Reply
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 31 to 55 of 55
  1. #31
    Registered User Vietgoboi's Avatar
    Join Date: Mar 2006
    Location: United States
    Posts: 4,861
    Rep Power: 1137
    Vietgoboi is a jewel in the rough. (+500) Vietgoboi is a jewel in the rough. (+500) Vietgoboi is a jewel in the rough. (+500) Vietgoboi is a jewel in the rough. (+500) Vietgoboi is a jewel in the rough. (+500) Vietgoboi is a jewel in the rough. (+500) Vietgoboi is a jewel in the rough. (+500) Vietgoboi is a jewel in the rough. (+500) Vietgoboi is a jewel in the rough. (+500) Vietgoboi is a jewel in the rough. (+500) Vietgoboi is a jewel in the rough. (+500)
    Vietgoboi is offline

    Exclamation Will rep on recharge, great progress stackcalB!

    stackcalB, thanks for photo, will be using it as reference points.

    Keep us posted when you hit 12%
    Reply With Quote

  2. #32
    Registered User fitliftkit's Avatar
    Join Date: Mar 2009
    Location: California, United States
    Age: 50
    Posts: 14
    Rep Power: 0
    fitliftkit has no reputation, good or bad yet. (0)
    fitliftkit is offline

    DEXA vs. hydrostatic

    I've been having my body fat measured hydrostatically ($49 first time, $39 thereafter).

    weight lean lb fat lb body fat %
    10/08/09 120 109.2 10.8 9
    05/20/09 122 111.15 10.85 8.9
    04/07/09 123 109.55 13.45 10.9

    Yesterday was 10/08/09 and after my test I was pretty frantic. It appeared that my new nutritional program which I started on 7/01/09 (a cut diet) reduced my lean mass by 2 lbs and slightly increased my body fat.

    I wanted a second opinion, so today 10/09/09 I had a DEXA done ($79). Results state that my bodyfat is 15%.

    Hydrostatic 9% bodyfat and DEXA 15%? One day after the other? Seems hydrostatic has a tendency to test a little low (my nutritionist didn't believe I was 10% bf when we started working together) and DEXA tests people a bit high.

    I don't think I will be wasting my money on these tests anymore. I was really focused on increasing lean mass, but if my strength is increasing (meticulous weight lifting records) and I'm looking leaner, then perhaps that is good enough for me. All this hype about "gold standard"...I'm not buying any of it. Anybody who tells they are "n" percent bodyfat anymore isn't going to make a difference to me. I'd rather judge myself by looking at their body.

    You can see older photos of me on my profile and I'll post some newer and if I have the time, I'll take some today.
    Reply With Quote

  3. #33
    Registered User mosdel's Avatar
    Join Date: Jul 2010
    Location: Canada
    Age: 45
    Posts: 186
    Rep Power: 170
    mosdel has no reputation, good or bad yet. (0) mosdel has no reputation, good or bad yet. (0) mosdel has no reputation, good or bad yet. (0) mosdel has no reputation, good or bad yet. (0) mosdel has no reputation, good or bad yet. (0) mosdel has no reputation, good or bad yet. (0) mosdel has no reputation, good or bad yet. (0) mosdel has no reputation, good or bad yet. (0) mosdel has no reputation, good or bad yet. (0) mosdel has no reputation, good or bad yet. (0) mosdel has no reputation, good or bad yet. (0)
    mosdel is offline
    i've been thinking about getting a hydrostatic test or a dexa test to find me accurate body fat %

    but apparently these 2 tests offer quite the different results! it seems like Dexa may overestimate your body fat %.

    an example would be to look at StackcalB's photos in this thread. his photo on the right shows him to be 15% body fat.

    would people here have guessed him to be 15%?


    Originally Posted by stackcalB View Post
    Hey guys,

    Just managed to find this thread by accident.
    I had a DEXA scan just a couple of days ago, $60 AUD so about $40 USD.

    My reading was 14.8% body fat, which was higher than I thought it would be, as my previous result was 17.5% and I thought I dropped quite a bit of fat.

    Anyway, here are some pics to let you know what 15% body fat really looks like (15% are the after pics on the right).
    Some people really underestimate their fat levels.
    Getting below 8% would be extremely difficult.



