[quote]RockCrusher wrote:
NovaGreg,
I posted something similar on Gus’ thread. When I was in the military(USAF '93-'97), they used and may still use a method for determining bf% using height/weight/neck/belly measurements. The best info I could find is that some AF researchers developed a calculation that was a best fit to test subjects that had their bf% tested in some standardized way.
Frankly, it is at best a serious SWAG(scientific wild-assed guess) and fairly variable based on the measurements though it does take three measures each in the neck and belly and averages them before doing the calculation. I say all of that because I want everyone to understand that I understand the limitations.
I have a DOS program that runs the calculation based on these input parameters. So, for grins, I ran your numbers. Your first measurements were on
1/7/2008
Height:73.00"
Weight:260lbs
Neck :17.125" rounded up to 17.13
Belly :45.00"
Total BM:260
Fat BM: 76
Lean BM:184
%BF: 29.27%
Your last measurements were on
3/9/2008
Height:73.00"
Weight:236lbs
Neck :17.00"
Belly :39.50"
Total BM:236
Fat BM: 53
Lean BM:183
%BF: 22.31%
The program returned a bf% and I multiplied this against the weight to generate the LBM, rounded to the next pound and subtracted from the total mass to get the fat mass.
The same two observations apply here. First, the bf% numbers seemed to pass the BS test and seemed reasonable. Second, these numbers show only a negligible drop in LBM while dropping 7% bf.
Dan[/quote]
Dan,
Thanks so much dude. For my tape measurements, I use Myotape, which is very accurate. I posted on my thread that I’m am starting to wonder if my scale that I’ve been relying on is off, and that I actually started at a heavier weight than 266. I’ll be weighing myself on Friday on the gym scale, so when I find out and take measurements, perhaps you can let me know what the program says?