Other/Mixed Body fat calculator not BMI or DEXA

[guardian7]

This body fat calculator combines the usual height and weight but also body measurements into its model. No free method seems very accurate but does this seem good enough for general guidelines and to check for progress for those who are not able or willing to use DEXA or other more sophisticated measurements. BMI has been proven to be particularly unreliable for those who resistance train and meant for general population statistics not individual progress.

Is anyone able to evaluate and comment on this. PN is quite a well regarded organization I understand.

The Precision Nutrition Body Fat Calculator

Plug in your stats and get your free personalized body fat report

www.precisionnutrition.com

 

[BillSteamshovel]

Did not do a good job for me. But that doesnt mean it will be bad for everyone, Navy method has never worked well for me and is used in the PN estimate.

PN calculator had me at 26% bodyfat whereas my "gut feel" from comparison photos on internet would be between 15 and 20.
3 point caliper estimate done by physio has me at 16% I didn't ask for the plus/minus on that but easy enough to google it..

At the bottom of the page PN says it uses a combination of 3 other calculators. Navy, Cunn Bae and YMCA. There will be an +/- error associated with each of those methods. The PN accuracy/error will depend upon how the PN index is calculated from the 3 others.

 

[Ege]

I have an unpopular experience. Mirror check with the help of body fat percentage images works for me and given the fact that the so called objective ways of measuring body fat percentage have their own errors, it is good enough for most. You can google your self to see some reliable experts advice this on youtube and in blogs.

I have found below article on the method with a quick google.

SaunaBar

 

[LukeV]

All methods are inaccurate (even DEXA the so-called gold standard can produce a range of results for the same individual at the same body fat level) but they all seem to serve the purpose if the purpose is to track change in body fat over time in someone who’s body fat percentage fits within that common, say, 12% to 30% range. I’ve probably used them all this way, to good effect but they’re almost certainly not telling me anything independent of body weight on a cheap set of scales. Unless you‘re on anabolic steroids you will not be putting on muscle quick enough to cheat the scales (for those who think they need a calculator to differentiate muscle gain from fat loss)

 

[Ege]

All methods are inaccurate (even DEXA the so-called gold standard can produce a range of results for the same individual at the same body fat level) but they all seem to serve the purpose if the purpose is to track change in body fat over time in someone who’s body fat percentage fits within that common, say, 12% to 30% range. I’ve probably used them all this way, to good effect but they’re almost certainly not telling me anything independent of body weight on a cheap set of scales. Unless you‘re on anabolic steroids you will not be putting on muscle quick enough to cheat the scales (for those who think they need a calculator to differentiate muscle gain from fat loss)

Agreed and in that perspective a mirror check is a lot better than some body would believe.

Put a side the fluctuations from water, glycogen reserves etc, a natural adult can’t gain muscle fast enough to go up on scale on a caloric deficit.

And in my opinion, when you work on your strength (if you are a beginner or intermediate lifter) that is as good enough as you can do.

Honestly, we indeed all know very well if we are overweight or not and we will again know very well when we are no more overweight regardless of what dexa or BMI says. Check you tube it is full of dexa results that clearly does not make much sense.

 

[Kenny Croxdale]

Is anyone able to evaluate and comment on this. PN is quite a well regarded organization I understand.

Precision Nutrition

Yes, they are well regarded with nutirition and suggestion on training.

PN Calculator

Unfortunately. the PN Calculator is garbage.

All of the various method of measuring Body Fat Percentage aound educated guesses.

All method have plus/minus variance of accuracy. None was provide in the article.

The PN Calculator has an even greater variance of accuracy.

Vettiing The PN Calculator

That can be validated with DEXA or Hydrostatic Static Weighing performed by a University Lab with trained Technician.

PN calculator had me at 26% bodyfat whereas my "gut feel" from comparison photos on internet would be between 15 and 20.
3 point caliper estimate done by physio has me at 16%

Bill Reading

Since I don't know him, it is hard to make much of an evaluation.

However, I doubt the Bill body fat percentage is 26%. His estimation is it's 15 -20% is more realistic.

Calipers

How accurate Calipers are is primarly dependent on a well trained Technician who has performed hundreds of test.

A good Technician will use a tape measure to measure the precise spot to measure each time.

They will use a black marker to mark the exact spot.

If someone is not using this approach, the reliability of the reading is called into question.

That can be validated with DEXA or Hydrostatic Static Weighing performed by a University Lab with trained individuals.

