I've been using a calculator based on measurements of my waist, weight, and height. I've also used the circumference method which measuring my hips/wrist/forearms/neck/waist. It says i'm around 12-13% bf. My question is, I got on a Tanita scale last night and it said I was 25.6% bf. If I'm 25.6% bf and weight 200lbs that means that I have 50lbs of fat on me? wth?? If I were to get down to 150lbs i'd look sick (ethiopian sick). Does the tanita scales measure using the ponderal scale or another method. Something just seems funny, either that or i'm still a fatass...

How do you feel? At 12.9 you should be starting to get some good definition. If you were 25% you'd still have some substantial fat clinging to you. You'd know if you were 25% Those two numbers are pretty extreme, so chances are one of them is wildly off.

Remember, the Tanita is dependant upon hydration levels too. Plus, the Tanita is not meant to be used for "spot checking" body fat, but as a moving average. I think you are supposed to use something like a 4 week window on in before it starts to get close to being accurate.

I've been using a calculator based on measurements of my waist, weight, and height. I've If I were to get down to 150lbs i'd look sick (ethiopian sick). Does the tanita scales measure using the ponderal scale or another method. Something just seems funny, either that or i'm still a fatass...

It sounds like scales are wrong for that day. A 32" waist is certainly quite an acheivement at your weight. Did you get pictures to show such a tremenous loss of body fat in such a short period?

They would help and motivate others, if you shared them. Also you might get a few estimates on precieved body fat %.

I've been using a calculator based on measurements of my waist, weight, and height. I've also used the circumference method which measuring my hips/wrist/forearms/neck/waist. It says i'm around 12-13% bf. My question is, I got on a Tanita scale last night and it said I was 25.6% bf. If I'm 25.6% bf and weight 200lbs that means that I have 50lbs of fat on me? wth?? If I were to get down to 150lbs i'd look sick (ethiopian sick). Does the tanita scales measure using the ponderal scale or another method. Something just seems funny, either that or i'm still a fatass...

I have the Tanita scale also. I am 5' 10" and weigh 175. My body fat per the scale is 22.5 ( this is an average over a one month period). I eat correctly and exercise daily (cardio) and work with weights 3 times a week. I have been doing this for months now, so I think the 12-13% is probably too low.

cz3ch:
5/15/04 - 5' 10" 226 25%bf 42" w
6/14/04 - 5' 10" 211 20%bf 38" w
7/15/04 - 5' 10" 204.5 14.8%bf 35" w
8/15/04 - 5' 10" 201.5 12.9%bf 34" w


I am sorry, I meant a 34" waist but that still doesn't cancel out losing 8" off waist while losing 25 lbs in 3 months and possibly cutting %BF in half.

I have the Tanita scale also. I am 5' 10" and weigh 175. My body fat per the scale is 22.5 ( this is an average over a one month period). I eat correctly and exercise daily (cardio) and work with weights 3 times a week. I have been doing this for months now, so I think the 12-13% is probably too low.

Hmmm.. Maybe you're right. I guess my big question is, does the Tanita scale use the YMCA Fat Calculation or the Ponderal Index?

It just seems insane to say that 25% of 200lbs (50lbs) is fat. Right now I feel great, and the only fatty areas are aroun my tummy/lower abs and it's mostly hanging skin. I"ve been down to 165 a long time ago and I almost looked too thin.

I guess looking on the + side, I've made great strides in a short amount of time. I'd just hate to see what my percentage was when I started. I didn't take "before" pictures unfortunately.

Here's a link to a current picture (though clothed)
http://www.after5support.com/j2.jpg

cz3ch:
5/15/04 - 5' 10" 226 25%bf 42" w
6/14/04 - 5' 10" 211 20%bf 38" w
7/15/04 - 5' 10" 204.5 14.8%bf 35" w
8/15/04 - 5' 10" 201.5 12.9%bf 34" w


I am sorry, I meant a 34" waist but that still doesn't cancel out losing 8" off waist while losing 25 lbs in 3 months and possibly cutting %BF in half.

