Calipers, redux

[AHM]

So, I went last week to have my bf% done w/ calipers at the gym, but I worked out first. Oops! So, I went back today and had it done instead.

So, she (being the trainer) did a 3 site test, tricep, suprailliac, thigh. According to the chart that went w/ the calipers, that came out to 22%. So, she (and I) thought that was high, and checked the other chart which she said she preferred. That one had me at 14% (duh, no wonder she likes that chart better! lol!).

So, I know these tests and measurments and bioimpedance are all pretty sketchy. But how can something like the charts be SO dramatically different? And what am I supposed to take away from this? Most online calculators have me at soemwhere between 14 and 19%. I had just really hoped that this would give me a better idea of where I am exactly. But I guess not. Poo.

[bilbobaggins]

well a 8-9 sight test would be much more accurate. Can you see your abs?

[AHM]

I agree, I am looking for directions for an 8 or 9 site and haven't found one yet...

Beginning to see abs, but not totally there yet!

Bottom line, they should NOT be that different! I mean, holy cow, 22% and 14% are WAY different!If I were you, I wouldn't be satisfied with that! I'd HAVE to know! At 22% most women aren't able to see much their abs (depending on how thick they are and how your fat is distributed) but at 14% most women have some nice abs. I can vouch for this, I definitely have way better abs at 15% than I did at 22%. Anyway, here are two sites I recommend. BPB and I have been using the second site, doing 10 sites for our bf measurements.

http://weightrainer.virtualave.net/bodycalc.html

http://maelstrom.seos.uvic.ca/people/zahariev/misc/bf_women.html

[AHM]

I agree, I am not satisfied! I used my accumeasure to do a 1 site (which is all their chart has details for) and it jived w/ the 14.9%. As do most of the other "calculators" out there. However, I seriously doubt I am that low. I would say more likely 16-17. I am on my way to abs, but NOT there yet!

That maelstrom site is great and I will do the 10 site this weekend. The Excell sheet is great! (I hate math!)

Thank you!

[davethewonderpony]

If you post your millimeter totals or PM them to me I can calculate it for you as well, whether it is 3,4,7 or more sites.

Remember that average BF levels for women are between 20-25%, I think if you are around 14% you would be able to see abs for sure. That is a huge difference, though. How could a trainer look you in the eye and tell you that it is 22% and then come back and tell you 14? That's the trainer not knowing what they are doing IMO.

[AHM]

I agree, Dave, I don't think she knew what she was doing either. And all she did was look at the charts that came w/ the calipers (22) and some miscellaneous other chart (14 - I also found this chart online when searching, so who knows?)

My 3 site MM's were:
tricep 12
suprailiac 8
thigh 13

I am still going to do the 10 site and plug it into that excell sheet this weekend.

<blockquote><font class="small">posted by AHM:</font><hr /> ...

That maelstrom site is great and I will do the 10 site this weekend. The Excell sheet is great! (I hate math!)

Thank you! <hr /></blockquote>

Yeah, we really like it too. You're welcome! http://www.plauder-smilies.de/happy/xyxthumbs.gif

[davethewonderpony]

Okay, the results I got (Jackson-Pollock) was 12.8% for the Sum of 3. However, I noticed something a little bit funny. You're saying your iliac crest was only 8mm? And your tricep was 12? I don't think she did your iliac correctly. You would have to have an incredibly thin fat free waist to have only an 8 for your iliac crest. When my BF% was 8-9 my iliac was still in double digits, and that site is always a large one for women as well.

The iliac should be measured at a 45 degree downward angle, at the midline of the body, 3 cm up from the iliac crest (the top of your hip bone). I have a feeling it wasn't measured properly because I know I have NEVER tested a woman with that measurement for an iliac crest, and that includes figure competitors I have measured.

[Mrs_Centricity]

Has anyone here done the MRI body fat test? It's supposed to be realy acurate within 1% . And supposedly only costs around $50.

I have never really looked into myself just heard about it from others.

[thunderpunch]

Im understanding the technology behind it,it would be similar to a water test but,less freaky.But,thats pretty cool!