Jump to content
RemedySpot.com

Body Fat Percentage

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Hi folks:

This US Navy publication seems very helpful for estimating BF%. It

uses height and (abdomen circumference minus neck circumference).

The article supplies equations - if that is what you like - or tables

if you do not like equations.

I doubt we will find a source that is appreciably better.

Note that for males abdomen circumference is measured horizonally at

**navel** level, and neck circumference below the adams apple sloping

down somewhat from rear to front. All measurements are in inches.

http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/kurilla5.pdf

Also of interest, from other sources: (at least in the case of

males) each one inch decline in abdomen circumference is associated

with a decline in BF% of almost exactly 2%.

Take for example an individual who, let's say, has an abdomen

measurement of 36 inches and a BF% of 20%. Then at an abdomen

measurement of 35 inches his BF% would drop to 18%.

So, in order to drop his BF% from 20 to 10 he would need to reduce

his abdomen circumference from 36 to 31.

Rodney.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...

Hi Francesca:

So we are all different. Caution is advised, and having a proper

(immersion or dexa) test done may be important when approaching low

levels of BF%, so as to be sure one knows if the proxy method being

used is accurate for the individual concerned.

From your picture I doubt you need to lose weight.

Rodney.

>

> >

> > Hi folks:

> >

> > Here is another method which gives a number for me that is quite

> > close to the US Navy method:

> >

> > http://www.healthcentral.com/cooltools/CT_Fitness/bodyfat1.cfm

> >

> > Rodney.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why should one care, particularly, about body fat percentage? How does

this relate to CR and longevity?

On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 13:29:23 -0000, Rodney <perspect1111@...> wrote:

>

>

> Hi Francesca:

>

> So we are all different. Caution is advised, and having a proper

> (immersion or dexa) test done may be important when approaching low

> levels of BF%, so as to be sure one knows if the proxy method being

> used is accurate for the individual concerned.

>

> From your picture I doubt you need to lose weight.

>

> Rodney.

>

>

> >

> > >

> > > Hi folks:

> > >

> > > Here is another method which gives a number for me that is quite

> > > close to the US Navy method:

> > >

> > > http://www.healthcentral.com/cooltools/CT_Fitness/bodyfat1.cfm

> > >

> > > Rodney.

>

>

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>>>

From: Dowling <christopher.a.dowling@g...>

Date: Thu Oct 28, 2004 9:33 am

Subject: Re: [ ] Re: Body Fat Percentage

Why should one care, particularly, about body fat percentage? How does

this relate to CR and longevity?

>>>

The structure of the human body consists mostly of proteins and fat.

Bones are a protein matrix with embedded mineral crystals.

Carbohydrates are components of cartilage, but overall, carbohydrates

do not have a major structural role in the animal kingdom. Plants, on

the other hand, use carbohydrates (e.g., cellulose) as a major

structural constituent.

We know that too much fat is associated with cardiovascular disease,

diabetes, etc., so it may seems reasonable to reduce body fat as much

as possible. But because the brain and all the walls of the cells of

the body have a high proportion of fat, we have to have a proper

amount of body fat. If the amount of fat is too low, the body will

not be able to create new cells or maintain the proper amount of fat

in the brain. The recent message about the GRAY ZONE shows that we

have to be very cautious, and there seems to be some agreement that

Vitousek's papers on the psychological effects from severe dieting

have some validity.

So, how does body fat percentage relate to CR and longevity? In my

opinion, body fat percentage relates to physical health and mental

health. I don't think that you can live long without proper mental

health. If you live a long life but your higher faculties are gone,

you are no more than a zombie and no better off than someone with

Alzheimer's. The difference between CR for mice and CR for humans is

that, to stay human, the mind has to be preserved. To do this, we

need to learn what is the optimum amount of body fat consistent

with longevity and mental health.

Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>>>

From: Francesca Skelton <fskelton@e...>

Date: Thu Oct 28, 2004 9:17 am

Subject: Re: [ ] Body Fat Percentage

According to this, I'm too fat at 110lbs and 5'4 " . It's telling me to

lose anywhere from 10 to 14 lbs. Perhaps what they mean is that I

should " replace " my " fat " with lean muscle mass? At my age I think my

weight is pretty good.

on 10/28/2004 8:53 AM, Rodney at perspect1111@y... wrote:

> http://www.healthcentral.com/cooltools/CT_Fitness/bodyfat1.cfm

>>>

Francesca,

I just tried the link and my were results consistent with the Navy

method. (13% body fat, 20 pounds of fat and 131 pounds of lean body

mass)

If you only have 14 lb of fat in your 110 lb frame, that is only 12.7%

body fat, which is as close as you can get to the essential fat for a

woman.

Tony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True, much is unknown regarding body composition, exercise, dietary

intake, caloric intake in humans, and longevity. Certainly there is

probably a range of " optimal " for longevity in humans.

The animal studies suggest we ought only pay attention to calories,

provided adequate nutritional intake. Exercise does appear to be a

factor for human health and, perhaps, longevity. Exercise also

affects body composition, so that one can take in huge volumes of

calories (e.g. Lance Armstrong at ~6,000 Kcals/day) and maintain low

body fat and low BMI. Obsession with body fat percentage, IMO, is a

waste of effort, at least with respect to longevity.

On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 14:36:15 -0000, citpeks <citpeks@...> wrote:

>

>

> >>>

> From: Dowling <christopher.a.dowling@g...>

> Date: Thu Oct 28, 2004 9:33 am

> Subject: Re: [ ] Re: Body Fat Percentage

>

> Why should one care, particularly, about body fat percentage? How does

> this relate to CR and longevity?

