DEXA says I'm obese - 36% body fat - thoughts?

[marwils]

Hi everyone! First post in this group - I am starting again on a fitness journey and I do strength training/HIIT 3x a week. Right now I'm 5'9", 155.5lbs. I figured I would get a DEXA scan to track progress and body composition more accurately. My smart scale tells me I'm 25% body fat, and I know they're not the most accurate so I wanted to see what the DEXA would show. Also, based on images online and in books about what certain body fats look like I do feel like I'm more around 25% body fat/ maybe should be 30ish% with DEXA.

For context, I saw this table from a comment in this post, which makes a lot of sense, but even still DEXA is saying I'm obese.(

https://www.reddit.com/r/xxfitness/comments/mhwoj1/f26_55_124lbs_dexa_scan_i_finally_got_it_cause_i

):

Calipers
DEXA

Essential Fat
10-13%
16-19%

Athletic
14-20%
20-25%

Fit
21-24%
26-29%

Acceptable
25-31%
30-35%

Obese
32%
36%+

Thoughts? Am I crazy? Is it possible the scan saying I'm 36.1% is wrong?

My working theory is that since this scan technology was developed for bone density testing, and not for body composition testing it has limitations especially in a 3 dimensional world. I wonder if it's more accurate for males than females? I do have a large bum and if I flex my legs and bum, my hip area doesn't splay out. I was laying down naturally for the scan and it's 2D so I'm wondering if the area measured is more than it should be because of laying down and your body squashing out. Has anyone else with large hips experience this?

EDIT: Since everyone is conflicted I'm getting another scan at a different location (storefront vs the mobile van). I'm going to test out my theory of flexing a tiny bit more during the scan so my hips don't spread out like this last one. If it's a way different result then Body Spec is going to refund me the cost of both scans. I will update this post on November 30th (next soonest available appt) with the results.

EDIT 2: Another reason I was encouraged to get this scan was because I had my ACL repaired 1.5 years ago with my quad tendon and my physical therapist suggested it as a way to keep track of the muscle difference between my right and left (surgical) leg. I spent the first part of this year bulking to get my legs even (lifting heavy weights - unilateral strength training, and getting 150g protein/day etc. + supplements). I am now starting a cutting phase and trying to trim down. It's been a journey to even get to this point because Jan 2023 my left quad was 50% the strength of my right (measured isometrically).

DEXA scan results showing 36.1% body fat, but a lot of area in hip region

https://preview.redd.it/xoso1fs4gzx...bp&s=682cba354b4129865f0eba5052642453f6d6d60e

body progress photo, day of scan

 

[jvant]

@marwils At 5’5 and 120, I was dexa measured at 30% fat about 8 years ago. Pretty sure most people would have been surprised at that but my scan and my body looked pretty close to yours.

 

[marwils]

@jvant Thanks, around 30% was what I was expecting. I am going back on Nov 30 for another one to test out my theory.

 

[stevens86]

@marwils Dexa is usually pretty close but I personally wouldn’t worry about some dumb online chart. Everyone is different and hold their weight differently

Even with a smart scale it is about consistency over time and take some of it with a grain of salt. My Garmin index scale shows me at 21% and I am around 15% when I did the dunk tank earlier this year.

 

[dandeebeau]

@marwils One of us, one of us. You don’t weigh a lot, but you also don’t have a significant amount of muscle, so oddly enough it just looks better on you than it would for most people. My biggest wake up call that I was indeed fat and needed to make significant changes was living in Korea for a few years. Just kind of walking around and seeing how I was the biggest person in the locker room every time, spare tire around the stomach, zero definition in my thighs, mini little fat pouch on my lower abs, solid chunk of goopy fat on the arms. In the Americas, this is normal as heck. But it’s a new normal, and the so easy not to notice.

Get a solid caloric deficit in, and stay consistent. One thing I told myself constantly when losing weight was that it’s ok to be hungry. There’s no way to avoid it, it’s a good thing. Eventually you learn to deal with something that literally 99.9% of our ancestors dealt with, and you’ll get there.

Be happy this is what opened your eyes and not something much much worse down the road.

 

[cosimnot]

@marwils I suggest you watch Mike Israetel's recent video ""You might be fatter than you think"

He is quite clear in the video that aside from MRIs, DEXAs are the gold standard for evaluating bodyfat.

 

[marwils]

@cosimnot Maybe for men

 

[cosimnot]

@marwils The 2nd half of that video is about bodyfat % in women.

The consistent theme throughout is that an awful lot people are delusional about how much fat they are carrying and the delusion is biased toward underestimation. I don't think he talks about the psychology involved -- i.e. when you show people to be delusional they tend to dig their heels in.

 

[marwils]

@cosimnot

Quote from this article: "I knew the research well enough to anticipate differences, but it’s still pretty weird to tell someone that you just “measured their body-fat” twice in the span of ten minutes, and the values differ by 8-10 percentage points."

 

[alan7057]

@marwils my friend (f) and i (m) both have gone for different types of body fat tests. dexa,hydrostatic weighing, as well as caliper testing and various others. we are nearly the same age. both of our tests all came out relatively accurate. now maybe your scan was bad it can happen. i wont argue that. but the difference between men and women from the scan is negligible. it matched up with the other forms of testing we did for both of us. it also doesnt really care how you lay. its capable of making accurate measurements regardless. but it is possible the machine could've been out of calibration that you went to.

best case retest. if they are the same you have your answer. if they are different take the average between the two. or ask them to take another form of test like i listed above. body fat testing isnt always 100% accurate and can very day to day. but you can usually find it within a few percent pretty well. my guess is you're somewhere between 32-37% if that test isnt inaccurate.

 

[aijeleth24]

@marwils This seems crazy. The idea that someone 5’9 and 155lbs is “obese” is not right by any reasonable measure.

Maybe talk to your doctor, but as long as you’re eating responsibly and getting regular exercise, just throw that piece of paper away.

 

[dawn16]

@aijeleth24 “Obese” is usually a classification used in reading BMI. By that definition, OP is absolutely not obese.

 

[kowalski1]

@aijeleth24 Except it's not really. BMI often under-represents how much fat people are holding onto, and a lot of "normal weight" people are "obese" by bodyfat standards.

This is especially true if you're coming off years/decades of being sedentary.

 

[pathfinder98]

@marwils I'd say it's overestimating your BF% for sure, but there is no way to know how much.

The key isn't comparing different methods but sticking with ONE METHOD and actually the same machine or even the same set of calipers used by the same exact person doing the testing. No method is 100% accurate, but you can get very good trend data using the same method and device to track bf% gain or loss.

However, as you as you're totally aware. Women carry a lot more body fat than men, and it sounds like you possibly have severely underdeveloped muscles and low bone density and thickness despite looking perfectly fine. Perhaps you haven't done hard, consistent weight training and load-bearing impact cardio (jogging, walking, hiking, sprinting vs. elliptical machines, swimming, and cycling)

Non-load bearing. Non-impact cardio is great for alternate days between high-impact cardio and for when you have injuries, but should never replace load-bearing and high impact exercises.

You need to maximize muscle hypertrophy and increase bone density ASAP for health and quality of life as you age since women who don't exercise or eat enough protein and calcium are at huge risk for osteoporosis.

 

[dawn16]

@marwils I think you’re trying to make unnecessary excuses for your reading.

Here’s a visual chart of what various body fat percentages look like on women:

https://mennohenselmans.com/understanding-body-fat-percentages-for-women-a-visual-guide/

Here’s a good article on the utility of DEXA scans:

https://macrofactorapp.com/body-composition/

I don’t think the scan is that far off, but it really doesn’t matter. Either you’re happy with how you look or you’re not. The number is immaterial.

 

[ozarkmichael]

@dawn16 So is OP “Skinny fat”? Is it a Lack of muscle?

 

[dawn16]

@ozarkmichael Deleted my prior comment bc I thought it was on a different thread. I think the scan is in the ballpark on OP’s body fat is all. I’m not drawing any conclusions or making any value judgments from that.

 

[marwils]

@dawn16 maybe - but with the visual charts you sent and others like it, I feel like honestly I should be around 30% BF with DEXA (25% with other measurement methods)....not 36%! which does seem far off (to me) - mainly because it kinda defeats the purpose of getting scans to track progress if you can't trust it?:

https://www.builtlean.com/body-fat-percentage-men-women/

https://ultimateperformance.com/you...-loss/womens-body-fat-percentage-in-pictures/

https://www.blogilates.com/blog/5427378002/

 

[niagaraboy]

@marwils DEXA can be 10% inaccurate (although usually isn't) which at 36 is 3.6 so it is at least possible you are 32.4 which is closer to your estimate.

 

[dawn16]

@marwils Yes, you are exactly right. There’s no reason to use these scans to track progress (other than maybe if you are a competitive professional body builder). They’re a terrible metric. Pick pretty much anything else — measurements, lift PRs, endurance, or even just how your clothes fit and how you feel.

The scans are relatively worthless.