Bod Pod?

morganjen · ‎03-13-2010

Anyone have any experience with the BOD POD® Body Composition Measurement Testing? I made an appointment at our hospital to have this done. They made a big deal about how much the machine costs. But after looking online at it, I have serious doubts I will be to do it since I am claustrophobic. It looks like a diaster for me. I'd be happy with old-school calipers to measure my body fat at this point.

Originally joined board 12-14-2004

Desertdi · ‎03-13-2010

Looks just like a steam cabinet......and only takes 5 minutes. Can't be too bad...........especially since it's "the latest" (!)

♥Surface of the Sun♥

hckynutjohn · ‎06-15-2015

@morganjen wrote:
Anyone have any experience with the BOD POD® Body Composition Measurement Testing? I made an appointment at our hospital to have this done. They made a big deal about how much the machine costs. But after looking online at it, I have serious doubts I will be to do it since I am claustrophobic. It looks like a diaster for me. I'd be happy with old-school calipers to measure my body fat at this point.

For decades now the most accurate body composition testing has been "Submersion Testing". It has been proven to be 1%, plus/minus accuracy. Many other methods fell in the 5-8%, plus/minus range.

For example using one of the less accurate protocols--you reading comes back with 17% body fat. Within "the range of error", your true reading could be between as low as 9%, up to a high of 25%.

If a person is satisfied with that "margin of error"? Might as well stick with using a "body caliper" even if you aren't sure how to use it. Couldn't be very far off.

When I was in Cardiac Rehab after my 1st heart attack, an Exercise Physiologist used Calipers for body composition testing. They measured it at the start of the 36 class course, and again at the end of the 36th session.

My caliper reading at the end using calipers was 15%. I decided to have another "submersion analysis test". It came back with 9% body fat, so plus/minus would be between 8% low to 10% as a high. As you can see this is a major difference.

I've never heard of the one you mention, but I have another type of testing for body composition. This one's accuracy depended on one's bodies "Hydration Level". They would have it set up at the end of 10k road races. They also suggested to runners NOT to drink fluids during their run.

This test measured an electrical connection with a chest strap type device and another electronic device connected to your feet. The time it took the electric signal to go from one device to the other was their method. They would weigh you and their formula somehow was said to translate weight/time of connection. For me it came up at 13% body fat, which at least was close to my submersion test results.

Maybe this Body Pod thing is something new. I haven't really followed this for a few years. I am assuming from what you say, you have probably never had a spinal MRI. I have had many of them and no problems. I know many hospitals have semi-open MRI machines for full scans. My spinal doctor friend says he does not use them because they have a much weaker magnetic field, thus much less intricate details of the spine.

Long post but maybe a little info you might not have known.

hckynut(john)

1jenniferjuniper · ‎03-09-2010

Ummm, John long response from someone whot had no idea what the OP was talking about. I had an open MRI for my spine and got a detailed report. Don't agree with your doc.

hckynutjohn · ‎06-15-2015

@1jenniferjuniper wrote:
Ummm, John long response from someone whot had no idea what the OP was talking about. I had an open MRI for my spine and got a detailed report. Don't agree with your doc.

Ahh c'mon now, cut me a little slack,eh? The OP mentioned Body Composition Measurements. If you read any of my "long response", you should have seen that I more than casually familiar with what those words mean and/or imply. What I said was that I "was not familiar with that protocol for Body Composition Measurement".

If you were satisfied with the details of your MRI, that is the only thing that counts. I could go into a "long response" about different "details" shown in different magnetic power levels from different MRI machines, but?

I will be sure to tell my friend, the spinal doc, you don't agree with him next time my wife pet sits for him.

hckynut(john)

1jenniferjuniper · ‎03-09-2010

Lol thanks for your response John.
By all means let your doc know, I trust my doc

morganjen · ‎03-13-2010

It does have a window, but I don't think there is a way to open the door from the inside. Apparently there is a panic button, but still...

Originally joined board 12-14-2004

sidsmom · ‎11-25-2011

Caliper method is 99.9999999999% (!) accurate for most.

Unless you're in a contest or getting paid to know your BF%,

again, calipers are just fine.

As for the underwater method, Susan Powter said it best:

"if the caliper method shows you're at 20%,

you're not gonna jump in a pond &

discover it's really 10%!"

In other words, there might be a slight difference, but not enough to write home about.

The Bod Pod sounds fancy, but if close quarters prohibits you from knowing this information, the caliper method works perfectly!

hckynutjohn · ‎06-15-2015

@sidsmom wrote:
Caliper method is 99.9999999999% (!) One has to have a 100% method to use as a measurements STANDARD to make accurate comparison conclusions. What protocol was used as the Standard 100% to get this 99.9999999999?

As for the underwater method, Susan Powter said it best:
"if the caliper method shows you're at 20%,
you're not gonna jump in a pond &
discover it's really 10%!" I don't know who she is or her expertise. From her quote it appears she hasn't studied the results of "submersion testing verses calipers. Numerous Major Studies done by World Renowned Exercise Physiologists performed on thousands of "World Class Olympic Athletes" from most of their Specialized Sports.

In other words, there might be a slight difference, but not enough to write home about. Some don't consider a 16% plus/minus a Slight difference! Muscles carry fat every step a person takes, and and carrying an extra 16% of 200lbs =32lbs. So that is 32 extra pounds to carry, and that is a "Slight" difference? Not to me.

The Bod Pod sounds fancy, but if close quarters prohibits you from knowing this information, the caliper method works perfectly!

You didn't quote me, but since my post is the only one that mentions the words "calipers" and submersion(underwater your word) testing? I will use assumption as a guide. Thus my responses in Red above!

hckynut(john)

sidsmom · ‎11-25-2011

Like many posters before me, I'm looking at one of many of your responses with tilted head & a WTF look on my face. =:/

"16%" comment doesn't make a sense in reference to my post.

I said nothing of a 16%...anything. =:/

Body Fat % is important info to have, but it's not a required piece of info. Stating such would create an excuse for many.

99.99999999% (yep, I'm using it again!) of the people out there losing weight, getting better biomarkers at the doctor, feeling better......just want to look good in a pair of skinny jeans. Knowing what your BF% is not needed.

I commend the OP for wanting to step outside the 'health box' to acquire this information...especially since I'm assuming she/he is not a professional athlete REQUIRED to know this info...much like Olympic athletes.

Again, the OP can get a VERY accurate % for a normal Jane/Joe just by using the caliper method...or the Bod Pod. No sense 'jumping into a pond' for that 1-2% differential.