Carbonfiberboy 

Well, he's only 52, he has an excuse. I keep track of my kJ so I can figure kCal in bike food. That's about performance, not weight. Other than that, I don't count my calories. I just use the scale for that.

My weight goes up and down 5-7 lbs. over a year's time. I let it do what it seems to want to do. Sometimes I get too lean and it feels like I'm low on power. Adding more power seems easier than losing an amount of weight to create the same change in climbing speed. I'm about 8 lbs. over my freshman weight, same pants size. My legs, arms, and chest were all too small. I can still do the same rides I did 25 years ago, I'm just slower. Can't complain. Healthy food, portion size discipline with the scale as scorekeeper works for me. My wife rotates through 500 recipes. That's a varied diet.

terrymorse 

That's not how I use a smart scale. I weigh every morning, before eating or drinking anything. Measuring apples to apples.

The absolute numbers displayed certainly have an error bias, but the readings appear to be consistent. In that way, they are a decent measure of body changes over time.

Certainly cheaper and more convenient than a DEXA scan.

Seattle Forrest

Of course not. But it's how you learn how trustworthy your scale is when it's taking you something other than your weight. If your hydration status can dramatically change what your scale thinks your fat vs muscle mass is, and you're probably not at the same hydration level every morning ...

Seattle Forrest

​​​​​​I'm not trying to be a jerk here, I'm trying to keep everybody on the same page, reality. These two quotes contradict each other, and can't both be true. The second one is true. I'm taking the time and effort to point this out because I don't want anyone making decisions about their health and fitness based on inaccurate data.


​​​​​​​

genejockey 

How would you know? You've never been overweight! Your advice on this is like getting travel advice from someone who's never been there.

genejockey 

I agree, you won't lose weight from exercise alone, if you keep eating 'on demand'. You'd lose weight if you started exercising and continued to eat the same exact amount, of course, but mostly that isn't what people do.

I was able to lose 30lbs in a bit under a year, through calorie counting and a big increase in mileage, but the biggest thing was getting on Zwift, so that I'd continue doing much the same amount of exercise through the Food Holidays and the Rainy Season. I have now kept that weight off for a year and a half - this morning's weigh in, I was 201.8. March of 2020, I was over 230, having been between 220 and 240 for a number of years.

I'm sure there may be things one can do to optimize weight loss, like what you eat, when you eat it, and when you ride, but I can't be bothered to be that obsessive. And you don't really need to be - though if that kind of thing floats your boat, by all means go ahead.

MinnMan

accuracy: Is the measurement reflecting the true value of the parameter.
precision: Does the measurement give high repeatability within a small window of uncertainty.

If I measure something, let's say mass, and I always get the same result within a small window, say, 153.56±0.01 grams, then I have a precise measurement. It may not be at all accurate - the true mass could be 159 grams. If I use a different balance and I get masses that vary from measurement to measurement, but centered about the true mean, say 158.5±1.5 grams, then the second balance is more accurate but less precise.

So the measurement in question, % body fat, appears to be fairly precise, without any constraints on accuracy.

Had ​​​​terrymorse written in his first post

then it would have been all good.

genejockey 

Exactly. This is why I always use the same scale, and tend to think more in terms of the weight I've lost rather than the weight I AM. Also why I weigh myself at the same time of day.

Seattle Forrest

I'm not interested in playing word games. Those scales do not measure body fat percentage, lean mass, or anything like it. They measure how long an electric current takes to go from one foot to the other. This is not an accurate method of determining body composition. It's just not. It's like estimating your average power for a ride based on how disheveled your hair looks.

MinnMan

Sorry Seattle Forrest , this is not a word game. Accuracy and precision have distinct meanings in metrology that are not open for debate. You can stay focused on accuracy if you like, but that does not address precision, which is a valid concept regardless of your opinion.

If you could show that the disheveled hair index gave the same numerical answer through repeated measurements under the same measurement protocols, then it would be potentially precise, without any constraints on whether it is accurate. You are implying that the disheveled hair index is both inaccurate and imprecise, and therefore this is. not a reasonable comparison to the time series data that terrymorse showed.

