Xewie sanoi:
Yksi pervo ja hankala tapa voisi olla laihduttaa aivan perkeleesti ja kun ei olis lihasta eikä läskiä oltais oman 'kuivapainon' tuntumassa. Siittä sit lähettäis mittaamaan eri tavoilla jolloin saatais tapoihin virhemarginaalia paremmin. Tämän jälkeen painon noustessa ois helpompi arvioida saadun massan rasva-lihas suhdetta.
Herra on hyvä ja alkaa toteuttamaan tätä koetta sitten. :D ;)
Tässä vielä vähän netistä poimittua lisäinfoa näistä hommista:
Having argued in favour of body fat assessment, I should caution you that the tools of body fat assessment vary wildly in their accuracy and ease of use. In general, it's a sad truth that the easier the body fat measurement, the more inaccurate it's likely to be. Body fat calculations are based on population norms, which at the time many of the calculations were developed, meant white male college students (they were easy to get hold of for university lab research, which, by the way, is another reason to critically read scientific studies that use this as a normative population). Athletes, people of nonwhite backgrounds, older folks, basically anyone outside of that "norm" can get an inaccurate reading. There are apocryphal stories, for example, of black athletes getting negative body fat percentage readings (this means, perhaps, that they actually give body fat to the people around them?). I've heard people claim to be 4% body fat because their tape measurement said so, and I usually tell them that if they're 4%, then:
a) they should see horizontal striations (ridges) on the muscles in their ass;
b) they should be covered in visible veins (not just a few);
c) they should be able to see the lymph nodes in their groin;
d) unless they're a competing bodybuilder about to go on stage, their family is probably booking their funeral.