    Reply With Quote

  4. #34
    Registered User mpipes's Avatar
    Join Date: Jul 2006
    Location: Lake Havasu City, AZ
    Age: 47
    Posts: 2,980
    Rep Power: 288
    mpipes will become famous soon enough. (+50) mpipes will become famous soon enough. (+50) mpipes will become famous soon enough. (+50) mpipes will become famous soon enough. (+50) mpipes will become famous soon enough. (+50) mpipes will become famous soon enough. (+50) mpipes will become famous soon enough. (+50) mpipes will become famous soon enough. (+50) mpipes will become famous soon enough. (+50) mpipes will become famous soon enough. (+50) mpipes will become famous soon enough. (+50)
    mpipes is offline
    Originally Posted by mosdel View Post
    i've been thinking about getting a hydrostatic test or a dexa test to find me accurate body fat %

    but apparently these 2 tests offer quite the different results! it seems like Dexa may overestimate your body fat %.

    an example would be to look at StackcalB's photos in this thread. his photo on the right shows him to be 15% body fat.

    would people here have guessed him to be 15%?
    That's the point. People are highly optimistic - read: unrealistic - in their bodyfat estimations. When someone gets a DEXA scan and people are referencing it against some random people's visual assessments and questioning DEXA's accuracy (not that DEXA is problem-free), you know there's a problem with the whole thing.

    At the end of the day, any body fat measurement is simply an estimation, even the expensive scans. Endlessly wanking over the numbers is useless because it all boils down to one thing: either you like the way you look, or you don't. If you don't, just change it. You don't need a test to tell you that. If you get to 10% but you still don't like the results, are you going to stop just because a test said you reached your goal? No. You'll keep going until you like how you look.
    Reply With Quote

  5. #35
    protein boy geneticcode's Avatar
    Join Date: Sep 2009
    Posts: 216
    Rep Power: 705
    geneticcode is a jewel in the rough. (+500) geneticcode is a jewel in the rough. (+500) geneticcode is a jewel in the rough. (+500) geneticcode is a jewel in the rough. (+500) geneticcode is a jewel in the rough. (+500) geneticcode is a jewel in the rough. (+500) geneticcode is a jewel in the rough. (+500) geneticcode is a jewel in the rough. (+500) geneticcode is a jewel in the rough. (+500) geneticcode is a jewel in the rough. (+500) geneticcode is a jewel in the rough. (+500)
    geneticcode is offline
    I just had a dexa scan and it says I'm at 4.5% body fat. I thought dexa scans were accurate. It does break down different tssues (lean and fat) in detail for body parts though.
    Reply With Quote

  6. #36
    Blackmill Music 10/10 th3pwn3r's Avatar
    Join Date: Jul 2008
    Location: Chicago, Illinois, United States
    Posts: 10,607
    Rep Power: 4499
    th3pwn3r is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) th3pwn3r is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) th3pwn3r is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) th3pwn3r is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) th3pwn3r is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) th3pwn3r is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) th3pwn3r is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) th3pwn3r is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) th3pwn3r is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) th3pwn3r is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) th3pwn3r is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500)
    th3pwn3r is offline
    Originally Posted by geneticcode View Post
    I just had a dexa scan and it says I'm at 4.5% body fat. I thought dexa scans were accurate. It does break down different tssues (lean and fat) in detail for body parts though.
    Post pictures?
    "Everyone thinks they're on their way to single digit body fat as soon as they see a blurry four-pack in the right lighting.Your final body weight at 5-6% will be a lot less than what you think.Talk to me again when you get in contest shape." I'd be willing to say that 95% of people on this forum accomplish nothing in years, don't be one of those people. It's sad,they seem to have the knowledge many don't but can't utilize it.
    Reply With Quote

  7. #37
    Registered User DLEHMA's Avatar
    Join Date: Apr 2011
    Location: New Jersey, United States
    Age: 32
    Posts: 1,722
    Rep Power: 1858
    DLEHMA is just really nice. (+1000) DLEHMA is just really nice. (+1000) DLEHMA is just really nice. (+1000) DLEHMA is just really nice. (+1000) DLEHMA is just really nice. (+1000) DLEHMA is just really nice. (+1000) DLEHMA is just really nice. (+1000) DLEHMA is just really nice. (+1000) DLEHMA is just really nice. (+1000) DLEHMA is just really nice. (+1000) DLEHMA is just really nice. (+1000)
    DLEHMA is offline
    Originally Posted by th3pwn3r View Post
    Post pictures?
    Yeah please. I wish everyone that got their bf% tested by an "accurate" method would post pictures. 4.5% is ridiculously low.
    watdo I do in this dilemma?
    Reply With Quote

