Re: What makes 15% the ideal bodyfat for men?

Discussion in 'General Fitness' started by Steve McDevitt, Feb 18, 2005.

  1. "Ignoramus29670" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >I have a bit of a theoretical question. Just what makes 15% bodyfat
    > the ideal for men. My bodyfat is at 15% (calculated using both
    > calipers and navy method), and I still have quite a bit of fat. I have
    > some fat on my belly.
    >
    > Would it be "less than ideal" to be at, say, 13% of bodyfat?
    >
    > The reason why this question is theoretical is that there is, as far
    > as I can see, little reason for me to work on reducing my BF%, but I
    > would like to understand things a little better.
    >
    > Was there some research saying that, say, mortality is lowest at this
    > bodyfat, or some such?
    >
    > Thanks


    Ideal for who and for what? 15% is fat, as for as I'm concerned. I'm at 7
    and still trying to get a little lower, so who in their right mind would say
    15 is A-OK?
     
    Tags:


  2. GaryG

    GaryG Guest

    "Steve McDevitt" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:%[email protected]_s51...
    > "Ignoramus29670" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    > >I have a bit of a theoretical question. Just what makes 15% bodyfat
    > > the ideal for men. My bodyfat is at 15% (calculated using both
    > > calipers and navy method), and I still have quite a bit of fat. I have
    > > some fat on my belly.
    > >
    > > Would it be "less than ideal" to be at, say, 13% of bodyfat?
    > >
    > > The reason why this question is theoretical is that there is, as far
    > > as I can see, little reason for me to work on reducing my BF%, but I
    > > would like to understand things a little better.
    > >
    > > Was there some research saying that, say, mortality is lowest at this
    > > bodyfat, or some such?
    > >
    > > Thanks

    >
    > Ideal for who and for what? 15% is fat, as for as I'm concerned. I'm at 7
    > and still trying to get a little lower, so who in their right mind would

    say
    > 15 is A-OK?
    >


    Most health care authorities say that 15% is a very healthy goal for adult
    men. Athletes tend to have lower percentages, but there are some risks
    associated with levels too low (below 10%).

    According to this web page, 5% is the lowest level considered safe for
    males:
    http://www.bodyfattest.com/why.php

    You may wish to see a health care professional, to get an assessment as to
    whether or not you have an eating disorder, or body dysmorphic disorder.

    GG
     
  3. Justin Case

    Justin Case Guest

    On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 12:59:07 -0800, "GaryG" <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    >"Steve McDevitt" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >news:%[email protected]_s51...
    >> "Ignoramus29670" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >> news:[email protected]
    >> >I have a bit of a theoretical question. Just what makes 15% bodyfat
    >> > the ideal for men. My bodyfat is at 15% (calculated using both
    >> > calipers and navy method), and I still have quite a bit of fat. I have
    >> > some fat on my belly.
    >> >
    >> > Would it be "less than ideal" to be at, say, 13% of bodyfat?
    >> >
    >> > The reason why this question is theoretical is that there is, as far
    >> > as I can see, little reason for me to work on reducing my BF%, but I
    >> > would like to understand things a little better.
    >> >
    >> > Was there some research saying that, say, mortality is lowest at this
    >> > bodyfat, or some such?
    >> >
    >> > Thanks

    >>
    >> Ideal for who and for what? 15% is fat, as for as I'm concerned. I'm at 7
    >> and still trying to get a little lower, so who in their right mind would

    >say
    >> 15 is A-OK?
    >>

    >
    >Most health care authorities say that 15% is a very healthy goal for adult
    >men....


    Because adult men are typically fat, lazy beer bellied slobs.
     
  4. "GaryG" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > "Steve McDevitt" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:%[email protected]_s51...
    >> "Ignoramus29670" <[email protected]> wrote in
    >> message
    >> news:[email protected]
    >> >I have a bit of a theoretical question. Just what makes 15% bodyfat
    >> > the ideal for men. My bodyfat is at 15% (calculated using both
    >> > calipers and navy method), and I still have quite a bit of fat. I
    >> > have
    >> > some fat on my belly.
    >> >
    >> > Would it be "less than ideal" to be at, say, 13% of bodyfat?
    >> >
    >> > The reason why this question is theoretical is that there is, as
    >> > far
    >> > as I can see, little reason for me to work on reducing my BF%, but
    >> > I
    >> > would like to understand things a little better.
    >> >
    >> > Was there some research saying that, say, mortality is lowest at
    >> > this
    >> > bodyfat, or some such?
    >> >
    >> > Thanks