Seattle Forrest

Again, debating if a person would have been right if they had used a different word is too pedantic for me and serves no point. I don't care what the dictionary says, I care whether these scales do what is being claimed - and they don't.

MinnMan

Suit yourself. Different words connote different concepts, and if you don't care to recognize the distinction, it's not like you are putting people at risk. An engineer who equated the two would be.

wolfchild

True I've never been overweight....But I did do an experiment on myself few years ago and gained a lot of weight on purpose just to see what would happen. Few years ago I started doing some serious dedicated weightlifting and eating massive amount of food and in one year I went from 154 pounds to 201 pounds. I gained 47 pounds on my 6 foot frame , I looked good, I was a lot stronger but I didn't feel all that great. Carrying all that extra weight made me feel slow, sluggish and tired all the time so I decided it just wasn't worth it and went on to loose most of the weight I gained ...I can tell you that loosing most of those 47 pounds was a lot easier and faster than gaining them., loosing all those pounds was almost effortless....No calorie counting, no fitness apps, no fad diets. All I did was reduce the food portions and continued on working out and cycling. I eat instinctively and it works great for me..

genejockey 

So, IOW, you had to put in conscious effort to GAIN weight, and when you stopped working at it you LOST weight back to your original weight. And you think your advice has any relevance to people who are already "eating instinctively" and are overweight?

Tell you what - next time you need to gain weight, just eat when you feel hungry, whatever you feel like eating at that point. "instinctively", as you say. You'll gain a lot of weight! I know I did, and therefore it must be that way for everyone.

(You see how silly that sounds? Take a hint)

koala logs

Introducing a significant amount of oatmeal into your diet somewhat solves that problem.

Oatmeal is quite filling and takes away hunger quite effectively but since it's low calories, you are likely to lose weight even if you are "eating on demand" with exercise.

Worked for me. I don't monitor my calories burned / intake. Just eating oatmeal in between meals to kill food cravings. Got my weight down from 138 lbs to 125 lbs in just 3 months and seemed to have leveled at 125 lbs with BMI of 19.6.

MinnMan

Personally, I'd rather be obese than eat oatmeal, but that's just me. YMMV

burnthesheep

This statement is more accurate. Yes.

Also, to prove the opposite of your observation I can see when I started to eat or drink a bit more but the volume of work didn't stay at the "peak" where I was eating and drinking more. So, some gain.

It's a balance, implying two sides to the scale. You can add weight or remove from either end of the scale, and the scale will start to move. Volume of exercise on one side and volume/type of food on the other.

You can balance the scale with low exercise and low food. Or high exercise and high food. The effect being different person to person, of course.

terrymorse 

Still, oatmeal's a pretty good race day breakfast, with raisins and walnuts on top.

At least for me.

Iride01 

With a poached egg on top too. I put the walnuts on the bottom. Raisins I haven't tried with oatmeal.

Seattle Forrest

I recognize the distinction just fine, I also recognize the dysfunction of ignoring how a tool works and declaring it useful or not based on the dictionary.

Seattle Forrest

To be fair, you're also the guy who started a thread looking for advice about your poop not working very well.

HeyItsSara

Right. Two sides to every question. If it's calories in, calories out that's one thing but some ppl have hormone issues, etc.

koala logs

It's only real food and everything the body needs.

RH Clark

I lost 160lbs in 2 years with only diet and exercise . IMHO it was about 90% diet and 10% exercise. Very overweight people won't be physically able to exercise enough to see significant long-term improvements without strict dieting.

If you just need to shed a few pounds, your diet isn't likely too bad to start with and some additional exercise may do the trick fairly easily. On the other hand, if you are 100 lbs. overweight, your diet is likely the main factor why, and should be addressed as the main problem.

A person's diet and nutrition have to always be a top priority. Even if you can get lean by simply consuming fewer calories than you burn, if you don't get the proper nutrition over the long term your body can get sick or injured and all that exercise benefit will soon be lost.

BTinNYC

Oh yeah.
I was hoping my cholesterol would drop along with weight but that didn't happen. I was ravenous and ate EVERYTHING. This block trying to eat smarter.