The Foundation Trust

The foundation of trust in an individul, organization, company, etc is built on providing accurate information.,

Building trust is something the occurs overtime and not overnight.

Ironcially, trust can quickly be damaged or destroyed with inaccurate or misleading information.

Based on the PN Calculator article, there has been some damage done.

It bring into question other information that they might present.

 

[guardian7]

Precision Nutrition

Yes, they are well regarded with nutirition and suggestion on training.

PN Calculator

Unfortunately. the PN Calculator is garbage.

All of the various method of measuring Body Fat Percentage aound educated guesses.

All method have plus/minus variance of accuracy. None was provide in the article.

The PN Calculator has an even greater variance of accuracy.

Vettiing The PN Calculator

That can be validated with DEXA or Hydrostatic Static Weighing performed by a University Lab with trained Technician.



Bill Reading

Since I don't know him, it is hard to make much of an evaluation.

However, I doubt the Bill body fat percentage is 26%. His estimation is it's 15 -20% is more realistic.

Calipers

How accurate Calipers are is primarly dependent on a well trained Technician who has performed hundreds of test.

A good Technician will use a tape measure to measure the precise spot to measure each time.

They will use a black marker to mark the exact spot.

If someone is not using this approach, the reliability of the reading is called into question.

That can be validated with DEXA or Hydrostatic Static Weighing performed by a University Lab with trained individuals.

The Foundation Trust

The foundation of trust in an individul, organization, company, etc is built on providing accurate information.,

Building trust is something the occurs overtime and not overnight.

Ironcially, trust can quickly be damaged or destroyed with inaccurate or misleading information.

Based on the PN Calculator article, there has been some damage done.

It bring into question other information that they might present.

Thanks for the detailed analysis particularly issues of variance. I was just looking for the best tradeoff between accuracy and convenience in order just to get a decent gage of progress over time for general fitness that would be free and self-administered. BMI is unreliable. I have no need for DEXA or exact measurements. How you look/feel is too subjective and would be affected by mirrors, lighting, etc. Tape measure?

 

[BillSteamshovel]

How you look/feel is too subjective and would be affected by mirrors, lighting, etc. Tape measure?

I went from 100+kg to 78 then deliberately back up to 90+ and now on the way down again, some observations follow that might be helpful, am keen to hear from others regarding how they do the measurements.

I reckon if you use the same mirror and the same lighting all the time and a tape measure and a $5 caliper you would get a fairly good idea of what is changing.

A cheap caliper and tape measure, used consistently, will give numbers you can monitor in your diary or a spreadsheet and will definitely tell you whether bodyfat around the measuring points is increasing or decreasing.

If you make an effort to use the calipers in the exact same spot with the exact same "pinch" that would be great. People emphasise that you need to be trained to use calipers in a consistent fashion, but they will still give you an idea of whats going on if you are untrained. For example my belly pinch decreased from 15+ to 8mm, I do not think that is a 7mm "mistake".

If you set up a camera to take a selfie whilst doing a side plank you will see abs emerging over time as the abdominal fat gets used up, or you could see them slowly dissappear as you accumulate more bodyfat. Use the same lighting for consistency if you like.

You could even make up your own personal index ratios if you wanted to get fancy and calibrate them against your own photos for future reference.

How do diy bodybuilders do this stuff without spending a fortune on professional caliper and electronic measurements ?

Or you could simply forget about measuring and just go with photos I get the impression lots of people do that.

 

[LukeV]

Thanks for the detailed analysis particularly issues of variance. I was just looking for the best tradeoff between accuracy and convenience in order just to get a decent gage of progress over time for general fitness that would be free and self-administered. BMI is unreliable. I have no need for DEXA or exact measurements. How you look/feel is too subjective and would be affected by mirrors, lighting, etc. Tape measure?

Yeah tape measure is probably easiest and suits your purpose

 

[Kenny Croxdale]

the detailed analysis particularly issues of variance.

James Wright, Registered Dietitian

Wright wrote a great series examining the various method of calulating body fat precentages years ago.

