Weight v Body Fat

52fifi
52fifi Posts: 12 Member
edited December 19 in Health and Weight Loss
Ok general views please... I have just completed a 6 week challenge at my local gym.. and was appalled at the start when I was told my body weight was 12.4 and fat was 40.5% I followed the diet plan and went to HIT Classes and dropped 14 lb to 11.1 and now at 38% body fat (still way to high). I would like to mention that I am 55 and 5'7, and a size 12 but how have i managed to keep that much body fat and should I now be concentrating on getting fitter and trying to lose the body fat and not calorie count.. feel like old school and cant help thinking about the weight numbers.. but to take my body fat down i would need to lose roughly another 15lb which would make me to thin (i think) What does anyone else think??

Replies

  • TavistockToad
    TavistockToad Posts: 35,719 Member
    how was your bodyfat measured?
  • 52fifi
    52fifi Posts: 12 Member
    By a machine (pads attached to hands and feet)
  • tinkerbellang83
    tinkerbellang83 Posts: 9,142 Member
    Bio-Electrical Impedance is not great for accuracy if that's the machine you're talking about, they can be thrown off by hydration, water retention from recent exercise, etc.

    To lose body fat, you need to lose weight, so calorie counting will still help, just a small deficit and some strength training will help improve your body composition over time.
  • paulbrttn
    paulbrttn Posts: 72 Member
    How did they test your body fat? Most methods are pretty inaccurate. For example you started at 172 lb and 40% body fat, so 69lb of fat. You've lost 14lb, if only half of that was fat (allowing for water and muscle loss) that is closer to a 5% reduction than 2%. (Think my numbers are right)
    You're better off going with whether you're happy with the image in the mirror than a number on a scale or inaccurate body fat measurements.
    Kudos on your weight loss.
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    The choice isn't 15lbs of weight loss or lose nothing though. Why not lose 5lbs and reassess?
    Calorie counting is optional to lose weight, it's just a helpful tool to be more accurate.

    While BIA scales aren't terribly accurate generally 4 point commercial grade ones can give a reasonable trend over time is used under consistent and sensible conditions - but often a gym might not be the most consistent of conditions. I wouldn't get hung up on the numbers from any one particular reading as that can simply be a bad data point.
  • DancingMoosie
    DancingMoosie Posts: 8,619 Member
    We used to have a scale at work that estimated bf% and it would tell me I was around 50%bf. It would make me so mad! I was maybe 145lb at 5'3"? Just guessing, but there's no way I was 50%bf. Anyways, just take it with a grain of salt and keep working out and sticking to your deficit.
  • HoneyBadger302
    HoneyBadger302 Posts: 2,085 Member
    Just to be clear, are you weighing in stones?

    Regardless, if you are trying to lose body fat, you will need to be in a calorie deficit.

    Working out and strength training can increase your TDEE, meaning you can eat more and still be in a deficit, and can help you retain muscle, so it's still very worthwhile, but has very little to do with losing fat.

    Losing fat comes from eating less than you burn in a day. Whether you're sitting on your tush all day, or running around like a crazy person dawn to dusk, in order to lose, you must consume less than YOUR body is using.

    At your height and weight, you may find that a 1 pound/week loss is far more sustainable. If you are weighing in stones, losing nearly 18 pounds in 6 weeks isn't sustainable. Some of that may have been water weight and if you changed your diet, excess waste in your system, etc, but I wouldn't plan on that keeping going.

    As for the BF%, I wouldn't hang my hat on that being accurate. You can use it as a trend if done frequently under very similar conditions, but as far as accuracy, nah. Might give you a ballpark, but most of the impedance tests are ballpark at best, and unreliable most of the time.
  • Tacklewasher
    Tacklewasher Posts: 7,122 Member
    HoneyBadger155 wrote: »
    As for the BF%, I wouldn't hang my hat on that being accurate. You can use it as a trend if done frequently under very similar conditions, but as far as accuracy, nah. Might give you a ballpark, but most of the impedance tests are ballpark at best, and unreliable most of the time.

    Damn thing at my gym tells me I'm under 20% BF. Also one you stand on and hold in your hands.

    No frikken way. My home scale (Withings) says I'm 27ish and that is far more believable. Anyway, I'm pretty much ignoring the number.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories