Proof the scale/BMI LIES!
I felt like posting my example of why the scale/BMI LIES based on body fat percentage. I had my body fat % done this week.
Female, 22, 5’0” 137.4 pounds, 23% body fat, 31.6pounds fat mass, 105.8pounds lean mass
Now for someone who’s short, 137 pounds at 5’0 seems like a lot considering my BMI is almost 27 ‘overweight’. Based on BMI weight someone 5’0 should be around 97 to 127 pounds. I’ve previous had a goal weight of 115, close to the middle. But the Women Ranges for body fat % are:
Essential: 10-12%, Athletes: 14-20%, Fitness:21-24%, Overweight: 25-31%
Hey look I'm in Fitness range! So let’s look at the goal of 115 and how unrealistic that is. I want to keep all my lean mass but I’ll factor in 2 lean pound loss. To drop 20 pounds from fat, I’d be left with 11.6pounds of fat and have a body fat percentage of 10.09%!! That’s almost below what’s essential! Totally unrealistic to be 115 pounds even at 5’0 tall! If I lose 7 pounds I’ll be at 130 pounds and 18% BF. My lowest possible goal is to lose 11 pounds and that would bring me to 126 pounds and 15% BF. Never before getting my body fat % done would I ever of wanted to set a goal as high as 126-130 pounds!
So stop going by a number on a scale ladies! It really does lie! Having this done really put things into perspective for me.
Wow, it's neat to find someone like me. I'm 5 feet tall, 127 pounds, 18% body fat and I have finally stopped fretting over being so heavy. Like you, I got down to 115 for about a year, but even though it was a "healthy" weight for my height, I looked too gaunt and my fat % dropped to 13.5%. I felt fine, but my face looks a bit better with the extra weight and now I'm getting older, I need it.
My measurements are pretty normal too, I think. 35-29-36.
But yeah, I agree, that BMI thing can be sort of tough, even for people who are thinner than normal. I've got skinny friends who look fine even though they're technically underweight. In the end, BMI is a quick check tool, that's all.
how'd you have your bf% tested?
Interesting. I'm 46, 5'1" and weighed 112 this morning. I recently got my body fat tested with calipers and I'm 22%. My Tanita scale was reporting me at 20% so it wasn't too far off.
This is interesting, silverbutterfly. I'm just over 5' 0" and 102 pounds-- yet I have the same body fat % as you! You must be very athletic and muscley! 
I've always been very soft and curvy for my weight (measurements 30 1/2- 23 1/2- 34 1/2, pear shape!)
Original Post by darkylinky:
how'd you have your bf% tested?
I had it done at a Gym by a Personal Trainer. Here, Goodlife does it with a fitness accessment for $25 non member price.
Back in Dec i weighted 125 pounds. I've gained 8 pounds of muscle in 6 months and also 4 pounds of fat. I've been trying to lose weight not gain though but I had a lot of hard times in the first 3 months from Dec. stupid holiday food.
Ya I'm pretty athlectic but as many times as it's stated on CC, girls don't look like the muscley guys! Only thing i really tell is muscular is my quads right above my knees. love it though. I'm so posting before and after pics for when i was skinny fat at 125 and once i lose the 7-11 pounds of fat and weigh more then before but look so much better :D I'm totally an apple shape though. My weight seems to be on my stomach.
I also disagree with the women BF% ranges. I think most young women should strive for the athletic range, while the fit range is more reasonable for older women (those who have had children).
anyway, good luck!!
Original Post by silverbutterfly:
I felt like posting my example of why the scale/BMI LIES based on body fat percentage. I had my body fat % done this week.
