Body fat
#3
RAGBRAI. Need I say more?
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: West Branch, Iowa USA
Posts: 868
Bikes: 1998 Mongoose NX7.1, 2008 Kona Jake, GT singlespeed (year unknown).
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally posted by flyefisher
What is your preferred way to check % body fat?
What is your preferred way to check % body fat?
#4
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 20
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Covert Bailley gives a formula using body measurements. Not an expert on this as far as its relative merits, just offering what I have read. (He states that it is +/- 2% accuracy compared with underwater immersion tests.)
Women 30 years and younger:
hips +(.80*thigh) - (2Xcalf) - wrist = % body fat
Women over 30:
hips + thigh -(2Xcalf) -wrist = %body fat
Men 30 years and younger:
Waist + (1/2hips) - (3Xforearm) - wrist = %body fat
Men over 30:
Waist + (1/2hips) - (2.7Xforearm) - wrist = %body fat
Women 30 years and younger:
hips +(.80*thigh) - (2Xcalf) - wrist = % body fat
Women over 30:
hips + thigh -(2Xcalf) -wrist = %body fat
Men 30 years and younger:
Waist + (1/2hips) - (3Xforearm) - wrist = %body fat
Men over 30:
Waist + (1/2hips) - (2.7Xforearm) - wrist = %body fat
#5
Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Posts: 29
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Covert Bailley gives a formula using body measurements. Not an expert on this as far as its relative merits, just offering what I have read. (He states that it is +/- 2% accuracy compared with underwater immersion tests.)
I know, I know - all formulas like this are based on averages - I'm just curious and would like to see the rationale for this particular derivation, as it isn't one I've seen before.
Thanks
#6
Marathon Cyclist
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Posts: 1,779
Bikes: Road Bike / Mountain Bike
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
#7
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 20
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally posted by OldDog
Do you have a link that gives details about the derivation of these formulae? I'm curious about what magically happens on a persons 30th birthday that would make their body fat spontaneously increase by 0.2 thigh diameter or 0.3 forearm diameter, depending on gender.
I know, I know - all formulas like this are based on averages - I'm just curious and would like to see the rationale for this particular derivation, as it isn't one I've seen before.
Thanks
Do you have a link that gives details about the derivation of these formulae? I'm curious about what magically happens on a persons 30th birthday that would make their body fat spontaneously increase by 0.2 thigh diameter or 0.3 forearm diameter, depending on gender.
I know, I know - all formulas like this are based on averages - I'm just curious and would like to see the rationale for this particular derivation, as it isn't one I've seen before.
Thanks
I don't see an explanation for why the switch at age 30. He discusses some of the physical changes with age - loss of muscle mass and bone density that would cause changes in body composition, but this would seem to already be accounted for when he advises people to adjust their weight downward as they get older to keep their body fat constant as they lose lean body mass. He definitely isn't advising people to let the fat pile on after they reach a certain age.
The only website with a reference to this I have found so far is https://www.healthcentral.com/cooltoo.../bodyfat1.cfm. It does not provide the formula, but it does use a calculator that I am pretty sure uses the same formula, as the reference book is the same that I quoted from - "The Ultimate Fit or Fat" by Covert Bailey.
Another tool at the same site yielded a rather interesting/questionable result for my own measurements - using your % body fat and and current weight, it calculates your ideal weight. For me, female, 5'6" and 274 pounds, it calculated 33% body fat (which seems quite low), and calculated that I needed to loss 39 pounds of fat for an ideal weight of 235 pounds, purportedly at 22% body fat, which seems extremely high (height/weight or BMI charts give 155 pounds as the top weight with 146 as ideal.) How does this thing "know" that at 235 pounds, I'm going to be 80 extra pounds of muscle over my "ideal" weight, not fat? (For sure, I wouldn't accept that as a final weight without validation by more accurate form of testing by someone that knows what they are doing.)
#8
feros ferio
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: www.ci.encinitas.ca.us
Posts: 21,796
Bikes: 1959 Capo Modell Campagnolo; 1960 Capo Sieger (2); 1962 Carlton Franco Suisse; 1970 Peugeot UO-8; 1982 Bianchi Campione d'Italia; 1988 Schwinn Project KOM-10;
Mentioned: 44 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1392 Post(s)
Liked 1,324 Times
in
836 Posts
The equations relating body fat to body dimensions are extremely unreliable and inconsistent. Caliper-based and electrical resistance-based measurements are far better, but I suppose immersion/buoyancy is the best. I just watch how much pinchable flab I accumulate around the navel.