  8. #38
    Registered User carriesand's Avatar
    Join Date: Sep 2011
    Age: 53
    Posts: 1
    Rep Power: 0
    carriesand has no reputation, good or bad yet. (0)
    carriesand is offline
    I had a DEXA scan done today, and I am too afraid to be excited about it. Was their machine calibrated? Am I reading it correctly?
    I have a scale that shows weight and "measures body fat". I take it with a grain of salt and that's why I wanted to see what an accurate method would measure me at.
    My home scale has been very consistently telling me the past week 16.3% down to 15.8% (I've been eating to lean out, so I like seeing it drop). I was assuming the DEXA would be close or maybe HIGHER, but to my surprise, it's telling me total body fat is 12%. Breakdown is:
    L Arm 12.0
    R Arm 12.3
    Trunk 9.2
    L Leg 14.0
    R Leg 15.0
    Subtotal 11.5
    Head 18.2 (fat headed, haha!)
    Total 12.0

    (I am a 41 year old female, weighing 136 at the time of testing, 134.4 this morning. I'm athletic, practice martial arts, lift weights and eat to be lean)
    So am I reading that right? Can I honestly say that I am 12% body fat? Thanks for any insight!
    Reply With Quote

  9. #39
    Registered User dharmana's Avatar
    Join Date: Jan 2012
    Location: New York, New York, United States
    Posts: 38
    Rep Power: 0
    dharmana is the lowest scum of the boards. (Worst Rank) dharmana is the lowest scum of the boards. (Worst Rank) dharmana is the lowest scum of the boards. (Worst Rank) dharmana is the lowest scum of the boards. (Worst Rank) dharmana is the lowest scum of the boards. (Worst Rank) dharmana is the lowest scum of the boards. (Worst Rank) dharmana is the lowest scum of the boards. (Worst Rank) dharmana is the lowest scum of the boards. (Worst Rank) dharmana is the lowest scum of the boards. (Worst Rank) dharmana is the lowest scum of the boards. (Worst Rank) dharmana is the lowest scum of the boards. (Worst Rank)
    dharmana is offline
    This post proves that even DEXA scan is not as accurate as its thought to be. Some are reporting it is overestimates body fat and others think it underestimates body fat percentage. DEXA is still based on a 3-compartment model. It assumes the hydration of fat free mass as a constant when it can vary a lot. The only thing which DEXA measures directly is bone mineral density.

    So instead of getting fixated on body fat percentage which is erroneous, i think people should focus on skinfold thickness. It is the only direct measurement of subcutaneous fat atleast. I prefer to getting the sum of all thickness for 7 points and just monitor the total thickness over the months. The moment you put in this average thickness into a bodyfat estimation formula, all sorts of estimations and assumptions come into the picture distorting the results. So my verdict is skinfold thickness beats body fat percentage!
    Reply With Quote

  10. #40
    Registered User Uvwrangler's Avatar
    Join Date: Mar 2012
    Age: 46
    Posts: 1
    Rep Power: 0
    Uvwrangler has no reputation, good or bad yet. (0)
    Uvwrangler is offline

    Skin fold doesn't work for everybody!!

    People obviously have different compositions/different shapes. Skinfold put me at 14% but I happen to have a lot of visceral fat & skinfold doesn't account for that.
    Furthermore, the accuracy of the skinfold method is affected the skill of the technician, the type of calipers used, the prediction equation used for the measurement, and subject factors. It is therefore hard to get consistent and reproducible results each time with this method.

    I'm glad I did a DEXA because my overall fat % was ridiculously higher than the 14% I thought I was at and I had never worried because I always thought I was in a healthy range. The DEXA is still a better indicator than the other methods as it also specifies where the fat is (in my case the highest % are in the belly/apple shape) and as long as I see change (hopefully over the next few months) I'll be happy with that.

    Originally Posted by dharmana View Post
    This post proves that even DEXA scan is not as accurate as its thought to be. Some are reporting it is overestimates body fat and others think it underestimates body fat percentage. DEXA is still based on a 3-compartment model. It assumes the hydration of fat free mass as a constant when it can vary a lot. The only thing which DEXA measures directly is bone mineral density.

