I decided that I needed to take care of my health more, so for the past 6 weeks I have been going to the gym regularly, about 3 times a week.
They have a machine that can calculate your percentage body fat. What is the ideal PBF to try to achieve?

First, it is important to remember that those machines aren't really accurate. That being said, they are good for determining trends.

As for actual BF, I believe anything over 25% is considered overweight. I like to stay around 15% at my age. That's when I pass the mirror test. Sometimes I'm below, sometimes (right now) I'm a little over.

It's different for men and women. Women typically need a little higher percent body fat and have a harder time getting and staying under about 18%. For a fit male (not an athlete) that's a more reasonable percentage than for women.

Great point. I didn't intend to assume the OPs gender.

Swarely said:

---

Great point. I didn't intend to assume the OPs gender.

---

haha no worries, I am all Male.



I am okay if the numbers are not exact, but here is my trend. About 5 weeks, and it goes from 24.6 to 21.9. When I first checked, I thought my first goal should be getting below 23 but that's gone by quicker than I thought. I think I should have 20 as my next goal.

As for the "mirror test", I still FAIL. But I believe that I am improving.

They can be a barometer, but don't take them as God's word. When you get below 20%, you're usually considered healthy.

Around 15% is where most people really start seeing definition. 12% is athlete. 8%-10% is Brad Pitt. 4%-6% gets below essential fat, isn't sustainable, and is usually the dudes on gear with nasty veins all over the place.

If you really want to push yourself, 12% will look damn good. Match the diet to boot, and you can float in that 8%-12% for as long as you keep at it.

Be patient. It takes time to achieve.

Also remember that, depending on your body type, muscle definition may come sooner or later in that fat drop. When dropping weight, the body also eats muscle. That's where safe supplements like whey and creatine offer great benefits.

I'm at about 13% or so. The individual measurement isn't so important as much as using the same method every time consistently and then observing trends.

I have a goal of 11% or so. Or basically cutting another 2% over time. It is difficult to fine tune the diet, which is where it is done. You need to support your fitness needs while identifying bits of unneeded empty calories.

BassCowboy33 said:

---

They can be a barometer, but don't take them as God's word. When you get below 20%, you're usually considered healthy.

Around 15% is where most people really start seeing definition. 12% is athlete. 8%-10% is Brad Pitt. 4%-6% gets below essential fat, isn't sustainable, and is usually the dudes on gear with nasty veins all over the place.

If you really want to push yourself, 12% will look damn good. Match the diet to boot, and you can float in that 8%-12% for as long as you keep at it.

Be patient. It takes time to achieve.

Also remember that, depending on your body type, muscle definition may come sooner or later in that fat drop. When dropping weight, the body also eats muscle. That's where safe supplements like whey and creatine offer great benefits.

---

Thanks for the information around ranges. However I also saw on some site that below 18% is considered "underweight". How true is that? Or can you be both underweight and athletic at the same time?

I'll take one step at a time. Next milestone: 20%.

infinity ag said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

They can be a barometer, but don't take them as God's word. When you get below 20%, you're usually considered healthy.

Around 15% is where most people really start seeing definition. 12% is athlete. 8%-10% is Brad Pitt. 4%-6% gets below essential fat, isn't sustainable, and is usually the dudes on gear with nasty veins all over the place.

If you really want to push yourself, 12% will look damn good. Match the diet to boot, and you can float in that 8%-12% for as long as you keep at it.

Be patient. It takes time to achieve.

Also remember that, depending on your body type, muscle definition may come sooner or later in that fat drop. When dropping weight, the body also eats muscle. That's where safe supplements like whey and creatine offer great benefits.

---

Thanks for the information around ranges. However I also saw on some site that below 18% is considered "underweight". How true is that? Or can you be both underweight and athletic at the same time?

I'll take one step at a time. Next milestone: 20%.

---

I would not consider under 18% underweight for men. Maybe for women? 18% for most men is close to dad bod.

I have seen this table on the internet here and in a few other places.

https://www.cdc.gov/healthyweight/assessing/bmi/adult_bmi/index.html

What do you consider "dad bod"? No defined abs?

https://athleanx.com/articles/body-fat-percentage-men

jtraggie99 said:

---

What do you consider "dad bod"? No defined abs?

https://athleanx.com/articles/body-fat-percentage-men

---

Id say it's more than flat stomach, but less than fat. Your stomach doesn't hang over your belt, maybe the gut presses when eating a shirt, arms have little definition. Jaw definition is soft, but not multiple chins.

infinity ag said:

---

I have seen this table on the internet here and in a few other places.

https://www.cdc.gov/healthyweight/assessing/bmi/adult_bmi/index.html

---

Putting the less than sign after the number on 35 is blowing my mind. I was always taught < or > before the number.

The whole-Body Mass Index thing definitely has critics.

I was recently at the doctor's office and, at the end of the day, fully clothed, they said I weighed 203lbs. I do not.
I stay under 200 very purposefully to stay out of the heavy weight division in Jiu Jitsu.

