How accurate are calipers and does this look like 24%bodyfat?

Options
2»

Replies

  • MarkusDarwath
    MarkusDarwath Posts: 393 Member
    Options
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    No way...24% BF on a male is overweight and almost obese...25% is considered obese and the OP doesn't look obese to me.

    Actually, there is no "overweight" category with body fat measurements. You are either obese (which simply means over-fat and at increased health risk) or not.

    OP: I would guesstimate your BF% at 20 or a bit under based on that pic. Mind you, visual guesstimates are the least accurate, especially from untrained random internet people :) A major consideration is that we can only see your abs/lower chest and arms in that picture. If you carry your subcutaneous fat more in your legs, that can throw your average (and no, women aren't the only ones with that tendency. Men are more likely to carry in our bellies, but most often that is also more likely to be visceral fat as well.) You appear to be in very good 'regular person' shape.

  • Aaron_K123
    Aaron_K123 Posts: 7,122 Member
    edited February 2018
    Options
    I am not claiming that my method of tracking bodyfat % was necessarily the most accurate (I had my wife using calipers on me) but if you look at the pictures under my profile I had estimated my bf% as being ~24% in the Feb 22nd pic and around 18% in the July 28th pic. To me you look much closer to my July 28th than to my Feb 22nd.

    3b3c87e999bc0879b0238c6af77022b048a7.jpg
    [img][/img]3b3cfa55b89771d51c82cdb9b441928feb4b.jpg
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,867 Member
    Options
    MarkusDarwath wrote: »
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    No way...24% BF on a male is overweight and almost obese...25% is considered obese and the OP doesn't look obese to me.

    Actually, there is no "overweight" category with body fat measurements. You are either obese (which simply means over-fat and at increased health risk) or not.

    OP: I would guesstimate your BF% at 20 or a bit under based on that pic. Mind you, visual guesstimates are the least accurate, especially from untrained random internet people :) A major consideration is that we can only see your abs/lower chest and arms in that picture. If you carry your subcutaneous fat more in your legs, that can throw your average (and no, women aren't the only ones with that tendency. Men are more likely to carry in our bellies, but most often that is also more likely to be visceral fat as well.) You appear to be in very good 'regular person' shape.

    Yeah..but if 25% is considered obese then it's pretty obvious that 24% would be overweight.
  • PAV8888
    PAV8888 Posts: 13,914 Member
    Options
    +1 that visible stuff looks around/sub 20 and not close to 25.
  • MarkusDarwath
    MarkusDarwath Posts: 393 Member
    Options
    cwolfman13 wrote: »

    Yeah..but if 25% is considered obese then it's pretty obvious that 24% would be overweight.

    "Overweight" would be a subjective visual assessment. Statistically significant increases to health risk begin at 25% (for men). Below that there simply is no verifiable and repeatable difference in health markers to assess a 'less healthy' category. There's just "underweight," "normal," "obese," and "morbidly obese."
  • DevilsFan1
    DevilsFan1 Posts: 342 Member
    Options
    andreascjonsson wrote: »
    According to the navy body fat calculation i got 16% bodyfat instead wich sound way to low XD
    Maybe my genetics just put the fat in unusal places :P

    I think 16 is much closer than 24. While you cannot see your abs distinctly, you're very close;
  • Johnd2000
    Johnd2000 Posts: 198 Member
    Options
    andreascjonsson wrote: »
    According to the navy body fat calculation i got 16% bodyfat instead wich sound way to low XD
    Maybe my genetics just put the fat in unusal places :P

    I measure as 16% by the Navy method. Calipers (7 point) put me as 18.6% and my scales have me as anywhere between 18-19%.

    My conclusion was that the US Navy weren’t in the business of rejecting recruits based on body fat, if they could avoid it.
  • MarkusDarwath
    MarkusDarwath Posts: 393 Member
    Options
    Johnd2000 wrote: »
    andreascjonsson wrote: »
    According to the navy body fat calculation i got 16% bodyfat instead wich sound way to low XD
    Maybe my genetics just put the fat in unusal places :P

    I measure as 16% by the Navy method. Calipers (7 point) put me as 18.6% and my scales have me as anywhere between 18-19%.

    My conclusion was that the US Navy weren’t in the business of rejecting recruits based on body fat, if they could avoid it.

    The biggest flaw with the navy formula is the neck measurement. It uses the assumption that the neck is one of the leanest parts of the body, so the thicker your neck is in comparison with your other measurements the more it will reduce your body fat calculation. Those with fat or unusually muscular necks will thus have their body fat underestimated a bit. I would imagine it could also skew high for people with really long and thin necks.

  • StevefromMichigan
    StevefromMichigan Posts: 462 Member
    Options
    andreascjonsson wrote: »
    Hi!

    I recently whent to a PT and measured my bodyfat percentage. He used calipers and said he was experienced with them and apparently i had 24% wich is a letdown and higher than i thought. I know calipers arent perfect but it should be somewhat around that percentage. This is me atmwc3ql11fzb5u.jpgis my self image skewed and im actually at 24% or what does it look like to you?

    I would say around 18%-20% based on the fact that you can see some ab definition.
  • Rayman79
    Rayman79 Posts: 2,009 Member
    Options
    without seeing the whole body it's impossible to get a really good read, as people hold fat in different places/patterns. From the little we can see I'd be more inclined to put you in the high teens though.
  • Lean59man
    Lean59man Posts: 714 Member
    edited February 2018
    Options
    Honestly your bodyfat % may be high because your muscle % is low.

    Hit the weights.

Categories