    >>
    >> Ideal for who and for what? 15% is fat, as for as I'm concerned. I'm
    >> at 7
    >> and still trying to get a little lower, so who in their right mind
    >> would

    > say
    >> 15 is A-OK?
    >>

    >
    > Most health care authorities say that 15% is a very healthy goal for
    > adult
    > men. Athletes tend to have lower percentages, but there are some
    > risks
    > associated with levels too low (below 10%).
    >
    > According to this web page, 5% is the lowest level considered safe for
    > males:
    > http://www.bodyfattest.com/why.php


    I need to chime in, again, to say that even hydrostatic testing depends
    on all sorts of charts and isn't necessarily accurate, "gold standard"
    that it may be. I was frankly very surprised when I was tested
    hydrostatically - the number they give you depends upon many of the
    numbers you give them, and makes lots of assumptions about one's lung
    capacity (I've got asthma, mine is less than average), your age (the
    chart figures you're fatter if you're older, all other things being
    equal, which means you'll get a higher number if you say you're older,
    even if you're not really fatter) and other stuff like that.

    By all means measure, but as has been suggested on this newsgroup
    before, the best thing to do is pick a method you like that yields
    consistent results for you and use it to judge your relative progress
    and not as a "gold standard" of absolute meausure. And be sure to check
    at the same time of day, allow for when you've had lots of sodium, are
    dehydrated, and the like.

    -S-
    http://www.kbnj.com


    > You may wish to see a health care professional, to get an assessment
    > as to
    > whether or not you have an eating disorder, or body dysmorphic
    > disorder.
    >
    > GG
    >
    >
     
  5. Hobbes

    Hobbes Guest

    In article <[email protected]>, "Steve Freides"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    > "GaryG" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    > > "Steve McDevitt" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > > news:%[email protected]_s51...
    > >> "Ignoramus29670" <[email protected]> wrote in
    > >> message
    > >> news:[email protected]
    > >> >I have a bit of a theoretical question. Just what makes 15% bodyfat
    > >> > the ideal for men. My bodyfat is at 15% (calculated using both
    > >> > calipers and navy method), and I still have quite a bit of fat. I
    > >> > have
    > >> > some fat on my belly.
    > >> >
    > >> > Would it be "less than ideal" to be at, say, 13% of bodyfat?
    > >> >
    > >> > The reason why this question is theoretical is that there is, as
    > >> > far
    > >> > as I can see, little reason for me to work on reducing my BF%, but
    > >> > I
    > >> > would like to understand things a little better.
    > >> >
    > >> > Was there some research saying that, say, mortality is lowest at
    > >> > this
    > >> > bodyfat, or some such?
    > >> >
    > >> > Thanks
    > >>
    > >> Ideal for who and for what? 15% is fat, as for as I'm concerned. I'm
    > >> at 7
    > >> and still trying to get a little lower, so who in their right mind
    > >> would

    > > say
    > >> 15 is A-OK?
    > >>

    > >
    > > Most health care authorities say that 15% is a very healthy goal for
    > > adult
    > > men. Athletes tend to have lower percentages, but there are some
    > > risks
    > > associated with levels too low (below 10%).
    > >
    > > According to this web page, 5% is the lowest level considered safe for
    > > males:
    > > http://www.bodyfattest.com/why.php

    >
    > I need to chime in, again, to say that even hydrostatic testing depends
    > on all sorts of charts and isn't necessarily accurate, "gold standard"
    > that it may be. I was frankly very surprised when I was tested
    > hydrostatically - the number they give you depends upon many of the
    > numbers you give them, and makes lots of assumptions about one's lung
    > capacity (I've got asthma, mine is less than average), your age (the
    > chart figures you're fatter if you're older, all other things being
    > equal, which means you'll get a higher number if you say you're older,
    > even if you're not really fatter) and other stuff like that.
    >
    > By all means measure, but as has been suggested on this newsgroup
    > before, the best thing to do is pick a method you like that yields
    > consistent results for you and use it to judge your relative progress
    > and not as a "gold standard" of absolute meausure. And be sure to check
    > at the same time of day, allow for when you've had lots of sodium, are
    > dehydrated, and the like.


    Hydrostatic is not really a gold standard Steve. There is a lot of
    variation depending on how well the person cleared their lungs. I believe
    the most accurate now is generally accepted to be the 'Bodpod' type of
    thing.

