BNA losers club - 2015
The information / discussion in the Cycling Health Forum is not qualified medical advice. Please consult your doctor.
-
- Posts: 364
- Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 12:43 pm
Re: BNA losers club - 2015
Postby clydesmcdale » Wed Apr 22, 2015 9:50 am
198cm - 37yr old
- October 2011 118.9kg
- April 2012 108.7kg
- May 2012 106.2kg
- June 2012 105.5kg
- July 2012 103.8kg
- August 2012 101.7kg
- September 2012 99.9kg
- October 2012 97.6kg
- November 2012 97.3kg
- December 2012 97.3kg
- January 2013 96.3kg
- February 2013 93.6kg
- March 2013 94.1 kg
- April 2013 92.0 kg
- May 2013 93.0 kg
- June 2013 94.5 kg
- July 2013 94.5 kg
- August 2013 93.5 kg
- September 2013 94.2 kg
- October 2013 94.3 kg
- November 2013 94.0 kg
- December 2013 93.5 kg
- January 2014 93.5 kg
- February 2014 95.0 kg
- March 2014 94.5 kg
- April 2014 94.8 kg
- May 2014 95.0 kg
- June 2014 95.2 kg
- July 2014 95.5 kg
- August 2014 96.2 kg
- September 2014 95.9 kg
- October 2014 92.8 kg
- November 2014 91.5 kg
- December 2014 88.5 kg
- January 2015 90.5kg
- February 2015 89.9kg
- March 2015 92.7kg
- April 2015 90.8kg
Goal - maintain sub 90kg for 2015
- rusty842
- Posts: 380
- Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 9:49 pm
Re: BNA losers club - 2015
Postby rusty842 » Wed Apr 22, 2015 9:11 pm
- casual_cyclist
- Posts: 7758
- Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:41 am
- Location: Kewdale
Re: BNA losers club - 2015
Postby casual_cyclist » Wed Apr 22, 2015 9:40 pm
Waist measurement helps with that. I am down 2 belt notches at the same weight. I just means you are losing fat, not muscle. Good news!rusty842 wrote:I'm fitting into next size smaller business shirts however it only says 1kg on the scales. Haven't really done anything radical yet as new job I'm settling in so we will see how it all goes
- rusty842
- Posts: 380
- Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 9:49 pm
Re: BNA losers club - 2015
Postby rusty842 » Wed Apr 22, 2015 9:52 pm
I know. It's only positive. Belt has gone down a notch. Shirt down a size.casual_cyclist wrote:Waist measurement helps with that. I am down 2 belt notches at the same weight. I just means you are losing fat, not muscle. Good news!rusty842 wrote:I'm fitting into next size smaller business shirts however it only says 1kg on the scales. Haven't really done anything radical yet as new job I'm settling in so we will see how it all goes
I know over time with making better food changes the number will come down. Aiming for 87 by eofy
- TonyMax
- Posts: 647
- Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 10:23 am
- Location: Northside Canberra
Re: BNA losers club - 2015
Postby TonyMax » Fri May 01, 2015 7:03 am
1/1/15: 90.4kg
1/2/15: 85.8kg
1/3/15: 86.9kg
2/4/15: 91.3kg
1/5/15: 90.5kg
Target 79.9kg.
Some progress made in the right direction again, a reasonably light exercise month and I still have bad eating habits. I'll try to cut out the snacking for May and see where I end up in a month.
- skull
- Posts: 2087
- Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 9:48 pm
Re: BNA losers club - 2015
Postby skull » Fri May 01, 2015 1:02 pm
Happy month weigh in today, not as low as expected but still tracking down and happy with the result.
January: 105.7kg
February: 102.9kg
March: 99.6kg
April: 99.1kg
May: 97.2kg
Kaching.
-
- Posts: 10316
- Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: BNA losers club - 2015
Postby Nobody » Fri May 01, 2015 1:15 pm
62.5Kg. BMI 20.9
Not much change. Up, down. Don't expect much more loss then.
Waist:
73.5cm or WHtR 0.425
Down 1cm from last time.
I've found time of day important for measuring my waist as I can be 2cm larger by the afternoon than in the morning.
-
- Posts: 3459
- Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am
Re: BNA losers club - 2015
Postby CKinnard » Fri May 01, 2015 2:30 pm
yep, you wanna measure waist when you get out of bed, as there's just too much variationNobody wrote:I've found time of day important for measuring my waist as I can be 2cm larger by the afternoon than in the morning.
- abdominal muscle tone
- hydration and food/fiber content
- slumpy posture.
- singlespeedscott
- Posts: 5510
- Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 4:35 pm
- Location: Elimbah, Queensland
BNA losers club - 2015
Postby singlespeedscott » Sun May 03, 2015 8:36 am
08/01/15 - 78kg & 22.2% body fat;
17/01/15 - 78.3kg & 22.3% body fat;
23/01/15 - 78kg & 22.2%fat;
01/02/15 - 78kg & 22.2% fat;
08/02/15 - 77.5kg, 22.0% fat.