Actually as of today, I am down to a 33" waist and about 200lbs (it floats up and down by a couple of lbs each day but on avg is 200). I see great defiinition in my arms/back/legs just see a bit of fat underneath the chest (gyno?), and some sagging skin/fat on the lower abs. I'm not going to throw myself off of a bridge if I don't have realisitic numbers. All I know is, I've dropped 25+ lbs in 3 months and sunk 9" off my waist and have improved my cardiac profile 20 fold, and am getting buffed out. So something is going right :)

I'd just like to know ACCURATELY where I am BF% wise. I'm able to put on 1-2lbs of muscle/month with the Max-OT program I'm doing so that's not a problem, just assuring fatloss is my focus. Maybe I should ease back on the heavy weight training and just focus more on cardio and lighter weights?

<<<<<confused :)

Try using the Circumference Method of the army. You are using what the army uses for females. For men they only use the neck and abdomen. I think the number will be somewhere in between the two. By looking at the pic I would guess you are more than twelve but far less than the 25.6 that your scale says. It is hard to tell in clothes but I am guessing somewhere between 18-21 percent. You can find the Army's measurement procedures in Army Regulation 600-9

I'd just like to know ACCURATELY where I am BF% wise. I'm able to put on 1-2lbs of muscle/month with the Max-OT program I'm doing so that's not a problem, just assuring fatloss is my focus. Maybe I should ease back on the heavy weight training and just focus more on cardio and lighter weights?

Keep up with weights, that and diet are giving you the positive changes, you are proud of. Find a gym/school/ friend to give you a good measure with calipers.

BTW: are you measuring waist, relaxed or sucked-in?

Keep up with weights, that and diet are giving you the positive changes, you are proud of. Find a gym/school/ friend to give you a good measure with calipers.

BTW: are you measuring waist, relaxed or sucked-in?

Waist is relaxed, though the tape is firmly held, such as suggested by most magazines/sources... I can just about fit into size 34 pants and 36 are huge on me now...

Try using the Circumference Method of the army. You are using what the army uses for females. For men they only use the neck and abdomen. I think the number will be somewhere in between the two. By looking at the pic I would guess you are more than twelve but far less than the 25.6 that your scale says. It is hard to tell in clothes but I am guessing somewhere between 18-21 percent. You can find the Army's measurement procedures in Army Regulation 600-9

Thanks for the tips, I followed the guidelines, and using it, it noted I was 33% BF... WTH??? There's no way that's possible...

Keep up with weights, that and diet are giving you the positive changes, you are proud of. Find a gym/school/ friend to give you a good measure with calipers.

BTW: are you measuring waist, relaxed or sucked-in?

I belong to 24/hr fitness but the guys there are morons. And they charge u to measure. I'm going to buy a set of digital calipers from accufitness that has a memory on it to keep track of my progress or lack thereof..

Needless to say... i'm sorta discouraged a bit.

By looking at the pic I would guess you are more than twelve but far less than the 25.6 that your scale says. It is hard to tell in clothes but I am guessing somewhere between 18-21 percent.
18-21 seems way too high if you ask me. I'd put you at about 14-15 % given the picture in the link. Reason? You don't look chubby, but you don't look near ripped either. At 18-21 you'd probably have a more puffy face.

A bodyshot without a shirt on would tell more.

Needless to say... i'm sorta discouraged a bit.

Man don't get down. You have already made substantial progress. The rate at which we all progress changes a lot through time. It takes some getting use to, but you just gotta keep heading towards that goal.

18-21 seems way too high if you ask me. I'd put you at about 14-15 % given the picture in the link. Reason? You don't look chubby, but you don't look near ripped either. At 18-21 you'd probably have a more puffy face.

A bodyshot without a shirt on would tell more.