Female, 22, 5’0” 137.4 pounds, 23% body fat, 31.6pounds fat mass, 105.8pounds lean mass
Now for someone who’s short, 137 pounds at 5’0 seems like a lot considering my BMI is almost 27 ‘overweight’. Based on BMI weight someone 5’0 should be around 97 to 127 pounds. I’ve previous had a goal weight of 115, close to the middle. But the Women Ranges for body fat % are:
Essential: 10-12%, Athletes: 14-20%, Fitness:21-24%, Overweight: 25-31%
Hey look I'm in Fitness range! So let’s look at the goal of 115 and how unrealistic that is. I want to keep all my lean mass but I’ll factor in 2 lean pound loss. To drop 20 pounds from fat, I’d be left with 11.6pounds of fat and have a body fat percentage of 10.09%!! That’s almost below what’s essential! Totally unrealistic to be 115 pounds even at 5’0 tall! If I lose 7 pounds I’ll be at 130 pounds and 18% BF. My lowest possible goal is to lose 11 pounds and that would bring me to 126 pounds and 15% BF. Never before getting my body fat % done would I ever of wanted to set a goal as high as 126-130 pounds!
So stop going by a number on a scale ladies! It really does lie! Having this done really put things into perspective for me.
Why are you even paying any attention to BMI? It's been well publicized for some time that that number is fairly useless. And the body fat number, from scales, has never been 100% accurate- you are only supposed to use it as a RELATIVE number, to measure change. Sounds like you were placing to high a value on those numbers in the first place.
Wow lol. Seriously don't ever listen to the BMI, always get ur BF checked...then decide if u really are fat or not.
I'm 145lbs, and 5 5, so my BMI ia 24.1 which is almost overweight, but still in the normal range. However, i have had my BF checked every year for wrestling, and it is always from 10-12 percent, or in the athletic zone for men. I have a friend on the team who is 5 3 and 155. BMI puts him at overweight. Guess what...he is 7 percent fat...less than me, even tho the BMI says hes fat and im not. doesnt make sense.
Arnold had a BMI of 29 (as well as many other athletes) when he was in his prime bodybuilding days...almost OBESE according to BMI standards. Yet his bodyfat was less than 6 % at times.
The BMI scale is designed as an indicator of health & lifestyle. For 99% of people (the ones that aren't professional athletes or body-builders) an overweight BMI (>25) is usually an indication that they eat too much, have a poor diet and/or don't move around enough.
You're not 'healthy' at BMI 24.9 and 'unhealthy' at BMI 25.1.... that would be silly. Lifestyle choices usually take a long time to turn into health problems after all. Someone can smoke for years and be in pretty good health. People can binge-drink for years before the liver packs up. And being overweight/obese takes a long time to work its magic as well. Same applies to people who are underweight (BMI <18.5)... their health problems are potentially going to show up a little quicker and they can't afford to dismiss their underweight status lightly.
Original Post by silverbutterfly:
Essential: 10-12%, Athletes: 14-20%, Fitness:21-24%, Overweight: 25-31%
I think BMI is still useful as a guide. Yes, athletic people don't fit well on the BMI scale, but given most people aren't athletic I still think it's a valid indication.
Also, I think it's odd how your body fat guide goes from fitness to overweight. Having an average (fitness?) boydweight percentage doesn't have anything to do with whether you are actually fit or not.
The OP missed a few rankings.
For Women - Acceptable 25-31%, Overweight: 32-41%, Obese: 42%+
I agree that falling into a certain body fat percentage range doesn't make you 'fit' or an 'athlete' and they need better terms like acceptable, overweight etc. The whole point is there's a bigger picture then a number on a scale for determining a goal weight and what would be best for each person even at same height. I like percentages better then numbers as it's tailored more.
I might have a fair amount of muscle, but still don't consider myself close to an athlete, whether i fit or don't bit on the BMI scale or body fat % range. especially since I'm only doing 2 lower, 2 upper body splits with heavy weights a week, with runs including a long run on the weekend (just got back from 13k actually) Only completed 1 race as well- 10k in under 60 min.
BMI Calculators are like going to a chain store to buy clothes, like walmart, etc. Everything you buy in dept, stores as far as clothing goes is made in "generalized" fit and not very specific. If you want a perfect fit to your specific body, then you have to go to a tailor
These so-called digital scales that show a body fat % along with the body weight are also generalized and un-reliable. They require you to be barefoot, if you aren't barefoot they usually will not register the bofy fat&%. These scales base their readings upon water weight to guage BF%. So your bf% can be different on a daily basis dependant upon how much fluid you consume on the given days.
