A994080d499afca98cdc9de896701ebd
2

32 percent body fat, but quite athletic and strong looking??

by (1281)
Updated 26 minutes ago
Created August 10, 2011 at 1:53 PM

Hey folks! Would be great if you could help with a friend's issue

A friend of mine went paleo 6 months ago and has been doing crossfit-like exercising. She is not at a crossfit gym (lives in Germany; there are only very few, unfortunately).

Her body looks really good, athletic,strong and fit! She loves weight lifting, and does occasional WODs on her own (e.g.: 20 burpees, 20 sit-ups and 10 backsquats for a few rounds and afterwards some rowing usually. Sometimes she does the WOD of my gym, if she has the equipment).

Now she was at a new (normal)gym, got a check-up etc. And her body fat percentage appears to be 32! The personal trainer was really confused because of that result and the way she looks. It doesn't seem to fit together. Can you explain this to us? She does eat a lot of fat but is usually VLC except PWO. Would you advise her to start some endurance training for lowering the body fat?

btw, it's a female, 22 years old, 180 cm and 73 kilos! Thanks!

83d6a06c93bb3490dbca339cbbb63385
526 · November 23, 2011 at 12:20 AM

Those scales are notoriously inaccurate. Mine too says 32% but I have kinda visible abs! According to my height, weight, and waist circumference, I should be around 26%. Endurance training will not help her lose fat. And yeah, what he said is complete bullshit.

345c1755efe005edd162b770dc6fb821
8757 · August 10, 2011 at 5:46 PM

I had one of those very same tests performed and it said 44% body fat, but her's was even less sophistocated, just step on and whamo! your made of blubber!! When I later did one thru measurment, weight, age etc. it came out to 25%....that was at the early stages of primal for me

Aead76beb5fc7b762a6b4ddc234f6051
15229 · August 10, 2011 at 3:32 PM

never apologize for "appearing dumb". you dont. :)

A994080d499afca98cdc9de896701ebd
1281 · August 10, 2011 at 2:44 PM

that makes sense. well, she just mentioned that when she told him how she eats he came up with the idea that some fat she consumes becomes intramuscular, like an energy depot. is that complete bullshit? sorry for appearing that dumb haha

7cc85cf98e4d0cac622f755294ac7ee1
355 · August 10, 2011 at 2:39 PM

It sounds to me like the test is wrong either in execution... I have a hard time believing a well muscled female is around 32% body fat, or the OP is sincerely overstating the persons capacity.

7e746be2f0e550a8cd7df881322ae705
18701 · August 10, 2011 at 2:35 PM

Does the scale allow you to choose build type such as athletic or average? That can make a difference. Also, if she retains water or not makes a huge difference on the electrical impulse type scales. My guess is that it's a inaccurate measurement.

A994080d499afca98cdc9de896701ebd
1281 · August 10, 2011 at 2:31 PM

it was a scale where you enter your age and height. then you step on it with bare feet and hold a measuring thingy which is connected with the scale with your hands. sorry for that inaccurate description, hope that does it!

A8d95f3744a7a0885894ee0731c9744c
3756 · August 10, 2011 at 2:03 PM

I second akd, it all depends on the test. A lot of bf % tests are SUPER inaccurate.

Aead76beb5fc7b762a6b4ddc234f6051
15229 · August 10, 2011 at 1:55 PM

how was the test performed?

Total Views
3.9K

Recent Activity
3874fa3e7624fb3134013c43766b6eba

Last Activity
67D AGO

Followers
0

Get Free Paleo Recipes Instantly

5 Answers

best answer

0bc6cbb653cdc5e82400f6da920f11eb
4
19220 · August 10, 2011 at 3:00 PM

Now she was at a new (normal)gym, got a check-up etc. And her body fat percentage appears to be 32!

It is likely to be incorrect. Body fat scales have their problems.

Her body looks really good, athletic,strong and fit!

If she looks great don't worry about it :)

180 cm and 73 kilos (5 feet 11 inches and 161 pounds)

At her height and weight with a Body Mass Index of 22.5 i'm sure she does not need to loose any fat.

Well done for being young and healthy :)

3874fa3e7624fb3134013c43766b6eba
1
110 · August 10, 2011 at 4:11 PM

More a comment than an answer - other than I think it's the type of BF% test in question. If this number is important to your friend, have her check out a a sports/performance centre for a better analysis.

I am practically in your friend's shoes. Female, 69 kg (153 lb), 175 cm (5'9"), BMI 22.6, except I am 38 yrs old, not 22! ;) I have had 2 different scales that calculate BF% (Withings & Taylor) and I am always in doubt of BF% numbers I see for myself. This morning (after reading your post I went to see what it told me today... a whopping 32.2%) My physical size, I wear a size 8 clothing (US/Canadian), waist 29" and feel the leanest I have in my adult life.

After 6 months Paleo/LC, increased strength, improved performance & appearance, my BF% numbers haven't changed. Withings technology insists I'm 32% fat, and Taylor is a bit more considerate with 28% fat. My husband however has seen his BF% numbers drop from 22% to 15%. When I weigh myself, it's right after waking - and that's possibly what gives inaccurate results (if your body isn't hydrated). Not sure if that's all of it though as my husband also weighs himself in the AM and he's showing changes. He's also tall (195 cm, 6'5"), so the 'tall = inaccurate" hypothesis may not hold. It may be the male vs. female body composition differences in the calculations. If there is electrical impedance through the abdominal/hip area, the scale may register this as a "fatter" man than woman. No idea other than the number is meaningless to me.

Long way of saying, I'm sure it's the scale/test that was used. I certain my BF% measurements aren't accurate so I've stopped looking at that number. One day I'll go for a caliper measurement for interest sake, but I don't really care about that number anymore.

1a98a40ba8ffdc5aa28d1324d01c6c9f
1
20353 · August 10, 2011 at 2:18 PM

Most calculations do not account for folks who are tall very well...

7cc85cf98e4d0cac622f755294ac7ee1
355 · August 10, 2011 at 2:39 PM

It sounds to me like the test is wrong either in execution... I have a hard time believing a well muscled female is around 32% body fat, or the OP is sincerely overstating the persons capacity.

D30ff86ad2c1f3b43b99aed213bcf461
0
12174 · August 10, 2011 at 4:19 PM

Gabrielle Reece is often quoted as 170 lb. and 6'3". Since your friend is tall at 5'11" and ~161 very toned pounds, my bet is she's just the victim of an inaccurate test that's based on a narrow set of general assumptions. If she's toned and fit and looks and feels fabulous, what else matters?

32-percent-body-fat,-but-quite-athletic-and-strong-looking??

Af9537cfa50562b67979624e9007e12a
0
1334 · August 10, 2011 at 4:11 PM

confirm the bodyfat percent via measurements, and / or a fat caliper just for fun. does sound a little off to me too, unless she is not as muscled as you think. I would throw in some hard sprints in there once or twice a week personally, I find they do wonders fat wise for me.

Answer Question

Login to Your PaleoHacks Account

Get Free Paleo Recipes