• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

How do body fat %'s work?

K

krackato

Golden Member
If you weigh 155lbs and your scale says you're 15% body fat, does that mean that you have 23.25lbs of fat on you? I know those electrical impendence scales can swing their results quite a bit and a lot of people say they're useless, but I just want to know how you're supposed to calculate the numbers.

155 x 0.15 = 23.25

1lb of fat = 3500 calories

I'm at a pretty good weight (153-155lbs) but I'd like to gain some muslce and lower my body fat percentage to atleast 12%.
 
I really have no idea...I did some test...measure diameter around your forearm, bicep...measure around your torso...put in your weight, height and age...and it spits out some number...

According to that calculation I have 10.7% body fat...what does this mean? I have no idea...
I am 5'10 - 142lbs and 23 years old (or will be Monday)...one thing I do know is that it said my body fat percentage was "good"...so whatever...
 
Originally posted by: Manzelle

According to that calculation I have 10.7% body fat...what does this mean? I have no idea...
I am 5'10 - 142lbs and 23 years old (or will be Monday)...one thing I do know is that it said my body fat percentage was "good"...so whatever...
Click to expand...

it means you are one skinny motherfvcker!

your numbers are right, krackato. impedence scales suck for guys like you with low BF, you should get some digital calipers.
 
Yeah you have the idea but the numbers are much more flaky towards the lower end of the scale.

Best thing to do is to use it to *track* your gains.

Bulk then cut is easier. For most people it will be VERY HARD to gain a substantial amount of muscle mass and remain lean.

EVERYONE I have ever heard wants to get big and 'stay' lean. Mostly from guy that are some what under weight. Not going to happen in most cases.

Just bulk out pack on a few lbs of FAT and then CUT later. Much easier to gain when you have a few extra lbs. Fats are needed to build muscle mass also.

Bulk for 6 months. Get to be a bit of a fatty then CUT. If you want to do it the other way it will take ages. Or you will be disappointed with your results as they will be slow or non exisitent and most people 'give' up by then.

EAT A LOT. Bulking is mainly about EATING.

Do squats, bench press, deadlifts, military press, pull ups, wide grip pull ups, bent over rows, sit ups (variety and mix up every few months), and hyper extensions for your back.

You will go VERY FAR with the basics.

Good luck.

Koing
 
Look up Consumer Report's tests for these scales. They are horribly inaccurate at report body fat%. If you actually want an accurate reading go have a DEXA scan performed.


EXAMPLE
 
Yeah that's what it means. Koing is right that it's incredibly hard to pile on muscle while staying trim, if you're a person who naturally tends towards a greater body fat, because keeping your BF % low requires quite few calories, and that conflicts with putting on muscle. Personally I have a decent base, and my BF is now at about 12%. I aim to hit 10% and keep it there long term. I know that the comparitively few calories required to keep that will hurt my ability to put on muscle quickly, but it's worth it to me.
 
Originally posted by: Yossarian
Originally posted by: Manzelle

According to that calculation I have 10.7% body fat...what does this mean? I have no idea...
I am 5'10 - 142lbs and 23 years old (or will be Monday)...one thing I do know is that it said my body fat percentage was "good"...so whatever...
Click to expand...

it means you are one skinny motherfvcker!

your numbers are right, krackato. impedence scales suck for guys like you with low BF, you should get some digital calipers.
Click to expand...

I don't consider myself skinny...tone yes, on the brink of being skinny...perhaps...however, I suppose in this obese society we live in today a 30" waist and no gut is considered skinny...
 
Originally posted by: klah
Look up Consumer Report's tests for these scales. They are horribly inaccurate at report body fat%. If you actually want an accurate reading go have a DEXA scan performed.
Click to expand...
DEXA is quite accurate (have had one performed), although finding a body composition laboratory both with the equipment available and access to the general public on a whim can be difficult. Most body composition labs will conduct a battery of tests including bioelectrical impedance, physical body measurements, skin fold test, underwater weighing, and the BOD POD, in addition to the DEXA test for redundancy and accuracy.

Many hospitals/universities offer free or very low cost full body compositional analysis for study purposes, both for adults and children.
 
Originally posted by: Yossarian
Originally posted by: Manzelle

According to that calculation I have 10.7% body fat...what does this mean? I have no idea...
I am 5'10 - 142lbs and 23 years old (or will be Monday)...one thing I do know is that it said my body fat percentage was "good"...so whatever...
Click to expand...

it means you are one skinny motherfvcker!

your numbers are right, krackato. impedence scales suck for guys like you with low BF, you should get some digital calipers.
Click to expand...

LOL I was thinking the same thing. I am 5'10 also, but weigh in the 190-195 lb range. But yes if those are the numbers than you are correct.
 
Originally posted by: classy
Originally posted by: Yossarian
Originally posted by: Manzelle

According to that calculation I have 10.7% body fat...what does this mean? I have no idea...
I am 5'10 - 142lbs and 23 years old (or will be Monday)...one thing I do know is that it said my body fat percentage was "good"...so whatever...
Click to expand...

it means you are one skinny motherfvcker!

your numbers are right, krackato. impedence scales suck for guys like you with low BF, you should get some digital calipers.
Click to expand...

LOL I was thinking the same thing. I am 5'10 also, but weigh in the 190-195 lb range. But yes if those are the numbers than you are correct.
Click to expand...

5'10 195 = BMI 28.0
5'10 190 = BMI 27.3

BMI 25.0 ? 29.9 = Overweight

5'10 142 = BMI 20.4

BMI 18.5 ? 24.9 = Normal

Results taken from:

http://www.healthstatus.com/calculate/bmi

and

http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/bmi/calc-bmi.htm

BMI is not the same as body fat % obviously...I am merely illustrating the fact that I am not "skinny" unless normal is considered skinny...
 
If you're atheltic, then you really shouldn't go by BMI. However, if you're in the "average"category, then BMI can be a farely accurate indicator of your body composition, and what you should aim for.

I'm 5'10" and 165 lbs, and the last skinfold test I had done measured me at around 8% body fat. It was done by a well-trained professional, and I still would attribute about a +/- 1 or 2% error rate to it. Those electronic scales are practically useless other than for gaining a VERY general idea of where you stand.

Also, as Koing stated, it's pretty tough to gain size if you don't have some excess weight on you. It's possible of course, but the going will be a lot slower. If you want to gain size, then gain some weight first, and then work on getting lean and cutting up. If you're happy with your size and just want to gain muscle, then keep the diet the same, and head to the gym. I've gained maybe 10 lbs. in four years of working out, so I can definitely attest to the fact that gaining weight when you want to remain lean is pretty damn difficult.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top