A simple myotape for measurements and a body calipher (preferably not an electronic one) would give you the most accurate data.
A comment about female bf%.... obviously the female physique is different than a man in it's entirety. The avg woman is 21% and not considered as fat. A man @ 21% is considered out of line and too much fat. An athletic woman avg is about 15% whereas an avg man should be about that 15%. If a woman is below that 15%, she better be well muscled because the olympic woman, the pros are about 12%....extra ordinary females, those whom you see competing in body building, etc. can be around 10% or even less (but look at their physiques! the results of years of hard work and deication).
Original Post by blue_eyed_dragon:
These so-called digital scales that show a body fat % along with the body weight are also generalized and un-reliable. They require you to be barefoot, if you aren't barefoot they usually will not register the bofy fat&%. These scales base their readings upon water weight to guage BF%. So your bf% can be different on a daily basis dependant upon how much fluid you consume on the given days.
not exactly. they measure electrical conductivity (hence the need for being barefoot). fat is an insulator; water is a conductor. yes, they can fluctuate based on the amount of water one is retaining at a particular moment (which is affected by how much fluid one has consumed, but also by a tonne of other variables), but that fluctuation probably isn't more than 1 or 2% from day to day. also, these fluctuates are very easy to account for: if your weight is up but your bf% is down, you're retaining water; if your weight is down but your bf% is up, you're dehydrated. simple.
no, they're not precise, but neither is a caliper test. i would venture to say the scales have the potential to be much more accurate, given the skill (or lack thereof) and salesmanship of many of those wielding the calipers.
the only truly accurate way to measure is through an immersion test.
anyway, for setting a baseline and monitoring progress (which is what most of us are after), a body fat scale is the cheapest and most convenient option. mine has been a tremendous help to me, as i've gone from 168 and 48-ish % to 131 and 23-ish %.
as for the low ranges of body fat %age, be careful. having a low body fat % does not mean that you are athletic. if you're at 15% body fat and you're an athlete, you're probably reasonably healthy; if, however, you're not an athlete, you're probably not well.
Well, according to my scale my body fat percentage is 27.9% but has fallen from 35% when I weighed 142 pounds (I am 122 now). However, as my body fat percentage has fallen my water percentage has risen. I don't know if that has to do with muscles or what but it has been very consistent.
Original Post by pgeorgian:
Original Post by blue_eyed_dragon:
These so-called digital scales that show a body fat % along with the body weight are also generalized and un-reliable. They require you to be barefoot, if you aren't barefoot they usually will not register the bofy fat&%. These scales base their readings upon water weight to guage BF%. So your bf% can be different on a daily basis dependant upon how much fluid you consume on the given days.
not exactly. they measure electrical conductivity (hence the need for being barefoot). fat is an insulator; water is a conductor. yes, they can fluctuate based on the amount of water one is retaining at a particular moment (which is affected by how much fluid one has consumed, but also by a tonne of other variables), but that fluctuation probably isn't more than 1 or 2% from day to day. also, these fluctuates are very easy to account for: if your weight is up but your bf% is down, you're retaining water; if your weight is down but your bf% is up, you're dehydrated. simple.
no, they're not precise, but neither is a caliper test. i would venture to say the scales have the potential to be much more accurate, given the skill (or lack thereof) and salesmanship of many of those wielding the calipers.
the only truly accurate way to measure is through an immersion test.
anyway, for setting a baseline and monitoring progress (which is what most of us are after), a body fat scale is the cheapest and most convenient option. mine has been a tremendous help to me, as i've gone from 168 and 48-ish % to 131 and 23-ish %.
as for the low ranges of body fat %age, be careful. having a low body fat % does not mean that you are athletic. if you're at 15% body fat and you're an athlete, you're probably reasonably healthy; if, however, you're not an athlete, you're probably not well.
