PDA

View Full Version : What is your body fat percentage?



shazou
06-15-2019, 04:27 AM
I got tested electronically at my local drugstore and these were my results:

15.2% body fat :-)

My height at the time was 5'9 and weight 135 lbs w/out clothes & shoes on that is

https://i.imgur.com/xbCLNmm.jpg

Seabass
06-15-2019, 04:58 AM
I got tested electronically at my local drugstore and these were my results:

15.2% body fat :-)

My height at the time was 5'9 and weight 135 lbs w/out clothes & shoes on that is



I'm your exact height in centimetres too and I must say that 135 lbs without clothes first thing in the morning, after peeing and before breakfast is very light! It's generally more a height and weight you would see of an endurance athlete or featherweight boxer, martial artist.

When I was 130 lbs I considered myself anorexic and was diagnosed borderline anorexic, ie the start. I probably was probably very near 10% body fat or under it too but I came to hate it. Since that time 3 years ago, I've fluctuated in weight a bit but am today sitting at 165 lbs. Scales and grip tests tell me my BF% is anywhere between 16-20% so I just go with 20. Hoping to finish a slow bulk at 170 lbs before dropping to 160 lbs, IMO 160 lbs is the sweet spot for me with a more toned and lean physique. I am naturally smaller framed or ectomorph with mild mesomorphic traits I think.

oz
06-15-2019, 05:34 AM
140 lbs? I haven't weighed that little since junior high when I was very skinny. You should do some weightlifting and eat a little more take your proteins. You're too light man and you're not a short guy.

Right now I'm about 185 pushing to 190 might even go up to 200. Been lifting weights about twice a week and making good muscle gains. I don't need these things to tell me how much body fat I have because I can see it and feel it, besides they're not totally accurate either. I don't have saggy man boobs to me that's the most important indicator of the kind of shape you're in.

Speaking of that how about Andy Ruiz that just knocked out Anthony Joshua lol talk about superhero body vs fat ass. What an upset that was.

agent_lime
06-15-2019, 07:47 AM
155lbs 5'10 12%bf. Slow bulk is hard, and in my early thirties I can't put on that much muscle anymore. I think if I am back to 165-170 around 15% I'll be happy.

oz
06-15-2019, 08:51 AM
155lbs 5'10 12%bf. Slow bulk is hard, and in my early thirties I can't put on that much muscle anymore. I think if I am back to 165-170 around 15% I'll be happy.

You make it sound like early 30's is already old age.

Not for me, I'm 31 years old also 5'10 and I'm gaining muscle very abundantly. I'm only doing twice a week, one day upper body and one day legs, around 45 minutes per workout. I feel and look better than ever before. When I gain enough size and muscle I'll do it all only once a week to maintain good shape. It's freaking easy even for a lazy guy like me. Plus it's good and necessary for my overall health all I do is sit around and sleep pretty much 24/7.

Stephen1986
06-15-2019, 09:32 AM
I'm 5 foot 9 and about 200lbs (trying to lose weight at the moment). I've never had my body fat measured as far as I can remember, it's probably not too healthy for a man though.

agent_lime
06-15-2019, 09:57 AM
You make it sound like early 30's is already old age.

Not for me, I'm 31 years old also 5'10 and I'm gaining muscle very abundantly. I'm only doing twice a week, one day upper body and one day legs, around 45 minutes per workout. I feel and look better than ever before. When I gain enough size and muscle I'll do it all only once a week to maintain good shape. It's freaking easy even for a lazy guy like me. Plus it's good and necessary for my overall health all I do is sit around and sleep pretty much 24/7.

That sit around is helping you with the muscle gain. Testosterone levels do drop off in the 30's, so things do become harder. I used to be able to gain muscle without trying much in my early 20's. I could probably train more for hypertrophy instead of strength. Eat in more of a surplus too, but I just don't want to gain too much fat. The bulk cut has never served me well.

agent_lime
06-15-2019, 09:59 AM
I'm 5 foot 9 and about 200lbs (trying to lose weight at the moment). I've never had my body fat measured as far as I can remember, it's probably not too healthy for a man though.

Keto, low carb, intermittent fasting all really help. For me just giving up on any sugar to start made a big difference. Then later I did keto and lost about 12lbs, 5-6 inches off my waist as well, all in 8 weeks. Reddit has a good keto, intermittent fasting community if you want to take a look.

oz
06-15-2019, 10:51 AM
Every workout I lift the same amount of reps and sets but at least 10lbs heavier, progressive overload, and the gains keep coming.

spruithean
06-15-2019, 02:31 PM
I'm not entirely sure what my exact bodyfat measurement is, though if the Navy method is anything to go by it is in the "Athletic" range. So anywhere between 10-15%, I'm 5'11"–6'0" and about 195lbs. I've always been fairly lean my whole life, and I workout roughly 3+ times a week rotating phases of hypertrophy and strength. I focus most of my workouts around the more demanding exercises, at least when I'm not dealing with bouts of injury or what have you.