    But your point is valid. Testing is all relative and simply estimates the
    actual number.
     
  6. GaryG

    GaryG Guest

    "Justin Case" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 12:59:07 -0800, "GaryG" <[email protected]>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >"Steve McDevitt" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > >news:%[email protected]_s51...
    > >> "Ignoramus29670" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > >> news:[email protected]
    > >> >I have a bit of a theoretical question. Just what makes 15% bodyfat
    > >> > the ideal for men. My bodyfat is at 15% (calculated using both
    > >> > calipers and navy method), and I still have quite a bit of fat. I

    have
    > >> > some fat on my belly.
    > >> >
    > >> > Would it be "less than ideal" to be at, say, 13% of bodyfat?
    > >> >
    > >> > The reason why this question is theoretical is that there is, as far
    > >> > as I can see, little reason for me to work on reducing my BF%, but I
    > >> > would like to understand things a little better.
    > >> >
    > >> > Was there some research saying that, say, mortality is lowest at this
    > >> > bodyfat, or some such?
    > >> >
    > >> > Thanks
    > >>
    > >> Ideal for who and for what? 15% is fat, as for as I'm concerned. I'm at

    7
    > >> and still trying to get a little lower, so who in their right mind

    would
    > >say
    > >> 15 is A-OK?
    > >>

    > >
    > >Most health care authorities say that 15% is a very healthy goal for

    adult
    > >men....

    >
    > Because adult men are typically fat, lazy beer bellied slobs.


    Also, because getting much below 15% requires a significant degree of
    dedication to exercise and diet, yet confers no significant health
    advantages.

    GG
     
  7. "Hobbes" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > In article <[email protected]>, "Steve Freides"
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >> "GaryG" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >> news:[email protected]
    >> > "Steve McDevitt" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >> > news:%[email protected]_s51...
    >> >> "Ignoramus29670" <[email protected]> wrote in
    >> >> message
    >> >> news:[email protected]
    >> >> >I have a bit of a theoretical question. Just what makes 15%
    >> >> >bodyfat
    >> >> > the ideal for men. My bodyfat is at 15% (calculated using both
    >> >> > calipers and navy method), and I still have quite a bit of fat.
    >> >> > I
    >> >> > have
    >> >> > some fat on my belly.
    >> >> >
    >> >> > Would it be "less than ideal" to be at, say, 13% of bodyfat?
    >> >> >
    >> >> > The reason why this question is theoretical is that there is, as
    >> >> > far
    >> >> > as I can see, little reason for me to work on reducing my BF%,
    >> >> > but
    >> >> > I
    >> >> > would like to understand things a little better.
    >> >> >
    >> >> > Was there some research saying that, say, mortality is lowest at
    >> >> > this
    >> >> > bodyfat, or some such?
    >> >> >
    >> >> > Thanks
    >> >>
    >> >> Ideal for who and for what? 15% is fat, as for as I'm concerned.
    >> >> I'm
    >> >> at 7
    >> >> and still trying to get a little lower, so who in their right mind
    >> >> would
    >> > say
    >> >> 15 is A-OK?
    >> >>
    >> >
    >> > Most health care authorities say that 15% is a very healthy goal
    >> > for
    >> > adult
    >> > men. Athletes tend to have lower percentages, but there are some
    >> > risks
    >> > associated with levels too low (below 10%).
    >> >
    >> > According to this web page, 5% is the lowest level considered safe
    >> > for
    >> > males:
    >> > http://www.bodyfattest.com/why.php

    >>
    >> I need to chime in, again, to say that even hydrostatic testing
    >> depends
    >> on all sorts of charts and isn't necessarily accurate, "gold
    >> standard"
    >> that it may be. I was frankly very surprised when I was tested
    >> hydrostatically - the number they give you depends upon many of the
    >> numbers you give them, and makes lots of assumptions about one's lung
    >> capacity (I've got asthma, mine is less than average), your age (the
    >> chart figures you're fatter if you're older, all other things being
    >> equal, which means you'll get a higher number if you say you're
    >> older,
    >> even if you're not really fatter) and other stuff like that.
    >>
    >> By all means measure, but as has been suggested on this newsgroup
    >> before, the best thing to do is pick a method you like that yields
    >> consistent results for you and use it to judge your relative progress
    >> and not as a "gold standard" of absolute meausure. And be sure to
    >> check
    >> at the same time of day, allow for when you've had lots of sodium,
    >> are
    >> dehydrated, and the like.

    >
    > Hydrostatic is not really a gold standard Steve. There is a lot of
    > variation depending on how well the person cleared their lungs. I
    > believe
    > the most accurate now is generally accepted to be the 'Bodpod' type of
    > thing.


    Hydrostatic bills itself as the gold standard - please tell me what is a
    "bodpod " - never heard of that.

    > But your point is valid. Testing is all relative and simply estimates
    > the
    > actual number.


    -S-
    http://www.kbnj.com
     
  8. John

    John Guest

    "Steve Freides" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >snipped<


    > Hydrostatic bills itself as the gold standard - please tell me what is a
    > "bodpod " - never heard of that.


    I saw one the gym bought the other day. It's a chamber you have to sit in
    for about 15 minutes. I was told the pressure inside is increased and they
    figure it from there somehow. But, they make you dress in a Speed-O, and it
    has a big window in front so everyone can see the moron sitting in an
    airtight chamber in Speed-O's.
     
  9. "John" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > "Steve Freides" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    >>snipped<

    >
    >> Hydrostatic bills itself as the gold standard - please tell me what
    >> is a
    >> "bodpod " - never heard of that.

    >
    > I saw one the gym bought the other day. It's a chamber you have to sit
    > in
    > for about 15 minutes. I was told the pressure inside is increased and
    > they
    > figure it from there somehow. But, they make you dress in a Speed-O,
    > and it
    > has a big window in front so everyone can see the moron sitting in an
    > airtight chamber in Speed-O's.


    From http://www.bodpod.com/p_bodFAQ.php

    > The general error range of the BOD POD is 1-2% (the same as
    > hydrostatic weighing).
    >
    >How does the BOD POD measure body composition?
    >
    > The BOD POD system measures body composition by determining body
    > volume and
    > body weight. Once those two variables are determined, body density can
    > be computed
    > and inserted into an equation to provide percent fat measurements.


    This is, again, my problem - an equation is used. Although they don't
    mention age on the web site, I'm assuming that the equation still
    involves guesses at several things.

    -S-
     
  10. Proton Soup

    Proton Soup Guest

    On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 13:39:27 -0500, "Steve Freides"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >"John" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >news:[email protected]
    >> "Steve Freides" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >> news:[email protected]
    >>>snipped<

    >>
    >>> Hydrostatic bills itself as the gold standard - please tell me what
    >>> is a
    >>> "bodpod " - never heard of that.

    >>
    >> I saw one the gym bought the other day. It's a chamber you have to sit
    >> in
    >> for about 15 minutes. I was told the pressure inside is increased and
    >> they
    >> figure it from there somehow. But, they make you dress in a Speed-O,
    >> and it
    >> has a big window in front so everyone can see the moron sitting in an
    >> airtight chamber in Speed-O's.

    >
    >From http://www.bodpod.com/p_bodFAQ.php
    >
    >> The general error range of the BOD POD is 1-2% (the same as
    >> hydrostatic weighing).
    >>
    >>How does the BOD POD measure body composition?
    >>
    >> The BOD POD system measures body composition by determining body
    >> volume and
    >> body weight. Once those two variables are determined, body density can
    >> be computed
    >> and inserted into an equation to provide percent fat measurements.

    >
    >This is, again, my problem - an equation is used. Although they don't
    >mention age on the web site, I'm assuming that the equation still
    >involves guesses at several things.


    Uh, Steve, I hate to break the news to you, but that's how it is with
    all scientifical type stuff, math and equations. And it's basically
    the same method as a dunk test, only the fluid in this case isn't
    water, it's air.

    Nothing too special about the equations here either, just basic
    college freshman type physics.

    -----------
    Proton Soup

    "Thanks for noticing that I didn't actually say anything." - Mike Lane
     
  11. "Proton Soup" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 13:39:27 -0500, "Steve Freides"
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >>"John" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >>news:[email protected]
    >>> "Steve Freides" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >>> news:[email protected]
    >>>>snipped<
    >>>
    >>>> Hydrostatic bills itself as the gold standard - please tell me what
    >>>> is a
    >>>> "bodpod " - never heard of that.
    >>>
    >>> I saw one the gym bought the other day. It's a chamber you have to
    >>> sit
    >>> in
    >>> for about 15 minutes. I was told the pressure inside is increased
    >>> and
    >>> they
    >>> figure it from there somehow. But, they make you dress in a Speed-O,
    >>> and it
    >>> has a big window in front so everyone can see the moron sitting in
    >>> an
    >>> airtight chamber in Speed-O's.

    >>
    >>From http://www.bodpod.com/p_bodFAQ.php
    >>
    >>> The general error range of the BOD POD is 1-2% (the same as
    >>> hydrostatic weighing).
    >>>
    >>>How does the BOD POD measure body composition?
    >>>
    >>> The BOD POD system measures body composition by determining body
    >>> volume and
    >>> body weight. Once those two variables are determined, body density
    >>> can
    >>> be computed
    >>> and inserted into an equation to provide percent fat measurements.

    >>
    >>This is, again, my problem - an equation is used. Although they don't
    >>mention age on the web site, I'm assuming that the equation still
    >>involves guesses at several things.

    >
    > Uh, Steve, I hate to break the news to you, but that's how it is with
    > all scientifical type stuff, math and equations. And it's basically
    > the same method as a dunk test, only the fluid in this case isn't
    > water, it's air.
    >
    > Nothing too special about the equations here either, just basic
    > college freshman type physics.


    GIGO. I'm trying to make two points here: first, bodpod isn't any more
    accurate than hydrostatic, according to the bodpod web site, it's just
    easier to use; second, having gone through this, I find the guesses
    about my lung capacity based on statistical norms and my visceral fat
    based on my age incompatible with the notion that the results are
    "accurate."

    I don't find either method worth the trouble. The hand-held Omron
    gadget is accurate enough and brainless easy to use - pick it up and
    hold it. No need for getting wet, stripping to a bikini, etc.

    Just my opinion and all that...

    -S-
    http://www.kbnj.com

    > -----------
    > Proton Soup
    >
    > "Thanks for noticing that I didn't actually say anything." - Mike Lane
     
  12. Proton Soup

    Proton Soup Guest

    On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 15:06:13 -0500, "Steve Freides"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >"Proton Soup" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >news:[email protected]
    >> On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 13:39:27 -0500, "Steve Freides"
    >> <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>
    >>>"John" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >>>news:[email protected]
    >>>> "Steve Freides" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >>>> news:[email protected]
    >>>>>snipped<
    >>>>
    >>>>> Hydrostatic bills itself as the gold standard - please tell me what
    >>>>> is a
    >>>>> "bodpod " - never heard of that.
    >>>>
    >>>> I saw one the gym bought the other day. It's a chamber you have to
    >>>> sit
    >>>> in
    >>>> for about 15 minutes. I was told the pressure inside is increased
    >>>> and
    >>>> they
    >>>> figure it from there somehow. But, they make you dress in a Speed-O,
    >>>> and it
    >>>> has a big window in front so everyone can see the moron sitting in
    >>>> an
    >>>> airtight chamber in Speed-O's.
    >>>
    >>>From http://www.bodpod.com/p_bodFAQ.php
    >>>
    >>>> The general error range of the BOD POD is 1-2% (the same as
    >>>> hydrostatic weighing).
    >>>>
    >>>>How does the BOD POD measure body composition?
    >>>>
    >>>> The BOD POD system measures body composition by determining body
    >>>> volume and
    >>>> body weight. Once those two variables are determined, body density
    >>>> can
    >>>> be computed
    >>>> and inserted into an equation to provide percent fat measurements.
    >>>
    >>>This is, again, my problem - an equation is used. Although they don't
    >>>mention age on the web site, I'm assuming that the equation still
    >>>involves guesses at several things.

    >>
    >> Uh, Steve, I hate to break the news to you, but that's how it is with
    >> all scientifical type stuff, math and equations. And it's basically
    >> the same method as a dunk test, only the fluid in this case isn't
    >> water, it's air.
    >>
    >> Nothing too special about the equations here either, just basic
    >> college freshman type physics.

    >
    >GIGO. I'm trying to make two points here: first, bodpod isn't any more
    >accurate than hydrostatic, according to the bodpod web site, it's just
    >easier to use; second, having gone through this, I find the guesses
    >about my lung capacity based on statistical norms and my visceral fat
    >based on my age incompatible with the notion that the results are
    >"accurate."


    There are some things about it I just don't quite get, like the use of
    a hair net. All I can guess is that they're using a very small
    pressure differential and/or maybe there's some problems with
    transients. Something about it seems like an ad-hoc work-around to
    me.

