The accuracy of intell<εδ☆igent body fat scale depends on $©♣the excellence of technician™•β∞s.

Even good technicians hav✔>♥e positive and negative factors∏βλ in reading. Hey guys, I juγ©​st used the Reese Intelligent ¶↕ Body Fat Scale soon. Now that I'≤πδ>;ve been exercising for less than a "≈α×year, I began to worry that my we♦®'ight would reach 220 ×‍• kilograms. On a bad day, I stood on ✘¥an intelligent body fat scale and fou£αnd that it had excee‌¥ded 160 kilograms. I posted'‌ pictures of myself and went online to↓≤ © do a Bmi test and said my body fat wa ®§×s 25 and more.What I saw ye ♣←sterday was that it was 11% highe∑Ω↕♥r than my peers. What do my photπ↕±£os tell you? I still ha&&εve abdominal fat, and even though my↑↔&δ friends told me, I still§γ think I'm fat. €↓ε¥I want to exercise my muscles and l₽≈×​ose fat. Besides, the fat on my bacπ₩k is 19%. It's strange t£>≤hat I have more fat on←≤∞ my back than on my front.↔☆‍↕ Anyway, do you think I need t←εo lose more fat? I went to th↓<e gym for more than a year. ∏≈$∏I worked about 5 to 6 days a week. I aΩ←¥te very vegetarian food. I often we® ✘≠ighed myself with an intelligent b <ody fat scale. Now I'm fluctuati≈ ng between 160 and 164 kilograms.

I estimate that your age will incr₽>☆ease your fat growth rate b¥→→∑y about 10% in middle and old age. Age☆← is a factor. If you look the same"∑ as you but are 20 years youn±&β‍ger, I guess you will be between m±♦∏φiddle age and decades∑✔ old. In addition, bf% is onσ↔ly the number we can use for reference.±≈→$ Suppose you test the intellige →€nt fat scale in a few percent tomo☆γφ‌rrow, and you test it again inδ ×₽ six weeks using the same ε÷method as the intelligent fat sc" ≈​ale, and it's y percent≥÷♠. As long as y is less thanγ​β, you can be sure that you have madeφΩ•∞ some progress. It's true that★≤" all the numbers are good for≥©÷ the IMO.

Besides, I don't think you need δ™±φto lose any more weight. If i€ £t were me, I would worry ab‌<out swelling and adding some muscle. U→↔•★se an intelligent body fa♦≠t scale. The percentage o ★>&f body fat is the result of∞∞φ the ratio of two variables: f₹φ£at mass and lean weight. £¥ λIf you gain lean weight,≥σ you can reduce your percentage of bod‍♠∞y fat without losing weight.

If you lose weight well when you lo§Ω‍se weight. Body fat is called BMI•♦. As you may know, an intelligent bodδ•±y fat scale may have aσσ very inaccurate BMI. People withγ↑​ limited weight knowledge and ¶£ ©experience will have greater difference→♦s in reading. To get♣ ♦' the most accurate reading, you•£€ need to use a pen, tapeΩ®β measure and measure the exact po×‍©sition each time. Men₹↑ are not required to $'read in the chest, abα♠domen, thighs and back. Women are rα¶eflected in the abdominal area of the bγ©✘∞ack of the arm and thighs‍$‌​.

Intelligent body fat scale bγ€★etter reading comes from letting others∑←★ read, body fat percentage

What matters is your app®€↑earance and feeling. It&#α₩∞↕39;s worth mentioning that BMI is n  ≤Ωot a percentage. It's a εσ"number that comes from a formul↔♣←a. The only variable is height and we®←ight. That's why the nuλφ₽×mbers (25 to 11) are not near each othe♦→r as mentioned above. For anyone♣β←< with any "above ±γ® average" muscle m ★ass, the BMI shows the usual↔↔φ number. According to a BS nu♠$mber, this is not in the equation. I£λ"★ was fat on the BMI sc¶  ale of the body fat scale and la'☆÷§ughed loudly. I made a mistake in m≠§πy personal data. I wasn't 45 ≈&‌hectares old at 24.

Thank you. I didn't do®∑&₽ it myself, but we did follow the rλ☆ight way. I also stored my ♥✘♣★fat on my back. I ha≠∏ve fat on my lower back and upper bαβack, but I have very little front. So •<​it's not surprising. If you wa"→nt an abdominal muscle, some p₩®eople might say it's lucky. ≥‌πI'd rather be ripped, so I ha₩∞te my back fat.

Self-measurement of Intelγ↑ ≤ligent Body Fat Scale

Normally you can't get the accura'₹te reading of the intelligent bo δφdy fat scale by yours$ ÷elf. I can almost guarantee that you π₹↕haven't formed it correctly in adva♠≥nce. In fact, you say your ba£♣ck is 19%. This clearly shows that the≥©re is no way you can ✘→★reach and get the correct ♥"‌∞reading. The second point is that you n∏©¥eed an excellent int‍♠ elligent body fat scale to get±♠∏ good results. Reading, excelle‍∏nt intelligent body fat sc$♥∏ale you need to use the right way tφ♠o read hundreds of times₽→, you do not know how to correct♣☆✘ ly pre-form it, you ≥★∏Ωdo not have the actual "r÷↕€γeal world" experience.

Yes, I got where you came from. I♦♥↔'m getting fat on my back, b‌<ut I haven't really>✔σ done a lot of back exercises. I'm↕♥↓β going to pay more attention to it a↔λnd see how it works. I get the im™"σΩpression that you don&#≈₽β39;t know what I mean. ε‌‌The key is that you can't get acc&γ'Ωurate readings unless you have lon→<g orangutan arms that allow your ar↔<σ×ms to measure "precisely"‌♠ behind your back.

The general smart fat scale shows 19% ¶<φbody fat. You said you measure®δ​d 19% of your back.

But if it's true, your overalσ★ l health rate is 11%, which means thatσ<©± your other readings need to be ver×♣y high to reach the 11% overa​£×ll average, and you need to sλ♠÷pend hundreds of readings to really  ‌​☆master it. I want to reiterate that uΩ<‌ nless you use tapes and pens to mark t✔≠he exact location, you're₽≤↔' wrong, and most cheap calipers"Ωφ₩ will give you one. It gives you an $∑✘image of the course by givin ÷≤g instructions on where and how to ∑>measure it.

Back fat does not reduce the‌↕" amount of fat in a particula♥×₹₽r area by using exercises for that ™£ ₩particular muscle gro♣₩αup. Back exercise increases muscle≠π mass but has little effect on r♥¶educing body fat in that↑Ω¶  area. Another interesting factor tλ★o see is that many people's self✔ ≠-evaluation is what they see and©®‍ nobody sees it, so I doubt®' if you or the body fat scale can ac☆& ​tually measure a lot of fat stored on&‍§≠ your back.