BMI - scale vs. chart vs. covert bailey method

ddc · 07-08-2009, 04:49 PM

I'm 5'7" 150 lbs and the covert calculator said 29% for me.
Close to what my Taylor scale says.......

I just went through the covert calculator again and it doesn't ask for your height-??????????

jendiet · 07-08-2009, 04:51 PM

Well, I don't think 37 is accurate either. Don't worry I'm not upset. I KNOW what I am working with. I have to get rid of saddle bags, spare tire, some cottage cheese...

I am looking more at fat loss than anything--so that really puts me at the mercy of these scales--so I don't have the money to do the hydrostatic but I can watch my progress with BOTH covert Bailey and my seemingly static scale.

Thanks again for your input!

sacha · 07-08-2009, 04:52 PM

Well, the truth is that numbers are just that - numbers - if you are feeling better, sleeping better, walking better, that's all you need to know that things are going in the right direction!

jendiet · 07-08-2009, 04:57 PM

ddc--I am pretty muscular--but dang you have some guns...nice!

you have a Taylor too? Is it a bioimpedence? What does your Taylor say about BF%.

Rebound · 07-08-2009, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jendiet

well since there is like little to none fat on my lower legs (my calves are 15 inches in circumference). 5 lbs each on my hips, 10 lbs across my abdomen, 5 lbs across my back. 5 lbs across my butt, and another 10 lbs elsewhere--I would say 43 lbs of fat is right compared to 66--that is actually ridiculous. Now that I think of it.

If you were currently carrying only 43 pounds of fat at a total weight of 185, your "0%" body fat weight would be 142 pounds. That would make your 135 goal weight very difficult to achieve.

If you are carrying closer to 66 pounds of fat, you would weigh 119 if you lost it all. At your goal weight of 135 you would be carrying 16 pounds of fat and would have a body fat percentage of about 12%.

Of course, we all know that it isn't QUITE this cut and dried, but it's certainly some "food for thought!"

Personally I'd rather have a high body fat right now! (Which I do!) That way there's more to lose!

jendiet · 07-08-2009, 05:10 PM

Again, thanks for the advice!

pintobean · 07-09-2009, 12:29 AM

According to the link posted in this thread, after I took the test, I have 25% body fat. And according to the site results - You have 40.5 Pounds of fat and 121.5 Pounds of lean (muscle, bone, body water) -
I find it hard to believe. I assumed it would be more.

ddc · 07-09-2009, 01:30 AM

Jennifer, my scale is about 10 (?) yrs old and says it works by bioelectrical impedence.
I'm really not sure how accurate it is, and I maybe only do the BF function a few times per year. I can tell from how I look if I'm getting too flabby-haha!
I know that it said to do the BF measurement with the feet slightly damp, so I usually do it after I get out of the shower.

Good luck to you and keep up the good work!!

jendiet · 07-09-2009, 08:27 AM

oh...i never wet my feet? I lost the instruction booklet to it a long time ago, it has all these cool modes and 2 people settings--and I don't know how to operate them anymore. I'll try it with my feet slightly wet.

JayEll · 07-09-2009, 11:35 AM

I would try to check the instructions. Maybe online? Because my Tanita scale says feet should be bare and clean, but not to step on the scale when wet.

Jay

jendiet · 07-09-2009, 12:06 PM

actually, it doesn't matter with that thing. I don't get it. AT 196 my body fat % was 37. So it irks me. I don't care because my clothes are very loose fitting and I can see a HUGE difference. I know I'm not losing all muscle because it's my squishy parts that are shrinking...

I will use covert bailey to monitor my progress. When I see progress with that--I'll try my scale again. For now, I give up on that mode on it.

Bumbleberry · 07-09-2009, 10:35 PM

At 5'3 and 194 lbs, I was 38 % BF.

Haven't been tested since that time.

jendiet · 07-09-2009, 11:15 PM

Thank you bumble--that seems about right for that weight. My scale read 37 BF% at 196. But at 179.8--I think it should be changed!

Sooo..I figured out what it was...

I was dehydrated. I didn't realize being dehydrated REALLY would interfere with the bioimpedence.

I drank a glass of water...and 30 minutes later decided to try again. bingo!

It read 34.5% I am no longer upset with my scale. I read up on them and it says dehydration will cause innacurate results. It wasn't so much inaccuracy as it was NO CHANGE at all? From 196-179????

Now that I know the trick. I will continue to use my scale to check my progress ( i dehydrate really easily-no I'm not a diabetic)