I just ran a simple test, it isnt just 1-2% regarding water/fluids. I got my neighbors digital scale and got on it barefoot and nude. It rang up 199 lbs and 7.5 %BF. Then I went and drank down 1.25 gallons of water, waited an hour and got back on the scale. It rang up 202 lbs and 12% BF.
Yes immersion may be the best test, however i refered to the myotape and calipher as a simple means and INEXPENSIVE as opposed to paying on a regular basis for tests. Pay once for the tools and you get to keep the tools....
I agree about being athletic and non athletic and their relativity to bf%. And it appears that most of the people that are here are not athletic and that the majority of this CC site is about those whom are trying to loose weight and a small percentage is about persons trying to gain weight.
Original Post by blue_eyed_dragon:I just ran a simple test, it isnt just 1-2% regarding water/fluids. I got my neighbors digital scale and got on it barefoot and nude. It rang up 199 lbs and 7.5 %BF. Then I went and drank down 1.25 gallons of water, waited an hour and got back on the scale. It rang up 202 lbs and 12% BF.
your neighbour has a really crappy scale.
first, 1.25 gallons of water weighs about 11 pounds, so either you peed out most of it or your weight was way off.
second, like i said above, water is a conductor; fat is not. therefore, drinking all that water, if it had any effect at all, would give the illusion that your body fat % had dropped, not risen.
edited because i remembered what my second point was .
i've had my body fat scale for 3.5 years, and it's never fluctuated more than 3% from one day to the next (and not at all from hour to hour or minute to minute).
Original Post by blue_eyed_dragon:
Yes immersion may be the best test, however i refered to the myotape and calipher as a simple means and INEXPENSIVE as opposed to paying on a regular basis for tests. Pay once for the tools and you get to keep the tools....
so, you bought the calipers? should i take that to mean that you're measuring yourself? because that doesn't work. in order for the calipers to measure accurately, your muscles have to be relaxed, which means standing in a relaxed stance, hands dangling loosely at your sides. it's impossible to measure oneself accurately; you have to have someone else do it for you.
The scale doesn't lie, your interpretation of its results can mislead you though.
BMI doesn't lie either, it was not made to be a measure of health, and shouldn't be used as one. It just tells you where you are weight-wise compared to the average person for your height. BMI should be done away with.
Original Post by blue_eyed_dragon:
These so-called digital scales that show a body fat % along with the body weight are also generalized and un-reliable. They require you to be barefoot, if you aren't barefoot they usually will not register the bofy fat&%. These scales base their readings upon water weight to guage BF%. So your bf% can be different on a daily basis dependant upon how much fluid you consume on the given days.
If you aren't going to learn how to correctly use something, then it follows that it won't be useful to you.
Anyone that reads the owner's manual would understand the above.
Original Post by pgeorgian:
your neighbour has a really crappy scale.
first, 1.25 gallons of water weighs about 11 pounds, so either you peed out most of it or your weight was way off.
second, like i said above, water is a conductor; fat is not. therefore, drinking all that water, if it had any effect at all, would give the illusion that your body fat % had dropped, not risen.
edited because i remembered what my second point was
i've had my body fat scale for 3.5 years, and it's never fluctuated more than 3% from one day to the next (and not at all from hour to hour or minute to minute).
Original Post by blue_eyed_dragon:
Yes immersion may be the best test, however i refered to the myotape and calipher as a simple means and INEXPENSIVE as opposed to paying on a regular basis for tests. Pay once for the tools and you get to keep the tools....
so, you bought the calipers? should i take that to mean that you're measuring yourself? because that doesn't work. in order for the calipers to measure accurately, your muscles have to be relaxed, which means standing in a relaxed stance, hands dangling loosely at your sides. it's impossible to measure oneself accurately; you have to have someone else do it for you.
Great post - and I agree 100%.
 |
New journal post After Thanksgiving by njakamarilyn 19:21 |
 |
rinear added slmaring as a friend |
|
slmaring added rinear as a friend |
|
New journal post Feeling big by drivenlass 19:17 |
|
New journal post Happy Post-Thanksgiving! by kokorozashi 19:14 |