|
Related Topics:
| Getting too fat -- need cutting advice - I'm currently 6'6" 270 and and have been lifting steadily for 9 months after a couple years off. I've been bulking for 3 months and have developed an admirable gut. I was gonna wait till the spring to cut but feel like I'm letting it get away from
Fitting alcohol into diet plans - I'm currently on a ~3000 kcal/day diet; 35% from protein, 45% from carbs, 20% from fat. If I wanted to have a beer or two this weekend, I'm wondering where's the most logical place to swap out some calories from my diet. Should I cut back on fat or..
Questions about Athletes and Dietary Supplements - Dear Sir and Madam: I am a student at the of Northern Iowa, and I am very in Athletes and Dietary because I use dietary as part of my training; and I am writing a report about this topic. I..
check out my cutting diet - Here is a typical day. Due to my schedule I can only get three meals in a day instead of the more optimal 5 or 6. Breakfast 4 extra large eggs fried(I use cooking spray to minimize fat calories) 2 slices wheat bread 2 cups of 1% milk Lunch Roast beef.
How Much to Increase Calories Per Week? - Hi, I just started my HST cycle on Monday, and I'm currently at 2500 calories per day w/ 200 grams protein (I'm ~ 205lbs). I will need to eat more to support more muscle mass, but I don't want to put on too much fat. How often and by how much should I
|
|
|
Next: Weight Training & Fat Loss: Weight Loss Dietary Supplements - Did You Know You Were Be..
|
| Author |
Message |
External
Since: Dec 24, 2005
Posts: 33
|
(Msg. 1) Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 11:21 am
Post subject: Fat measurement accuracy
Archived from groups: misc>fitness>weights (more info?)
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 | |
External
Since: Apr 20, 2007
Posts: 57
|
(Msg. 2) Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 11:21 am
Post subject: Re: Fat measurement accuracy [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Feb 3, 6:21 am, "Manco" <manco_doll....TakeThisOut@net2blah.com> wrote:
> Calipers or tape-measure with the Army/Navy formula? Alot of people swear by
> the army formula from tape measurements. Of course the CT-scan is the gold
> standard now.
haHA! The Army/Navy formula is bullsh!t. There were guys who said they
were zero and one percent BF based on that formula. While they were
certainly lean, no one has zero bodyfat.
Gold standard, eh?
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=ct-scan+for+bodyfat+measurement
Interesting. I was not aware of that gizmo being used for bf
measurement.
The mirror is your best tool, however. Numbers are entertaining and
can offer bragging rights, but how you look is what really counts wrt
your gut, etc. I mean if you've got a muffin top or five chins who
cares if you're 30% bf or 55% bf, you've got a problem. Luckily, it's
one that can typically be solved with a treadmill and fewer calories!
-- |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Apr 20, 2007
Posts: 57
|
(Msg. 3) Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 3:15 pm
Post subject: Re: Fat measurement accuracy [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Feb 3, 6:13 pm, "Manco" <manco_doll... RemoveThis @net2blah.com> wrote:
[...]
> But CT fat scans cost at least $500, so not practical more then once very
> few years.
What if you're Michael Jordan or Tiger Woods or any of the other
assorted and varied megapaid professional athletes? Or, hey, what if
you're an elementary school art teacher, single, with no dependents,
and living in an apartment that only costs $305 per month in rent?
What THEN?
WHO DO I PAY???
Wait, there's groceries to be considered.
SCRATCH THAT LAST!
-- >> Stay informed about: Fat measurement accuracy |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Dec 24, 2005
Posts: 33
|
(Msg. 4) Posted: Sun Feb 03, 2008 11:13 pm
Post subject: Re: Fat measurement accuracy [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Tom Anderson wrote:
>
> Probably. But at least the error would be constant, so if you had some
> idea of what the error was, you could correct the tape measurement.
> Not sure how you'd work out the error in the first place, unless you
> splashed out on a CT scan.
>
> tom
But CT fat scans cost at least $500, so not practical more then once very
few years. >> Stay informed about: Fat measurement accuracy |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Dec 24, 2005
Posts: 33
|
(Msg. 5) Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 1:52 am
Post subject: Re: Fat measurement accuracy [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Curt wrote:
> On Feb 3, 6:13 pm, "Manco" <manco_doll....TakeThisOut@net2blah.com> wrote:
> [...]
>
>> But CT fat scans cost at least $500, so not practical more then once
>> very few years.
>
> What if you're Michael Jordan or Tiger Woods or any of the other
> assorted and varied megapaid professional athletes? Or, hey, what if
> you're an elementary school art teacher, single, with no dependents,
> and living in an apartment that only costs $305 per month in rent?
> What THEN?
>
> WHO DO I PAY???
>
> Wait, there's groceries to be considered.
>
> SCRATCH THAT LAST!
In the end, the visual counts far more then keeping track of a number. >> Stay informed about: Fat measurement accuracy |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 18, 2005
Posts: 237
|
(Msg. 6) Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 12:58 pm
Post subject: Re: Fat measurement accuracy [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 03:59:53 -0800 (PST), Curt <curtjames.DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Feb 3, 6:21 am, "Manco" <manco_doll....DeleteThis@net2blah.com> wrote:
>> Calipers or tape-measure with the Army/Navy formula? Alot of people swear by
>> the army formula from tape measurements. Of course the CT-scan is the gold
>> standard now.
