Body Fat %

K

kristi

Cathlete
I am so excited. This weekend I checked my body fat % with one of those hand held body impedence machines I bought for my husband's birthday back in March. Since I had my son 5 months ago I have lost 5%. I was initially 32% right after I had him, but I am now 27%. The numbers still seem rather high and I'm really not that big, only 5'4" and 135 pounds. I can't help but wonder about the accuracy of the machine. Does anyone know how accurate those machines are?

I'm just really happy that I have lost 15 pounds in the past 3 1/2 months and I think I am in better shape now at 135 than I was at 130, before I became pregnant. That is all thanks to Cathe's kick butt workouts and everyones encouraging posts that I keep reading.

Thanks for letting me share.
 
Hi Kristi. That doesn't sound right. According to the BMI charts (which of course are based on averages), someone at your height and weight has a BMI (body fat %) of 23%. And since you work out with weights you probably have less body fat than that because the charts overestimate the body fat % for people with a muscular build. So 27% doesn't sound right to me. BTW, 27% body fat is considered to be overweight and I doubt seriously that you're overweight so the machine is probably wrong.
 
It didn't sound right to me either. I've been working out with heavy weights for months because I think it will give me the best results along with cardio. Do you think that a machine like that might just check the upper body instead of total body since it is hand held? I was thinking that since I am not small in the bust area on the top that maybe it is only figuring it for the upper body.

My husband has been working out very strictly since January with very heavy weights and it really isn't moving very much for him even though he has lost 30 pounds and is continuing to get smaller in his clothes around the middle.

I think we may need to go to another method.

Thanks again!
 
Janice you out there??

Just thought Janice might be able to shed some light on this subject, if she's out there. She just had underwater weighing done and may want to share her info with ya...just a thought.

Briee
 
RE: Janice you out there??

One thing I will say about this is that while the bioelectrical impedence method may be off some percentages, it is possible to be muscular with quite a bit of fat.

You can look at me and see a great deal of muscle. I am very solid. But I came in at 25% in underwater testing, which is supposedly the MOST accurate. That was very dissapointing to me because while I do eat my "treats", I THOUGHT my diet was 80% clean. I lift VERY heavy and have been doing this with Cathe for approx. a year now. Even my husband agrees that for someone that works out as hard as me, I should see quite a bit of results and I really didn't. My lean mass went up of course (106 lbs at 5'1), but fat didn't seem to change enough. Don't know what it was when I started, but I know I was not "fat". And I had been active before Cathe, but had never lifted weights consistently before.

I am just saying everyone that knew me before Cathe would have never thought I had upwards of 25% bodyfat(except for my DD boobs ha ha) but apparantly I did. Just makes you realize that lots of muscle does not automatically mean you are burning fat as fast as the speed of light.

However, I will say that of what I know, bio electrical impedence testing is not very accurate due to hydration levels in your body and some other factors. I would say it is likely to be lower, but that is not definite.

The best thing you can do is just measure it that way now and then three months from now or so, do it again. That way, if it is off, atleast you are sticking to the same method.

I will test my bodyfat again probably about six months from now if at all, as now I am pretty convinced it is better to simply go by how you look and whether you fit in your jeans or not. Currently, I am "dieting" to accomplish that!!
Also, 27% is still good considering the "average" adult american female is 32%.......




Janice
 
RE: Janice you out there??

Kristi..

I will point out also that you should be VERY happy with your body fat analysis results. You can clearly see the improvement over time... Your stats work out this way...

BEFORE
150lbs.
32% body fat= 48 pounds total fat weight
Lean body mass= 102 pounds total weight.

AFTER
135 lbs.
27% body fat= 36.45 pounds total fat weight
Lean body mass= 98.55 pounds total weight


While it is obvious that you did lose approx. 3.5 pounds of lean weight, you lost an amazing 11.55 pounds of PURE FAT!!! That ratio is right about where you want it, showing that you did not lose too much lean weight..you are dieting right!!

I wanted my body fat results so that I could also analyze my progress in this way. You always want to make sure you are not sacrificing muscle when you diet down. Strength training helps minimize that. Of course, if you wanted to significantly add LBM you would have to take in a surplus of calories and work out hard. Once you get your body fat where you want it you can concentrate on that.. Job well done..I hope I can have a success story like yours soon!!!!


Janice
 
RE: Janice you out there??

One more thing....

Thanks for thinking of me, Briee!! Makes me feel important!!:):)

Janice6
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Our Newsletter

Get awesome content delivered straight to your inbox.

Top