Auntie Helen said:
I weigh myself about once a fortnight and always first thing in the morning, after a wee and before I've drunk anything. Of course the weight fluctuates but only weighing myself every fortnight means that the general weight trend is pretty much always downwards. However I was expecting to have gone up a bit, so to be down 250g (even though that isn't very much) is still good after all the Chocolate Pudding Cake and more.
Fair play to you. Your -250g is a lot better than my +900g! I wasn't just making that comment for you though, I was also thinking of other people who I've known get upset by apparent trivial upward changes in their weight.
Auntie Helen said:
I am noticing that my weight as demonstrated by the scales doesn't really compare with how I feel in terms of fitness and the fit of my clothes. I presume this is because I'm far more muscular now after the cycling than I was when I weighed this amount before but was on the way up in terms of weight (i.e. 2 years ago).
That has been my experience too. When I was a student, my weight fell to 10 st 10 lbs which is pretty damn low for a 6' 1" man of biggish-medium build. I was so skinny that my party-piece was to slide a large roll of Sellotape over my wrist and it would go all the way up to my armpit
![Smile :smile: :smile:](/styles/default/xenforo/smls/smile.gif)
! Now, it would get stuck at my wrist because I actually have some arm muscles. My legs are
much more muscular now. I got down to 11 st 10 lbs a few years back and I looked more gaunt than I had previously weighing a stone less. I'm sure that I actually had less body fat when I weighed more. The extra weight was due to extra muscles.
Auntie Helen said:
Someone said about ignoring BMI and trying to go for fat distribution to give you an idea of diet success and that interests me - not that I have a fat percentage calculator thingie.
Yeah, BMI might be okay if you are of an averagely muscular build but it defines very muscular people as being obese when they just have lots of muscle.
Body fat calculation is actually quite difficult to do accurately. Those electronic fat meters work on measuring body impedance and it just isn't reliable. Having dry feet or wet feet would make a difference, as would your hydration levels. You could do it by using callipers to measure skinfold thickness, but that is also prone to error unless you get someone who is very skilled at it to do the measuring.
I prefer to go by my waist measurement - I'm currently 45" and I should be about 32" - 33" so I don't need a meter to tell me that I'm fat.
Another obvious check is the wobble-test. Strip naked facing a full length mirror, put your hands on your hips, tense all your muscles and hop up and down vigorously. Stop laughing, then do it again, but taking the test seriously this time
![Oh my! :ohmy: :ohmy:](/styles/default/xenforo/smls/ohmy.gif)
! If you are a woman, only your breasts should be wobbling. If you're a man, you shouldn't have breasts so only your genitals should be wobbling. That's a pretty good test too.