    So instead of getting fixated on body fat percentage which is erroneous, i think people should focus on skinfold thickness. It is the only direct measurement of subcutaneous fat atleast. I prefer to getting the sum of all thickness for 7 points and just monitor the total thickness over the months. The moment you put in this average thickness into a bodyfat estimation formula, all sorts of estimations and assumptions come into the picture distorting the results. So my verdict is skinfold thickness beats body fat percentage!
    Reply With Quote

  11. #41
    Registered User ejthomp's Avatar
    Join Date: Jun 2009
    Location: Vancouver, Washington, United States
    Age: 60
    Posts: 4,384
    Rep Power: 775
    ejthomp is a jewel in the rough. (+500) ejthomp is a jewel in the rough. (+500) ejthomp is a jewel in the rough. (+500) ejthomp is a jewel in the rough. (+500) ejthomp is a jewel in the rough. (+500) ejthomp is a jewel in the rough. (+500) ejthomp is a jewel in the rough. (+500) ejthomp is a jewel in the rough. (+500) ejthomp is a jewel in the rough. (+500) ejthomp is a jewel in the rough. (+500) ejthomp is a jewel in the rough. (+500)
    ejthomp is offline
    Thanks for bumping this thread. It really shows that there is no foolproof way to measure bodyfat. NONE.

    Trust the mirror guys! It tells you all you need to know.
    A diet isn't punishment. A diet is a way to reward your body with the wholesome, nutritious food that it needs. Your body composition is a direct reflection of what you put in your mouth.
    Reply With Quote

  12. #42
    Registered User osteoscan's Avatar
    Join Date: Mar 2012
    Age: 65
    Posts: 1
    Rep Power: 0
    osteoscan has no reputation, good or bad yet. (0)
    osteoscan is offline

    DXA Accuracy

    Unfortunately, DXA is highly accurate - per peer reviewed research, a Discovery A machine is a precision instrument measuring bone mineral content, muscle mass and soft tissue to the gram (+/-, see below) regardless of how the patient is placed on the table (exception – overlapping skeletal anatomy may effect BMC measurement, improper placement of the regional lines will effect regional fat and lean mass measurements – not the total).

    BMC FAT Lean Mass Total Mass

    Normal Precision 20g 100g 200g 200g

    Min. Detected Difference 57g 850g 850g 565g

    Furthermore, in peer reviewed research – the following has been documented,

    Actual mass (destructive) vs Computed Tomography statistically insignificant difference

    CT vs DXA (fan beam Hologic) .8% difference

    DXA vs hydrostatic weighing 3.4% difference

    Make sure when you have the test performed that the machine has been calibtated (all DEXA machines must be calibrated daily) and the system passes radiographic uniformity (BMC calibration).

    I have had a couple of triathletes come unhindged when their body fat came in at 14% when hydrostatic weighing and calipers pegged them at 8 to 9%. 14% is a brutally low number considering DXA measures all fat in your body (good and bad). Typical good fat measurement is roughly 4% for males and 8 to 10% for females. Additionally, once you have actual muscle mass in grams, fat content in grams and BMC in grams - you can calculate your BMR (basal metabolic rate). This will help you adjust your caloric intake to achieve desired results.
    Last edited by osteoscan; 03-17-2012 at 12:09 PM.
    Reply With Quote

  13. #43
    Registered User aman88's Avatar
    Join Date: May 2009
    Location: United States
    Age: 35
    Posts: 2,722
    Rep Power: 865
    aman88 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) aman88 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) aman88 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) aman88 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) aman88 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) aman88 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) aman88 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) aman88 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) aman88 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) aman88 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) aman88 is a jewel in the rough. (+500)
    aman88 is offline
    which one did you use, apparently some can be inaccurate?

    http://weightology.net/weightologyweekly/?page_id=260
    Exercise Physiologist
    M.S. - Exercise and Sport Physiology
    West Chester University of Pennsylvania
    B.S. - Kinesiology
    University of Maryland


    *Note: I am in no way, shape, or form suggested for anyone to do anything. Anything I post is purely based off of my own personal experience and opinions. If you decide to follow or do anything I say, that is of your own free will and not my suggestion.*
    Reply With Quote

  14. #44
    Registered User aman88's Avatar
    Join Date: May 2009
    Location: United States
    Age: 35
    Posts: 2,722
    Rep Power: 865
    aman88 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) aman88 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) aman88 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) aman88 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) aman88 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) aman88 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) aman88 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) aman88 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) aman88 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) aman88 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) aman88 is a jewel in the rough. (+500)
    aman88 is offline
    Originally Posted by carriesand View Post
    I had a DEXA scan done today, and I am too afraid to be excited about it. Was their machine calibrated? Am I reading it correctly?
    I have a scale that shows weight and "measures body fat". I take it with a grain of salt and that's why I wanted to see what an accurate method would measure me at.
    My home scale has been very consistently telling me the past week 16.3% down to 15.8% (I've been eating to lean out, so I like seeing it drop). I was assuming the DEXA would be close or maybe HIGHER, but to my surprise, it's telling me total body fat is 12%. Breakdown is:
    L Arm 12.0
    R Arm 12.3
    Trunk 9.2
    L Leg 14.0
    R Leg 15.0
    Subtotal 11.5
    Head 18.2 (fat headed, haha!)
    Total 12.0

    (I am a 41 year old female, weighing 136 at the time of testing, 134.4 this morning. I'm athletic, practice martial arts, lift weights and eat to be lean)
    So am I reading that right? Can I honestly say that I am 12% body fat? Thanks for any insight!
    yea it appears dexa can be very inaccurate for some people. a woman at 12% would have a 6 pack. it is also the point when sustained at that level for prolong periods menstrual function can stop. Where not impossible, it probably is not likely you are at that level.

    As with the guy who posted the pictures 15% seems inaccurate.

    In school we learned about the most accurate method which deals with burning off body tissue. I forgot all of it since it can only be performed on the dead it was pointless to know.
    Exercise Physiologist
    M.S. - Exercise and Sport Physiology
    West Chester University of Pennsylvania
    B.S. - Kinesiology
    University of Maryland


    *Note: I am in no way, shape, or form suggested for anyone to do anything. Anything I post is purely based off of my own personal experience and opinions. If you decide to follow or do anything I say, that is of your own free will and not my suggestion.*
    Reply With Quote

  15. #45
    Registered User Chitown815's Avatar
    Join Date: Jun 2011
    Age: 42
    Posts: 7
    Rep Power: 0
    Chitown815 has no reputation, good or bad yet. (0)
    Chitown815 is offline
    Originally Posted by aman88 View Post
    yea it appears dexa can be very inaccurate for some people. a woman at 12% would have a 6 pack. it is also the point when sustained at that level for prolong periods menstrual function can stop. Where not impossible, it probably is not likely you are at that level.

    As with the guy who posted the pictures 15% seems inaccurate.

    In school we learned about the most accurate method which deals with burning off body tissue. I forgot all of it since it can only be performed on the dead it was pointless to know.

    I'm planning on getting one, the site has a FAQ and explains why DEXA tends to read higher then those all in one scales/calipers/Hydro

    When you have your DXA scan, it measures ALL of the fat in your entire body. One thing to keep in mind is that the average human brain weighs about 10-12lbs and is made up almost entirely of fatty tissue. Right off the bat that is an extra 10lbs of fat being calculated into your total body percentage that would never be accounted for by a caliper test. This could easily account for a 2-4% difference all on its own.
    Reply With Quote

  16. #46
    Registered User teariki's Avatar
    Join Date: Oct 2005
    Posts: 202
    Rep Power: 225
    teariki has no reputation, good or bad yet. (0) teariki has no reputation, good or bad yet. (0) teariki has no reputation, good or bad yet. (0)
    teariki is offline
    mirrors can lie too :<
    Originally Posted by ejthomp View Post
    Thanks for bumping this thread. It really shows that there is no foolproof way to measure bodyfat. NONE.