__________________
"Far and away the best prize that life offers is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." --Theodore Roosevelt
Capo: 1959 Modell Campagnolo, S/N 40324; 1960 Sieger (2), S/N 42624, 42597
Carlton: 1962 Franco Suisse, S/N K7911
Peugeot: 1970 UO-8, S/N 0010468
Bianchi: 1982 Campione d'Italia, S/N 1.M9914
Schwinn: 1988 Project KOM-10, S/N F804069
"Far and away the best prize that life offers is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." --Theodore Roosevelt
Capo: 1959 Modell Campagnolo, S/N 40324; 1960 Sieger (2), S/N 42624, 42597
Carlton: 1962 Franco Suisse, S/N K7911
Peugeot: 1970 UO-8, S/N 0010468
Bianchi: 1982 Campione d'Italia, S/N 1.M9914
Schwinn: 1988 Project KOM-10, S/N F804069
#9
Member
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Posts: 29
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I don't see an explanation for why the switch at age 30.
I think you are right about the link you provided using the same formula - it tells me 13%, but if I change the age to 29, it tells me 9%. The 'ideal weight' thing also tells me that for my height (6'2") and current weight (191) I need to gain 4 pounds to be at my ideal body weight - not. If I'm going to do the Bicycle Tour of Colorado and climb those hills next summer, I need to get DOWN to 180 or below, not go up. I guess its all about averages again. And people getting fit by biking, no matter how big or small, are not the 'average' couch potato.
#10
Upgrade your Turbo
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Lenoir City, Tennessee
Posts: 286
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
that formula says I'm 6% body fat.... i KNOW that's way off... I have very large forearms though...12.5"
34" waist... I'm 5'10 and 186#
i was just thinking today how much i want to be 5% body fat... so i know it's all wrong :-D
34" waist... I'm 5'10 and 186#
i was just thinking today how much i want to be 5% body fat... so i know it's all wrong :-D
#11
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 20
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
The neatest thing about posting comments on things I really don't know about is that I learn so much from the responses
And here I was, making plans for those 80 extra pounds of muscle, thinking maybe I would have a new career in pro football or wrestling in my middle age
And here I was, making plans for those 80 extra pounds of muscle, thinking maybe I would have a new career in pro football or wrestling in my middle age
#12
cycle-powered
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Munich Germany (formerly Portland OR, Texas)
Posts: 1,848
Bikes: '02 Specialized FSR, '03 RM Slayer, '99 Raleigh R700, '97 Norco hartail, '89 Stumpjumper
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
based on my feeling (basically guessing), best to worst measurements:
1) immesion - never done it, but i think it's complicated and you measure your volume displaced in the water, then subtract your lung capacity (or measure somehow when fully exhaled) and then divide by your weight somehow -- i don't know the formulas
2) calipers - usually 3 or more places - i think back of arm, waist and thigh are the most common - again i don't know formulas, but i think there are different ones that have different measurements and/or weight them differently
3) electrical resistance - these measure the difference in conductivity between fat and muscle -- not sure, but i think things like the device as well as your hydration level would effect this measurement a lot (mine done on a basic cheap handheld during my Lactacte Threshold test last Spring was 10.5% which i think is way too high -- i know i've lost muscle and my body fat is up a bit from the 5% or so about 3 years ago, but i don't think it's that high (more like 8-9% i think) --- i'm 6'1" and 165lbs just for reference)
4) formulas based on weight-height-diameters -- i don't see these being very accurate
1) immesion - never done it, but i think it's complicated and you measure your volume displaced in the water, then subtract your lung capacity (or measure somehow when fully exhaled) and then divide by your weight somehow -- i don't know the formulas
2) calipers - usually 3 or more places - i think back of arm, waist and thigh are the most common - again i don't know formulas, but i think there are different ones that have different measurements and/or weight them differently
3) electrical resistance - these measure the difference in conductivity between fat and muscle -- not sure, but i think things like the device as well as your hydration level would effect this measurement a lot (mine done on a basic cheap handheld during my Lactacte Threshold test last Spring was 10.5% which i think is way too high -- i know i've lost muscle and my body fat is up a bit from the 5% or so about 3 years ago, but i don't think it's that high (more like 8-9% i think) --- i'm 6'1" and 165lbs just for reference)
4) formulas based on weight-height-diameters -- i don't see these being very accurate