My bodyfat % is what?!?!?!

[Triskeliongirl]

Emily, it should be obvious to you that the measurement was off. Those devices are not accurate. Given you height, weight and clothing size, I think you would be ill if you lost any more weight. I remember riding with a petite women in chiapis, that got very sick when her weight dropped from the stress of touring, and she is similar to you in size.

[emily_in_nc]

Thanks! It's good to know that these devices are not super accurate, though I still think my body fat % is higher than I'd like -- not because of any number, but because of how much I can pinch in various areas, and how much bulging I get on the top of my bikini undies compared to 20 years ago at this same weight -- and I'm much more physically active and fit now! My body shape has changed a lot in my 40s. My breasts are smaller, my tummy is bigger, and my hips are a lot curvier. I've also got back fat - ugh! One reason I think I can actually be "overfat" and be as light as I am is that I have teeny bones -- my wrists, ankles, etc. are super small.

I would be interested in having my body fat measured in a more accurate manner but don't know how to go about doing that -- I don't want to spend the money to go somewhere that would do it, and don't even know what type of place would do that. Maybe I could buy some calipers and do it myself? But, I'm not sure I care enough to do that, even; I just want to have less to pinch so I don't feel flabby and uncomfortable without clothes on or in skimpy things.

You'll just have to take my word for it that I am neither anorexic, nor do I have body dysmorphic disorder (I was a psych major so know all about disorders like this); I'm truly reacting to a change in body composition that's occurred in my 40s, no matter how much I work out.

But I'm not whining....I know I am very fortunate to be the size I am compared to so many struggling with their weight! Thanks again for the feedback.

Emily

[Bikingmomof3]

Emily,
Do not sweat it. The numbers could be off or your muscle mass may not be as much as you would like. Build some weights into your routine, if you are concerned. I used to be your weight (long time ago) and now I am heavier (size 6) but a lot stronger than I was when I weighed less. I have no idea if there is any correlation at all. I am 15 years older and 3 kids later, my body shape has completely changed, so I imagine there are numerous factors involved.

Basically, I think I managed to say nothing.

[Crankin]

I think it would put your mind at ease to have an accurate body fat calculation. I am pretty much like you in build and exercise schedule; 5' 1", 106. I wear a size 2 and look quite petite in clothes. But, I have a lot of fat on my hips and butt, and I definitely notice changes in my abs, which used to be rock hard. I don't feel really comfortable in bathing suits, shorts, or even most bike shorts, unless they are the brand i get that holds the flab in with a lot of lycra. I know this sounds like whining to a lot of people, but it's almost more of a health issue than a "looking good" issue. I have upped my weight training and started doing yoga. I noticed on the days I do yoga, with a light warm up on the bike, my body fat goes down (using those famously unreliable home scales).
I think our bodies adapt to what we do and as we age, we have to fool the body and mix up the exercise, or else what we do doesn't work.

[BleeckerSt_Girl]

I recently read that those bodyfat calculations are often inaccurate in that they show athletes to have high bodyfat % when in fact they are measuring muscle bulk as fat! I think they are moving more towards measuring your waistline now to determine whether people are overweight or not. They use this waist measurment to gauge a person's risk for heart attack etc.

[emily_in_nc]

I recently read that those bodyfat calculations are often inaccurate in that they show athletes to have high bodyfat % when in fact they are measuring muscle bulk as fat! I think they are moving more towards measuring your waistline now to determine whether people are overweight or not. They use this waist measurment to gauge a person's risk for heart attack etc.

Lisa,

I think you may be thinking of BMI (body mass index) calculations. It is true that they can be very "off" for muscular people (especially very fit men) who are heavy for their height due to muscle mass rather than body fat. This is very different than body fat %, which is the actual percent of your body that is fat vs. lean (muscles, organs, skeleton). My BMI is low (19), since I am light even for my height, so that is not the problem here. My issue is very similar to Robin's (thank you Robin for the validation!!!) in that I am short and lightweight but still have a serious case of the "jiggles"!

I do lift weights, but only twice a week (no time for more, really, since I want to be able to fit in cardio also), and nothing super heavy. I do have some muscular definition, but much less than a lot of the women I see in the gym who work out longer and harder than me. Most of my issues are with my torso, and it seems the only way to tone that up is to do more cardio and lose fat without losing muscle (tricky).

I'm going to try not to worry too much about this. For my age (46 next month), I am sure that I am doing fine; I'm just not 25 any more and can't expect to look like I did then (my face and hair don't look the same either, after all). On a positive note, I read that women with a bit of extra body fat tend to have fewer menopausal symptoms than really lean women, so I have that to look forward to!

Emily

[yellow]

I think Lisa is referring to the methods for women where they take several measurements and "calculate" body fat that way. A while back I used several different home methods and my results were everything from 17.5% (bah ha ha! ) with the Navy Circumference Method to 28% using some other one where you took measurements of your hips, forearm, wrist, waist, and (I think) neck. I am fairly muscular, which is why I think the one method placed me so high--it assumed that bulk is fat, not muscle. If you do a Google on "body fat measure" you'll get about 20 gagillion hits.

I don't know that you can get a really accurate measurement. Everything I've read says even the most accurate are +/- 2% and others can be +/- 5%.

About the rolls...I think when you are lean, they actually can be more pronounced. I have very definite patches on the tops of my hips, the backs of my legs, and (like you) on my back (I hate that too ). I have a very lean torso (in the front anyway) and lean arms, so the extra on my hips, legs, and back looks extra extra bad to me. It is what it is. It jiggles when I run, but oh well. I'm in pretty good shape and am actually lighter than I have been in years (most recently due to stress and a cold, bad way to lose it...). I figure my actual percentage is probably 21-22%, maybe higher, maybe lower, but that's really not a bad place to be.

I have to keep reminding myself that what really matters is my health and how I feel. Sure, I go through periods where I get obsessed with the numbers on the scale, but in the long run, I know that I'm not doing too badly. I could always eat better, rest more, and love more, all of which would probably improve how I feel. But then I could also eat more poorly, sleep all the time, and be a cranky middle aged woman.

Perspective, my friend. But I think you know that. (and please remind me of that next time I whine about stepping on the scale and seeing a couple more pounds... )