Looking to save some Money by going from being checked every two months at a center to a personal “In the ballpark meter”. I know previous technology was highly ineffective with inconsistent readings, calipers will not work for me since I will be doing it myself. Have any personal impedance monitors become more consistent?
The electrode testers are cheap and from what I’ve heard decently accurate. Though I’ve heard that it can be influenced by your hydration level and maybe some other factors
Any particular manufacture? The reviews I have read online very.
It seems the lower fat % you are the harder time some of them have at reading. Last week I was at 9.7%. Would like to find something that will do +/-1%
Calipers will work for alone using the accumeasure or slim guide gives good ball park numbers and far more accurate than things like scales and such which use the highly variable BIA method. See:
http://www.brinkzone.com/general-health/the-importance-of-body-fat-testing/
They use BIA and tend to be all over the place. I have no confidence in them at all personally.
I just use a mirror.
If I look fat, I’m fat.
Things must have changed over the last 10 years. The old way was abb, arm, calf and back for measure points. Cant get my back, are their alternate points? Got a video of someone doing it I can take a look at?
It has not changed. Multi point measurements are more accurate, but single site using those cheap calipers is surprisingly accurate per comments in the vid.
There’s probably something to this. Of what use is a BF% after you’re under, say, 10? It’s not likely a measure of health beyond that.
It is used to closely gage if a nutrition plan is still effective and keeping you in the optimum range.
You should never maintain the same plan year to year, your body will adapt.
Bought one and it is no too bad, seems to be a ±2% which is ok. Not to big a fan on the age parameter, but it is what it is and it only cost me $30
That’s about the best margin of error you’re going to find. People tend to lose LBM and increase BF as they age, and accuracy should be increased by factoring that in as they do. It’s a very small % of people who don’t gain BF and lose LBM as they age, and that small % might be less accurate in those categories, but it’s more about tracking changes than absolute numbers per se.
Tracking changes is the primary goal this does the job.
Accuracy would be a premium, my exception to the age is the wide margin. 5 years provides a ±1% swing. I guess I’m more questioning of it since I’m just on the fringe and it list me as 12.7 and 3 months ago I would have been a 11.7 
so with that scale I’m seeing a drastic change when I know there really isn’t one. I guess not that big a deal for the next 4 years.LOL