attention to that #. I go mostly by my tape measure and how my clothes fit.
0 -
There may be better BI scales than the one I have, but I know mine is absurdly inaccurate. The biggest influence on its reading is how wet my feet are. When they're dry, sometimes the scale doesn't even get a reading, and if it does, it's something ridiculous like 55%. When my feet are nice and wet, after a shower, it's much closer to what calipers tell me (21% - 22%), but even then the scale isn't consistent. One day it's 23%, next day it's 25%. And if I wait five minutes it's 30%. Nuts!0
-
JeffseekingV wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »JeffseekingV wrote: »I'm not rich so I can't afford to have multiple DEXA scans done at $150 a pop. I'd probably advocate ONE scan and then immediately do a bioimpedence scale, calipers, hand held bioimpedence etc... then compare the two for reference.
It's not really the accuracy perse as long as it's consistent. If it's consistent, then the DELTA change in bodyfat is what is important.
When the reliability of these scales is in question even the delta is not a great measure. Tape measures and callipers are reliable. Also note that when reliability is in question you have no external validity. For cost, tape measures and callipers win every time.
They might not give an accurate absolute reading but as long as they are consistent in their error, that's fine with me.
I've stepped on the scale like 3-4 times in a week and it showed about the same BF%
Same with me--its trending downward. I had mine done with calipers at the gym and it was 18%. My scale for the last 2 weeks(I just got it) has been between 22 and 21% every day and it is trending down. I am getting it done at my gym with calipers Friday,so that will give me a better frame of reference.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions