CureZone   Log On   Join   Happy New Year 2025
Raider and Wrenn
 
SqueakyClean Views: 2,110
Published: 21 y
 
This is a reply to # 656,355

Raider and Wrenn


Raider, what method of fat testing did they use? Skin calipers? Body weight and a formula? Or was it electric current? Body fat is not an easy thing to determine, I think that the most accurate way is something very complex involving submerging the body in water in a laboratory.

For example if they used skin calipers, and measured a skinny place on your body then the numbers would be skewed. Generally that's not too accurate anyway and takes no account of muscle. (Like, measuring a skinny arm when you have a big butt, etc.)

If you weigh 113 then it's possible you might be at 17% but generally women (as someone mentioned) are in the 20% (or more) where as males, or athletes are in the teens or sometimes single digits. By the way, why do you want to know? Is it just curiosity or you need to know?

Wrenn (Amy B), I am very interested considering that you used to be an athlete (solid muscle). Would you mind telling the nature of your athleticism, and training?
Also you said you never wanted to be that level of fitness again. I am curious as to why - is it the time and effort involved? Or was there a downside? You didn't like the way you looked? It didn't feel good? I am just curious. I wanted to get some discussions started about this in the exercise and fitness forum a while back but nobody seems interested in that forum. If you want to post on this topic in there then I will check it. Thanks!
-Squeaky
 

Share


 
Printer-friendly version of this page Email this message to a friend
Alert Moderators
Report Spam or bad message  Alert Moderators on This GOOD Message

This Forum message belongs to a larger discussion thread. See the complete thread below. You can reply to this message!


 

Donate to CureZone


CureZone Newsletter is distributed in partnership with https://www.netatlantic.com


Contact Us - Advertise - Stats

Copyright 1999 - 2024  www.curezone.org

0.297 sec, (1)