Body Fat Testing
The Pitfalls of Body Fat "Measurement", Part 1

The Pitfalls of Body Fat "Measurement", Part 2 - Hydrostatic Weighing

The Pitfalls of Body Fat "Measurement", Part 3 - The Bod Pod

The Pitfalls of Body Fat "Measurement", Part 4 - Bioelectrical Impedance (BIA)

The Pitfalls of Body Fat "Measurement", Part 5 - Skinfolds

The Pitfalls of Body Fat "Measurement", Part 6 - Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry (DEXA)

The Pitfalls of Body Fat "Measurement", The Final Chapter

The Pitfalls of Bodyfat "Measurement": BIA & Skinfolds Strike Again (VIDE0)

Cheat Your Body Fat Test

My Personal Exerience

1) Hydrostatic Weight Body Fat Reading

Texas A&M Human Performance Lab

Years ago, I had it measured at the Texas A&M University Human Performace Lab with a qualifed Technician.

It came out about how I expected.

University of New Mexico Human Performance Lab

The reading was absurd. They had student performing the test that wasn't qualified.

The main issue was the he did not measure my Residual Lung Capacity; which is vital.

Fat Floats

Hydrostatic Weight is based on the fact that flat floats. Thus, the boyancy factor plays a large role in the reading.

Air in your lungs also makes you more boyant. Thus, a Qualitifed Technician must obtain your Residual Lung Capacity to determing your body fat percentage. Texas A&M did that. UNM did not.

2) Untra Sound Body Fat Analyzer

I was unimpressed with this method. The reading made no sense.

infrared Body Fat Analyzer

I was extremely unimpressed.

It measured me at 10%. That was too low. I knew that it had to be much higher.

It measured a Bodybuiling friend of mine who was leaner than was at 14%!

4) Bioelectrical Impedance (BIA)

This is one of the worst.

You need to follow a certain protocol before taking it to assure the best reading; which is still quetionable.

One of the issues the reading is influence by how it is take.

a) Scale BMI

If you carry a lot of fat in your lower body, it will give you a higher reading that it should.

If you have less fat in your lower body, it will give you a lower reading than you really are.

b) Handheld BMI

If you carry a lot of fat in your upper body, it will give you a higher reading that it should.

If you have less fat in your upper body, it will give you a lower reading than you really are.

Calipers

A good Techniican who has performed hundreds of test can provide you with a fairly reliable reading with in the plus or minus range of accuracy.

No Comment

Since I am not familar with the other methods...no comment.

 

[offwidth]

Can someone please articulate the useful and practical reasons why a person would need to accurately know their body fat percentage?

 

[Anna C]

Can someone please articulate the useful and practical reasons why a person would need to accurately know their body fat percentage?

The only uses I can think of are 1) motivational as one makes changes, and 2) to monitor the possible loss of lean body mass (LBM) as one loses bodyweight. I agree with others that both of these objectives can be met by the mirror. However some people have an impaired ability to objectively assess themselves in the mirror. This can go both ways; either denial of an unhealthy high BF% and thinking one is just fine when they really do need to make a change for improved health, or inability to accept one that is just fine (always wanting to go lower) due to some body dysmorphia. In this case, an objective measure such as BF% can help to "tell the truth."

 

[BillSteamshovel]

The only uses I can think of are 1) motivational as one makes changes

Yes, thats exactly why I do the measurements.
The numbers help reinforce/confirm the idea that "its all working as it should" and keep doing what you are doing.

 

[LukeV]

Can someone please articulate the useful and practical reasons why a person would need to accurately know their body fat percentage?

The same reason/s someone might want to know that they weigh, say, 89kg rather than 90kg. It's just another form of personal measurement used to determine pass/fail, to motivate, to assess progress etc. At its most basic it's no different to a 1RM really. Some people say "why bother?" while others want to know to microplate accuracy

 

[offwidth]

The same reason/s someone might want to know that they weigh, say, 89kg rather than 90kg. It's just another form of personal measurement used to determine pass/fail, to motivate, to assess progress etc. At its most basic it's no different to a 1RM really. Some people say "why bother?" while others want to know to microplate accuracy

Fair enough…

 

[guardian7]

The only uses I can think of are 1) motivational as one makes changes, and 2) to monitor the possible loss of lean body mass (LBM) as one loses bodyweight. I agree with others that both of these objectives can be met by the mirror. However some people have an impaired ability to objectively assess themselves in the mirror. This can go both ways; either denial of an unhealthy high BF% and thinking one is just fine when they really do need to make a change for improved health, or inability to accept one that is just fine (always wanting to go lower) due to some body dysmorphia. In this case, an objective measure such as BF% can help to "tell the truth."

Yes, you are right about perception being a problem for some people. A lot of people have difficulty with self-evaluation. We are also good at rationalizations such as my weight gain is due to muscle mass not fat. etc.