I meant 18-21 because I keep track of Body fat for a lot of men in the military and it is definitely hard to tell with clothes on. But he looked thick through the midsection which by the Army's BF% method, would push his numbers up. It was just a guess based on using that method. I am sure there are other methods that would give him a lower number. Like I said it is hard to tell with clothes on. :d_wink:

I meant 18-21 because I keep track of Body fat for a lot of men in the military and it is definitely hard to tell with clothes on. But he looked thick through the midsection which by the Army's BF% method, would push his numbers up. It was just a guess based on using that method. I am sure there are other methods that would give him a lower number. Like I said it is hard to tell with clothes on. :d_wink:


A photo without the shirt might help, but is embarassing... still not where I want to be... Between a mild case of gyno + non-6pack stomach.. bleh.. i think i'm going to get a pair of those digital calipers and start doing my averages on my own and just see what happens...

I'm sure there are methods that would give me high or low #'s.. the question is.. which one is the correct method?

A photo without the shirt might help, but is embarassing... still not where I want to be... Between a mild case of gyno + non-6pack stomach.. bleh.. i think i'm going to get a pair of those digital calipers and start doing my averages on my own and just see what happens...

I'm sure there are methods that would give me high or low #'s.. the question is.. which one is the correct method?

I guess the only thing I can say is let me have your Height, Weight and Abdomen measurements at the waist (Around the belly button) and your neck measurements right below the Adam's apple. The measurement you came up with just doesn't sound right. If you could post your numbers of the above along with your age I will see if you calculated right. Let me know, I don't mind as my routine was shot out of the water by the surgery I had today for at least two weeks. I plan on trying to eat as clean as possible while I am out. :eat:

I meant 18-21 because I keep track of Body fat for a lot of men in the military and it is definitely hard to tell with clothes on. But he looked thick through the midsection which by the Army's BF% method, would push his numbers up. It was just a guess based on using that method. I am sure there are other methods that would give him a lower number. Like I said it is hard to tell with clothes on. :d_wink:
A thick midsection would definitely push the numbers up for any method I guess, but I can't really tell what his midsection is like with that shirt on. We want a shirtless pic, don't we?

cz3ch, it's not embarassing to not have reached your ultimate goal yet. There aren't many members that have actually, as far as I know. I admit that it takes a lot of courage to post certain pics, but you're in good company. Nobody would put you down for posting shirtless pics, no matter what you look like.

I guess the only thing I can say is let me have your Height, Weight and Abdomen measurements at the waist (Around the belly button) and your neck measurements right below the Adam's apple. The measurement you came up with just doesn't sound right. If you could post your numbers of the above along with your age I will see if you calculated right. Let me know, I don't mind as my routine was shot out of the water by the surgery I had today for at least two weeks. I plan on trying to eat as clean as possible while I am out. :eat:

5'10
200lb
abd33"
Neck13"
Age 27

5'10
200lb
abd33"
Neck13"
Age 27

OK so your height factor is 79.83
Your Abdomen to waist difference factor is 99.48

Which according to this circumference method gives you 19.65% Body Fat. In the Army they allow 22% for your age, so overall you are coming along nicely. Your neck is pretty small, and if you did some shrugs you might be able to lower that BF% a bit. Your neck is key here, for instance me at 140 my neck is 14 and I am a female. Mostly from working out those shoulders and neck so much. Also take this with a grain of salt as I believe the Army BF% 's to be off by around 2%, so if I had to guess I would say 17.65% at lowest. Which really isn't all that bad. If you don't ever come to accept yourself as you are with that shirt off, it will be harder for you to accept yourself the lower your numbers get. I know, sounds funny, but it is 100% true. I know, when I started at 230 I said just let me be 175, then 175 turned into 150 then 150 turned into 140 then 135, it never was good enough, now I understand, I am a curvy gal and I look good at 140 or 150. I run so I hold tons of muscle in my legs, don't beat yourself up and let the people on this site see how far you have come. You never know, they may be able to give some advice on what you could do to decrease your areas of concern. Keep on fighting to get yourself where you want to be. :tu:

A bit off-topic, but is there an online calc for the 'army' method (female)? I tried the navy calculator, but it put me somewhere around 14% and I know that's definitely too low. My guestimate based on bodycomp and my inexperienced calipers is around 17-18%. No pics, sorry. Might try to take some soon. Too bad I can't get rid of the 'crepe paper' look around my abs just yet.