    Trust the mirror guys! It tells you all you need to know.
    Reply With Quote

  17. #47
    Registered User shawnhall12's Avatar
    Join Date: May 2012
    Posts: 2
    Rep Power: 0
    shawnhall12 has no reputation, good or bad yet. (0)
    shawnhall12 is offline

    dexa is lacking

    I recently bulked up to a solid 186 at 5'11 ..... visible abs, v cut, obliques...etc my diet is insanely strict. I show up at dexafit chicago.... he measures me says 15% and im like..... uhhh i think thays impossible.... he says its android fat. I lift up my shirt, n show him my near 8pack and goes "uhhhh it mist be fat on your organs...." i politely thanked him later i had a very thorough skin caliper reading done and measure between 4.9 and 5.5 %...... then spoke to a doctor who said unless my body is killing itself.... i dont have "fat organs" ...
    Thoughts? Thankee
    Shawn
    Reply With Quote

  18. #48
    Registered User shawnhall12's Avatar
    Join Date: May 2012
    Posts: 2
    Rep Power: 0
    shawnhall12 has no reputation, good or bad yet. (0)
    shawnhall12 is offline
    Originally Posted by shawnhall12 View Post
    I recently bulked up to a solid 186 at 5'11 ..... visible abs, v cut, obliques...etc my diet is insanely strict. I show up at dexafit chicago.... he measures me says 15% and im like..... uhhh i think thays impossible.... he says its android fat. I lift up my shirt, n show him my near 8pack and goes "uhhhh it mist be fat on your organs...." i politely thanked him later i had a very thorough skin caliper reading done and measure between 4.9 and 5.5 %...... then spoke to a doctor who said unless my body is killing itself.... i dont have "fat organs" ...
    Thoughts? Thankee
    Shawn
    Sorry for not proofing im doin cardio right now. Ha.
    Reply With Quote

  19. #49
    Soon JackedPlusRich's Avatar
    Join Date: Apr 2012
    Location: Mate, Australia
    Age: 35
    Posts: 803
    Rep Power: 273
    JackedPlusRich will become famous soon enough. (+50) JackedPlusRich will become famous soon enough. (+50) JackedPlusRich will become famous soon enough. (+50) JackedPlusRich will become famous soon enough. (+50) JackedPlusRich will become famous soon enough. (+50) JackedPlusRich will become famous soon enough. (+50) JackedPlusRich will become famous soon enough. (+50) JackedPlusRich will become famous soon enough. (+50) JackedPlusRich will become famous soon enough. (+50) JackedPlusRich will become famous soon enough. (+50) JackedPlusRich will become famous soon enough. (+50)
    JackedPlusRich is offline
    Originally Posted by shawnhall12 View Post
    I recently bulked up to a solid 186 at 5'11 ..... visible abs, v cut, obliques...etc my diet is insanely strict. I show up at dexafit chicago.... he measures me says 15% and im like..... uhhh i think thays impossible.... he says its android fat. I lift up my shirt, n show him my near 8pack and goes "uhhhh it mist be fat on your organs...." i politely thanked him later i had a very thorough skin caliper reading done and measure between 4.9 and 5.5 %...... then spoke to a doctor who said unless my body is killing itself.... i dont have "fat organs" ...
    Thoughts? Thankee
    Shawn
    Error rates for DEXA scans range between 3 - 10%. This means you could actually be as low as 5%. It's more likely you are between 8-10% and your scan was off by 5-7%. 5.5% bf is dangerous and near impossible to maintain for any length of time.
    Diet is what separates the Jacked from the Frustrated.
    Reply With Quote

  20. #50
    Registered User YaboySilenT33's Avatar
    Join Date: May 2012
    Age: 32
    Posts: 95
    Rep Power: 145
    YaboySilenT33 has no reputation, good or bad yet. (0)
    YaboySilenT33 is offline
    Originally Posted by JackedPlusRich View Post
    Error rates for DEXA scans range between 3 - 10%. This means you could actually be as low as 5%. It's more likely you are between 8-10% and your scan was off by 5-7%. 5.5% bf is dangerous and near impossible to maintain for any length of time.
    I did a dexa today and it said I was 13.2% bodyfat, down from 13.8% two weeks ago. however, I feel like that isn't accurate, considering my abs clearly show and are on the verge of a 8 pack. A pic is attached. But it said my lean mass went up and my bodyfat went down, which would explain my 1.4 lb gain....are DEXA's accurate? My professor in exercise sci said I'm really closer to 7% and you multiply the DEXA reading by .5-.6
    Attached Images
    Last edited by YaboySilenT33; 06-08-2012 at 09:04 AM.
    Hard work pays off, you get what you put in. So why stop now, gotta keep pushin' -Juelz Santana
    Reply With Quote