> >>>

>

> The structure of the human body consists mostly of proteins and fat.

> Bones are a protein matrix with embedded mineral crystals.

> Carbohydrates are components of cartilage, but overall, carbohydrates

> do not have a major structural role in the animal kingdom. Plants, on

> the other hand, use carbohydrates (e.g., cellulose) as a major

> structural constituent.

>

> We know that too much fat is associated with cardiovascular disease,

> diabetes, etc., so it may seems reasonable to reduce body fat as much

> as possible. But because the brain and all the walls of the cells of

> the body have a high proportion of fat, we have to have a proper

> amount of body fat. If the amount of fat is too low, the body will

> not be able to create new cells or maintain the proper amount of fat

> in the brain. The recent message about the GRAY ZONE shows that we

> have to be very cautious, and there seems to be some agreement that

> Vitousek's papers on the psychological effects from severe dieting

> have some validity.

>

> So, how does body fat percentage relate to CR and longevity? In my

> opinion, body fat percentage relates to physical health and mental

> health. I don't think that you can live long without proper mental

> health. If you live a long life but your higher faculties are gone,

> you are no more than a zombie and no better off than someone with

> Alzheimer's. The difference between CR for mice and CR for humans is

> that, to stay human, the mind has to be preserved. To do this, we

> need to learn what is the optimum amount of body fat consistent

> with longevity and mental health.

>

> Tony

>

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi :

I agree with Tony's answer to this. I would like to add that for

those who believe that CRON is beneficial it may be important to do

it to the extent it is beneficial and not go beyond what is

beneficial.

In order to make a judgment about whether one is nowhere close to the

most beneficial level of CRON, or perhaps well beyond it, one needs

some way to measure it. One helpful way is BF%. There are lots of

others. BMI is one I like less than BF%. Waist circumference is

another. Lipids values is another. BP another. ...........

But there are disadvantages to each of these measures. The

disadvantge of BF% is it is difficult/expensive to be sure one has

the correct number. With many of the others there is no way I know

of to determine if they are TOO LOW - too low total cholesterol, say,

or too low blood pressure, or too low WBC.

But one adbvantage of BF% is that we do have some indications of what

is too low. Tony has often posted them here. As have others.

IMO it is important to have some indication as to how far in CRON is

far enough. BF% is one measure that helps with that, imo, fwiw.

Rodney.

> > >

> > > >

> > > > Hi folks:

> > > >

> > > > Here is another method which gives a number for me that is

quite

> > > > close to the US Navy method:

> > > >

> > > > http://www.healthcentral.com/cooltools/CT_Fitness/bodyfat1.cfm

> > > >

> > > > Rodney.

> >

> >

> >

> >

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WRT " too low " for body fat, what, exactly are these parameters, and

given the relative inaccuracy of body fat measurement, of what use are

they?

On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 14:58:10 -0000, Rodney <perspect1111@...> wrote:

>

>

> Hi :

>

> I agree with Tony's answer to this. I would like to add that for

> those who believe that CRON is beneficial it may be important to do

> it to the extent it is beneficial and not go beyond what is

> beneficial.

>

> In order to make a judgment about whether one is nowhere close to the

> most beneficial level of CRON, or perhaps well beyond it, one needs

> some way to measure it. One helpful way is BF%. There are lots of

> others. BMI is one I like less than BF%. Waist circumference is

> another. Lipids values is another. BP another. ...........

>

> But there are disadvantages to each of these measures. The

> disadvantge of BF% is it is difficult/expensive to be sure one has

> the correct number. With many of the others there is no way I know

> of to determine if they are TOO LOW - too low total cholesterol, say,

> or too low blood pressure, or too low WBC.

>

> But one adbvantage of BF% is that we do have some indications of what

> is too low. Tony has often posted them here. As have others.

>

> IMO it is important to have some indication as to how far in CRON is

> far enough. BF% is one measure that helps with that, imo, fwiw.

>

> Rodney.

>

>

> > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Hi folks:

> > > > >

> > > > > Here is another method which gives a number for me that is

> quite

> > > > > close to the US Navy method:

> > > > >

> > > > > http://www.healthcentral.com/cooltools/CT_Fitness/bodyfat1.cfm

> > > > >

> > > > > Rodney.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the article you link, I really don't see any reference for body

fatWRT " too low " for males. Also, this is an article for a general

audience, without reference to studies.

WRT to burning things you don't want burned, I disagree. With CR, you

lower BMI. This may entail " burning " excess muscle, etc.

On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 15:21:01 -0000, Rodney <perspect1111@...> wrote:

>

>

> Hi :

>

> Here is an article, from what looks like a reputable website, that

> discusses the issue. Tony has tables which I have seen various

> places that specify expected healthy minimums for 'essential

> fat', 'athletes', and regular people, both for males and females.

>

> http://sportsmedicine.about.com/cs/body_comp/a/aa090200a.htm

>

> Also is it not true that if your body fat reserves get too low your

> body will start to burn for energy stuff you really would prefer to

> keep? Like muscle, including perhaps heart muscle? Possibly

> including the bone matrix tissue Tony has mentioned here a number of

> times?

>

> Rodney.

>

>

> > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Hi folks:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Here is another method which gives a number for me that is

> > > quite

> > > > > > > close to the US Navy method:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> http://www.healthcentral.com/cooltools/CT_Fitness/bodyfat1.cfm

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Rodney.

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...