I'm 24 years old, and similar stats, so I'll post what I'm at now.

June 2004, I was 199 lbs, 35" waist
mybodycomp.com showed me at 24% body fat, and the ole calipers showed me at 25%.

September 7th, I am at 173 lbs, 33" waist.
mybodycomp.com Shows me at 17% body fat, calipers at 19%.

I have some decent definition in my arms and my lower back fat and love handles are *almost* non-existant. Also, my chest is starting to fill out a little better, but there's still some fat on my chest.

I was 18 when I started gaining the weight. At 155 lbs, I started gaining my gut and about 165 is when I started noticing the fat in my chest, then everything else...

so... I'd say about 160 to 165 will be a good stopping point to maintain muscle and lower body fat a bit. At that point, the chest fat should almost be gone and the gut a little smaller.

Hope anything I've said is useful somehow.

A bit off-topic, but is there an online calc for the 'army' method (female)? I tried the navy calculator, but it put me somewhere around 14% and I know that's definitely too low. My guestimate based on bodycomp and my inexperienced calipers is around 17-18%. No pics, sorry. Might try to take some soon. Too bad I can't get rid of the 'crepe paper' look around my abs just yet.

Yes, you need to google Army Regulation 600-9

Take measurements of your neck (Below where adam's apple would be)
Wrist and forearm same arm (wrist between bones of wrist and hand) (Forearm below elbow at largest part of forearm, bent out with inside facing up)
Hips (At largest part of butt (best bet is right at top of pubic bone)
The regulation shows all the right spots. Then there are numbers for those calculations and a table you use to input height/weight and the numbers from the calculations and how to add and subtract. Basically add hips and weight factor then take that number and subtract the sum of your Neck, wrist, forearm, and height here is the link hopefully it works

http://www.usapa.army.mil/pdffiles/r600_9.pdf

found on pages 23,24,25,29, and 30 of 43 this is where you get the factors to add and subtract. The measurements equal a factor number.

OK so your height factor is 79.83
Your Abdomen to waist difference factor is 99.48

Which according to this circumference method gives you 19.65% Body Fat. In the Army they allow 22% for your age, so overall you are coming along nicely. Your neck is pretty small, and if you did some shrugs you might be able to lower that BF% a bit. Your neck is key here, for instance me at 140 my neck is 14 and I am a female. Mostly from working out those shoulders and neck so much. Also take this with a grain of salt as I believe the Army BF% 's to be off by around 2%, so if I had to guess I would say 17.65% at lowest. Which really isn't all that bad. If you don't ever come to accept yourself as you are with that shirt off, it will be harder for you to accept yourself the lower your numbers get. I know, sounds funny, but it is 100% true. I know, when I started at 230 I said just let me be 175, then 175 turned into 150 then 150 turned into 140 then 135, it never was good enough, now I understand, I am a curvy gal and I look good at 140 or 150. I run so I hold tons of muscle in my legs, don't beat yourself up and let the people on this site see how far you have come. You never know, they may be able to give some advice on what you could do to decrease your areas of concern. Keep on fighting to get yourself where you want to be. :tu:

Thanks for your hep/information. Looks like I need to totally revamp my progress tally then or at least pull my bf %. This month has sort of sucked for me because I'm in a total stall weight wise. I'm back at 201 ish and not moving, and my waist is about 33-33.5 right now.

Yah i know I need to get over the shirtless factor, I'll get there eventually. I mean I can totally tell a diff and others can in my appearance so I know i'm making progress. It's just discouraging to find out your real bf % :)

Would you suggest getting a set of those digital calipers so i can do this myself or keep using the circumf method?

cz

I'm about the same as you, I'm 5'10 204lbs. Yesterday I got my BF mesured at my gym and they took measurements of my abs, chest, and legs. I'm not sure what method it was, but my BF came out to be 21.8%, which is a little higher than I expected (I figured about 19-20%) but I think it's correct. With out looking at a picture of your body, it's hard to say if we are close or not. But just looking at the picture you posted, I'd say we have similiar body types. So I'd guess you're about 20%.

