bodyfat calculator

[Matt Meinrod]

How accurate is this guy?

http://members.aol.com/webhealth/bodyfat.htm

[Brendan Merchant]

It's not.

It says I'm 15.6% when I'm really 23%

[Matt Meinrod]

what method did you use to get tested at 23?

[Brendan Merchant]

I had the test done with calipers.

[Nikhil Rao]

I'm supposedly 8% according to that calculator

But i have love handles and my lower abs are only barely visible if I flex

[tackle78]

I was recently hydrostaticly weighed at 9.76% bf. That said I was 14.2%.
Girth measurements are very difficult to calculate with any accuracy, having a mucsled lower back not to mention obliques and abs creates larger waistlines, I currently have visible abs relaxed stomach, so I'd say 14 is high for me.

[Scott Markowitz]

Also...what does age have to do with it? Either you're fat or not.

[Nick Davis]

yeah its def off...says im 12%..im around 19% last time i checked about 2 months ago

[Billy Wolt]

those things don't work well for people with higher amounts of lean mass.

it's for the averge joe

[Bob Wanamaker]

What about this one?

http://home.fuse.net/clymer/bmi/

It was recommended by a coach on another board.

Note: I didn't test the AOL one, there was some message from my browser about trying to install software, and I always just say no to that sort of thing.

[Scott Markowitz]

According to that one I should be dead sometime next week.

BMI is useless for people with any sort of muscle at all. Heck, it's useless for most other people too. Almost every pro athlete is considered obese by that standard, including most qbs and baseball and basketball players.

[MalachiMcMullen]

According to that one I should be dead sometime next week.

BMI is useless for people with any sort of muscle at all. Heck, it's useless for most other people too. Almost every pro athlete is considered obese by that standard, including most qbs and baseball and basketball players.

Yep, I'm overweight according to BMI. Last time I checked I was around 28.

[davebeers]

neither of those are accurate

if you can see someone's abs from a distance then they're around 10%

[Mac Smith]

I remember in the late 80's, early 90's when BMI testing first became popular, my high school health teacher figured out everyone's in our class and even at 14 I was considered obese. I was 6'0 and 215lbs with 7-8% bodyfat!!! This BMI $hit is a freakin joke!!!!!!

[Nikhil Rao]

I remember in the late 80's, early 90's when BMI testing first became popular, my high school health teacher figured out everyone's in our class and even at 14 I was considered obese. I was 6'0 and 215lbs with 7-8% bodyfat!!! This BMI $hit is a freakin joke!!!!!!

you're telling me. I continually get cautioned about having to lose weight because I'm borderline. I wear 31" pants! I'm barely bigger than normal sized!!!!

[Brandon Campbell]

lol yea it also is messing with the nations measurement for obesity also. Since the BMI is what it is based off of. Pretty stupid if you ask me. Basically almost everyon one on this board is contributing to the nations obesity problem!!! not saying its not going up since 20years ago but its not really as bad as they make it seem. ALl them talkshows showing fatkids. Hell fat kids been around forever, There was one in the movie Goonies! way before obesity was a problem lol. Sorry just watch goonies chunk always makes me laugh.

[Matt Meinrod]

Who cares about BMI I thought we were discussing bodyfat calculators

[Brandon Campbell]

BMI is what a body fat calculator calculates basically. sort of not really. Any calculator where u plug in numbers is going have errors in it big time. The best way is to get calipers or get in the water tank. All the online ones and stuff dont work.

The one you posted uses surface area, so bodybuilder is obese as a fat man.

[tackle78]

Also...what does age have to do with it? Either you're fat or not.

The older you get the higher your visceral bf tends to be(the fat maintained around your guts). This is why middle aged beer bellies are often almost hard feeling, due to the tightly packed fat inside the gut, and twenty year old beer bellies tend to be more jiggly. (Very scientific wording I know :BB: )
But to what degree this occurs is highly debatable, and individual.

[Matt Brouse]

This BMI $hit is a freakin joke!!!!!!
More than most will ever realize.

[Scott Markowitz]

The older you get the higher your visceral bf tends to be(the fat maintained around your guts). This is why middle aged beer bellies are often almost hard feeling, due to the tightly packed fat inside the gut, and twenty year old beer bellies tend to be more jiggly. (Very scientific wording I know :BB: )
But to what degree this occurs is highly debatable, and individual.

I can see that age might matter in how much fat is acceptable, but it seems irrelevant to me as to how much fat is there.

[Matt Nickerson]

What about this one?

http://home.fuse.net/clymer/bmi/

It was recommended by a coach on another board.

Note: I didn't test the AOL one, there was some message from my browser about trying to install software, and I always just say no to that sort of thing.

A little more research yeilded this:

"David P Willoughby, who was a champion body builder in the early twentieth century, performed extensive anthropometrics measurements on highly-conditioned (male) athletes and found a direct proportionality between waist and height."

So basically, its based on ONE persons studies. Doesn't hold much validity in my opinion, but hey, I am no expert.

Hell fat kids been around forever, There was one in the movie Goonies! way before obesity was a problem lol. Sorry just watch goonies chunk always makes me laugh.

"Do the truffle shuffle."

http://www.yikers.com/video_chunks_truffle_shuffle_is_the_newest_dance_c raze.html

[tackle78]

I can see that age might matter in how much fat is acceptable, but it seems irrelevant to me as to how much fat is there.


