I don't know how accurate that graphic is, but 20% is nowhere near fat according to it, so 22%, not fat at all.

I would use the word overweight for 30% and more, chubby for 35%, and fat for 40% and more. Again, that's according to that pic.

According to this pic from the previous page...



It seems like I can be more forgiving. For example, that 30% looks banging , and not overweight at all. 35% manages to look ok and not classically 'chubby' the way most people use that term, and that's because the fat distribution is uniform. If the fat was more concentrated in the belly area, she could easily look not just chubby, but even fat. So I would go with overweight for 35% and up according that pic.

Again, the adjectives can vary even for the same percentage body fat from person to person, and depend on the distribution of fat, bone structure, height, and some other smaller factors.

9/20/2013 11:36:50 AM

22% is only fat if you're a dude

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_fat_percentage#Typical_body_fat_amounts

9/20/2013 11:38:59 AM

That table is wonky. So at 24 you are average but at 25 you become obese? Dafuq?

There should be an overweight category between average and obese.

And what about the government classification criteria... I think they use BMI, right? Do they also do it with body fat percent? Cuz if they do, that would be great.

9/20/2013 11:44:36 AM

the average person is overweight, thus the average body fat percentage is fat

9/20/2013 11:45:28 AM

lol

9/20/2013 11:52:43 AM

Are those descriptors in the table according to what you find in the wild, or according to how people should be?

You are saying that the cut off for average will shift to something like 40% in about a decade... but is that what has really happened in the past? Are there past cutoffs available so we can see and compare if they really have shifted or not?

9/20/2013 11:57:10 AM

I had no idea 0EPII1 was so tiny

9/20/2013 12:04:04 PM

Quote :

"how dare you attack me, you hypocrite!"

you can't judge somebody for being a judgmental jerk

[Edited on September 20, 2013 at 12:17 PM. Reason : ]

9/20/2013 12:17:21 PM

Quote :

"22% is fat, you guys are all chubby chasers (see: anything Kate Upton on this site)"

You're either trolling, or I'm embarrassed for you.

9/20/2013 12:42:16 PM

okay, fatty

9/20/2013 12:50:40 PM

Fat slobs and people on unsustainable diets/workouts judge others ITT

9/20/2013 1:00:57 PM

This one also looks consistent with that chart.



So going by the internet, the people calling it "wonky" are wrong.

9/20/2013 1:05:10 PM

I just want you guys to know that this thread has caused me to start a starvation diet.

9/20/2013 1:47:20 PM

^^ another chart that proves my point

9/20/2013 1:48:24 PM

Are you referring to when I used the word wonky? I gave a specific example of what I meant.

So dtownral, would you call that chick fat? She has 29% body fat and nobody in their right mind would even call her overweight, let alone FAT. But for you, 22% is fat, right? 22% is actually fit and trim, and low enough for the beginning stages of ab definition to show, that is, an athletic girl.

How can anybody call a chick with faint vertical ab lines FAT???

See the pic I posted at the top of the page

9/20/2013 1:52:54 PM

dtown only digs chicks who are Amenorrheic

9/20/2013 1:56:26 PM

he's trolling. it feeds his socipathic ego.
(he actually has a slight beer belly and quickly receding hairline, and i have it on good authority that his wife is actually anorexic and kinda looks like a 50 year old cher)

[Edited on September 20, 2013 at 1:58 PM. Reason : ]

9/20/2013 1:58:42 PM

Doesn't matter what he has, but if his wife really does look like what you have heard, and he is into that kind of body type on women, no wonder he calls athletic girls with faint abs FAT.

9/20/2013 2:13:02 PM

i'd have wore the girl in the original post out at 185

9/20/2013 2:21:21 PM

I shared this thread with my trainer during our session this morning. You guys got a lot of eye rolls.

9/20/2013 2:34:05 PM

you should fire them, they are giving you terrible advice

9/20/2013 2:42:18 PM

I think we need to share this thread with the girl in the OP...!!!

Somebody dig her up and email her the link?

9/20/2013 2:42:58 PM

i've been to her wordpress, but it looks like she abandoned it.

http://crissgetsfit.wordpress.com/

[Edited on September 20, 2013 at 2:46 PM. Reason : she seems like a nice girl, who'd proably laugh at the chumps in this thread.]

9/20/2013 2:45:25 PM

9/20/2013 3:15:10 PM

it's sad that right underneath that picture she wrote that she needs to lose another 5 lbs.

9/20/2013 3:31:08 PM

(she abandoned her website because she gained the weight back, because you guys told her she looked better that way)

9/20/2013 3:32:35 PM

Unfortunately that 5 lbs she thinks she should lose is probably just loose skin that hasn't firmed back up.

[Edited on September 20, 2013 at 3:42 PM. Reason : .]

9/20/2013 3:42:07 PM

She says she wants to lose 5 pounds of fat and gain loads of muscle... Nothing wrong with that if she wants to become like those fitness women.

Wonder what she looks like now....


[Edited on September 20, 2013 at 3:54 PM. Reason : ]

9/20/2013 3:54:02 PM

yeah definitely nothing wrong with getting stronger. Sorry I misquoted her, she says 5 more lbs of FAT. while there's nothing wrong with it if she wants to go into bodybuilding but really, her body is perfect up above.

here's her actual words

Quote :

"I have about 5ish pounds more fat that I’d like to lose, as well as gaining loads more muscle, but I’m worried more about body composition than silly, arbitrary numbers."