  21. #51
    Blackmill Music 10/10 th3pwn3r's Avatar
    Join Date: Jul 2008
    Location: Chicago, Illinois, United States
    Posts: 10,607
    Rep Power: 4499
    th3pwn3r is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) th3pwn3r is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) th3pwn3r is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) th3pwn3r is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) th3pwn3r is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) th3pwn3r is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) th3pwn3r is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) th3pwn3r is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) th3pwn3r is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) th3pwn3r is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500) th3pwn3r is a glorious beacon of knowledge. (+2500)
    th3pwn3r is offline
    Originally Posted by YaboySilenT33 View Post
    I did a dexa today and it said I was 13.2% bodyfat, down from 13.8% two weeks ago. however, I feel like that isn't accurate, considering my abs clearly show and are on the verge of a 8 pack. A pic is attached. But it said my lean mass went up and my bodyfat went down, which would explain my 1.4 lb gain....are DEXA's accurate? My professor in exercise sci said I'm really closer to 7% and you multiply the DEXA reading by .5-.6
    That's just a blurry 4 pack in my opinion, far from an 8 pack. Anyways...the number you're given isn't going to change how you look now is it? For that reason you shouldn't give a sh11t about the numbers. You're looking pretty good man and that's all that matters.
    "Everyone thinks they're on their way to single digit body fat as soon as they see a blurry four-pack in the right lighting.Your final body weight at 5-6% will be a lot less than what you think.Talk to me again when you get in contest shape." I'd be willing to say that 95% of people on this forum accomplish nothing in years, don't be one of those people. It's sad,they seem to have the knowledge many don't but can't utilize it.
    Reply With Quote

  22. #52
    Registered User IronPuma10's Avatar
    Join Date: Jan 2015
    Age: 32
    Posts: 1
    Rep Power: 0
    IronPuma10 has no reputation, good or bad yet. (0)
    IronPuma10 is offline
    Originally Posted by shawnhall12 View Post
    I recently bulked up to a solid 186 at 5'11 ..... visible abs, v cut, obliques...etc my diet is insanely strict. I show up at dexafit chicago.... he measures me says 15% and im like..... uhhh i think thays impossible.... he says its android fat. I lift up my shirt, n show him my near 8pack and goes "uhhhh it mist be fat on your organs...." i politely thanked him later i had a very thorough skin caliper reading done and measure between 4.9 and 5.5 %...... then spoke to a doctor who said unless my body is killing itself.... i dont have "fat organs" ...
    Thoughts? Thankee
    Shawn


    Hi Shawn,

    I'm actually certified to operate a Dexa scanner. Unfortunately, the Dexa scanner IS correct within 1-2% (unless you are dehydrated or have taken calcium supplements within ~4 hours of the reading). Even if you were (give or take) 15% BF, you most likely have a genetic advantage when it comes to abdominal structure. In your case, your abs are either very well developed or are structured in a way that they are slightly more forward on your body in relation to your chest and hips. Other people who are not so lucky could get down to 10% and still will not have a perfect 8 or even 6 pack. However, you should know that men are predisposed to having higher percentages of body fat in their abdomen (genetics & hormones, once again), so you really need to have a Dexa scan done which includes VAT (visceral adipose tissue) technology to find out how much fat is directly AROUND your organs (your organs aren't simply "fat"...) before you believe your doctor, who is not trained in this field. Also, your body doesn't have to be "killing itself," it's actually being smart when it puts fat around your organs, because it's saving up for possible times of need if starvation were to ever occur. It just doesn't realize that it will cause itself more harm than good when it comes to potential cardiovascular disease from increased visceral fat levels. Keep in mind that your brain is almost all fatty tissue...so that would account for 1-1.5% as well. Anyway, I've seen patients who are 4.5% BF and still have 1 entire pound of fat surrounding their internal organs in their abdomen. Skin caliper tests have no way of reading this, and they also do not take into account your muscle mass & bone weight. Just a few things to think about before you jump to conclusions.
    Reply With Quote

  23. #53
    Summer is coming Maverick2015's Avatar
    Join Date: Dec 2014
    Location: United States
    Posts: 2,753
    Rep Power: 837
    Maverick2015 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) Maverick2015 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) Maverick2015 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) Maverick2015 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) Maverick2015 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) Maverick2015 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) Maverick2015 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) Maverick2015 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) Maverick2015 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) Maverick2015 is a jewel in the rough. (+500) Maverick2015 is a jewel in the rough. (+500)
    Maverick2015 is offline
    Originally Posted by IronPuma10 View Post
    Hi Shawn,