15/02/13 - 75.8kg & 21.4% fat
26/02/15 - 77.2kg & 21.9% fat
05/03/15 - 76.8kg & 21.8% fat
13/03/15 - 76.8kg & 21.8% fat
23/03/15 - 77.9kg & 22.1% fat
30/03/15 - 76.2 & 21.5% fat
06/04/15 - 77.6 & 22.0% fat
17/04/15 - 77.1 & 21.9% fat
22/04/15 - 76.2kg & 21.5 % fat
03/05/15 - 75.2kg - went for a ride this morning and had one of those I'm feeling light days. Weigh in proved to be right. However I think my scales are on the fritz as it's said I was 29.2% body fat. No way I am that given you can see my six pack.
-
- Posts: 10316
- Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: BNA losers club - 2015
Postby Nobody » Sun May 03, 2015 9:01 am
Good to see the weight still moving in the wanted direction.singlespeedscott wrote:03/05/15 - 75.2kg - went for a ride this morning and had one of those I'm feeling light days. Weigh in proved to be right. However I think my scales are on the fritz as it's said I was 29.2% body fat. No way I am that given you can see my six pack.
My understanding of the body fat percentage scales is that you stand on them with bare feet and it passes a small DC current though your body (micro amps) and measures your resistance. Then it converts this to a body fat percentage. If you were to wet your feet and stand on them, I'd say you'd get the lowest body fat percentage yet, if it was working normally.
As you know, the measuring tape is probably going to tell you more than the scales will.
-
- Posts: 1525
- Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 10:21 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: BNA losers club - 2015
Postby am50em » Sun May 03, 2015 9:30 am
99.5 -> 98.7 -> 98.7 -> 97.7 -> 97.7
- casual_cyclist
- Posts: 7758
- Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:41 am
- Location: Kewdale
Re: BNA losers club - 2015
Postby casual_cyclist » Sun May 03, 2015 11:48 am
Numbers in square brackets are results from 4 weeks ago.
Waist: 95 cm [97 cm]
WHTR: 0.51 [0.52]
Weight: 94 kg [92.5 kg]
Except weight, moving in the right direction.
-
- Posts: 10316
- Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: BNA losers club - 2015
Postby Nobody » Sun May 03, 2015 7:24 pm
Since you weren't looking to lose weight, I would still say they are good results. Doesn't really matter how small for WHTR, as long as it's decreasing.casual_cyclist wrote:
Numbers in square brackets are results from 4 weeks ago.
Waist: 95 cm [97 cm]
WHTR: 0.51 [0.52]
Weight: 94 kg [92.5 kg]
Except weight, moving in the right direction.
- toolonglegs
- Posts: 15463
- Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:49 pm
- Location: Somewhere with padded walls and really big hills!
Re: BNA losers club - 2015
Postby toolonglegs » Mon May 04, 2015 5:57 pm
20/01 102.5 kgs
07/02 102.5 kgs
23/02 102.5 kgs
28/03 102.5 kgs
04/05 99.9 kgs
Rightside of 100 for the first time since December
- skull
- Posts: 2087
- Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 9:48 pm
Re: BNA losers club - 2015
Postby skull » Mon May 04, 2015 7:42 pm
Giddy uptoolonglegs wrote:
Rightside of 100 for the first time since December
-
- Posts: 3459
- Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am
Re: BNA losers club - 2015
Postby CKinnard » Mon May 04, 2015 7:54 pm
or measure before and 10 minutes after drinking 1 liter of water!Nobody wrote:If you were to wet your feet and stand on them, I'd say you'd get the lowest body fat percentage yet, if it was working normally.
most resistance to current is in the skin. if you are dehydrated, skin resistance increases dramatically.
drinking a liter increases blood flow to the skin and evaporative water loss. This dramatically decreases skin resistance, and effects bodyfat % readings from dumb consumer scales.
-
- Posts: 204
- Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 11:20 pm
- Location: St Marys NSW
Re: BNA losers club - 2015
Postby fishwop » Mon May 04, 2015 11:35 pm
Scales that estimate body fat percentage are notorious for overestimating by quite a large margin.singlespeedscott wrote: However I think my scales are on the fritz as it's said I was 29.2% body fat. No way I am that given you can see my six pack.
http://www.calculator.net/body-fat-calculator.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
This site will give you a more accurate estimate.