9/20/2013 4:03:14 PM

^^^^ just right on the right.

9/20/2013 4:11:57 PM

Go ahead and say she doesn't look healthy.


She is not 22% in that second picture. CHUBBY CHASERS

9/22/2013 8:17:22 AM

^She is probably 18-20%

My scale says I'm at 22% bf but I look nowhere near what the pictures of guys online look like with similar bf. lost some definition under my pecs and have a beer belly but no massive love handles. I think my scale is off. I need to lay off the beers though..

9/22/2013 11:39:07 AM

Those scales are not very accurate, and can give wildly different readings depending upon level of hydration. Underwater testing and DEXA are the most accurate methods. Calipers are also quite accurate when done by an expert.

9/22/2013 11:46:07 AM

Yeah. I have two at home and then there's a professional grade scale at the gym -- the three give different readings within a 5-7 point range. They give a good general idea of where you are, but it's hard to even measure exact changes in BF because I can step off and step back on and get two different readings. But you can plot the numbers over time and get a general trend in changes.

9/22/2013 12:01:34 PM

yeah..i use it to see if i am going in the right direction
definitely horribly inaccurate though

9/22/2013 12:02:47 PM

Is that the type that sends a pulse through your legs?

It always seemed to me like you could get a different number just by having (literally) moist feet. Then there are all kinds of other factors, how much of your mass is in your legs versus upper body, how high your crotch is above the ground.

Seems like it would give a decent measure with a multi-parameter model. But I doubt that's what your scale is doing.

9/22/2013 1:28:28 PM

9/22/2013 5:08:08 PM

^^the instructions say something about wetting your feet for the most accurate reading but I never really do that.
Didn't think about the more mass in the legs thing..I do have really fucking fat thighs and butt.

9/22/2013 6:41:15 PM

Why would anyone jump rope naked

9/22/2013 11:33:37 PM

glassssssss has a fat donk

9/23/2013 6:13:42 AM

the older I get, I wish I would have had sex with more chubby chicks in college...they were more fun 90% of the time.

9/23/2013 1:04:02 PM

this girl - had no reason to need to lose weight, now she has no tittys.



[Edited on September 23, 2013 at 1:18 PM. Reason : 9]

9/23/2013 1:18:30 PM

that's exactly the terribly kind of statement that needs to stop, you chubby chasers are encouraging people to gain weight back. she looks so much better in the picture on the right.

9/23/2013 1:30:53 PM

this is closer to what I thought, for a guy upper teens you're starting to get chubby, around 10% you start to show some muscle definition and 5% is the shredded ab look

what confuses me is that a woman going by the same standard would have a really unhealthy bf level for a woman with a 6 pack but I guess they have a different standard for bodyfat percentage then men

(also the people attacking BB, you can see the 28.6 is just starting to get chubby so 22% is prob pretty average for a girl)

(and it's also amusing me like every after picture is much sharper lighting to make the good look better and every fat picture is dull lighting to make the fatties look worse)

[Edited on September 23, 2013 at 1:35 PM. Reason : k]

9/23/2013 1:31:12 PM

Yup much better.

Heck, I can even see her vastus medialis on her right leg... awesome!

9/23/2013 1:33:56 PM

Women have different body fat standards from men. A third of our estrogen comes from our fat cells which is why we start to experience hormonal problems when or body fat is too low or high. And honestly, it's pretty obvious that we should have higher body fat because of our body composition. Breasts, hips, and buttocks are basically adipose tissue. That excess body fat is essentially what makes us feminine.

9/23/2013 2:32:10 PM

Quote :

"Didn't think about the more mass in the legs thing..I do have really fucking fat thighs and butt."

Oh, if your thighs touch that will pass current. I wonder if the instructions say something about that.

9/23/2013 2:36:47 PM

Quote :

"Women have different body fat standards from men. A third of our estrogen comes from our fat cells which is why we start to experience hormonal problems when or body fat is too low or high. And honestly, it's pretty obvious that we should have higher body fat because of our body composition. Breasts, hips, and buttocks are basically adipose tissue. That excess body fat is essentially what makes us feminine."

Men also have hormonal problems at low body fat, it's just a different percentage. Obviously men don't have a period to lose, but the reproductive system takes a hit. If you can hit 4-5% body fat as a male and you aren't on drugs, chances are you'll have a greatly reduced or non-existent libido.

You can basically see what the body views as top priority as you get closer to starvation. If you can't feed yourself, how are you going to have healthy children? It's just not possible, especially prior to the modern era. Muscle is actually one of the last things to be sacrificed in a starvation scenario. Of course, most of people worrying about the hormonal impact of dieting or starvation mode are anywhere near needing to concern themselves.

I would say that, ignoring the exact number percentage of body fat, women are at ideal attractiveness at a higher fat to mass ratio when compared to men. That's not to say that fat women are attractive to the general population, it's that men have a leaner "aesthetic" threshold. Why? Because women carry children. No man in his right mind wants a woman on the verge of starvation, unless he wants to have tiny, malnourished children. Given what we know about child development in the womb and the impact of stress on early brain development, you risk having some shoddy offspring if you only go for women in the sub-18% range.

9/23/2013 3:06:42 PM

Quote :

"jprince11: (also the people attacking BB, you can see the 28.6 is just starting to get chubby so 22% is prob pretty average for a girl)"

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5751a4.htm

9/23/2013 6:07:30 PM

next

9/23/2013 7:20:22 PM