signalsTanita Innerscan Elite Scale Review
February 23rd 2007 20:11
This scale is model BC-554 - it's currently the most expensive, and most thorough Tanita scale you can get. It measures -
-Weight
-Body fat percentage
-Muscle mass
-Hydration
-Physique rating
-Bone mass
-Visceral fat
-Metabolic age
-Basal metabolic rate
Phew! With a list like that, you would have to be really, really interested in your body composition. Fortuantely, I am and the scale arrived today.
The scale takes 4 AA batteries, which were provided. It's glass and rather heavy (I believe about 8 lbs). After reading the directions, I put in my height, age, and gender - and let the scale measure me.
Now, I did buy one of these scales last year - and the results just tore me apart. I was so distraught that I sold it on eBay to someone else. However, I'm a little more composed now.
Here's how I rated - and what surpised me.
First off, weight - My weight, while in a healthy range, is on the high end for a medium frame. The scale reminded me that I weighed too much (thank you, I know).
Body fat- This scale said my body fat was 35 percent! However, calipers and other scales have put it closer to 20-22 percent. I was slightly dehaydrated at the time (which the scale also told me and I was aware of) so that could have skewed the results.
Muscle mass - The scale said I had 90 lbs of muscle. That is quite lower than I thought, however I've been neglecting my training. Still, I highly doubt I have that little muscle.
Physique rating - Ha! This scale ranked me as a 2 (out of 9)! What a wakeup call! (however this was due to the EXTREMELY high body fat reading).
Bone mass - My bone mass was 4.8 lbs. Now, for any woman who weighs 110-165 lbs, it should have been closer to 5.3. This may have been due to years of anorexia and diet cola drinking (which can leach the calcium from your bones).
Visceral fat - This is the only result I was pleased with. The scale actually said I have very little visceral fat - ranking a 2 out of a possible 59.
Basal metabolic rate - Mine is 1368. Not too bad but read on...
Metabolic age - At 22, I have a metabolic age of 39! Now I've been told that some of the medications I'm on make it harder to lose weight. But boy, I had no idea! This has motivated me to exercise more - and possibly get my thyroid checked (if it truly is this low, I'm sure it would show up on a test).
You may be saying "I'm sure it's just a bunch of crap," but this scale is similar to the one I bought last year. Matt, at 22 also, had a metabolic age of 18 (makes sense because young guys have such fast metabolisms). I had a 27-year-old friend weigh on it and hers was exactly 27.
**** Update - I have an appt. for 9 AM on Monday to get T3 and T4, etc, levels checked. So I'll let you guys know.
Overall, I'm pleased with this scale, and hope it will show trends over time. I'm glad we have this and I can't wait to see what Matt's numbers are!
Claire S.
-Weight
-Body fat percentage
-Muscle mass
-Hydration
-Physique rating
-Bone mass
-Visceral fat
-Metabolic age
-Basal metabolic rate
Phew! With a list like that, you would have to be really, really interested in your body composition. Fortuantely, I am and the scale arrived today.
The scale takes 4 AA batteries, which were provided. It's glass and rather heavy (I believe about 8 lbs). After reading the directions, I put in my height, age, and gender - and let the scale measure me.
Here's how I rated - and what surpised me.
First off, weight - My weight, while in a healthy range, is on the high end for a medium frame. The scale reminded me that I weighed too much (thank you, I know).
Body fat- This scale said my body fat was 35 percent! However, calipers and other scales have put it closer to 20-22 percent. I was slightly dehaydrated at the time (which the scale also told me and I was aware of) so that could have skewed the results.
Muscle mass - The scale said I had 90 lbs of muscle. That is quite lower than I thought, however I've been neglecting my training. Still, I highly doubt I have that little muscle.
Physique rating - Ha! This scale ranked me as a 2 (out of 9)! What a wakeup call! (however this was due to the EXTREMELY high body fat reading).
Bone mass - My bone mass was 4.8 lbs. Now, for any woman who weighs 110-165 lbs, it should have been closer to 5.3. This may have been due to years of anorexia and diet cola drinking (which can leach the calcium from your bones).
Visceral fat - This is the only result I was pleased with. The scale actually said I have very little visceral fat - ranking a 2 out of a possible 59.
Basal metabolic rate - Mine is 1368. Not too bad but read on...
Metabolic age - At 22, I have a metabolic age of 39! Now I've been told that some of the medications I'm on make it harder to lose weight. But boy, I had no idea! This has motivated me to exercise more - and possibly get my thyroid checked (if it truly is this low, I'm sure it would show up on a test).
You may be saying "I'm sure it's just a bunch of crap," but this scale is similar to the one I bought last year. Matt, at 22 also, had a metabolic age of 18 (makes sense because young guys have such fast metabolisms). I had a 27-year-old friend weigh on it and hers was exactly 27.
**** Update - I have an appt. for 9 AM on Monday to get T3 and T4, etc, levels checked. So I'll let you guys know.
Overall, I'm pleased with this scale, and hope it will show trends over time. I'm glad we have this and I can't wait to see what Matt's numbers are!
Claire S.
| 36 |
| Vote |
Subscribe to this blog
