Anyone on /fit/ could please tell me if this page is accurat

>>41066580
navy method is as accurate as you can get with tape

>>41066622
would you kindly explain to me the navy method?

>>41066580
You're definitely not 8.2, tape methods get worse as bf gets lower, they work better on chubbies

>>41066640
Thats the thing, I know im not 8,2. Also im pretty skinny

>>41066632
it's the one you linked. you don't really need to measure your hips as a guy though. try this instead http://fitness.bizcalcs.com/Calculator.asp?Calc=Body-Fat-Navy

>>41066660
Wait, that was the navy method? Huh, i just might be 8,2

>>41066668
post your body so it's easier to tell

>>41066668
its a shit method

Well ill be fucking dammed

http://fitness.bizcalcs.com/Calculator.asp?Calc=Body-Fat-Navy

-17%

Wait a sec guys gonna post a foto of me so you can tell

File: image (3).jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px)

1MB, 3264x2448px

>>41066674
There

>>41066660

Navy method is garbage, they just take the ratio between your neck and waistline.

Navy method is shit. It says lean mass is 70Kg on my body, but I weight fucking 58Kg

>>41066830
>>41066765
Nvm I had forgotten to convert the meassurements from inches to cm.

I got 11%

>>41066803
looks like around 10-13

>>41066765
>12%
Calling bullshit on this one. I'm as skinnyfat as they come.

>>41068236
they most likely have to assume average muscle mass. if you really are skinnyfat you should have less muscle than the average, which would obviously mean a higher bf%

>>41066580
>1-4%
kek