How accurate are those body measuring scales at the gym and such? I tried one just out of curiosity, and while I knew I'm about bmi ~19,7 or so, that thing claimed my body fat is 10,5. I looked up those visualisation pictures and I know I look absolutely nothing like that.
Things aren't adding up, what did I miss or get mixed up?
I'm 24% and I look exactly like that
I'm 30 to 34%. Never gonna make it, bros.
You will make it... just 6% to 10% more. Ascend Bulkbro!
I look like 34 percent bodyfat but I'm losing it and 25 percent bodyfat is good enough for me
5-9% is way more ripped than that. He doesn’t even have much ab definition.
This. 5-9% on pic is closer to 13%.
Also the rest have way smaller arms which I also don’t think is fair.
Does anyone have a more accurate definition scale somewhere? Because either that thing is off or the scale is off because I 100% do not look like 10,5%.
I have a visible bicep vein even when not pumped. When I workout it pops real good. I'm probably 25% bf
That anon isn't familiar with how fat distribution varies in individuals but overall vascularity is a good proxy for body fat. In your case your body is probably not storing much fat in arms at all and prefers to store it elsewhere
>How accurate are those body measuring scales at the gym and such?
More accurate than a pic on the net and /fat/'s "expertise". But really, ther eis no accurate way to measure body fat, go by looks, or, if you're dysmorphic already, go by clothing size and tape measure. In fact, pound for pound, the good old navy body fat test is probably your ebst bet, it's not accurate, but it isn't any more inaccurate than any other test BUT it's much cheaper, at basically zero cost.
In b4 idiots shilling for DXA scans and shit. DXA is the gold standard because it overestimates body fat (gives out contest read ybod ybuilders as 9% lol) and is the most expensive - both are good things for you if you earn money by testing peoples' body fat and try to coax them into joining your gym.
My clothing size is 164. I'm 168 or 170 cm tall - I have no idea - and I shop from the kids' section because Northern Europeans are fucking giants. Kids' clothes are measured by height, and I fit clothes that are meant for children 4-6 cm shorter than I am.
The old navy test says I'm 5% and that can absolutely not be right.
"164" isn't a size though? And how the fuck don't you know how tall you are?
Also, you have to be honest with the test, ofc, honest about your height and measurements. Nobody will know.
Oh wait, you mean childrens' sizes? lemme look that up.
Here's the German one. 164 means you have the size of a medium 15 year old. I think 5% body fat sound realistic. A 27" waist and 34" hips? At what, 5'8" or 5'7"? Bro.
Addendum: It means you have a chest size of 32" or somesuch, lmao. DUDE. You're like 4" or 10 cm too tall for your measurements, you deffo are too skinny.
164 is a size in Europe, that's 164 cm. And I don't know how tall I am because I measure 170 cm if I'm measured first thing in the morning and 168 in the afternoon, and I don't know which one of those you're supposed to use as your height.
my chest is about 34,6 in inches, whatever that is. Around 88 cm the last I checked.
I'm not skeletal, I look fairly normal and somewhat pudgy around the edges.
That sounds Finnish.
But anyway, you are the size of a skinny child. Oka,y maybe 5% isn't correct. maybe it's 8% or 9%. Bottom line is, you are skinny. TOO skinny, in fact, unless you want to wear girls clothing and seduce some Scandis (most of them are weird, it will probably work).
I'm a native finn who was born and raised here. Something in my genetic code just decided to go "hey fuck this guy in particular". I'm the shortest of all of my cousins, girls included.
>Around 88 cm the last I checked.
Rinanympäris means chest circumference, which is 82 cm for size 164.
If you're a bit pudgy at <20bmi then the answer is obvious, your level of lean mass is a bit lower than average and you're currently "skinny fat".
Just eat enough food/protein to grow together with your training (because you do lift right?) then you should be able to handle this over time. You dont have to bulk fast or anything but you should definitely eat at a surplus.
>(because you do lift right?)
well I wasn't at the gym to steal water bottles or anything. I don't want to bulk or anything, just get into a better shape.
>I don't want to bulk
Not eating at a surplus while being at a very low overall body mass isn't particularly good for muscle building though, the idea is to create an overall better body composition and favorably increase the ratio of lean mass vs fat.
As other poster mentioned, you're too skinny at current weight and you've more or less realized this with having to buy young teen sized clothing.
Gain 5-6 kg over the upcoming 4 months or so and you would realize that your overall composition/frame improved unless you forgot to train hard while doing it
I'm fine with the SIZE I am, I just want more muscle to the composition I have now. I get that muscle weighs more than fat so that'd mean weighing more too, but I don't want to buy a whole new set of clothes for some bulk phase.
Any idea where to find a better visual with a more precise scale?
mid is healthy, top and bottom are not.
You didn't actually say in what way this is a problem but from your posts and the >19.7bmi, you are probably just a hungry skeleton with limited lean mass. If you've trained forever and is actually a chiseled greek god at this weight then consider adding weight until 22-23 if you want to fill out your frame.
There just isn't much room for anything at your current body weight
These are wrong. I'm 10-15 and I have more definition than the 5-9 guy.
205lbs at 5’9
BMI of 30 Obese
But I’m guessing my body fat is 20-30% I’m flexing in the pic but otherwise big ass and thick thighs
fat ass and fat thighs*
There's a huge fucking difference between 10% and 14%, though. Better to compare 10-12%, 13-15%, 16-18, and 19-21%.
Body fat% does not matter.
If you have visible veins around your lower abdominal, then you are shreddet.
If you have visible veins from biceps up the should, you are in good shape.
If you have visible veins on biceps, you are lean.
If you have No visible veins, you are fat.
What about forearms? I have visible veins from hand to elbow, but that's it.
keep in mind that the picture show people with some decent muscle mass aswell. you wouldnt look like the 10-14% one without some muscle mass aswell. scales with bf% usually suck, youd get a more accurate number if you use a caliper, or better yet if the gym qt.14 receptionist does it for you.