# How to Measure Body Fat Using the US Navy Method



## Moe81 (Apr 6, 2009)

After a good search thru this forum i found nothin on how to measure %bf.

So, here it is. somethin i found on the net which seems to be pretty accurate. some of the pros may try it out and correct me if i'm wrong.

How to Measure Body Fat Using the US Navy Method

While most people associate measuring body fat with skin calipers, there's another method that involves taking a few measurements and using a formula to determine the percentage of body fat. This method, used by the US Navy, is as accurate (and possibly more accurate) than the skinfold test.[1] Plus, it's more convenient. So here's how to use what the Navy calls the "rope and choke" technique to measure your body fat percentage.

Steps:


Measure your height, without shoes.

Measure the circumference around your abdomen, at a horizontal level around the navel for men, and at the level with the least width for women. Don't pull your stomach in.

Measure the circumference of the neck, below the larynx with the tape sloping slightly downward to the front. Avoid flaring your neck out.

For women only: Measure the circumference of the hips, at the largest horizontal measure.

Plug the numbers into one of the formulas below, or use this online calculator.

Round to the nearest full percent.

 

*Formulas*


For men[2], all measurements in inches:

%Fat = 86.010*LOG(abdomen - neck) - 70.041*LOG(height) + 36.76


For men, all measurements in centimeters:

%Fat = 86.010*LOG(abdomen - neck) - 70.041*LOG(height) + 30.30


For women, all measurements in inches:

%Fat = 163.205*LOG(abdomen + hip - neck) - 97.684*LOG(height) - 78.387


For women, all measurements in centimeters:

%Fat = 163.205*LOG(abdomen + hip - neck) - 97.684*LOG(height) - 104.912


----------



## freddee (Mar 2, 2009)

?????????????????


----------



## joe.b (Sep 26, 2009)

i got lost on step 2:confused1:


----------



## Moe81 (Apr 6, 2009)

Haizzz.. aight guys here it is.. i'm gonna have to break it down to ya'll in details... pay attention now!!

i'm gonna use my measurements as an example..

my abdominal circumference at naval = 33.5 inches

my neck circumference = 13.5 inches

height= 68 inches

formula: (i'll be working the fornula step by step downwards)

%Fat = 86.010*LOG(abdomen - neck) - 70.041*LOG(height) + 36.76

%Fat = 86.010*LOG(33.5 - 15.5) - 70.041*LOG(68) + 36.76

note: to get any LOG value just type in google search for it. i.e. just type 'LOG 30'

%Fat = 86.010*LOG(18) - 70.041*LOG(68) + 36.76

from google, LOG 18= 1.25527 & LOG 68= 1.8325

plugging the value in:

%Fat = (86.010*1.25527) - (70.041*1.8325) + 36.76

note: '*' means multiply. work the equation in the brackets () first

%Fat = (107.966) - (128.35) + 36.76

%Fat = 107.966 - 128.35 + 36.76

%Fat = 16.37 % Kudos


----------



## bigspin (Aug 18, 2009)

Too complex for my brain.


----------



## Will101 (Apr 14, 2009)

It has taken me 20 mins but I get it now! Surely thogh, there are more simple ways?!


----------



## Guest (Nov 10, 2009)

I like mirrors.


----------



## Moe81 (Apr 6, 2009)

Well, i'm sure there are plenty other ways.. some may be simpler, some may not be...

but i really find this method to be fairly simple.. no disrespect but this equation is really high school calculus... just with a logarithm addition...


----------



## j1mshere (Jul 7, 2008)

Just did it and going by my visual appearence its accurate to about a 1 or 2 percent. Good find!


----------



## dixie normus (May 11, 2008)

Moe81 said:


> plugging the value in:
> 
> %Fat = (86.010*1.25527) - (70.041*1.8325) + 36.76
> 
> note: '*' means multiply. work the equation in the brackets () first


No need for brackets as multiplication always takes precedence over addition. :tongue:


----------



## Moe81 (Apr 6, 2009)

dixie normus said:


> No need for brackets as multiplication always takes precedence over addition. :tongue:


LOL.. i know... i was tryin to be more detailed as some of us here can't even get the equation right... :whistling:


----------



## anabolic ant (Jun 5, 2008)

dixie normus said:


> No need for brackets as multiplication always takes precedence over addition. :tongue:


well spotted dixie:smartass:!!!

moe81...you can try the jackson & pollack equations too,using skinfolds!!!

actually using skinfolds,with fat calipers would give you a more accurate/precise reading of bodyfat%...and you can use from 3 to 7(i think,been a while:confused1 different areas on the body to determine this,such as iliac crest,hip,abdomen :bounce:etc etc

and to get a better more accurate result,you might wanna perform the measurements 3 times,for an average!!!

saying this,there are many different equations for using skinfolds by fat calipers...go check it out,i'll guarentee you fat caliper skinfold readings will be to at least 0.1%-0.9% accurate:clap:...as good as any gold standard technnique,pretty much for nothing in money terms:thumb:!!!!


----------



## Moe81 (Apr 6, 2009)

Thanks brother. for pointng out..

but as i mentioned before in my first post:



Moe81 said:


> While most people associate measuring body fat with skin calipers, there's another method that involves taking a few measurements and using a formula to determine the percentage of body fat..[1] Plus, *it's more convenient*.


this enables the beginners to get a somewhat rough(pretty closely accurate actually) bf% for progress record and such..

i know the skinfold method too, and have done it. it's rounds up pretty close to the value from rope and choke method. plus, not everybody here has a caliper in our household now, do we?

that is y i posted a fairly simple technique that only requires a measure tape and some basic calculus. Unless we're in the midst of competing, i dun quite think that we actually need to measure our %bf up to .1% significance. correct me if i'm wrong pls.. Hence, i posted this in the 'Getting started' section.

thanks.

Peace.


----------



## j1mshere (Jul 7, 2008)

my boss did it, was consistent with other measurements he has done, and he has a completley different body type to me.


----------



## Jay.32 (Dec 12, 2008)

WILL HAVE TO TOTRY THIS


----------



## GunnaGetBig (Dec 14, 2008)

Good stuff! Worked for me!


----------



## Moe81 (Apr 6, 2009)

j1mshere said:


> my boss did it, was consistent with other measurements he has done, and he has a completley different body type to me.





GunnaGetBig said:


> Good stuff! Worked for me!


Thanks for the feed back guys... appreciate it!!


----------