Then I was told that my BMI is 26. something or other & that I was overweight. I spend more time in the gym, running, lifting, jiu jitsu than any 3 other people that doctor typically sees in a day.

So, I'm glad I found the link below. 7th paragraph.


The problem with BMI: Why this simple system for measuring obesity is so controversial - CBS News

There isn't an ideal BF% as long as one is not overweight or obese. It all depends on your goal and generally the lower the BF%, the more lean and "shredded" you'll appear. If you are more muscular than you will have that separated and veiny look. If you or less muscular, obviously you're going to lack that (depending on your genes) and more lean you will appear. But a lot of that depends on your overall genetics. So you may be 15% BF and have pretty defined abs and be 10% and not have very defined abs. Some have to get all the way down to below 6 or 7 to see the definition.

If you are on a bulk, ideally you will want more BF, obviously.Not too much but maybe between 15-20% but likely 15-17% so that when you do cut it can be a quicker process.

BassCowboy33 said:

---

They can be a barometer, but don't take them as God's word. When you get below 20%, you're usually considered healthy.

Around 15% is where most people really start seeing definition. 12% is athlete. 8%-10% is Brad Pitt. 4%-6% gets below essential fat, isn't sustainable, and is usually the dudes on gear with nasty veins all over the place.

If you really want to push yourself, 12% will look damn good. Match the diet to boot, and you can float in that 8%-12% for as long as you keep at it.

Be patient. It takes time to achieve.

Also remember that, depending on your body type, muscle definition may come sooner or later in that fat drop. When dropping weight, the body also eats muscle. That's where safe supplements like whey and creatine offer great benefits.

---

You put it better than I did. Though, I would argue (not saying you believe in body types as you were just using the term to make a point-I'm just being pedantic) there isn't a true "body type" (the old Mesomorphs, Endomorphs and Ectomorphs thing). That was a bunch of BS. Again, ideal is determinant on you goals and usually that is either what you want others to see or how you want to look in the mirror.

I really don't do BF% tests. I do not trust them. Machine or caliber. Even Dexa I remember I used an Inbosy scanner at Craig Ranch as a trainer and it measured me consistently at 16%, though I was pretty damn lean. Than I went to another gym and used their Inbody Scanner and was 13%. Which was much more likely given how lean I was. My friend (also a trainer) laughed and said she thought THAT was too high. I tried to measure under the relative same conditions, meals eaten that day, time of day, etc. Point is, those things aren't very accurate all the time.

Right now, I am probably around 15-17 honestly. Maybe higher. Better not be lower as I am working on getting bigger. I will do a mini cut here in a few months. Probably 8 week slow one. I am 6'2" 205. I do not want to lose too much too fast but probably can get down to 195-190. I still have a good hint of abs. Hell, I still look lean for this size. I've been as high as 220 (really hard to maintain that) and as low as 165 (too damn lean!).This is the biggest I feel like I have looked in terms of muscularity. I might have been a little "bigger" in 21 at 220 big actually feel like I'm more muscular and a lot leaner. I lose weight fast and a lot of that is genes and how fit I am and have been since 9th grade. But I get it's hard for others. We all have our struggles, no doubt.

I bet that when it becomes much easier, cheaper and more reliable to get bodyfat % measurements then BMI will be left behind as any kind of useful metric

True Anomaly said:

---

I bet that when it becomes much easier, cheaper and more reliable to get bodyfat % measurements then BMI will be left behind as any kind of useful metric

---

It's the reason the Navy always put me in the fat line.

True Anomaly said:

---

I bet that when it becomes much easier, cheaper and more reliable to get bodyfat % measurements then BMI will be left behind as any kind of useful metric

---

As a trainer, BMI just really wasn't a thing to be concerned with. And, for most fit people, it doesn't really tell the person much of anything. But BF% is also something that is hard to get a true measure on. Maybe tech will change that as time goes on.

BassCowboy33 said:

---

True Anomaly said:

---

I bet that when it becomes much easier, cheaper and more reliable to get bodyfat % measurements then BMI will be left behind as any kind of useful metric

---

It's the reason the Navy always put me in the fat line.

---

I have heard more than one prior service guy talk about this. Thick necked, muscled up guys were even told they were "over weight" by this metric.

O.G. said:

---

BassCowboy33 said:

---

True Anomaly said:

---

I bet that when it becomes much easier, cheaper and more reliable to get bodyfat % measurements then BMI will be left behind as any kind of useful metric

---

It's the reason the Navy always put me in the fat line.

---

I have heard more than one prior service guy talk about this. Thick necked, muscled up guys were even told they were "over weight" by this metric.

---

Yep. When you go the fat line, they make you take off your shirt, and they do extra measurements. I remember one time I got to the chest and waist measurements, and the lady doing it said, "Oh you'll have no trouble here...no trouble at all."

She'd probably get fired if she said that in modern times, lol.