- 01-01-2005, 05:35 PM
- 01-01-2005, 09:16 PM
- 01-01-2005, 10:17 PM
01-01-2005, 11:14 PM
01-01-2005, 11:54 PM
01-02-2005, 12:00 AM
01-02-2005, 12:16 AM
Thanks I think edge is closet:
love handles-petruding lower belly=14ish%
You know Tanita told me I was 16% the other night @ my mates house.
I think I have about 5 kg's(10lb) to lose- at 1kg a week- shouldnt be too bad- a couple p.s.m.f days will kick ass.
also I like this online bodyfat tester- you guys should try it
01-02-2005, 12:27 AM
mybodycomp.com is way better than that place....
I'd say you're around 14%. However, the fat layer is not too thick.
%BF isn't always a good measure, b/c a 180lb person, for example, with 5mm of BF surrounding their entire body will have lower bf% than a 120lb person w/ 5mm of BF surrounding whole body (I'm just using rough numbers). That's because there is more LBM.
I.E. I've got more visible fat in some areas that you, but I've got much more LBM so it's possible that I could test around your same BF% or even lower.....(probably not lower...I'm like 15%)
01-02-2005, 12:35 AM
That is exactly why BF is stated as a percentage. It does take into account how much lean muscle you have. It also takes into account how old you are. A 20 year old at 10% is going to look fatter than a 50 year old at 10% because inorder for the 50 year old to get to 10% his overall mm measurements have to be lower than the 20 year old. This is because no matter how fit you are, by the time you reach 50 or even 35 you have more fat surrounding your organs than a fit person in their teens.Originally Posted by kwyckemynd00
As with most things the BF% testing with calipers where figured according to numerous tests completed on white men, that is because of the way things were and many times still are in the world unfortunately. But politics etc aside:
So if BF measuring BF% by calipers asians should increase the % number by approx 2 because of less dense bones as evidenced by their gymnastic abilities.
Redheads should decrease the % number by 1 because their bones tend to be denser than the average population as evidenced by the large number (percentage wise) of redheaded athletes in contact sports such as boxing and basketball. And african americans should lower the body fat % number they get with calipers by approx 2 because of denser bones.
01-02-2005, 01:18 AM
I misread your post, CROWLER, and thought you were disagreeing with my statement that bf% is a bad measurement for a person to judge their visible "shreddedness", so I did some basic math...after all of that hard work, I reread your post and realized you weren't disagreeing oops!!
So, for all of those nay sayers and non-believers out there, I left the math up there.
Point of this following peice was simply: BF% is not the best way to determine your shrededness....
Okay, let's do the example with a cube. Lets say we're dealing with a cube of water. Cube means all sides are equad. water's density is 1g/cm^3.
Let's assume we have a 1g cube and a 2 g cube. lets find the surface area of both.
we have density (1g)
*we've determined that the side length of a one gram cube of water is 1cm.
find surface area:
**There are six sides on a cube. Each side is LxW. LxW = 1cm^2. So area = 6 sides x 1 cm/side == 6cm^2 of area
*Now, we've determined the area of a 1g cube of water is 6cm^2.
Solve for 2 gram cube:
Again, we alread have c (density).
*we've determined that the side length of a 2g cube is 1.25cm
LxW = 1.25cm x 1.25cm = 1.56cm^2
1.56cm^2/side * 6 sides = 9.375cm^2
So, even though we doubled the mass of the cube, the surface area only increased by a factor of 1.5!!
Therefore, if a person of larger size, but with an equal amount of bodyfat (cm thickness) layered over his body was given a bodyfat percentage test, the larger person would show up with a lower BF% although visibly and phsyically the layer of fat covering the body is the same.
Of course, this does not take into account fat anywhere other than the fat outside of the body, but that's an irrelevant factor assuming ideal conditions. NOTE: I'm not getting theoretical here...I'm simply doing the math that cannot be denied.
BF% is a good measurement, but what is more important is HOW YOU LOOK. If the goal is to have a six pack, dont ask what BF% you need to have....just do the workout and find out.
01-02-2005, 01:27 AM
Originally Posted by kwyckemynd00
I HATE YOU HATE YOU HATE YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Because I have no idea what your little math signs and stuff meanses you make me feel stupid
No problem buddy. Have a good night, I'm gonna hit the sack.
BTW it is still ok if I use change in my BF% to measure progress?
01-02-2005, 01:40 AM
L = Length
W = Width
^2 = squared (i.e. x*x)
^3 = cubed (i.e. x*x*x)
....ok, I'll stop here
BF% is good for big guys...but if I were a smaller, less muscular guy...I'd stick to progress Take your pic
01-02-2005, 12:05 PM
01-03-2005, 12:30 AM
i really don't know what your bf% is because i'm terrible at estimating that, but i would say your best bet is to gain as much muscle as you can and don't worry about bf right now, you've got room to put on muscle which will lower your bf% on its own
and thanks for the compliment
01-03-2005, 06:15 PM
yeah' Thanx for the responses's
yeah Im a small guy- but if you see a full body pic, my head looks small for my body-
its like instead of getting visible progress in say arm's or legs- my body grows alltogether as one.
I saw this one picture of a guy who's going threw a similar thing:
his body doesnt look big- but when you see his head- its just like WTF??!?
ever see super mario brothers or play double dragon? you know those guys who throw the boudlers? yeah that look aint hot!!!!
01-03-2005, 06:18 PM
01-03-2005, 06:54 PM
01-03-2005, 07:07 PM
Yeah, I know- by looking at your right hand.
I meant the angle and where your shoulder's are-inline with your hips are plus new with the pix- so trying to click the frickin mouse n pose-dude it sucked.
anyway: give this kid time, its a goal to set: glenihan's abs!
Similar Forum Threads
- By khafra in forum Weight LossReplies: 3Last Post: 05-13-2003, 12:33 PM
- By belbs75 in forum Exercise ScienceReplies: 5Last Post: 04-27-2003, 01:38 PM
- By Matthew D in forum Weight LossReplies: 3Last Post: 04-07-2003, 11:25 PM
- By YellowJacket in forum Weight LossReplies: 0Last Post: 03-02-2003, 07:33 PM
- By YellowJacket in forum Weight LossReplies: 3Last Post: 01-12-2003, 05:32 PM