JMcB
06-15-2019, 03:48 PM
Interesting, I have done this calculation for a while.

According to the Army Calculator (my Father went to West Point, no Navy calculations for me) my BFP is in the 16-17% range. Which I suppose isn’t too bad for someone who’s 66 years old. When I was younger, I always gravitated towards the aerobic exercises. Mostly running, rowing and bike riding but I would also use some weights for my upper body. Unfortunately, I injured my back in 2010 and can’t exercise anymore. When I’m feeling reasonably well, I can take a walk for a mile and use some light weights why lying on my bed but that’s about it. As a friend once told me; “You had your day”. B)

spruithean
06-15-2019, 04:14 PM
Interesting, I have done this calculation for a while.

According to the Army Calculator (my Father went to West Point, no Navy calculations for me) my BFP is in the 16-17% range. Which I suppose isn’t too bad for someone who’s 66 years old. When I was younger, I always gravitated towards the aerobic exercises. Mostly running, rowing and bike riding but I would also use some weights for my upper body. Unfortunately, I injured my back in 2010 and can’t exercise anymore. When I’m feeling reasonably well, I can take a walk for a mile and use some light weights why lying on my bed but that’s about it. As a friend once told me; “You had your day”. B)

Back injuries certainly suck, and they take the motivation and drive out of you big time. Long distance types of activities were never my strong suit, I always did better with short distances and more explosive activities, although at one point in my days of track and field I somehow managed to actually do well in 400m, go figure :lol:

The Army Calculator calculates me at the low end of the range I estimated for myself.

JMcB
06-15-2019, 05:20 PM
Back injuries certainly suck, and they take the motivation and drive out of you big time. Long distance types of activities were never my strong suit, I always did better with short distances and more explosive activities, although at one point in my days of track and field I somehow managed to actually do well in 400m, go figure :lol:

The Army Calculator calculates me at the low end of the range I estimated for myself.

I wonder if it’s a personality or perhaps a body type preference that’s partially innate. I enjoyed running because it was exhausting but after a certain point it became euphoric. I also liked how easy it was, just put on some running shoes and walk out the door. Plus, I had a nice area to run in, which also helped. On the other hand, I did lift enough weights to know how fulfilling that can be, too. So it’s all good! Although, I do wonder if your body type informs your preference

Tz85
06-15-2019, 09:46 PM
Right now I'm around 225LB at 10% BF. In 2015 when I was heavy into body building, I was around 240LB, 6-7%. I've been lifting a really long time.

spruithean
06-15-2019, 09:50 PM
Right now I'm around 225LB at 10% BF. In 2015 when I was heavy into body building, I was around 240LB, 6-7%. I've been lifting a really long time.

Seriously quite lean at 240lbs! Did you compete in bodybuilding at all?

Tz85
06-15-2019, 10:30 PM
I used to work out with a few NPC competitors and IFBB pros, but I never competed. I didn't have the patience to dry out, and use diuretics to get to 3-4%. 2014 during bull season I was on pace, but I partially tore my left pectoral, and at that point decided it wasn't worth it.

Tz85
06-15-2019, 10:31 PM
Seriously quite lean at 240lbs! Did you compete in bodybuilding at all?
I used to work out with a few NPC competitors and IFBB pros, but I never competed. I didn't have the patience to dry out, and use diuretics to get to 3-4%. 2014 during bulk season I was on pace, but I partially tore my left pectoral, and at that point decided it wasn't worth it.

shazou
06-16-2019, 07:21 PM
140 lbs? I haven't weighed that little since junior high when I was very skinny. You should do some weightlifting and eat a little more take your proteins. You're too light man and you're not a short guy.

Right now I'm about 185 pushing to 190 might even go up to 200. Been lifting weights about twice a week and making good muscle gains. I don't need these things to tell me how much body fat I have because I can see it and feel it, besides they're not totally accurate either. I don't have saggy man boobs to me that's the most important indicator of the kind of shape you're in.

Speaking of that how about Andy Ruiz that just knocked out Anthony Joshua lol talk about superhero body vs fat ass. What an upset that was.
I'm 135 without any clothes/shoes on, lol and I still have a bit of a belly....I was actually 125 back in 2014/2013 or so. I am also 38yo but pass as late-20s only in appearance.

