Dilemma re body fat percentage

Options
So, I've been tracking my body fat using the Fitbit Aria scale for the past 3 months. In my journey, I've gone from 29%BF to 25%BF.

I recently bought SlimGuide Calipers and they brought my BF to 33.5%. I know Calipers are more accurate.

Here's the dilemma, what do I do!? Which do I use?! There's a significant difference between them! One puts me in average, and the other above average.
«1

Replies

  • Firefly0606
    Firefly0606 Posts: 366 Member
    Options
    You could try taking your measurements with a tape measure and using a body fat calculator based on measurements?
  • Merkavar
    Merkavar Posts: 3,082 Member
    Options
    Are calipers even that accurate.

    They all seem like estimates.

    I would probably go with the scale just because you have 3 months worth of data.

    But have you looked at those bf% example images. Do you look like 25% or 35%?
  • heybales
    heybales Posts: 18,842 Member
    Options
    Calipers in the hands of an experienced trained person using 7-site method are more accurate, as long as the same level of hydrated body is presented to them.

    You experienced and trained in using them?
    Are you using 7 site method?

    Not accurate, easily at best 10% accuracy, likely worse.

    Which means it overlaps with the 10% accuracy of your scale too.

    Alls good.

    As mentioned above - use measurement method too, and then average all these 5-10% accurate methods together.

    Use the spreadsheet on my profile page - Weight loss calculator.
    Has Bodyfat calc that does exactly that, 2 measurement methods, place to put the scale reading, and skinfold measurements - averages them all together.
    Then a Progress tab to track the progress.
  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    Options
    heybales wrote: »
    Calipers in the hands of an experienced trained person using 7-site method are more accurate, as long as the same level of hydrated body is presented to them.

    You experienced and trained in using them?
    Are you using 7 site method?

    Not accurate, easily at best 10% accuracy, likely worse.

    Which means it overlaps with the 10% accuracy of your scale too.

    Alls good.

    As mentioned above - use measurement method too, and then average all these 5-10% accurate methods together.

    Use the spreadsheet on my profile page - Weight loss calculator.
    Has Bodyfat calc that does exactly that, 2 measurement methods, place to put the scale reading, and skinfold measurements - averages them all together.
    Then a Progress tab to track the progress.

    ^^^ this
  • terbusha
    terbusha Posts: 1,483 Member
    Options
    Either way, it sounds like you're still trying to reduce your body fat %, so I would continue along that path. At a point, I think that going off of what you see in the mirror/progress pics is more important than a number from calipers or a scale. You're doing great, so keep on going!
  • editorgrrl
    editorgrrl Posts: 7,060 Member
    Options
    I've had a Fitbit Aria wifi scale for a couple of years, and it's very inaccurate. It sends a pulse up one leg and down the other, then guesstimates your upper body.

    All that matters is a downward trend. I weigh daily and sync my Fitbit account with Trendweight.com (it's free, and syncs with Withings, too).
  • baybeejulia
    baybeejulia Posts: 218 Member
    Options
    You could try taking your measurements with a tape measure and using a body fat calculator based on measurements?

    Thanks for that! I do have my measurements taken at the gym for progress purposes and I think they're good to compare along the track, like pictures.
  • baybeejulia
    baybeejulia Posts: 218 Member
    Options
    Merkavar wrote: »
    Are calipers even that accurate.

    They all seem like estimates.

    I would probably go with the scale just because you have 3 months worth of data.

    But have you looked at those bf% example images. Do you look like 25% or 35%?

    I might stick with the scale only cos it's easier, but I won't rely on it for accuracy lol. Just to show a loss.

    Tbh I feel I like more like I'm in the 30s than the 20s.
  • baybeejulia
    baybeejulia Posts: 218 Member
    Options
    heybales wrote: »
    Calipers in the hands of an experienced trained person using 7-site method are more accurate, as long as the same level of hydrated body is presented to them.

    You experienced and trained in using them?
    Are you using 7 site method?

    Not accurate, easily at best 10% accuracy, likely worse.

    Which means it overlaps with the 10% accuracy of your scale too.

    Alls good.

    As mentioned above - use measurement method too, and then average all these 5-10% accurate methods together.

    Use the spreadsheet on my profile page - Weight loss calculator.
    Has Bodyfat calc that does exactly that, 2 measurement methods, place to put the scale reading, and skinfold measurements - averages them all together.
    Then a Progress tab to track the progress.

    That's awesome thank you. Will definitely pop over to your profile page and download that.

