Bodyfat% Levels....

[howardalex]

Accu-Measure Calipers.

calipers are the best way to test bodyfat :cheer:

 

[Skilla_Staz]

I wouldnt say that calipers are the most accurate way either. That might be able to measure BF% only in certain spots.

It's probably the cheapest way though, and its not SUPER inaccurate to the point where its just useless, but I'm sure there are better ways.

 

[howardalex]

I wouldnt say that calipers are the most accurate way either. That might be able to measure BF% only in certain spots.

It's probably the cheapest way though, and its not SUPER inaccurate to the point where its just useless, but I'm sure there are better ways.

immersion testing is a good one (unless I just made it up lol)

the hand held ones're no good, said I have 19% bodyfat and I have visible abs :S

 

[simon]

* Self-testing of % body fat with the Accu-Measure was as accurate as results from multi-site measurements and calculations taken by an experienced clinical investigator using a Lange caliper.
* % body fat calculations with the Accu-Measure were within 1.1 percentage points of underwater weighing results, the gold standard of body fat measurement.
* Accu-Measure was recommended over another self-assessment device, the Futrex-1000, which significantly overestimated % body fat.

http://www.accufitness.com/study.pdf

 

[Skilla_Staz]

I stand corrected...I think...

 

[Throttle]

Careful how you read that study (ignore the AccuFitness hype)...what it really says is that the Futrex-1000 is nearly useless b/c it badly overestimates, while the Accu-Measure is correct within 3.8% BF.

Now think about that. Take someone who is 15% BF -- the Accu-Measure may say anything from 11.2% to 18.8% -- what a world of difference! Plus, if you cut through the article's jargon, the Accu-Measure is even more inaccurate at extreme ends of body composition (I'm guessing below 12% and above 20% or so).

Anyway, I'm with Skilla_Staz's original point -- calipers are *not* the best way to measure bf% in a single reading. Presumably if it over or under measures, it will be fairly consistent.

Like guys have said here before, look in the mirror and ask if you're happy. If you absolutely must know that numbers, either go with something truly accurate (immersion) or use something like calipers knowing they are less accurate but may be consistent enough to reflect changes across time.

 

[reyalp]

You should definitely use calipers, with at least a 3 site measurement, to track your fat loss during a caloric defecit. Otherwise, you're gunning blind.
If you're losing LBM, you want to know that it's happening, right?

 

[Warboss Alex]

If you're losing LBM, you want to know that it's happening, right?

you can tell that from your workouts, if you're losing strength then you're losing muscle, if you're getting stronger no way you're losing muscle.

 

[reyalp]

As always WBA, you make a good point. Lift, eat, profit.

 

[Throttle]

Indeed. Nonetheless I'd be curious to see if someone could pull up the predicted consistency of the sort of 3-site measurement Reyalp is describing. It's gotta be better than +/-3.8%bf, but how much better?

Personally I'll stick with WBA's method.

 

[devoncassidy]

Call me crazy but I'm going for sliced. I got a long way to go but there's something cool about being able to see every vein and muscle in your body.

http://www.richgaspari.com/content/popup/photo_bw.asp?img=5a&width=460&height=532

 

[simba_]

Indeed. Nonetheless I'd be curious to see if someone could pull up the predicted consistency of the sort of 3-site measurement Reyalp is describing. It's gotta be better than +/-3.8%bf, but how much better?

Personally I'll stick with WBA's method.

Don't know if it's the most accurate but:
http://www.rustyiron.net/formmale.htm

 

[LoneSilver]

Good post.

I reckon my goal is to be 10% and I know I am not far away but basically just leaning toward powerlifter body types as well but I'll know more as I go.

I definitely need more work on my chest development or more mass to come up and my legs are doing find and getting porportional to my frame but don't think I'll need the others especially the last one that dude looks like he needs to stop working out simply disgusting in my opinion the chicks would run from a dude looking like that. Sliced shouldn't be part of a bodybuilders workout goal especially that dude thats insane maddness.

LoneSilver

 

[Throttle]

Don't know if it's the most accurate but:
http://www.rustyiron.net/formmale.htm

well, it'd be interesting if somebody could find the original article (as old as I am!) to see what the predicted margin of error is with their methods.

 

[blinkwatt]

what is the most accurate method?

The water bodyfat testing is the most accurate. I'm not 100% sure how it works but you have to sit in this pod which is closed off,water leaks in,you dunk your entire body underwater and it calculates it's from there. Again I'm not 100% how it works but that's how the Pros do it,and at the NFL Combine.

 

[tyciol]

I think BF% is often very misleading. For example, if you were at 5% bodyfat and 100lbs, if you bulked up to 200lbs and had 5% bodyfat, it would be 10lbs of fat rather than 5lbs of fat.

I realize that the muscle stretches that fat out to cover more areas and has a similar look, but is it really so linear as %? Couldn't what a % meant vary a lot depending on where it was stored, which varies depending on homones (which change) and genes (which don't). There has to be some more complicated calculation.

 

[Warboss Alex]

Yep, and weightlifting should not be a complicated subject, and no-one cares about whether you're 8% or 10% particularly not the girls you're all trying to get.. 'cause if you're working out to look good, then you'll attract girls with the same mindset (superficial) and they certainly don't give a damn about your bf%, they just care about aesthetics.

I can see it now:
"Wow Roxy, that guy has 10% bodyfat..."
"Yes Peaches, but remember, we're only after guys with 8%. Next!"

 

[LoneSilver]

LOL!

LoneSilver

I can see it now:
"Wow Roxy, that guy has 10% bodyfat..."
"Yes Peaches, but remember, we're only after guys with 8%. Next!"

 

[Kev07]

that last level looks insane

 

[blinkwatt]

Yep, and weightlifting should not be a complicated subject, and no-one cares about whether you're 8% or 10% particularly not the girls you're all trying to get.. 'cause if you're working out to look good, then you'll attract girls with the same mindset (superficial) and they certainly don't give a damn about your bf%, they just care about aesthetics.

I can see it now:
"Wow Roxy, that guy has 10% bodyfat..."
"Yes Peaches, but remember, we're only after guys with 8%. Next!"



Your kidding me right?

They dont care about the bodyfat % but the result of the low bodyfat.
Example; When I'm at the gym and lift w/ my friend who is a bodybuilder w/ a low bodyfat people just stare at him when he lifts....He only weights 160 but has very low bodyfat from dieting year round w/o any cheat meals. Now keep in mind a low bodyfat=definition and vascularity.

Now when I used to lift w/ my old buds who just ate for protein and had double digit bodyfat(10-20%ish) no one cared. They just had a 'nice body' according to the women,it wasn't enough to anywhere near as much attention. No veins,no definition, nothing special,just another guy in the gym.

Now that's in the gym w/ wife beaters on,now lets examine what happens at the beach or any other occassion were the shirt comes off. The difference between chicks taking a sneak peak and straight up sexually harrassing someone for their physique are a tan & bodyfat %.

Just look around your gym,now look at how many guy have veins popping out to were you can actually feel the vein not just see a blue thing under your skin, also look to see if any of them have proper curves & muscle seperation.

The Original Posters content is a great example. I think 'skip'(Abdominator) was modest in the 12% pic,I think it was 7-9%.