 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsLow CarbWeightWatchers WeightAdviser.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Weight Loss Forum / General Topics / April 2005Body Fat %
Hi all, I was wondering. What is the best way to lower your bodyfat %? I purchased one of those hand held electronic body fat meters and I keep getting about 24%. I am a 36 year old male 6'1, 180lbs. 2 years ago I was 246lbs. I run about 15 miles per week spread over 4 runs. Any suggestions? mark Check out misc.fitness.weights, they discuss these issues all the time. Briefly, the answer is lifting heavy things as well as proper dieting. Your meter's reading is a little surprising to me. i > Hi all, > I was wondering. What is the best way to lower your bodyfat %? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Any suggestions? > mark  Signature223/176.1/180 Now that you say that, I had it checked at a 5k event by a doctor with a pinch tester, he read 14.7%. In my opinion that may be a little low, but more along the lines of correct. Oh well, what do you want for $15. Mark > Check out misc.fitness.weights, they discuss these issues all the > time. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Any suggestions? > > mark > Now that you say that, I had it checked at a 5k event by a doctor with > a pinch tester, he read 14.7%. In my opinion that may be a little > low, but more along the lines of correct. > Oh well, what do you want for $15. That's great (and is as I suspected). 15% usually looks quite nice also... i >> Check out misc.fitness.weights, they discuss these issues all the >> time. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >> > Any suggestions? >> > mark Signature223/176.0/180 > Hi all, > I was wondering. What is the best way to lower your bodyfat %? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Any suggestions? > mark I agree with Ig...at your height and weight, a body fat of 24% sounds kind of high. I suspect your body fat meter may be incorrect. You can use the "Navy" method to compare with your meter. It only requires a couple of body circumference measurements, and should be reasonably accurate. If the Navy method yields a substantially different result, your body fat meter may be defective. FWIW, electronic body fat meters can be influenced by hydration levels, and will give different readings depending on time of day. I've included the Navy method of body fat analysis in the free trial version of my "WeightWare" program (http://www.WeightWare.com), or there's an online version of it here http://www.he.net/%7Ezone/prothd2.html (just ignore that site's odd recommendations for "Ideal" weight). SignatureGG http://www.WeightWare.com Your Weight and Health Diary "> You can use the "Navy" method to compare with your meter. It only requires > a couple of body circumference measurements, and should be reasonably > accurate. If the Navy method yields a substantially different result, > your > body fat meter may be defective. FWIW, electronic body fat meters can be > influenced by hydration levels, and will give different readings depending > on time of day. I still don't understand the weight vs BF relationship, according to the Navy method I have 25% BF & it should be 22%. According to the BMI calcs, I'm not overweight. So I'm not overweight but I'm still fat, how can this be? > "> You can use the "Navy" method to compare with your meter. It only > requires [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > I'm not overweight. So I'm not overweight but I'm still fat, how can this > be? Not sure I understand. What tells you that your body fat should be at 22%? Are you sure you're not confusing body fat percentage with Body Mass Index? The Navy method has a margin of error, like all body fat estimation techniques, which I think is around 3-4%. Try measuring every week or so and taking an average over the month. The Navy method is also quite sensitive to measurement errors, so you need to be careful in how you measure. The specific procedures for taking the measurements can be found in this document: http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/i13083_110502/i13083p.pdf Alternatively, you may simply be a statistical "outlier". If you go to a gym, you can probably get a body fat test using bioelectric impedance, or skin calipers, and compare those results to the Navy method's. FWIW, it's definitely possible to be "normal" per BMI, but have too much body fat...When you look in the mirror, do you see more muscles, or more fat? When you jump up and down naked in front of a mirror, is there a lot of "jiggling" (besides the obvious bits that are supposed to jiggle :-) ). SignatureGG http://www.WeightWare.com Your Weight and Health Diary ">> I still don't understand the weight vs BF relationship, according to the >> Navy method I have 25% BF & it should be 22%. According to the