    I guess exact body fat shouldn't really matter. You should just know whereabouts you are and aim for a downward trend.
  • baybeejulia
    baybeejulia Posts: 218 Member
    Options
    Also my husband did it for me, we did a 4 site test and we both have no experience whatsoever lol.
  • baybeejulia
    baybeejulia Posts: 218 Member
    Options
    terbusha wrote: »
    Either way, it sounds like you're still trying to reduce your body fat %, so I would continue along that path. At a point, I think that going off of what you see in the mirror/progress pics is more important than a number from calipers or a scale. You're doing great, so keep on going!

    Thanks, you're right! I'll rely more on pictures and tape measurements to gauge my progress.
  • baybeejulia
    baybeejulia Posts: 218 Member
    Options
    editorgrrl wrote: »
    I've had a Fitbit Aria wifi scale for a couple of years, and it's very inaccurate. It sends a pulse up one leg and down the other, then guesstimates your upper body.

    All that matters is a downward trend. I weigh daily and sync my Fitbit account with Trendweight.com (it's free, and syncs with Withings, too).

    Yea km starting to realise how inaccurate it is lol. I use trend weight too thanks to you :-)
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    Options
    What are you trying to accomplish?
  • hrhboo
    hrhboo Posts: 22 Member
    Options
    Merkavar wrote: »
    I would probably go with the scale just because you have 3 months worth of data.

    But have you looked at those bf% example images. Do you look like 25% or 35%?

    I'd go with the scales too. Making comparisons to images of others with the same body fat % unfortunately doesn't work so well because it doesn't take into account the % of lean muscle mass, water, bone mass, body composition etc.

    fnosg1q6exhl.jpg
  • PAV8888
    PAV8888 Posts: 13,867 Member
    Options
    @Haybales, whom I respect, says 10% accuracy for the scale.

    To me 10% off of a, say, 25% reading, means that in reality I could be anywhere from 22.5% to 27.5%. All kewl and useful.

    But, am starting to think that in the body fat % measurement world 10% accuracy for a 25% reading means being between 15% and 35%.

    Eyeballing is already way more accurate than that!

    I can attest that per DXA scan the scales for me are accurate to 10% as per the second definition, and therefore useless @ 100% ;-)
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    Options
    He means 10 %age points. So 15 to 35.
  • baybeejulia
    baybeejulia Posts: 218 Member
    edited July 2015
    Options
    Mr_Knight wrote: »
    What are you trying to accomplish?

    A lean body with visible muscles.
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    @Haybales, whom I respect, says 10% accuracy for the scale.

    To me 10% off of a, say, 25% reading, means that in reality I could be anywhere from 22.5% to 27.5%. All kewl and useful.

    But, am starting to think that in the body fat % measurement world 10% accuracy for a 25% reading means being between 15% and 35%.

    Eyeballing is already way more accurate than that!

    I can attest that per DXA scan the scales for me are accurate to 10% as per the second definition, and therefore useless @ 100% ;-)

    Yes! I want a DEXA. Hopefully getting one soon.
    hrhboo wrote: »
    Merkavar wrote: »
    I would probably go with the scale just because you have 3 months worth of data.

    But have you looked at those bf% example images. Do you look like 25% or 35%?

    I'd go with the scales too. Making comparisons to images of others with the same body fat % unfortunately doesn't work so well because it doesn't take into account the % of lean muscle mass, water, bone mass, body composition etc.

    fnosg1q6exhl.jpg

    Hmm, if that's the case I should be seeing some nice muscle definition coming through soon enough as I continue to lift.
  • Liftng4Lis
    Liftng4Lis Posts: 15,150 Member
    Options
    hrhboo wrote: »
    Merkavar wrote: »
    I would probably go with the scale just because you have 3 months worth of data.

    But have you looked at those bf% example images. Do you look like 25% or 35%?

    I'd go with the scales too. Making comparisons to images of others with the same body fat % unfortunately doesn't work so well because it doesn't take into account the % of lean muscle mass, water, bone mass, body composition etc.

    fnosg1q6exhl.jpg

    I'll take the first one, thanks!
  • MaggieLoo79
    MaggieLoo79 Posts: 288 Member
    Options
    My Aria puts my BBF% higher than what I was calculating with my measurements. Also, my hydration level can affect the Aria measurement as much as 7%. I'm just using it to show trends now. I don't trust it. :'(
  • baybeejulia
    baybeejulia Posts: 218 Member
    Options
    Well I am really excited! I have booked my DEXA scan tonight and I cannot wait for my true BF% haha!