-
- Posts: 364
- Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 12:43 pm
Re: BNA losers club - 2015
Postby clydesmcdale » Tue May 05, 2015 9:07 am
198cm - 37yr old
- October 2011 118.9kg
- April 2012 108.7kg
- May 2012 106.2kg
- June 2012 105.5kg
- July 2012 103.8kg
- August 2012 101.7kg
- September 2012 99.9kg
- October 2012 97.6kg
- November 2012 97.3kg
- December 2012 97.3kg
- January 2013 96.3kg
- February 2013 93.6kg
- March 2013 94.1 kg
- April 2013 92.0 kg
- May 2013 93.0 kg
- June 2013 94.5 kg
- July 2013 94.5 kg
- August 2013 93.5 kg
- September 2013 94.2 kg
- October 2013 94.3 kg
- November 2013 94.0 kg
- December 2013 93.5 kg
- January 2014 93.5 kg
- February 2014 95.0 kg
- March 2014 94.5 kg
- April 2014 94.8 kg
- May 2014 95.0 kg
- June 2014 95.2 kg
- July 2014 95.5 kg
- August 2014 96.2 kg
- September 2014 95.9 kg
- October 2014 92.8 kg
- November 2014 91.5 kg
- December 2014 88.5 kg
- January 2015 90.5kg
- February 2015 89.9kg
- March 2015 92.7kg
- April 2015 90.8kg
- May 2015 89.6kg
Goal - maintain sub 90kg for 2015
-
- Posts: 10316
- Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: BNA losers club - 2015
Postby Nobody » Tue May 05, 2015 9:57 am
Last time I did this I was 10.6, now 10.1%. I thought it would be lower as my waist has decreased, but so have my neck and hip measurements. Still moving in the right direction though.fishwop wrote:Scales that estimate body fat percentage are notorious for overestimating by quite a large margin.
http://www.calculator.net/body-fat-calculator.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
This site will give you a more accurate estimate.
-
- Posts: 3459
- Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am
Re: BNA losers club - 2015
Postby CKinnard » Tue May 05, 2015 7:32 pm
fishwop wrote:http://www.calculator.net/body-fat-calculator.html
This site will give you a more accurate estimate.
Not necessarily. This calculator is based on data collected by the US Navy of its personnel in 1984, when the obesity rate was much lower.
A lower % of obese and overweight subjects within a sample representing a population adds significant variance to the derived linear regression equation that the above site is based on, which incidentally for males is
495/(1.0324-0.19077*(LOG10(waist-neck))+0.15456*(LOG10(height)))-450
-
- Posts: 1525
- Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 10:21 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: BNA losers club - 2015
Postby am50em » Tue May 05, 2015 7:56 pm
e.g.
clydesmcdale should have wrote: Get in early for the beginning of the month... trying to put a bit more intensity into my rides, rather than just turn the legs over. Attempting to cut out as much sugar as I can. Having some positive results.
198cm - 37yr oldGoal - maintain sub 90kg for 2015Code: Select all
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2011 118.9 2012 108.7 106.2 105.5 103.8 101.7 99.9 97.6 97.3 97.3 2013 96.3 93.6 94.1 92.0 93.0 94.5 94.5 93.5 94.2 94.3 94.0 93.5 2014 93.5 95.0 94.5 94.8 95.0 95.2 95.5 96.2 95.9 92.8 91.5 88.5 2015 90.5 89.9 92.7 90.8 89.6
-
- Posts: 10316
- Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: BNA losers club - 2015
Postby Nobody » Tue May 05, 2015 8:15 pm
So which way would you say the percentage of fat to measurements would go in reality? Lower, higher or just incorrect for the same measurements? Is that because most people using it would be higher these days and so their sample rate of similar people back then in number would be lower? Is that what your saying? I would have thought that most cyclists here would be reasonably similar to Navy personnel in the '80s. Probably not many people on here with a BMI over 28 or a WHTR over 0.55.CKinnard wrote:Not necessarily. This calculator is based on data collected by the US Navy of its personnel in 1984, when the obesity rate was much lower.
A lower % of obese and overweight subjects within a sample representing a population adds significant variance to the derived linear regression equation that the above site is based on
-
- Posts: 10316
- Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: BNA losers club - 2015
Postby Nobody » Tue May 05, 2015 8:36 pm
Fair comment. You probably only need what you were when you started and when, then what you are now.am50em wrote:Nice going but can we please save some screen real estate. After a few more years will only get one comment per page!
What I'd like to see is people adding more detail about their height and age as CMD did. Even better would be a waist measurements since BMI is a calculation which disadvantages overly tall and short people.
http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/bhcv ... MI%29?open" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Height – BMI is not totally independent of height and it tends to overestimate obesity among shorter people and underestimate it among taller people. Therefore, BMI should not be used as a guide for adults who are very short (less than 150 cm) or very tall (more than 190 cm).
Comments like, "Started at 90, now 86, want to get to 78." doesn't really tell anyone else much unless they already know their height. Even then, I know a person taller than me with a lower BMI but has a gut. So clearly waist measurements are better. That's why I put as many relative measurements as I have at the time. That way you'll know why I'm not losing much more.
