Re: Measurement of Body Fat Percentage

[Guest guest]

Hi folks:

Of course this is far from being all bad. As Warren has posted here,

of the restricted mice that had a 40% increase in maximal lifespan,

those that lived the longest were the ones that had the most body

fat. So if I can just keep losing weight, and thereby need, and

ingest, fewer calories, while increasing my body fat, I should live

to be 200! ............ Why do I get the feeling Tony is about to

reply to this with an 'I told you so'? ;; ^ )))

Realistically, this is likely just an aberration which emphasizes,

again, the need to average perhaps ten daily measurements before

coming to any conclusions about this stuff.

Talking of whom, what happened to Warren? I really do miss his

wonderful posts with the very latest information in CRON science.

Rodney.

--- In , " Rodney " <perspect1111@y...>

wrote:

.....................

> So, since in the past couple of months my weight has declined a few

> pounds and both of these measurements have declined also, one might

> have expected that my BF% had declined as well. Right?

>

> WRONG! My BF%, at least according to the US Navy formula, has

> increased

[Guest guest]

I hope you won't read too much into error prone estimates of BF.

While at 21.5 BMI I am far from skin and bones, I have no desire to diet down to

test the red lines for too little BF.

FWIW my new years resolution was to stop losing and stabilize up a few pounds,

It has taken me some 2 months to get there (moderation always).

JR

PS: Warren remains active and has posted recently on the other (CRSOC) list.

-----Original Message-----

From: Rodney [mailto:perspect1111@...]

Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 12:13 PM

Subject: [ ] Re: Measurement of Body Fat Percentage

Hi folks:

Of course this is far from being all bad. As Warren has posted here,

of the restricted mice that had a 40% increase in maximal lifespan,

those that lived the longest were the ones that had the most body

fat. So if I can just keep losing weight, and thereby need, and

ingest, fewer calories, while increasing my body fat, I should live

to be 200! ............ Why do I get the feeling Tony is about to

reply to this with an 'I told you so'? ;; ^ )))

Realistically, this is likely just an aberration which emphasizes,

again, the need to average perhaps ten daily measurements before

coming to any conclusions about this stuff.

Talking of whom, what happened to Warren? I really do miss his

wonderful posts with the very latest information in CRON science.

Rodney.

--- In , " Rodney " <perspect1111@y...>

wrote:

.....................

> So, since in the past couple of months my weight has declined a few

> pounds and both of these measurements have declined also, one might

> have expected that my BF% had declined as well. Right?

>

> WRONG! My BF%, at least according to the US Navy formula, has

> increased

[Guest guest]

Your observation about the US Navy BF% formula is interesting. When I

read your note, I went to measure my neck and waist. My neck has

stayed at 15 " for the past 4 months, my waist has decreased by 1/4 "

along with the loss of 1 pound.

From the database files, you are my only age-matched " control " .

Rodney Age 62, Waist/Height=0.467, BF% = 16.8 (USN) BMI=22.7 Aug 2004

But if you have lost " a few pounds " your BMI is now lower.

Tony

===

From: " Rodney " <perspect1111@y...>

Date: Wed Feb 23, 2005 12:28 pm

My BF%, at least according to the US Navy formula, has

increased! The reason is that the circumference of my neck has

declined somewhat more than that of my abdomen. This means that my

abdomen-minus-neck measurement (which is what the formula uses) has

increased somewhat ......... so, so has my calculated BF%!

Rodney.