I'm not saying the standard for acceptable levels of bf. With things involving girth measurements, a higher number (girth measurement) in a younger males tends to represent a lower level then the average for an older sample population. Also with calipers, the skin has more sag the older you are so the numbers equate to a different %. But with girth the measurements tend to be associated with the visceral bf maintained. Like a 20 year old with 20 % would likely be mostly subcutaneous fat levels (or right under the skin), where a 60 year old with the same % would have more visceral (internal) fat levels. So it would be measured differently based on these types of calculations.

[Nikhil Rao]

lol yea it also is messing with the nations measurement for obesity also. Since the BMI is what it is based off of. Pretty stupid if you ask me. Basically almost everyon one on this board is contributing to the nations obesity problem!!! not saying its not going up since 20years ago but its not really as bad as they make it seem. ALl them talkshows showing fatkids. Hell fat kids been around forever, There was one in the movie Goonies! way before obesity was a problem lol. Sorry just watch goonies chunk always makes me laugh.

the funny thing is that numerous studies have shown that even on average, males have a significant amount more muscle mass than they did in the 1970s. At least one and maybe two BMI points IIRC.

[Nikhil Rao]

BMI is what a body fat calculator calculates basically. sort of not really. Any calculator where u plug in numbers is going have errors in it big time. The best way is to get calipers or get in the water tank. All the online ones and stuff dont work.

The one you posted uses surface area, so bodybuilder is obese as a fat man.

not totally. muscle is denser than fat, so if you have a fatty and a muscular dude at the same weight, the muscular guy has less surface area. But the calculator is only an approximation of htat based on waist size. If it used chest and thighs as well it might be more accurate.

Don't forget that none of these calculators take into account bone mass. Being Indian I have the bone mass of a 12 year old white girl. So most people guess my weight at 210ish despite being 190. Black people on the other hand have more bone mass than white people, on average.

[MaxMisch]

What about this one?

http://home.fuse.net/clymer/bmi/

It was recommended by a coach on another board.

Note: I didn't test the AOL one, there was some message from my browser about trying to install software, and I always just say no to that sort of thing.

Thanks for the link. There's lots of good data and info there.

[chrisklavette]

the funny thing is that numerous studies have shown that even on average, males have a significant amount more muscle mass than they did in the 1970s. At least one and maybe two BMI points IIRC.
You mean to tell me that men have upped in testosterone since the 1970's? What proof do you have?

[Tony Christopher]

Any bodyfat calculation is an estimate ... they simply vary in their accuracy.

BMI is pretty much the worst of the lot ... since it uses only two variables (height and weight).

Water immersion volume measurement is pretty much the best ... but even it assumes a uniform skeltal weight, which isn't entirely true (as Nikhil pointed out).

Quite frankly, a standard chart showing relaxed and flexed ab / oblique shots and corresponding volumetric BF% would probably be the best "quick and dirty" estimator for most people.

Though it wouldn't be much help once you got up into the obsese categories ... whether you're 35% or 40% doesn't look much different.

[Bob Wanamaker]

You mean to tell me that men have upped in testosterone since the 1970's? What proof do you have?

Actually, average test levels have been dropping for a few generations, according to this study (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?CMD=search&DB=pubmed):

A population-level decline in serum testosterone levels in American men.

Travison TG, Araujo AB, O'Donnell AB, Kupelian V, McKinlay JB.

New England Research Institutes, 9 Galen Street, Watertown, Massachusetts 02472, USA. ttravison@neriscience.com

CONTEXT: Age-specific estimates of mean testosterone (T) concentrations appear to vary by year of observation and by birth cohort, and estimates of longitudinal declines in T typically outstrip cross-sectional decreases. These observations motivate a hypothesis of a population-level decrease in T over calendar time, independent of chronological aging. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to establish the magnitude of population-level changes in serum T concentrations and the degree to which they are explained by secular changes in relative weight and other factors. DESIGN: We describe a prospective cohort study of health and endocrine functioning in randomly selected men of age 45-79 yr. We provide three data collection waves: baseline (T1: 1987-1999) and two follow-ups (T2: 1995-1997, T3: 2002-2004). SETTING: This was an observational study of randomly selected men residing in greater Boston, Massachusetts. PARTICIPANTS: Data obtained from 1374, 906, and 489 men at T1, T2, and T3, respectively, totaling 2769 observations taken on 1532 men. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measures were serum total T and calculated bioavailable T. RESULTS: We observe a substantial age-independent decline in T that does not appear to be attributable to observed changes in explanatory factors, including health and lifestyle characteristics such as smoking and obesity. The estimated population-level declines are greater in magnitude than the cross-sectional declines in T typically associated with age. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that recent years have seen a substantial, and as yet unrecognized, age-independent population-level decrease in T in American men, potentially attributable to birth cohort differences or to health or environmental effects not captured in observed data.

PMID: 17062768 [PubMed - in process]

[chrisklavette]

Actually, average test levels have been dropping for a few generations, according to this study (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?CMD=search&DB=pubmed):

I wonder why? But, this could be like global warming studies and really be no cause for alarm.

[Bob Wanamaker]

I wonder why? But, this could be like global warming studies and really be no cause for alarm.

The rise of emo?

[Nikhil Rao]

I wonder why? But, this could be like global warming studies and really be no cause for alarm.

a possibility is societal demasculinization. It's long been known that 'manly' activities (of just about any kind) up your testosterone. I mean just think about it, so many of the things that most of us here can do (like turn a wrench, or open a tight pickle jar) used to be things that every man could do. Now we're in the minority.

Another is the increasing amounts of plant and chemical estrogen mimics in food, packaging, and even water.

Also with the advent of widespread BC use, womens' tastes change toward more 'boyish' or effeminate guys.

SO there are factors at every level.

The increase in muscle mass is probably mostly due to the higher amounts of protein in our diet relative to a generation ago.