    >I don't find either method worth the trouble. The hand-held Omron
    >gadget is accurate enough and brainless easy to use - pick it up and
    >hold it. No need for getting wet, stripping to a bikini, etc.
    >
    >Just my opinion and all that...
    >
    >-S-
    >http://www.kbnj.com
    >
    >> -----------
    >> Proton Soup
    >>
    >> "Thanks for noticing that I didn't actually say anything." - Mike Lane

    >


    -----------
    Proton Soup

    "Thanks for noticing that I didn't actually say anything." - Mike Lane
     
  13. Hobbes

    Hobbes Guest

    In article <[email protected]>, Proton Soup
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    > On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 13:39:27 -0500, "Steve Freides"
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > >"John" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > >news:[email protected]
    > >> "Steve Freides" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > >> news:[email protected]
    > >>>snipped<
    > >>
    > >>> Hydrostatic bills itself as the gold standard - please tell me what
    > >>> is a
    > >>> "bodpod " - never heard of that.
    > >>
    > >> I saw one the gym bought the other day. It's a chamber you have to sit
    > >> in
    > >> for about 15 minutes. I was told the pressure inside is increased and
    > >> they
    > >> figure it from there somehow. But, they make you dress in a Speed-O,
    > >> and it
    > >> has a big window in front so everyone can see the moron sitting in an
    > >> airtight chamber in Speed-O's.

    > >
    > >From http://www.bodpod.com/p_bodFAQ.php
    > >
    > >> The general error range of the BOD POD is 1-2% (the same as
    > >> hydrostatic weighing).
    > >>
    > >>How does the BOD POD measure body composition?
    > >>
    > >> The BOD POD system measures body composition by determining body
    > >> volume and
    > >> body weight. Once those two variables are determined, body density can
    > >> be computed
    > >> and inserted into an equation to provide percent fat measurements.

    > >
    > >This is, again, my problem - an equation is used. Although they don't
    > >mention age on the web site, I'm assuming that the equation still
    > >involves guesses at several things.

    >
    > Uh, Steve, I hate to break the news to you, but that's how it is with
    > all scientifical type stuff, math and equations. And it's basically
    > the same method as a dunk test, only the fluid in this case isn't
    > water, it's air.
    >
    > Nothing too special about the equations here either, just basic
    > college freshman type physics.


    Advantage of the bod pod is you don't have to empty the lungs...

    --
    Keith
     
  14. "Hobbes" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > In article <[email protected]>, Proton Soup
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >> On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 13:39:27 -0500, "Steve Freides"
    >> <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>
    >> >"John" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >> >news:[email protected]
    >> >> "Steve Freides" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >> >> news:[email protected]
    >> >>>snipped<
    >> >>
    >> >>> Hydrostatic bills itself as the gold standard - please tell me
    >> >>> what
    >> >>> is a
    >> >>> "bodpod " - never heard of that.
    >> >>
    >> >> I saw one the gym bought the other day. It's a chamber you have to
    >> >> sit
    >> >> in
    >> >> for about 15 minutes. I was told the pressure inside is increased
    >> >> and
    >> >> they
    >> >> figure it from there somehow. But, they make you dress in a
    >> >> Speed-O,
    >> >> and it
    >> >> has a big window in front so everyone can see the moron sitting in
    >> >> an
    >> >> airtight chamber in Speed-O's.
    >> >
    >> >From http://www.bodpod.com/p_bodFAQ.php
    >> >
    >> >> The general error range of the BOD POD is 1-2% (the same as
    >> >> hydrostatic weighing).
    >> >>
    >> >>How does the BOD POD measure body composition?
    >> >>
    >> >> The BOD POD system measures body composition by determining body
    >> >> volume and
    >> >> body weight. Once those two variables are determined, body density
    >> >> can
    >> >> be computed
    >> >> and inserted into an equation to provide percent fat measurements.
    >> >
    >> >This is, again, my problem - an equation is used. Although they
    >> >don't
    >> >mention age on the web site, I'm assuming that the equation still
    >> >involves guesses at several things.

    >>
    >> Uh, Steve, I hate to break the news to you, but that's how it is with
    >> all scientifical type stuff, math and equations. And it's basically
    >> the same method as a dunk test, only the fluid in this case isn't
    >> water, it's air.
    >>
    >> Nothing too special about the equations here either, just basic
    >> college freshman type physics.

    >
    > Advantage of the bod pod is you don't have to empty the lungs...


    That's one thing in its favor. I wonder what one of them costs...

    -S-
    http://www.kbnj.com


    > --
    > Keith
     
Loading...
Loading...