# I Got My Body Fat Tested Every Way Possible- Shocking Results! Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6xv3dACPss Recap page: https://rapidrecap.app/video/Y6xv3dACPss Generated: 2026-02-04T17:08:45.216+00:00 --- ## Quick Overview The body fat measurement comparison revealed significant discrepancies between methods, with DEXA (6.0%) and Underwater Weighing (UWW, 3.2%) being the most precise, while Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis (BIA) and simple Waist-to-Hip Ratio yielded highly inaccurate results (ranging from 20.4% to 32.8% and 10-14% respectively), leading the presenter to conclude that DEXA and UWW are superior for absolute measurement, but skinfolds are best for tracking relative changes. **Key Points:** - DEXA scan results showed a body fat estimate of 6.0% (222 lbs) after a fat loss phase, compared to 14.0% (216 lbs) a month prior, indicating significant body composition change. - Underwater Weighing (UWW), the scientific gold standard, yielded a result of 3.2% body fat, which the presenter notes is likely skewed low due to his dense bone structure. - Bioelectrical Impedance (BIA) methods were highly inaccurate: scale BIA estimated 32.8% body fat, and handheld BIA estimated 20.4% body fat. - Skinfold measurements varied widely based on the method used: 3-site estimated 4.13%, 9-site estimated 5.9%, and 7-site estimated 8.3%. - The presenter judges Waist-to-Hip Ratio as the least valid method for body fat estimation, citing a 0.79 ratio based on 34-inch waist and 43-inch hips. - The presenter estimates his true body fat to be around 7-8%, concluding that DEXA and UWW are the most valid of the tested methods, despite their own minor errors (DEXA's 1-3% error rate). - The presenter thanks Dr. James Sackett and the Kinesiology team at Cornerstone University for facilitating the testing. ![Screenshot at 00:06: The body composition results table from a DEXA scan shows a stark difference between the May 13th \(15.6% fat at 235 lbs\) and November 14th \(14.0% fat at 216 lbs\) measurements.](https://ss.rapidrecap.app/screens/Y6xv3dACPss/00-00-06.jpg) **Context:** The video features Dr. Mike from RP Strength comparing the accuracy of various body fat testing methods on himself after a significant body recomposition phase spanning from May 13, 2025, to December 12, 2025. The tests performed include Waist-to-Hip Ratio, BIA (scale and handheld), Skinfolds (3, 7, and 9-site), BodPod, DEXA, and Underwater Weighing (UWW) at Cornerstone University in Grand Rapids, Michigan, with the goal of ranking them from least to most valid. ## Detailed Analysis The video compares seven different methods for measuring body fat, ranking them from least to most valid based on the results obtained from the presenter, Dr. Mike. The least valid method identified is the Waist-to-Hip Ratio (0.79 ratio), which gave a 10-14% body fat estimate based on a 34-inch waist and 43-inch hips, failing to account for muscle mass. Next, Bioelectrical Impedance (BIA) methods proved highly unreliable: scale BIA yielded 32.8% body fat, and handheld BIA yielded 20.4% body fat, both deemed comedic due to the presenter's muscular physique. Skinfold measurements showed variability based on the number of sites used: 3-site (4.13%), 9-site (5.9%), and 7-site (8.3%). The presenter notes that skinfolds are useful for tracking *changes* if done professionally, but the low 3-site result is unrealistic. The BodPod estimated 4.4% body fat, which the presenter believes is skewed low because his dense bones are off the standard charts, making him appear leaner than he is. DEXA scans, while generally great, are subject to firmware issues and still have a 1-3% error rate, but the presenter's results (6.0% after a fat loss phase) are considered reasonable compared to the initial 14.0%. The scientific gold standard, Underwater Weighing (UWW), yielded 3.2% body fat, which the presenter also believes is skewed low due to his dense bone structure and the difficulty in fully exhaling air. The final takeaway is that DEXA and UWW are the most valid for absolute measurement, but waist measurements are excellent for tracking progress during cutting phases, and skinfolds are best for tracking relative changes. ### Body Fat Testing Methods Ranked - Waist to Hip Ratio (0.79 ratio, 10-14% estimate) - Scale BIA (32.8% estimate) - Handheld BIA (20.4% estimate) - Skinfolds (3-site: 4.13%, 9-site: 5.9%, 7-site: 8.3%) - BodPod (4.4% estimate) - DEXA (6.0% estimate) - UWW (3.2% estimate) ### Waist to Hip Ratio Interpretation - Not a body fat test; useful only for tracking waist circumference changes during fat loss or bulking phases. ### BIA Utility - Scale BIA (32.8%) is only useful for a narrow demographic (e.g., 65kg, 20-year-old male undergrads); otherwise, it's a random number generator, especially with 'athlete mode' settings. ### Skinfold Interpretation - Awesome if done by a certified professional (anthropometrist); otherwise, it's a 'giant crapshoot'; best used for tracking *changes* rather than absolute values. ### BodPod Interpretation - Generally great (within 3% error), but the presenter's dense bones likely skewed the result low (4.4%) because the model assumes average bone density. ### DEXA Interpretation - Generally great but suffers from potential firmware issues and a 1-3% error rate; should be used for % fat, not Lean Body Mass (LBM) tracking due to hydration dependence. ### Underwater Weighing (UWW) Interpretation - The scientific gold standard (resulted in 3.2%), but still has a 1-2% error due to lung volume and bone density assumptions; requires exhaling all air for accuracy. ![Screenshot at 00:04: Comparison of DEXA scan results showing body fat dropping from 14% to 6% over approximately one month.](https://ss.rapidrecap.app/screens/Y6xv3dACPss/00-00-04.jpg) ![Screenshot at 00:36: Sign for the Cornerstone University Human Performance Lab where the testing is conducted.](https://ss.rapidrecap.app/screens/Y6xv3dACPss/00-00-36.jpg) ![Screenshot at 00:38: The apparatus used for Underwater Weighing \(UWW\) testing, a large metal tank filled with water.](https://ss.rapidrecap.app/screens/Y6xv3dACPss/00-00-38.jpg) ![Screenshot at 00:40: The subject preparing for the BodPod test, an egg-shaped device that measures body volume via air displacement.](https://ss.rapidrecap.app/screens/Y6xv3dACPss/00-00-40.jpg) ![Screenshot at 01:39: Dr. James Sackett reviewing results on a monitor after the UWW test, which yielded a 6.87 result on the screen \(likely related to density or volume calculation\).](https://ss.rapidrecap.app/screens/Y6xv3dACPss/00-01-39.jpg)