Edit: I got the example I made earlier around the wrong way according the Vic government website, so just added their explanation of why extreme heights don't work.
-
- Posts: 3459
- Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am
Re: BNA losers club - 2015
Postby CKinnard » Wed May 06, 2015 4:36 am
The derived equation is a best fit for the Navy personnel, who would have had a lower variance in bodyfat % for several reasonsNobody wrote:So which way would you say the percentage of fat to measurements would go in reality? Lower, higher or just incorrect for the same measurements? Is that because most people using it would be higher these days and so their sample rate of similar people back then in number would be lower? Is that what your saying? I would have thought that most cyclists here would be reasonably similar to Navy personnel in the '80s. Probably not many people on here with a BMI over 28 or a WHTR over 0.55.
- one being they are not a representative sample of the whole US population in 1984. As there is today, I think back then there would have been limitations on BMI for entry into the defense forces, if not for any other reason than heavy people would not be able to complete the physical exams.
- another being they are even less a representative sample of the US population in 2015. There's way more fat people around today.
Their sample would also not be representative for height either. People are getting taller.
Today, there are more younger people into bodybuilding (and taking PEDs). They will have thicker necks.
Many people lead more time pressed and stressful lives these days, and are on the whole more sedentary. This favors the laying down of visceral fat, which increases waist circumference, and less muscular development.
How does this effect the utility of the equation today? For any combination of neck and waist circumference subscribed to height, there will be significantly more variance. This will reduce accuracy of the bodyfat % estimate. I can't say whether it would be under or over predicting in general. Any estimate would just have a higher associated std deviation. TBH, I'd have to model the equation to discover its original form. It may not be linear, but quadratic or cubic with one or all variables. But that would take me an hour or two of number crunching which I am not inclined to do. Non linear associations between the variables mean the equation will have a higher error rate when used today.
As for most cyclists being similar to 1984 navy personnel, you think? The BNA health section and weight loss threads are pretty popular, and there's some big guys here. I think a lot of people take up cycling to manage excess weight. I certainly got back into it for that reason.
-
- Posts: 10316
- Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
- Location: Sydney
Re: BNA losers club - 2015
Postby Nobody » Wed May 06, 2015 9:34 am
So the further you deviate from the norm back then, the less accurate it gets. OK, but it would still have to be significantly better than body fat estimating scales for those who fall within the likely band for 1984 like myself. I'm from the era that would have been in the military in 80s. I could still pass their physical tests too in regard to general aerobic fitness, chin ups and push ups etc (excluding age). So it looks like I'm one of the fewer people in-band still for accuracy.CKinnard wrote:For any combination of neck and waist circumference subscribed to height, there will be significantly more variance. This will reduce accuracy of the bodyfat % estimate.
I'll give you the height, but the average on this thread aside, the average cyclist on the street would be leaner than the average person in the general population IMO. Probably the same, or even more so for joggers.CKinnard wrote:As for most cyclists being similar to 1984 navy personnel, you think? The BNA health section and weight loss threads are pretty popular, and there's some big guys here. I think a lot of people take up cycling to manage excess weight. I certainly got back into it for that reason.
- General Australian Cycling Topics
- Info / announcements
- Buying a bike / parts
- General Cycling Discussion
- The Bike Shed
- Cycling Health
- Cycling Safety and Advocacy
- Women's Cycling
- Bike & Gear Reviews
- Cycling Trade
- Stolen Bikes
- Bicycle FAQs
- Serious Biking
- Audax / Randonneuring
- Retro biking
- Commuting
- MTB
- Recumbents
- Fixed Gear/ Single Speed
- Track
- Electric Bicycles
- Cyclocross and Gravel Grinding
- Dragsters / Lowriders / Cruisers
- Children's Bikes
- Cargo Bikes and Utility Cycling
- Road Racing
- Road Biking
- Training
- Time Trial
- Triathlon
- International and National Tours and Events
- Cycle Touring
- Touring Australia
- Touring Overseas
- Touring Bikes and Equipment
- Australia
- Western Australia
- New South Wales
- Queensland
- South Australia
- Victoria
- ACT
- Tasmania
- Northern Territory
- Country & Regional
- The Market Place
- Member to Member Bike and Gear Sales
- Want to Buy, Group Buy, Swap
- My Bikes or Gear Elsewhere
- Cycling Brands
- Cannondale
- Garmin
- Giant
- Shimano
- Trek
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
- All times are UTC+11:00
- Top
- Delete cookies
About the Australian Cycling Forums
The Australian Cycling Forums is a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.
Bicycles Network Australia
Forum Information
Connect with BNA
This website uses affiliate links to retail platforms including ebay, amazon, proviz and ribble.