BMI calcs, >> I'm not overweight. So I'm not overweight but I'm still fat, how can this >> be? > Not sure I understand. What tells you that your body fat should be at > 22%? The website where you calculate it using the Navy method says: "Recommended BF% for a woman is 22%." > Are you sure you're not confusing body fat percentage with Body Mass > Index? Not at all, there are no measurements involved in BMI calcs. As it happens, my BMI is currently 22, almost in the middle of the 'healthy' range. > The Navy method has a margin of error, like all body fat estimation > techniques, which I think is around 3-4%. Try measuring every week or so > and taking an average over the month. Good idea. > The Navy method is also quite sensitive to measurement errors, so you need > to be careful in how you measure. The specific procedures for taking the > measurements can be found in this document: > http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/i13083_110502/i13083p.pdf Thanks. I find measuring a little tricky, I'm never sure that I have the tape in the right place, wonder whether it's too tight, etc. It's nowhere near as easy as stepping on a scale ;-) I have thought of buying a scale with BF monitor built-in but I've heard they're not accurate. > Alternatively, you may simply be a statistical "outlier". If you go to a > gym, you can probably get a body fat test using bioelectric impedance, or [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > fat? When you jump up and down naked in front of a mirror, is there a lot > of "jiggling" (besides the obvious bits that are supposed to jiggle :-) ). You've managed what most people haven't: to get me jumping up'n'down naked in front of the mirror ;-) The 'obvious' bits are not too jiggly (or obvious, for that matter), I'm rather skinny on top with a heavy bottom where I see no muscle, just fat ;-( Guess I'll have to keep working on that part ;-) > ">> I still don't understand the weight vs BF relationship, according to the > >> Navy method I have 25% BF & it should be 22%. According to the BMI calcs, [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Good idea. Whether your actual BF is 22 or 25%, that's still a very healthy number. Dr. C. Everett Koop shows 21 - 32% as the recommended range for women 18-39 years old. > > The Navy method is also quite sensitive to measurement errors, so you need > > to be careful in how you measure. The specific procedures for taking the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > I have thought of buying a scale with BF monitor built-in but I've heard > they're not accurate. I have one of the Tanita scales that shows BF. But, it can vary quite a bit (3-5%) depending on time of day and hydration status. It also seems like I'm somewhere between the "normal" and "athlete" settings. In "normal" mode, it shows me a little higher than what the Navy method shows (~13%). On "athlete" mode, it says I'm in single digits (LOL). As long as I pick one mode, and always take the reading around the same time of day it's consistent, so it's a good way to compare over time (even if it's not 100% accurate). > > Alternatively, you may simply be a statistical "outlier". If you go to a > > gym, you can probably get a body fat test using bioelectric impedance, or [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > You've managed what most people haven't: to get me jumping up'n'down naked > in front of the mirror ;-) Camcorder? (whoops....my bad). > The 'obvious' bits are not too jiggly (or obvious, for that matter), I'm > rather skinny on top with a heavy bottom where I see no muscle, just fat ;-( > > Guess I'll have to keep working on that part ;-) With your body fat and BMI readings, it looks like you're already at a healthy weight, but you should be aware of the potential for body dysmorphia - that's where you see "fat" where others don't. Trying too hard for "perfection" can be a starting point for eating and exercise disorders. GG > I have one of the Tanita scales that shows BF. But, it can vary quite a > bit [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > of day it's consistent, so it's a good way to compare over time (even if > it's not 100% accurate). Yes, same principle as with your weight, i.e. consistency more important than accuracy. I'll see how much those Tanitas cost. >> > Alternatively, you may simply be a statistical "outlier". If you go to > a [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Camcorder? (whoops....my bad). Sorry, forgot to switch it on ;-) >> The 'obvious' bits are not too jiggly (or obvious, for that matter), I'm >> rather skinny on top with a heavy bottom where I see no muscle, just fat > ;-( >> >> Guess I'll have to keep working on that part ;-) > With your body fat and BMI readings, it looks like you're already at a > healthy weight, but you should be aware of the potential for body > dysmorphia - that's where you see "fat" where others don't. When I first read 'dysmorphia' I was going to say 'yes, that's it', I thought it meant having a badly proportioned body with all the fat going to one place. >Trying too hard for "perfection" can be a starting point for eating and >exercise disorders. Don't worry, I'm the wrong age for anorexia ;-) > > I have one of the Tanita scales that shows BF. But, it can vary quite a > > bit [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Yes, same principle as with your weight, i.e. consistency more important > than accuracy. I'll see how much those Tanitas cost. My Tanita scale is several years old, but it's similar to this one: http://tinyurl.com/49swe I've been very happy with it, though I don't use the body fat feature very often (I prefer the Navy method, and track my circumference measurements along with the body fat estimate). Most of the Tanita scales are accurate to 0.2 lb, and very consistent when weighing - I can step off, and back on, and usually get the same weight both times (and nearly always get the same weight 2 out of 3 times). There's also a cool-looking scale from Germany that's supposed to be accurate to 0.1 lb, even if you're standing on one foot (http://tinyurl.com/3t6kt ). But, it doesn't have the body fat feature, and it's pretty expensive (like most highly engineered German products). > >> > Alternatively, you may simply be a statistical "outlier". If you go to > > a [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Sorry, forgot to switch it on ;-) Perhaps next time.... ;-). > >> The 'obvious' bits are not too jiggly (or obvious, for that matter), I'm > >> rather skinny on top with a heavy bottom where I see no muscle, just fat [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Don't worry, I'm the wrong age for anorexia ;-) Although it's generally thought of as a disease of the young, that's not necessarily true. I saw a documentary on eating disorders a year or two ago, and one of the people in the program was a 45-year old male who exercised 2-4 hours per day, and was obsessed with eating "healthy". He insisted that he was fat, and needed to lose more weight, even though he looked like a concentration camp survivor. It was strange listening to him describe his own body, as it was so different from what he actually looked like...just goes to show that it really can manifest at nearly any age (and gender). As much as I enjoy being thin (mostly because it helps when cycling), I could never do the anorexia thing...that would mean giving up chocolate, and without that I don't think life would be worth living. Family and friends know that if I ever lose interest in chocolate, or become interested in golf, an intervention is warranted :-). GG Gary, Thanks for the tips, I'm looking at the URLs for the scales. Oh, and I still like chocolate ;-) >> > I have one of the Tanita scales that shows BF. But, it can vary quite >> > a [quoted text clipped - 102 lines] > > GG Ok, after doing the "Navy" Method I calculated to be at 17.68. The doctor at the 5k event pinched a 14.7% and my "Navy" calculation of 17.68%. I guess my meter is off a bit. I remember the doctor saying that all of the different ways of calculating will give you a different number, and to just stick with one method of measuring to see your progress. Thanks to all. Mark > Ok, after doing the "Navy" Method I calculated to be at 17.68. > The doctor at the 5k event pinched a 14.7% and my "Navy" calculation of > 17.68%. I guess my meter is off a bit. I remember the doctor saying that > all of the different ways of calculating will give you a different number, > and to just stick with one method of measuring to see your progress. I would suggest to return the device back to the store, if you can. It is too inaccurate to have any value. Signature223/176.0/180 >Hi all, >I was wondering. What is the best way to lower your bodyfat %? Good question! Some experts say that the best method is through diet. Others say exercise. Still other say a combination of diet and exercise. Some say 'cardio' and some say 'resistance'. I think the simple truth is that they all work, but what works *best* probably depends on the individual. >I purchased one of those hand held electronic body fat meters and I >keep getting about 24%. I am a 36 year old male 6'1, 180lbs. 2 years >ago I was 246lbs. I run about 15 miles per week spread over 4 runs. >Any suggestions? >mark Note that those little hand-held analyzers are notoriously in-accurate. Better would be a Tanita or Phoenix body fat scale (unless you are an athlete)... but you need to follow their directions for measuring body fat precisely to get an accurate reading (ie. hydration, exercise, eating, time of day are all factors - the instructions with the scale tell you when best to take your reading ). |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.