My heaviest weigh-in was actually back in my early-20s of age....at a whopping 205 lbs..Don't know if that would be considered obese or not, but during my mid-20s I went on a diet and successfully dropped down to 140 Lbs.. Sometimes it fluctuates though..like upon reaching my early-30s it went up to 160 lbs again, but now I'm at a steady 135 which I'm pretty happy with in terms of BMI and body fat percentage.

In terms of health and food consumption though..I do have a tendency to go for the burgers and sodas rather than vegetables and water..which is something I'm trying to work on.. I had my blood test recently at my local medical center and everything seems to be okay with my liver and internal organs/blood-chemistry etc.

To be honest I'd have to drop down to 120 lbs or so to really have a flat stomach. And btw I'm weak a.f. physically..I _never_ lift weights and am honestly way more into the cardio stuff rather than the lift. I did bench 155 lbs at 3 reps one time back in HS but that's it. Last time I did a bench press was back in 2007 lol and it seemed that I could only do 110 lbs. LoL I think I'm gonna stick with the cardio stuff tbh haha.

oz
06-16-2019, 08:24 PM
205? Sounds like you were binge eating and gained a whole bunch of fat back then that accumulated around your waist and you never burned it off to this day. But whatever the case, if you only care about a flat stomach and running on the treadmill that's your prerogative. Me personally I'd lift weights to gain muscle and if you want to look shredded simultaneously burn fat, which is not easy to do but it can be done, although I never cared so much about the shredded look or having a 6 pack. And your body doesn't care how much weight your lifting as long as you're forcing your muscles to overload, plus it raises your testosterone. But humans are weird everyone is kinda different, what works for you maybe doesn't work for me. You're 38 years old, mature and experienced enough to know what's best for you. I was just posting a casual comment about your really low weight and yes I assumed you were younger, but you're Asian so I'm not surprised your look is deceitfully young lol.

spruithean
06-18-2019, 09:31 PM
I'm 135 without any clothes/shoes on, lol and I still have a bit of a belly....I was actually 125 back in 2014/2013 or so. I am also 38yo but pass as late-20s only in appearance.

My heaviest weigh-in was actually back in my early-20s of age....at a whopping 205 lbs..Don't know if that would be considered obese or not, but during my mid-20s I went on a diet and successfully dropped down to 140 Lbs.. Sometimes it fluctuates though..like upon reaching my early-30s it went up to 160 lbs again, but now I'm at a steady 135 which I'm pretty happy with in terms of BMI and body fat percentage.

In terms of health and food consumption though..I do have a tendency to go for the burgers and sodas rather than vegetables and water..which is something I'm trying to work on.. I had my blood test recently at my local medical center and everything seems to be okay with my liver and internal organs/blood-chemistry etc.

To be honest I'd have to drop down to 120 lbs or so to really have a flat stomach. And btw I'm weak a.f. physically..I _never_ lift weights and am honestly way more into the cardio stuff rather than the lift. I did bench 155 lbs at 3 reps one time back in HS but that's it. Last time I did a bench press was back in 2007 lol and it seemed that I could only do 110 lbs. LoL I think I'm gonna stick with the cardio stuff tbh haha.

To each his own indeed, however you can always get stronger through proper programming in a strength training program. It's a marathon and not race when it comes to lifting heavier and heavier. How one develops in their teen years in regards to strength is interesting, we can have two people, one who is quite strong at a young age and another person who isn't quite as strong and through good training the differences in their abilities will even out, in some cases the person who started off weaker ends up stronger, though some people excel at certain exercises compared to others due to their leverages and their anthropometry.

DMXX
06-18-2019, 09:50 PM
Sitting at 15% body fat right now after several months of ADHD-adjacent alternating between a recomp and a straight cut. I simply don't operate well in calorie deficit through diet, so I'm eating maintenance calories (1-1.2g protein/lb total BW, high fibre, low-med fat, med-high carb) and exercising twice daily. Hoping to surpass my previous milestone (11.3%) by October.

A few general comments...

- The leaner you are and the less sugar-filled your diet is, the easier it'll be for your body to mount an "anabolic" (hate that term but it's convenient here) response to whatever adaptive stimuli you put it through (due to lower insulin resistance).

- The leaner you are, the higher your circulating total testosterone will be (due to less peripheral aromatase conversion of testosterone to oestrogen).

- Take advantage of your body's endogenous growth hormone (fat-burning, muscle retaining/building, skin-ligament-bone building/replenishing) by improving sleep quality and duration, exercising regularly, exposing yourself to periodical stress and increasing dietary protein. If you're an intermittent fasting kind of guy, that'll bump it up too.

- Weight loss is net calorie reduction, no matter how you skin it (reduced calorie intake / increased calorie expenditure / dietary thermogenesis / combo of previous).

- Natural muscle loss (rate of approx. 1%/year) kicks in around 35-40 years. In men, that's probably partially mediated by the male equivalent of the menopause ("andropause"), which is much more gradual and variable (hence the countless stories of men in their 60's or 70's fathering healthy children).

- The more drastic your calorie deficit is, the more muscle mass you're going to lose. That's never good, unless you're a 700lb's ripped Tom Platz of Abs freak from Delray Beach.

- Avoid stress like the plague.

Enjoy your gains, folks.

spruithean
06-18-2019, 10:25 PM
Sitting at 15% body fat right now after several months of ADHD-adjacent alternating between a recomp and a straight cut. I simply don't operate well in calorie deficit through diet, so I'm eating maintenance calories (1-1.2g protein/lb total BW, high fibre, low-med fat, med-high carb) and exercising twice daily. Hoping to surpass my previous milestone (11.3%) by October.

A few general comments...

- The leaner you are and the less sugar-filled your diet is, the easier it'll be for your body to mount an "anabolic" (hate that term but it's convenient here) response to whatever adaptive stimuli you put it through (due to lower insulin resistance).

- The leaner you are, the higher your circulating total testosterone will be (due to less peripheral aromatase conversion of testosterone to oestrogen).

- Take advantage of your body's endogenous growth hormone (fat-burning, muscle retaining/building, skin-ligament-bone building/replenishing) by improving sleep quality and duration, exercising regularly, exposing yourself to periodical stress and increasing dietary protein. If you're an intermittent fasting kind of guy, that'll bump it up too.

- Weight loss is net calorie reduction, no matter how you skin it (reduced calorie intake / increased calorie expenditure / dietary thermogenesis / combo of previous).

- Natural muscle loss (rate of approx. 1%/year) kicks in around 35-40 years. In men, that's probably partially mediated by the male equivalent of the menopause ("andropause"), which is much more gradual and variable (hence the countless stories of men in their 60's or 70's fathering healthy children).

Thankfully regular resistance training, good diet with adequate protein can limit some of the loss, though it's not perfect.


- The more drastic your calorie deficit is, the more muscle mass you're going to lose. That's never good, unless you're a 700lb's ripped Tom Platz of Abs freak from Delray Beach.

Sickening.




- Avoid stress like the plague.

Enjoy your gains, folks.


Oh boy... all aboard the strugglebus!

Censored
06-18-2019, 10:59 PM
Is there a sure way to test your bodyfat %age?

DMXX
06-18-2019, 11:06 PM
Thankfully regular resistance training, good diet with adequate protein can limit some of the loss, though it's not perfect.


As Uncle Rip says, "at this point we're just staving off death".



Sickening.


Another Misfit Maniac, praytell? :D

JerryS.
06-18-2019, 11:26 PM
Is there a sure way to test your bodyfat %age?

yes, but it takes a swimming pool and a seat.

DMXX
06-18-2019, 11:27 PM
Is there a sure way to test your bodyfat %age?

The most accurate way is DEXA scanning, which is basically a full body X Ray scan. It is typically used in clinical medicine to assess for osteoporosis or osteopaenia. You'll have to remain still for up to 50 minutes. There is ionising radiation exposure (0.08mSv from memory). It'll give you an overall percentage, as well as a region specific percentage, and a chart. It's a good way of assessing for visceral fat.

Calipers are liable to observer bias, and they become unreliable once you venture beyond 7-8% body fat (I don't speak from experience on this).

Electrode current implements can also be used, but the readings are influenced by a multitude of external factors, and they're not considered especially accurate.

There's also water immersion testing (this is what I used to get assessed at 11.3%) near-exactly four years ago. I don't know how much they usually cost (a friend did it for free).

I found a body fat estimating tool based on a series of external measurements following the immersion testing, and the results were nearly identical (11% vs. 11.3%). I personally only use that to estimate my BF% these days (fiscal conservatism/minimalism and all).

Censored
06-19-2019, 05:30 AM
The most accurate way is DEXA scanning, which is basically a full body X Ray scan. It is typically used in clinical medicine to assess for osteoporosis or osteopaenia. You'll have to remain still for up to 50 minutes. There is ionising radiation exposure (0.08mSv from memory). It'll give you an overall percentage, as well as a region specific percentage, and a chart. It's a good way of assessing for visceral fat.

Calipers are liable to observer bias, and they become unreliable once you venture beyond 7-8% body fat (I don't speak from experience on this).

Electrode current implements can also be used, but the readings are influenced by a multitude of external factors, and they're not considered especially accurate.

There's also water immersion testing (this is what I used to get assessed at 11.3%) near-exactly four years ago. I don't know how much they usually cost (a friend did it for free).

I found a body fat estimating tool based on a series of external measurements following the immersion testing, and the results were nearly identical (11% vs. 11.3%). I personally only use that to estimate my BF% these days (fiscal conservatism/minimalism and all).

Could you tell me more about this? Thanks

spruithean
06-19-2019, 11:31 AM
As Uncle Rip says, "at this point we're just staving off death".



Another Misfit Maniac, praytell? :D

You gotta enjoy the ment.

LTG
06-19-2019, 02:32 PM
I'm 5'11, 185lbs and I would estimate somewhere around 17% bodyfat at the moment.

I've definitely gained a good amount of muscle in the past 7 months but it's time to get back down into the 10-12% range where I feel best. The strength is nice but it's the little things like feeling soft and having a rounder face that make me know it's time to get to work. It feels both inefficient and irritating when I carry excess weight of no value because my natural frame is geared towards being nimble and lean.

I'll be starting a 500 calorie defecit on Monday with the usual high protein and fat diet with the only carbs being from veggies and berries. It normally works pretty well for me.

Michalis Moriopoulos
06-19-2019, 03:51 PM
I'm 32 years old, 6'2" (187.96 cm) and 160 pounds (72.57 kg), with 10.7% body fat. This has basically been the case since I was in high school.

This is all down to a very fast metabolism. I don't work out at all and the only regular exercise I get is from normal aerobic activity like walking. I've eaten like eat shit for years, too. I'm concerned about my longterm cardiac health, though. I take in too much sodium and fat. I've had elevated blood pressure (prehypertension) for a few years now so I'm taking steps to eat better.

oz
06-19-2019, 05:16 PM
One thing that has annoyed me since early puberty is my right arm always been more muscular than the left.

DMXX
06-19-2019, 05:21 PM
Could you tell me more about this? Thanks

Here:

https://www.calculator.net/body-fat-calculator.html

Dorkymon
06-19-2019, 05:28 PM
Here:

https://www.calculator.net/body-fat-calculator.html

Thanks, it's 10.5% for me.
I commute on a bicycle 10km each way Monday-Friday for work and exercise at the gym 2-3 times a week.
I probably need to get in the habit of eating more, as I burn a lot in addition to having a fast metabolism.

shazou
06-20-2019, 03:31 AM
I'm your exact height in centimetres too and I must say that 135 lbs without clothes first thing in the morning, after peeing and before breakfast is very light! It's generally more a height and weight you would see of an endurance athlete or featherweight boxer, martial artist.

When I was 130 lbs I considered myself anorexic and was diagnosed borderline anorexic, ie the start. I probably was probably very near 10% body fat or under it too but I came to hate it. Since that time 3 years ago, I've fluctuated in weight a bit but am today sitting at 165 lbs. Scales and grip tests tell me my BF% is anywhere between 16-20% so I just go with 20. Hoping to finish a slow bulk at 170 lbs before dropping to 160 lbs, IMO 160 lbs is the sweet spot for me with a more toned and lean physique. I am naturally smaller framed or ectomorph with mild mesomorphic traits I think.
lol I feel I can actually drop down to 115 lbs if I wanted...at 115 I guess I'd be very 'tight' physically for the most part. Actually during my early 20s and also as a teenager many people would often remark that I was a "big guy" in appearance to them, hah but to me 5'9 and 115Lbs is quite thin IMO actually..though I do have pretty broad shoulders on average and I'd say I'm more 'medium'-framed in built more than anything. :)

shazou
06-20-2019, 03:36 AM
The most accurate way is DEXA scanning, which is basically a full body X Ray scan. It is typically used in clinical medicine to assess for osteoporosis or osteopaenia. You'll have to remain still for up to 50 minutes. There is ionising radiation exposure (0.08mSv from memory). It'll give you an overall percentage, as well as a region specific percentage, and a chart. It's a good way of assessing for visceral fat.

Calipers are liable to observer bias, and they become unreliable once you venture beyond 7-8% body fat (I don't speak from experience on this).

Electrode current implements can also be used, but the readings are influenced by a multitude of external factors, and they're not considered especially accurate.

There's also water immersion testing (this is what I used to get assessed at 11.3%) near-exactly four years ago. I don't know how much they usually cost (a friend did it for free).

I found a body fat estimating tool based on a series of external measurements following the immersion testing, and the results were nearly identical (11% vs. 11.3%). I personally only use that to estimate my BF% these days (fiscal conservatism/minimalism and all).
What is this method called (the one I did at my local drugstore in Manila):

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-PRJXUoeKwnM/VBf3UG7ngvI/AAAAAAAAACE/mJtnrBKgcX0/s1600/keito-health-monitor.jpg

like would something like this be accurate at all?

JMcB
06-20-2019, 04:00 AM
What is this method called (the one I did at my local drugstore in Manila):

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-PRJXUoeKwnM/VBf3UG7ngvI/AAAAAAAAACE/mJtnrBKgcX0/s1600/keito-health-monitor.jpg

like would something like this be accurate at all?

Beam me up, Scotty! ;-)

It looks like it’s taking the same measurements as the other calculators, just electronically. Presumably, it’s factoring in the weight of your clothes, etc.

spruithean
06-20-2019, 06:51 PM
What is this method called (the one I did at my local drugstore in Manila):

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-PRJXUoeKwnM/VBf3UG7ngvI/AAAAAAAAACE/mJtnrBKgcX0/s1600/keito-health-monitor.jpg

like would something like this be accurate at all?

That uses electrical impulses, though not of the same quality as the more expensive methods of estimating bodyfat.

JMcB
06-20-2019, 08:18 PM
That uses electrical impulses, though not of the same quality as the more expensive methods of estimating bodyfat.

Not to get off subject but: Nice coin!

What the story behind it? It looks like someone’s about to be trodden underfoot and bopped on the head.

spruithean
06-20-2019, 08:33 PM
Not to get off subject but: Nice coin!

What the story behind it? It looks like someones about to be trodden underfoot and bopped on the head.

I'm not exactly sure what is going in the image between the two people, but it is apparently a coin found in Britain of Frisian origins, roughly dated to 500 AD or so. It has a Frisian runic inscription which reads skanomodu

http://www.johannesbeers.nl/runes.html
http://christerhamp.se/runor/gamla/br-a/br-mynt-skanomodu.html

There is also this link for more runic inscriptions from Britain, Netherlands, etc https://www.arild-hauge.com/eanglor.htm

JMcB
06-20-2019, 08:52 PM
I'm not exactly sure what is going in the image between the two people, but it is apparently a coin found in Britain of Frisian origins, roughly dated to 500 AD or so. It has a Frisian runic inscription which reads skanomodu

http://www.johannesbeers.nl/runes.html
http://christerhamp.se/runor/gamla/br-a/br-mynt-skanomodu.html

There is also this link for more runic inscriptions from Britain, Netherlands, etc https://www.arild-hauge.com/eanglor.htm

Interesting and appropriate.

The most common gold coin in the late Roman Empire was solidus, a few centimeters large. The coin was found in various parts of the Empire, including in Britain, but this coin is from the late 500s when the Romans had already left the country ... The coin's design has been copied after the solidus struck in Ravenna in the 400's. Skanomodu was probably the name of the coin publisher. The coin is now in the British Museum, but it is uncertain where it comes from. It may well be the battle of the Frisian islands

Sorry for the detour, now back to body fat percentages.

So I used the Navy calculator and they’re giving me 17.3%. Which is just inside their fitness level, near the borderline of the average level.

Finn
06-20-2019, 10:53 PM
Let me put some weight in the discussion, no not in body fat ;)

Some interpretation about skanomodu, google translated:

'On a golden coin from around 600 AD the word skanomodu can be read in beautiful Germanic ruins. Most scholars agree on the significance and it is generally accepted that this is a Frisian proper name, making it one of the oldest traces of the Frisian language. It is for this reason that, among other things, the study association of the Frisian Language and Culture study program at the University of Groningen is named after it. But with the danger of grieving this kind people: with some right we can doubt the interpretation of the name and ask ourselves if he really is Frisian.

It is said that the coin was taken over by the British Museum in 1824 from the collection of King George III of the United Kingdom, who died four years earlier. How it once came into his possession is uncertain, but since he was also Elector and later King of Hanover, the coin might as well have its origins in those regions, including East Frisia. In any case, it is clear that it was used as a pendant and was modeled on the example of late Roman solidi from two centuries earlier. Apart from the rust bars then.

Skanomodu is considered to be a dual name. The first paragraph would be a younger form of Old German * skaun (ij) a- 'beautiful, beautiful' and the second paragraph a younger form of * mōda- 'courage, mind' or adjective 'courageous, of mind', meaning the name as a whole it would mean something like 'good-natured'. And because the development of the Old German * -au- into a long -a (or an -ā-) is characteristic of the Old Frisian, the name is read as Skānomōdu and thus considered Frisian.

These are reasonable assumptions, but it is possible that the first paragraph is a very different word, and an adjective that has been overlooked earlier because it is now quite rare: Old German * skana-. It is only left in the English regional languages, in the form of shan and extended also shanny and shandy. Its written meaning varies from "shy, frightened, wild" (said of cattle) and "unruly" to "frisky" and even "frivolous".

Derived from this is to shan, which in one region means "jumping sideways", in another "walking wide leg", and in both cases horses are said. This verb has its counterpart in Frisian skane, skeane "stand wide-legged". In view of the related words, the latter two meanings will have shifted from being "braced, being stiff," originally with fright or fear.

Himself is * skana-derived from the strong verb * skenan- that still lives on as Swedish skena, mainly in the meanings of 'frightening madman' (said of horses) and 'running, raging, whether or not aimlessly' (said of people). In addition, we find the verb * skun-n-, the precursor of Old English scunian, sceonian "to be afraid, to fear, to shun from fear, to shun" and English to shun to "shun, to shun". The latter word also has the meaning "push, poke".

That this * skenan must have originally meant "excitement" and "being stimulated" is all the more evident from another derivation: * skunda, which has been reported as Middle Low German, excites "excitement, incitement, lure". * Skunda (*) is then derived from * skunda, which initially also meant 'excitement' and 'being stimulated' and was handed down as Old English scyndan 'rushing', Old-Saxon skundian 'spurring' and Groning's 'persuading' .

Eventually * skenan himself, including Greek ξαίνω (ksanō), ‘carding, scratching, scratching’ goes back to the Proto-Indo-European root * ksen-. This is probably an extension of the older root * kes- "carding, combing", which is also the basis of Dutch hair and the like. The reversal of * sk- from parent * ks is incidentally sound-lawful. For this, compare the development of Old German * skeuban "push, push" from Proto-Indo-European * kseubh–.

To return to * skana-: given traditions, distractions and relatives, it seems to have originally meant 'stimulated' and by extension 'frightened' and 'shy', but also 'wild', 'unruly' and 'stiff' ". If we are then allowed to identify the word with the first member of Skanomodu, then this composition could perhaps best be interpreted as "stubborn of mind" or simply "stiff".

But the joke is now: if this interpretation is correct, then the name could be English as well as Frisian. Although it is conceivable in view of the close relationship between English and Frisian that the average, skanomodu Frisian is not concerned about this.'

https://taaldacht.nl/2016/04/09/skanomodu/

This one is even more accurat for Spruithean as he has Westeremden roots, this is 8th century rune from Westeremden :
https://www.mupload.nl/img/9k2k7owm6.36.01.png

It says:
ophmu givda mlu:iwi ok upduna (a)le wimv h us.
op hmu jibada mlu : iwi ok up duna (a)le wimœd h usa.

‘at the homestead stays good fortune; may it also grow near the yew on the terp; Wimœd owns this’

Ok more straightforward than skanomodu, this stays as mysterious as my body fat.....:P

JMcB
06-21-2019, 12:00 AM
Let me put some weight in the discussion, no not in body fat ;)

Some interpretation about skanomodu, google translated:

'On a golden coin from around 600 AD the word skanomodu can be read in beautiful Germanic ruins. Most scholars agree on the significance and it is generally accepted that this is a Frisian proper name, making it one of the oldest traces of the Frisian language. It is for this reason that, among other things, the study association of the Frisian Language and Culture study program at the University of Groningen is named after it. But with the danger of grieving this kind people: with some right we can doubt the interpretation of the name and ask ourselves if he really is Frisian.

It is said that the coin was taken over by the British Museum in 1824 from the collection of King George III of the United Kingdom, who died four years earlier. How it once came into his possession is uncertain, but since he was also Elector and later King of Hanover, the coin might as well have its origins in those regions, including East Frisia. In any case, it is clear that it was used as a pendant and was modeled on the example of late Roman solidi from two centuries earlier. Apart from the rust bars then.

Skanomodu is considered to be a dual name. The first paragraph would be a younger form of Old German * skaun (ij) a- 'beautiful, beautiful' and the second paragraph a younger form of * mōda- 'courage, mind' or adjective 'courageous, of mind', meaning the name as a whole it would mean something like 'good-natured'. And because the development of the Old German * -au- into a long -a (or an -ā-) is characteristic of the Old Frisian, the name is read as Skānomōdu and thus considered Frisian.

These are reasonable assumptions, but it is possible that the first paragraph is a very different word, and an adjective that has been overlooked earlier because it is now quite rare: Old German * skana-. It is only left in the English regional languages, in the form of shan and extended also shanny and shandy. Its written meaning varies from "shy, frightened, wild" (said of cattle) and "unruly" to "frisky" and even "frivolous".

Derived from this is to shan, which in one region means "jumping sideways", in another "walking wide leg", and in both cases horses are said. This verb has its counterpart in Frisian skane, skeane "stand wide-legged". In view of the related words, the latter two meanings will have shifted from being "braced, being stiff," originally with fright or fear.

Himself is * skana-derived from the strong verb * skenan- that still lives on as Swedish skena, mainly in the meanings of 'frightening madman' (said of horses) and 'running, raging, whether or not aimlessly' (said of people). In addition, we find the verb * skun-n-, the precursor of Old English scunian, sceonian "to be afraid, to fear, to shun from fear, to shun" and English to shun to "shun, to shun". The latter word also has the meaning "push, poke".

That this * skenan must have originally meant "excitement" and "being stimulated" is all the more evident from another derivation: * skunda, which has been reported as Middle Low German, excites "excitement, incitement, lure". * Skunda (*) is then derived from * skunda, which initially also meant 'excitement' and 'being stimulated' and was handed down as Old English scyndan 'rushing', Old-Saxon skundian 'spurring' and Groning's 'persuading' .

Eventually * skenan himself, including Greek ξαίνω (ksanō), ‘carding, scratching, scratching’ goes back to the Proto-Indo-European root * ksen-. This is probably an extension of the older root * kes- "carding, combing", which is also the basis of Dutch hair and the like. The reversal of * sk- from parent * ks is incidentally sound-lawful. For this, compare the development of Old German * skeuban "push, push" from Proto-Indo-European * kseubh–.

To return to * skana-: given traditions, distractions and relatives, it seems to have originally meant 'stimulated' and by extension 'frightened' and 'shy', but also 'wild', 'unruly' and 'stiff' ". If we are then allowed to identify the word with the first member of Skanomodu, then this composition could perhaps best be interpreted as "stubborn of mind" or simply "stiff".

But the joke is now: if this interpretation is correct, then the name could be English as well as Frisian. Although it is conceivable in view of the close relationship between English and Frisian that the average, skanomodu Frisian is not concerned about this.'

https://taaldacht.nl/2016/04/09/skanomodu/

This one is even more accurat for Spruithean as he has Westeremden roots, this is 8th century rune from Westeremden :
https://www.mupload.nl/img/9k2k7owm6.36.01.png

It says:
ophmu givda mlu:iwi ok upduna (a)le wimv h us.
op hmu jibada mlu : iwi ok up duna (a)le wimœd h usa.

‘at the homestead stays good fortune; may it also grow near the yew on the terp; Wimœd owns this’

Ok more straightforward than skanomodu, this stays as mysterious as my body fat.....:P

That’s putting some meat on the bones! ;-)

Kulin
06-21-2019, 09:41 PM
15%, 173 lbs at 187 cm. Trying to get to 185 lbs, then drop to 10% bodyfat with adequate muscle.

aafusc2988
06-26-2019, 01:52 PM
No idea, but I'm 6'0, 160 lbs. This time last year I was pushing 215 lbs. It's amazing what stopping drinking beer can do for you. When I did go back to the bar more regularly I switched to vodka waters.

Revmac
07-02-2019, 06:56 PM
7.0% bf. I’m 31, an even 6 feet and weigh about 115 lbs. I’ve actually been trying to get fat on beer, but my metabolism is just too fast. I try to lift when my back injury allows it, but all the gains I make I loose like 2 weeks after my disk goes out. I’m an ftDNA customer but I’ve been wondering if 23&Me or any of the other companies offer a test that could help me choose a healthier diet. Does anyone have any experience with any of these tests and what their prices are?

shazou
07-06-2019, 10:46 AM
some info:

https://i.imgur.com/lKfUsOq.jpg
...
https://i.imgur.com/6tijG2O.jpg

Kanenas
07-06-2019, 06:10 PM
I think ~18%. Most of my life I was more than that. I think I will try to be between 12% and 15%.

I was more than 25% for like a year or so and I felt very bad.