I think losing weight is one of the most hardest thing.

Anonymous wrote:I also have the Fitbit Aria scale and I think the Body Fat percentage is crap.

Body fat measurements from consumer scales are inaccurate.

Anonymous wrote:
Body fat measurements are notoriously hard to do.

+1

OP, you don't know what your body fat percentage is because it's unlikely you used a scientifically sound method to measure it.

I also have the Fitbit Aria scale and I think the Body Fat percentage is crap. I honestly would not worry. It tells me my BF is 30%, yet I’m 125 pounds and you can see a lot of my muscles—sides of abs, biceps, lines down the side of my quads, and all of my upper back. I’ve had a DEXA scan for body fat and it put me at 22% and my body composition really doesn’t appear to have changed much at all since then.

It sucks to spend money on a product that is not accurate in this respect but there are a lot of reviews out there citing its inaccuracy. I use the body fat feature mainly just to track trends upward or downward or to maintain where I’m at.

It means you don't have much muscle mass.

Think of the reverse - athletes with high muscle mass may often be "overweight" technically, according to the scale - but more of that "weight" is actually muscle. not fat.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:35% looks heavier than 40% in that picture

PP who posted that pix... I thought so too. Maybe the 35% pix thighs are bigger but you can't see it? I don't know. The closeup of the 35% pix makes it misleading I think.

NP, I also think 30% looks like she has less body fat than 25%. (Don't get me wrong, both look better than me, I'm not criticizing either of them! It's just interesting how things can look in a picture.)

And the leap from 40% to 45% looks off to me. Plus the 50% photo looks a lot less than the 45%. Probably a combination of the type of bathing suit and the distance of the camera to the subject.

The photos were really helpful so thank you to whomever it is who posted them!