Body fat scanner things, accurate? Finished up leg day today,

>>42118627
They aren't in my experience and I'm told they read lower bf% right after workouts. I used one after a workout and got 9% while I am usually 15-18.

>>42118627
>270lbs
>27.2% body fat
Doesn't take a genius to tell that aint accurate bud

>>42118672
Interesting, this was read right after leg day. Usually online calcs average out at 28.5%

They are not terribly accurate. Does your actual percentage matter?

Like when will it matter? If you're a fat fuck you're a fat fuck. If you are counting calories, measuring your weight and arm/chest/waste/thighs, what does fat percentage matter? Either you look good naked or you don't.

>>42118710
I was just looking for more metrics really. Right now i just track crap with measuring tape and body weight.

>>42118627
You're not supposed to workout prior to a body fat test. The BIA machines aren't terrible, but they depend heavily on hydration levels. Caliper tests, used with high quality calipers, and someone who knows what they're doing are cheap, quick, efficient ways. Not super accurate, but a more experienced person will increase accuracy.
My body fat according to a BIA was 8.3% and the caliper test was done by an athletic trainer which resulted in 8.0%.

>>42118627
i was massured by this when i enter to the gym
4% body weight altough i was skinny fat 190cm on 65kg
so its accurate

>>42118738
not*

>>42118735
I will def use it again and see how it varies then. Thanks!

>>42118735
So take it with a grain of salt.
6'0 ~170 lb at the time.

They are fantastic for measuring progress as long as you know how they work and the number they shoot out isnt exactly what your bodyfat is.

Hydration will throw off the numbers. So wake up take a huge piss and shit and immediately use it as early as possible. This is a good way to get numbers that are reliable.

Again the number on the thing likely isnt your bodyfat. But if you are trying to lose fat it WILL tell you how much you are losing over time. and you will be able to document your progress in some way.

>>42118832
Well put, thanks for the info. That's kinda why I was interested in getting a reading. I just like having metrics.

Appreciate it

>>42118627
No, they're inaccurate as fuck.
Dexa scan is the most commonly available thing.
I have one of those scanners as part of my bathroom scale, it has shown me anywhere between 11 and 43% while in all actuality I was between 12 and 20

>>42118627
They are inaccurate as hell. Had a friend in high school who was 5'6 135lbs and could run a sub 17 min 5k. It said he was 40% body fat.