>
>haHA! The Army/Navy formula is bullsh!t. There were guys who said they
>were zero and one percent BF based on that formula. While they were
>certainly lean, no one has zero bodyfat.
What about Karen Carpenter? >> Stay informed about: Fat measurement accuracy |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Apr 20, 2007
Posts: 57
|
(Msg. 7) Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 5:52 pm
Post subject: Re: Fat measurement accuracy [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Feb 4, 3:58 pm, Lucas Buck <sbcp....TakeThisOut@earthlink.NOSPAM.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 03:59:53 -0800 (PST), Curt <curtja....TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Feb 3, 6:21 am, "Manco" <manco_doll....TakeThisOut@net2blah.com> wrote:
> >> Calipers or tape-measure with the Army/Navy formula? Alot of people swear by
> >> the army formula from tape measurements. Of course the CT-scan is the gold
> >> standard now.
>
> >haHA! The Army/Navy formula is bullsh!t. There were guys who said they
> >were zero and one percent BF based on that formula. While they were
> >certainly lean, no one has zero bodyfat.
>
> What about Karen Carpenter?
I suppose "dead people don't count" would be inappropriate. 
hissss
Yes, Karen Carpenter, I'm guessing, was certainly closer to zero than
my erstwhile shipmates.
-- >> Stay informed about: Fat measurement accuracy |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 31, 2006
Posts: 197
|
(Msg. 8) Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 4:31 pm
Post subject: Re: Fat measurement accuracy [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Lucas Buck" <sbcpark.RemoveThis@earthlink.NOSPAM.net> wrote in message
news:54veq3l83advb7kq6shhq6d9nq3abmrvli@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 03:59:53 -0800 (PST), Curt <curtjames.RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Feb 3, 6:21 am, "Manco" <manco_doll....RemoveThis@net2blah.com> wrote:
>>> Calipers or tape-measure with the Army/Navy formula? Alot of people
>>> swear by
>>> the army formula from tape measurements. Of course the CT-scan is the
>>> gold
>>> standard now.
>>
>>haHA! The Army/Navy formula is bullsh!t. There were guys who said they
>>were zero and one percent BF based on that formula. While they were
>>certainly lean, no one has zero bodyfat.
>
> What about Karen Carpenter?
Bruce Lee as well. >> Stay informed about: Fat measurement accuracy |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Dec 18, 2007
Posts: 5
|
(Msg. 9) Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 9:25 pm
Post subject: Re: Fat measurement accuracy [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
> One thing to bear in mind is that the Navy formula still has an error of
> about 10% - and i think that's percentage points of fat, rather than
> percentage of the measurement. So if you measure as 19% fat, like me, you
> could be anywhere from 9% to 29%. My understanding is that the error is
> systematic and constant, though, so for example you might always resure 8%
> over, and i might always measure 3% under. That means it's useful for
> tracking gain and loss of fat, but not the absolute amount.
You guys are really making me feel better! After more than a year of
heavy lifting and watching what I eat, my abs are showing and my arms
are defined, but the Navy Circumference Method is still showing me at
25%.
I've been wondering how I can have a 6-pack (well, a 4-pack, anyway)
and still be obese!
- J >> Stay informed about: Fat measurement accuracy |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: May 02, 2006
Posts: 195
|
(Msg. 10) Posted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 12:22 pm
Post subject: Re: Fat measurement accuracy [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Wed, 6 Feb 2008, Jason Carlton wrote:
>> One thing to bear in mind is that the Navy formula still has an error
>> of about 10% - and i think that's percentage points of fat, rather than
>> percentage of the measurement. So if you measure as 19% fat, like me,
>> you could be anywhere from 9% to 29%. My understanding is that the
>> error is systematic and constant, though, so for example you might
>> always resure 8% over, and i might always measure 3% under. That means
>> it's useful for tracking gain and loss of fat, but not the absolute
>> amount.
>
> You guys are really making me feel better! After more than a year of
> heavy lifting and watching what I eat, my abs are showing and my arms
> are defined, but the Navy Circumference Method is still showing me at
> 25%.
Yeah, that sounds like error. I'm also around 25% according to the tape,
and i can assure you, the only six-pack in sight is the box of eggs in the
kitchen.
> I've been wondering how I can have a 6-pack (well, a 4-pack, anyway) and
> still be obese!
Although, in theory, if you had low subdermal fat but high visceral fat,
you could have a six-pack while still being fat. I think you'd have to be
a freak, though.
tom
--
Science of a sufficiently advanced form is indistinguishable from magic >> Stay informed about: Fat measurement accuracy |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Feb 03, 2008
Posts: 3
|
(Msg. 11) Posted: Thu Feb 07, 2008 10:20 pm
Post subject: Re: Fat measurement accuracy [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
FAQ
Search
Profile
Private Messages
Log in/Register/Password
