Dr. Squat - Dr. Fred Hatfield

A lot of universitys's and colleges will open the public up to body composition screening with a fee. It would be in their Kinsology deparment.

JJ

The Omron analyzer is probably bogus (it gives higher readings than most other analyzers I've had experience testing people with - especially with more muscular/lean/athletic individuals). Some models of Omron analyzers have two settings - athlete and normal. If yours has two settings, you'll want to use the athlete setting.

Second, you want to make sure you are using it as directed in the manual, including prepping the skin as required (usually this means cleaning it, shaving it, going over it with some sandpaper, then an alcohol swab).

As was said, best bet is to go to a local college that has an exercise science or kinesiology dept. and get analyzed by them. Chances are it won't be free, but it will usually be pretty low cost (around $20). Get either a 7-site skinfold or underwater weighting. BodPod is garbage. DEXA is really good but finding one is sometimes a problem and getting this test would be a couple hundred dollars.

If the BodPod is the ONLY method they used in the study for body composition they were idiots. However, I guess you could say it is a fairly accurate method (it measures pessures well), though it isn't a very valid method (how it goes about determining bodyfat is flawed).

When validating the BodPod the manufacturers used underweighting as the "standard" to compare their machine against. If you have a new device, it can't be better than the standard it is being validated against. BTW: Underwater weighting has a standard error of about two and a half percent. That is pretty good. Other than DEXA (which is expensive - basically it is a 2D MRI), underwater weighing is still the best route to go. Skinfolds can be good if the right method and regression equations are used, and the testing is being done by someone who knows what they are doing.

are bioimpedence scales the things where you enter your height and weight, and then stand on it and hold 2 little controls or something out to your side and then it gives you some breakdown on your fat / muscle / water ratio ?

and if so, then doing at the end of your workout when you are really hot would produce poor results? i tried one of those things at my gym and at 177cm, 74kg and a 80cm waist i registered at 16%, which to me seemed high, although i have never measured before

Any real aficianados out there who really know this subject cold? I studied it in depth ten years ago, but I have to imagine that someone has come up with better equations than what were available to me back a decade ago! No?

We know BMI is bogus (I can cite many references).

We know that impedance is bogus (I can cite meny references).

We know that hydrostatic weighing has limitations, the bod-pod has limitations, skinfold methods have limitations and etceteras.

It is reasonable to conclude that using the best tools available to you at the time should be accepted for what they are -- ESTIMATES -- and (assuming test-retest reliability is firmly in place) simply estimate your "progress" in fat loss?

My view is simply this...all estimate procedures are just that. The BEST (on a scale of good, better, best) is the MIRROR test!

We know BMI is bogus (I can cite many references).

We know that impedance is bogus (I can cite meny references).

We know that hydrostatic weighing has limitations, the bod-pod has limitations, skinfold methods have limitations and etceteras.

It is reasonable to conclude that using the best tools available to you at the time should be accepted for what they are -- ESTIMATES -- and (assuming test-retest reliability is firmly in place) simply estimate your "progress" in fat loss?

My view is simply this...all estimate procedures are just that. The BEST (on a scale of good, better, best) is the MIRROR test!

Most of those other methods are too easily skewed by seemingly insignificant potential variables. In my opinion however, with respect to most physiologist... I'll take skin fold measurements done by a competant person who takes lots of measurements regularly even over hydrostatic weighing. As you noted, it has it's limitations.

In addition, all the real use of bodyfat measure is is a quantifiable measure of bodyfat. When done by a qualified person, it is easily the most objective and convenient, and an objective measure (regardless of what the actual figure is) is what is needed from the measurements anyway.

Also, I would recommend that most people simply add up the skin folds and use that sum as opposed to plugging the measurements into various formulas in order to get a percentage. Watching the skin fold sum drop gives much better feedback for someone looking to drop bodyfat than trying to watch percentage points drop.

The most accurate method out there today is the DEXA, hands down. It is now considered the Gold Standard of body comp. It is only moderately affected by hydration levels, and we nullify this variable in our lab by requiring subjects to drink 32oz of water the night befire and 16 oz the morning of a test. Actually, we measure hydration status before the test by urine refractometry. The only other down points of DEXA are 1) the machines have a weight limit, so morbidly obese people are measured one-half body and an equation is used and 2) you still have some analytical positioning of the body to do, so human error can still play a part in the results. However, we are talking + or - 1%, every other method is 3% or more.

However, as others have mentioned, it is expensive and not everyone has a DEXA lying around. SKinfolds are convenient, but not anywhere near as accurate as people think. One of my older professors told us that they had to log 30,000 skinfold measurements in training before they were allowed to use the technique in a research study and report the results. That is YEARS of repeated measurements to prove reliability. I can not tell you how many times I have seen trainers do pre-post skinfolds on clients and report crazy losses of body fat when it is clear that their client looks almost the same. Unfortunately, unconscious human error makes skinfolds pointless. We still use them in our lab occasionally, but only when body comp isn't a variable (but we need to report an estimated lean body masss.)

I'm a fan of calipers as a cheap method that is relatively accurate. The only problem is that calipers won't measure VAT, so I usually go with calipers plus the tape measure.

Deleted. Only a single post, but please delete this user account.