I would say use the same method for consistence. I mean you are going to get a different BF% with each type, so pick one and stay with it that way you can track how much you lose BF% wise. Like I said the Army circumference method is off by around 2% so I guess 17.65% Body Fat. That really isn't all that bad, and I certainly wouldn't be disappointed. It is within a healthy limit and is considered very good by some. I would continue to use whatever method you are more comfortable with. I like the circumference method because it don't cost a dime. And to me that is worth having to subtract a couple of percent body fat. Plus like I said, I am comfortable since I have been using it for about ten years. No one method is perfect.

The 'army method' says I am almost 21%, making it in the late 18's, early 19's if you subtract the 2% margin of error. Not too far off, I'd guess -- my calipers say somewhere in the 17's, bodycomp says around 18. Actually, I was worried it was less rather than more :)

I was positive the 'navy method' measurement of 14 was wrong !

I would say use the same method for consistence. I mean you are going to get a different BF% with each type, so pick one and stay with it that way you can track how much you lose BF% wise. Like I said the Army circumference method is off by around 2% so I guess 17.65% Body Fat. That really isn't all that bad, and I certainly wouldn't be disappointed. It is within a healthy limit and is considered very good by some. I would continue to use whatever method you are more comfortable with. I like the circumference method because it don't cost a dime. And to me that is worth having to subtract a couple of percent body fat. Plus like I said, I am comfortable since I have been using it for about ten years. No one method is perfect.

How do you know the Army Circumf method is off by 2%? I'm really not that dissapointed in general because i can tell the difference. I just wish I was farther along than I am.

OK so your height factor is 79.83
Your Abdomen to waist difference factor is 99.48

Which according to this circumference method gives you 19.65% Body Fat. In the Army they allow 22% for your age, so overall you are coming along nicely. Your neck is pretty small, and if you did some shrugs you might be able to lower that BF% a bit. Your neck is key here, for instance me at 140 my neck is 14 and I am a female. Mostly from working out those shoulders and neck so much. Also take this with a grain of salt as I believe the Army BF% 's to be off by around 2%, so if I had to guess I would say 17.65% at lowest. Which really isn't all that bad. If you don't ever come to accept yourself as you are with that shirt off, it will be harder for you to accept yourself the lower your numbers get. I know, sounds funny, but it is 100% true. I know, when I started at 230 I said just let me be 175, then 175 turned into 150 then 150 turned into 140 then 135, it never was good enough, now I understand, I am a curvy gal and I look good at 140 or 150. I run so I hold tons of muscle in my legs, don't beat yourself up and let the people on this site see how far you have come. You never know, they may be able to give some advice on what you could do to decrease your areas of concern. Keep on fighting to get yourself where you want to be. :tu:

Just remeasured using averages 14" neck and 33.5 waist.. Giving me about 18% bf. So I updated my signature.. :) Time will help i'm sure ;P

Here's a good link I found written by someone in your area about bodyfat testing methods and their weaknesses

http://www.houstonfc.com/services_bodycomp.php

In my opinion Tanita's are junk. The best method is hydrostatic testing-if there's no facility that can do it, than the next best thing is comparitive photos. Skinfold testing has produced results with such inconsistency for me that I find it a worthless techniqe.

You've obviously made progress in the waist-the chest fat will be less apparent if and when you build up your pec's. good luck and well done

How do you know the Army Circumf method is off by 2%? I'm really not that dissapointed in general because i can tell the difference. I just wish I was farther along than I am.

Like I said I been doing this for a while. Plus using the hydrostatic method and the calipers, it is all a guessing game. I have loose skin from a 90 pound weight loss. Calipers are ineffective. The hydrostatic method is expensive and hard to find. You must always be well hydrated, and not have exercised or eaten for at least three hours. This is a small window for most people. Anyway, it is an estimate that seems to be about right when you subtract. The look in the mirror test is the best. Don't get discouraged, just keep on doing what you have been and you will get there. You didn't pack it on in a day and you won't take it off in a week either. :tu: :gl: