| Subject: Re: scales (sorry for the length - but good reading) |
Author:
lara
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 13:59:54 01/07/05 Fri
In reply to:
Deb
's message, "Re: scales (sorry for the length - but good reading)" on 11:28:14 01/07/05 Fri
That was great Deb. Thanks!
>>Deb is right, these scales mostly never work, I used
>>to have on at work and it was the state of the art but
>>the results of that scale never come out the same as
>>test results which are performed in a hospital. If I
>>were you I'd save my money.
>>A good gym club or fitness centre mostly has a body
>>fat metre and they are mostly pretty accurate.
>>
>>Chocolate
>
>That's what the article I tried to post a link to
>says...go to a gym and pay about $15.00 for them to do
>it (usually with skin-fold calipers) if you have the
>same person do it every time, it's fairly accurate.
>They used to do mostly hydrostat or underwater
>weighing but that seems to be becoming extinct.
>
>I just noticed the last link didn't bring you to the
>page I meant to post...it asks you to subscribe -
>sorry about that. Here's some passages from the
>article:
>
>"Exercisers getting in shape will actually change
>shape via aerobic and strength training. They will
>drop fat pounds and gain muscle pounds. Overall
>pounds, as measured on a regular scale, might not
>change much, so charting improvement in body
>composition is the best way to highlight success...."
>
>"Unfortunately, the methods to measure body fat aren't
>a snap. Some have potential accuracy problems. Only
>one sure way exists to nail down your fat composition:
>autopsy. Everything else is estimation..."
>
>"Increasingly, the new benchmark is DEXA, or
>Dual-Energy X-ray Absorptiometry. DEXA uses low X-rays
>to produce an image of fat, muscle and bone. It's the
>best method for accuracy, Ball said. It's also
>impractical for most people because it's done in a lab
>and uses radiation.
>
>A machine called the Bod Pod is up-and-coming. It
>works on a theory akin to underwater weighing but uses
>air displacement to make calculations. Customers sit
>in an egg-shaped chamber and receive a reading in a
>few minutes. The manufacturer said there's no Bod Pod
>in the Kansas City area. Ball has one at his lab at MU
>and charges $25 for the test..."
>
>"Two other methods are readily available. One is
>“bioelectric impedance,” in which an electric pulse is
>sent up one leg and down the other. Manufacturers such
>as Tanita Corp. have incorporated the technology in a
>bathroom-style scale. Fat slows the signal, allowing
>for a body fat computation.
>
>“Bioelectric impedance gets you in the ballpark,”
>Scott said.
>
>But to Scott, Ball and others, the winning method is
>still the skinfold test, which measures fat by
>pinching several sites on the body with calipers. The
>skin is pulled away from the muscle and measured in
>millimeters. The measurements are put into a formula
>that adjusts for factors such as gender, weight and
>age."
>
>"But accuracy problems still arise. The person
>performing the test must manipulate the skin just so.
>Some fitness centers are better than others at
>training testers. “If they're a little bit off in
>their technique, it can lead to significant errors,”
>he said.
>
>Two testers measuring the same person can get
>different readings. It's important to stick with the
>same tester as progress is tracked.
>
>“With the skinfold test, it's almost wholly inaccurate
>to have different people do your percent body fat,”
>Scott said..."
>
>"Besides skinfold, Scott recommends using a tape
>measure for “circumference measurements,” including
>around the arm, abdomen, bottom, waist and neck, and
>to check weight in pounds. “From those three things
>you can track a person's progress,” he said."
>
>The people the article is quoting are John Scott from
>the Scott Fitness Center in Kansas City and Steve Ball
>who is Assistant Professor of Exercise Physiology at
>the University of Missouri-Columbia.
>
>Written by: By EDWARD M. EVELD
>The Kansas City Star
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 