body fat monitors - adult vs athlete

[benster]

Does anyone know what the difference between the "adult" and "athlete" settings are on my Tanita bodyfat monitor?

The adult method gives about 5% higher body fat reading than the athlete.
Switching between male and female is about 10%.

Surely, it should be the same result?

Also, anyone used the new monitors with the handheld bit as well as standing on the scales? Any more effective?

Over the last few months, my BF% has been going up and up according to the scales- but not according to the mirror. My weight has been going up too.

[comanight2]

yeah they are pants mate... mirror or calipers is the best way

[The Force]

For all their perceived sophistication they are actually very simple machines.

The are based on the same principle as calipers, but instead of using a skin-fold measurement they use the BIA method.

The reason that the different settings give different values is that the data entered or calculated by the machine is looking at a different 'table' of results. Men and women have different compostions as do atheletes and non-atheletes. As the algorithms used in the caclulation decrease in accruacy the further you move away from the mean, a new base level is required to reset the reading. So, if the initial calibration is done with people in the 20-30% body fat range, as you move towards 10% the readings get less and less accurate. Similarly in reverse, if lean <10% BF subjects were used, when a 20% BF individual used the equipment, the likely reading would be significantly too high.

Hope this helps a bit.

As Coma says, they can be pants, but can also have some use if the limitations are understood.

The Force