 

[guardian7]

James Wright, Registered Dietitian

Wright wrote a great series examining the various method of calulating body fat precentages years ago.

Body Fat Testing
The Pitfalls of Body Fat "Measurement", Part 1

The Pitfalls of Body Fat "Measurement", Part 2 - Hydrostatic Weighing

The Pitfalls of Body Fat "Measurement", Part 3 - The Bod Pod

The Pitfalls of Body Fat "Measurement", Part 4 - Bioelectrical Impedance (BIA)

The Pitfalls of Body Fat "Measurement", Part 5 - Skinfolds

The Pitfalls of Body Fat "Measurement", Part 6 - Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry (DEXA)

The Pitfalls of Body Fat "Measurement", The Final Chapter

The Pitfalls of Bodyfat "Measurement": BIA & Skinfolds Strike Again (VIDE0)

Cheat Your Body Fat Test

My Personal Exerience

1) Hydrostatic Weight Body Fat Reading

Texas A&M Human Performance Lab

Years ago, I had it measured at the Texas A&M University Human Performace Lab with a qualifed Technician.

It came out about how I expected.

University of New Mexico Human Performance Lab

The reading was absurd. They had student performing the test that wasn't qualified.

The main issue was the he did not measure my Residual Lung Capacity; which is vital.

Fat Floats

Hydrostatic Weight is based on the fact that flat floats. Thus, the boyancy factor plays a large role in the reading.

Air in your lungs also makes you more boyant. Thus, a Qualitifed Technician must obtain your Residual Lung Capacity to determing your body fat percentage. Texas A&M did that. UNM did not.

2) Untra Sound Body Fat Analyzer

I was unimpressed with this method. The reading made no sense.

infrared Body Fat Analyzer

I was extremely unimpressed.

It measured me at 10%. That was too low. I knew that it had to be much higher.

It measured a Bodybuiling friend of mine who was leaner than was at 14%!

4) Bioelectrical Impedance (BIA)

This is one of the worst.

You need to follow a certain protocol before taking it to assure the best reading; which is still quetionable.

One of the issues the reading is influence by how it is take.

a) Scale BMI

If you carry a lot of fat in your lower body, it will give you a higher reading that it should.

If you have less fat in your lower body, it will give you a lower reading than you really are.

b) Handheld BMI

If you carry a lot of fat in your upper body, it will give you a higher reading that it should.

If you have less fat in your upper body, it will give you a lower reading than you really are.

Calipers

A good Techniican who has performed hundreds of test can provide you with a fairly reliable reading with in the plus or minus range of accuracy.

No Comment

Since I am not familar with the other methods...no comment.

As I thought, it seems much more difficult than one would think.

 

[BJJ Shawn]

The same reason/s someone might want to know that they weigh, say, 89kg rather than 90kg. It's just another form of personal measurement used to determine pass/fail, to motivate, to assess progress etc. At its most basic it's no different to a 1RM really. Some people say "why bother?" while others want to know to microplate accuracy

Kind of, ish…

Don’t forget that a lot of people compete in weight limit sports, so there’s a necessity involved with knowing your weight for a lot of us.

 

[guardian7]

Kind of, ish…

Don’t forget that a lot of people compete in weight limit sports, so there’s a necessity involved with knowing your weight for a lot of us.

Good point. When I was doing Muay Thai for fitness (not competition) I was astounded at the height-weight ratios of some of the weight classes in kickboxing. I also got some of my best weight loss results from boxing. I imagine weight assessment is also really important for some first responder or military job or selection requirements.

 

[Sam Goldner]

This body fat calculator combines the usual height and weight but also body measurements into its model. No free method seems very accurate but does this seem good enough for general guidelines and to check for progress for those who are not able or willing to use DEXA or other more sophisticated measurements. BMI has been proven to be particularly unreliable for those who resistance train and meant for general population statistics not individual progress.

Is anyone able to evaluate and comment on this. PN is quite a well regarded organization I understand.

The Precision Nutrition Body Fat Calculator

Plug in your stats and get your free personalized body fat report

www.precisionnutrition.com

I like the report it kicks out after with the variance and giving a general overview of what the weight-loss path can look like. I also like that it discusses the stratification of health-risk levels based on different measurements.

Is it perfect? No. Does it need to be for almost everyone using it? No. I am not disregarding the inaccuracies of the various equations, and the possibility that the way they wrote their algorithm may actually make them worse (I’d like to think they made it better but I have no idea), I’m merely saying I don’t care because it only needs to be “good enough.”