    I'm actually certified to operate a Dexa scanner. Unfortunately, the Dexa scanner IS correct within 1-2% (unless you are dehydrated or have taken calcium supplements within ~4 hours of the reading). Even if you were (give or take) 15% BF, you most likely have a genetic advantage when it comes to abdominal structure. In your case, your abs are either very well developed or are structured in a way that they are slightly more forward on your body in relation to your chest and hips. Other people who are not so lucky could get down to 10% and still will not have a perfect 8 or even 6 pack. However, you should know that men are predisposed to having higher percentages of body fat in their abdomen (genetics & hormones, once again), so you really need to have a Dexa scan done which includes VAT (visceral adipose tissue) technology to find out how much fat is directly AROUND your organs (your organs aren't simply "fat"...) before you believe your doctor, who is not trained in this field. Also, your body doesn't have to be "killing itself," it's actually being smart when it puts fat around your organs, because it's saving up for possible times of need if starvation were to ever occur. It just doesn't realize that it will cause itself more harm than good when it comes to potential cardiovascular disease from increased visceral fat levels. Keep in mind that your brain is almost all fatty tissue...so that would account for 1-1.5% as well. Anyway, I've seen patients who are 4.5% BF and still have 1 entire pound of fat surrounding their internal organs in their abdomen. Skin caliper tests have no way of reading this, and they also do not take into account your muscle mass & bone weight. Just a few things to think about before you jump to conclusions.
    Check the date of the thread. Still good info, but no need to resurrect this thread.
    Was 280+ at the beginning of 2019 (highest recorded weight is 290 on Dec 13, 2018).

    Jan 01, 2020...202.0
    Jan 08, 2020...goal is 200.5
    Reply With Quote

  24. #54
    Registered User Havvick's Avatar
    Join Date: Jan 2013
    Posts: 2
    Rep Power: 0
    Havvick is not very well liked. (-100) Havvick is not very well liked. (-100) Havvick is not very well liked. (-100) Havvick is not very well liked. (-100) Havvick is not very well liked. (-100) Havvick is not very well liked. (-100) Havvick is not very well liked. (-100) Havvick is not very well liked. (-100) Havvick is not very well liked. (-100) Havvick is not very well liked. (-100) Havvick is not very well liked. (-100)
    Havvick is offline
    Dexa includes everything including the lean mass and "fat" in your head, so peoples results tend to be higher than most other methods of testing. I've had numerous methods of testing body fat and dexa has seemed to be the only one thats consistent and can pick up on little changes and is quite accurate. (providing the tester calibrates their machine daily)
    Plus it gives you a wealth of knowledge about every part of your body, helping you identify where your weight is stored mostly, picking up on imbalances in muscle mass or fat mas etc.
    I see alot of people posting about getting body fat tested at "8%" or "10%" and they complain why cant they see abbs, and they get a dexa scan and find that they are around the 14% mark, and that majority of their weight is stored in their trunk, whilst having little fat elsewhere.
    Reply With Quote

  25. #55
    Registered User write2staceyz's Avatar
    Join Date: Oct 2016
    Location: California, United States
    Age: 42
    Posts: 797
    Rep Power: 16609
    write2staceyz is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) write2staceyz is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) write2staceyz is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) write2staceyz is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) write2staceyz is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) write2staceyz is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) write2staceyz is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) write2staceyz is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) write2staceyz is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) write2staceyz is a splendid one to behold. (+10000) write2staceyz is a splendid one to behold. (+10000)
    write2staceyz is offline
    Originally Posted by Tiffany_P View Post
    By the way, would you mind posting some pictures? It'd be great to see what an accurate 16% BF looks like for all the people on here who are always asking for guesses/opinions.
    My profile has a picture of dexa scan in case you are curious of what dexa scan looks like, just don't make fun of my body fat, LOL.

    I look more skinny than the result based on all my friends say, so I only rely on dexa scan to check the result because clothes can deceive people LOL.

    Dexa scan costs 45 dollar at my area. It is 6 minutes process get done in the truck.
    Reply With Quote

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts