Tanita body fat question, athlete vs. adult mode

[Carl]

My scale died so I got myself one of those Tanita body fat
scales. It has athletes mode and I am wondering which reading
is the correct one. The scale measures 4.6% in athletes mode
and 9.6% in normal mode... which one is it ? I tried at
different time during the day and the values seem to be fairly
consistent...

I am 6ft1, 149lb and am fairly athletic, exercise 8-10h/week,
but do not race. Each week I run 3x8miles (7.30min/mile), bike
2x30 miles + 50-60mile weekend ride (18-21 mph). Since my
resting HR hovers around 44, I thought I should use the
athletes mode...

Since I can still see and feel fat around my waist (ice cream
storage), I do not really believe the low reading.. I can see
my ribs though. How does one look with 5% fat?

-Carl

[Brad Ander]

"Carl" <celeryman88@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:75d7c2cb.0209230522.5acca595@posting.google.com...
> [6' 1" guy at 149 lbs wonders...] Since I can still see and
> feel fat around my waist (ice cream storage), I do not
> really believe the low reading.. I can see my ribs though.
> How does one look with 5% fat?

Like you do, in the mirror.

Brad Anders

[Gordon V C]

I (barely) meet the Tanita criteria for "athlete" but it gives
me a ridiculously low reading. I use the regular mode.

In article <75d7c2cb.0209230522.5acca595@posting.google.com>,
Carl <celeryman88@yahoo.com> wrote:
>My scale died so I got myself one of those Tanita body fat
>scales. It has athletes mode and I am wondering which reading
>is the correct one. The scale measures 4.6% in athletes mode
>and 9.6% in normal mode... which one is it ? I tried at
>different time during the day and the values seem to be
>fairly consistent...
>
>I am 6ft1, 149lb and am fairly athletic, exercise 8-10h/week,
>but do not race. Each week I run 3x8miles (7.30min/mile),
>bike 2x30 miles + 50-60mile weekend ride (18-21 mph). Since
>my resting HR hovers around 44, I thought I should use the
>athletes mode...
>
>Since I can still see and feel fat around my waist (ice cream
>storage), I do not really believe the low reading.. I can see
>my ribs though. How does one look with 5% fat?
>
>
>-Carl

--
Gordon V. Cormack CS Dept, University of Waterloo, Canada N2L
3G1 gvcormack@uwaterloo.ca http://cormack.uwaterloo.ca/cormack

[Tom Rodger]

As they tell you with the scale, you should be naked and dry
when you use
it. It uses electrical resistance to APPROXIMATE the body fat.
It's not as accurate as weighing within water, but
probably more accurate the caliper methods. The difference
between athlete and and regular adult mode is simply a
linear proportion. Actually, I use the adult reading since
it's larger and will show RELATIVE changes in body fat
more clearly. I don't expect the scale to show exactly
what my true body-fat percentage is, but I can see it go
up and down with diet, exercise, dehydration, etc.

But if yo are 6'1" and 149 pounds, you definitely have a low
percentage body fat as a man. WHERE the fat distributes is not
as contributory as the total proportion. Also, your 44 resting
heart rate also indicates a very low percentage.

If I were you, I would worry more about building strength,
especially on the bike. If you could gain maybe five pounds of
muscle and keep the percentage the same, you would probably
get faster (except for extreme bike-climbing grades rarely
encountered in triathlon) on the bike and in the water.

Frankly, I would kill to have a 5% body fat. Know that people
like Lance Armstrong and some of the Kenyan marathoners have
an even lower percentage. At these levels, there is
necessarily a fanatic attention to diet, megamileage, etc.,
beyond the understanding of most amateur humans. Pushing
yourself consistently like this not necessarily better for
overall fitness and health, either. Even Lance lets himself
gain a few pounds in the off season.

"Carl" <celeryman88@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:75d7c2cb.0209230522.5acca595@posting.google.com...
> My scale died so I got myself one of those Tanita body fat
> scales. It has athletes mode and I am wondering which
> reading is the correct one. The scale measures 4.6% in
> athletes mode and 9.6% in normal mode... which one is it ? I
> tried at different time during the day and the values seem
> to be fairly consistent...
>
> I am 6ft1, 149lb and am fairly athletic, exercise
> 8-10h/week, but do not race. Each week I run 3x8miles
> (7.30min/mile), bike 2x30 miles + 50-60mile weekend ride
> (18-21 mph). Since my resting HR hovers around 44, I thought
> I should use the athletes mode...
>
> Since I can still see and feel fat around my waist (ice
> cream storage), I do not really believe the low reading.. I
> can see my ribs though. How does one look with 5% fat?
>
>
> -Carl

[Armin]

Carl wrote:
> My scale died so I got myself one of those Tanita body fat
> scales. It has athletes mode and I am wondering which
> reading is the correct one. The scale measures 4.6% in
> athletes mode and 9.6% in normal mode... which one is it ? I
> tried at different time during the day and the values seem
> to be fairly consistent...
>
> I am 6ft1, 149lb and am fairly athletic, exercise
> 8-10h/week, but do not race. Each week I run 3x8miles
> (7.30min/mile), bike 2x30 miles + 50-60mile weekend ride
> (18-21 mph). Since my resting HR hovers around 44, I thought
> I should use the athletes mode...
>
> Since I can still see and feel fat around my waist (ice
> cream storage), I do not really believe the low reading.. I
> can see my ribs though. How does one look with 5% fat?
>
>
> -Carl

If you "can still see and feel fat around my waist (ice cream
storage)" then I doubt if it's 4..6% but you never know.

If knowing your body fat % is really that important to you
then have it measured at a reputable clinic and compare that
to the values the scale gives you. Then you'll know far sure.

Armin

[Bruce Lang]

Mine does that too, gives you about 1/2 of your adult mode
reading in athletic mode. I'm quite confident that I'm at the
higher number, 18 % rather than 9%.

Unless I really misunderstand the technology, it's seems silly
for them to have two modes that can measure so differently. If
they both measure via electrical current, and if that's good
for anything, you'd think the two measurements would be closer
together (within 20% of each other, perhaps?). But I still
like the thing for tracking progress. Just measure under
consistent conditions. I know they say not to do it first
thing i the morning but this works pretty well for me.

Bruce

"Carl" <celeryman88@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:75d7c2cb.0209230522.5acca595@posting.google.com...
> My scale died so I got myself one of those Tanita body fat
> scales. It has athletes mode and I am wondering which
> reading is the correct one. The scale measures 4.6% in
> athletes mode and 9.6% in normal mode... which one is it ? I
> tried at different time during the day and the values seem
> to be fairly consistent...
>
> I am 6ft1, 149lb and am fairly athletic, exercise
> 8-10h/week, but do not race. Each week I run 3x8miles
> (7.30min/mile), bike 2x30 miles + 50-60mile weekend ride
> (18-21 mph). Since my resting HR hovers around 44, I thought
> I should use the athletes mode...
>
> Since I can still see and feel fat around my waist (ice
> cream storage), I do not really believe the low reading.. I
> can see my ribs though. How does one look with 5% fat?
>
>
> -Carl

[Ken Papai]

"Tom Rodgers" <tr@svi.net> wrote in message
news:I2Gj9.1195$3%2.319320268@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
> As they tell you with the scale, you should be naked and dry
> when you use
> it. It uses electrical resistance to APPROXIMATE the body
> fat. It's not as accurate as weighing within water, but
> probably more accurate the caliper methods. The
> difference between athlete and and regular adult mode is
simply
> a linear proportion. Actually, I use the adult reading since
> it's larger
and
> will show RELATIVE changes in body fat more clearly. I don't
> expect the scale to show exactly what my true body-fat
> percentage is, but I can see
it
> go up and down with diet, exercise, dehydration, etc.
>
> But if yo are 6'1" and 149 pounds, you definitely have a low
> percentage
body
> fat as a man. WHERE the fat distributes is not as
> contributory as the
total

There is way too much variability here. People are small boned
and big boned. They can be skinny and out of shape, or bulky
and in-shape.

148 lb. 6'1" guy is likely under 10% body fat. You can also be
6'0" at 190 lbs and be 10%.

The scales will only give you +/- 15% on its guess of your BF.

An athlete (i.e., a bike racer) at 5% is super fit. A lay
person who doesn't exercise at 5% BF isn't fit.

YMMV, yada yada yada.....

> proportion. Also, your 44 resting heart rate also indicates
> a very low percentage.
>
> If I were you, I would worry more about building strength,
> especially on
the
> bike. If you could gain maybe five pounds of muscle and
> keep the
percentage
> the same, you would probably get faster (except for extreme
> bike-climbing grades rarely encountered in triathlon) on the
> bike and in the water.
>
> Frankly, I would kill to have a 5% body fat. Know that
> people like Lance Armstrong and some of the Kenyan
> marathoners have an even lower
percentage.
> At these levels, there is necessarily a fanatic attention to
> diet, megamileage, etc., beyond the understanding of most
> amateur humans.
Pushing
> yourself consistently like this not necessarily better for
> overall fitness and health, either. Even Lance lets himself
> gain a few pounds in the off season.
>
>
> "Carl" <celeryman88@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:75d7c2cb.0209230522.5acca595@posting.google.com...
> > My scale died so I got myself one of those Tanita body fat
> > scales. It has athletes mode and I am wondering which
> > reading is the correct one. The scale measures 4.6% in
> > athletes mode and 9.6% in normal mode... which one is it ?
> > I tried at different time during the day and the values
> > seem to be fairly consistent...
> >
> > I am 6ft1, 149lb and am fairly athletic, exercise
> > 8-10h/week, but do not race. Each week I run 3x8miles
> > (7.30min/mile), bike 2x30 miles + 50-60mile weekend ride
> > (18-21 mph). Since my resting HR hovers around 44, I
> > thought I should use the athletes mode...
> >
> > Since I can still see and feel fat around my waist (ice
> > cream storage), I do not really believe the low reading..
> > I can see my ribs though. How does one look with 5% fat?
> >
> >
> > -Carl

[Cl]

Bruce Lange wrote:
>
> Mine does that too, gives you about 1/2 of your adult mode
> reading in athletic mode. I'm quite confident that I'm at
> the higher number, 18 % rather than 9%.
>
> Unless I really misunderstand the technology, it's seems
> silly for them to have two modes that can measure so
> differently. If they both measure via electrical current,
> and if that's good for anything, you'd think the two
> measurements would be closer together (within 20% of each
> other, perhaps?). But I still like the thing for tracking
> progress. Just measure under consistent conditions. I know
> they say not to do it first thing i the morning but this
> works pretty well for me.
>
> Bruce

You have to take into account the greater bone density and fat
distribution patterns of the athlete vs the 'regular' adult

[Mark Evans]

Carl: why not try another reliable method and compare, I find
that using waist minus wrist then to chart gives me results
within 2% of normal mode if I weight at the recommended time
of day. As usual YMMV Mark "Carl" <celeryman88@yahoo.com>
wrote in message
news:75d7c2cb.0209230522.5acca595@posting.google.com...
> My scale died so I got myself one of those Tanita body fat
> scales. It has athletes mode and I am wondering which
> reading is the correct one. The scale measures 4.6% in
> athletes mode and 9.6% in normal mode... which one is it ? I
> tried at different time during the day and the values seem
> to be fairly consistent...
>
> I am 6ft1, 149lb and am fairly athletic, exercise
> 8-10h/week, but do not race. Each week I run 3x8miles
> (7.30min/mile), bike 2x30 miles + 50-60mile weekend ride
> (18-21 mph). Since my resting HR hovers around 44, I thought
> I should use the athletes mode...
>
> Since I can still see and feel fat around my waist (ice
> cream storage), I do not really believe the low reading.. I
> can see my ribs though. How does one look with 5% fat?
>
>
> -Carl

[Vesku]

In article <75d7c2cb.0209230522.5acca595@posting.google.com>,
celeryman88@yahoo.com says...
> My scale died so I got myself one of those Tanita body fat
> scales. It has athletes mode and I am wondering which
> reading is the correct one. The scale measures 4.6% in
> athletes mode and 9.6% in normal mode... which one is it ?

Either one works. Any body fat measurement method will give
different results, and there's hardly a reason to get all anal
about which one is the correct figure. What the scale gives
you is a statistical estimate, which does not take into
account how your body distributes fat, your current state of
(de)hydration, how much food you have just eaten, etc.

Just use the same mode every time and do the measurement at
the same time. The point is to measure change (relative)
against your previous results instead of a magic number
(absolute) you could compare against someone else's.

/vesku, who is 7.1% on the athlete scale with
visible ab veins

[Sh]

Dont get caught up in your body fat %'s. Use which ever scale
as a bench mark and add this figure to your training log and
check against it regularly and look at it as a componant of
the you entire training data.

I'd be more worried how even my "Roadie" tan was.

SH

[Roger Hunt]

Weight freaks.

[Bob]

"Mark Evans" <vivovoyager@worldnet.att.net> wrote in
message news:amLj9.56419$jG2.3322552@bgtnsc05-news.ops.wor-
ldnet.att.net...
> Carl: why not try another reliable method and compare, I
> find that using waist minus wrist then to chart gives me
> results within 2% of normal mode if I weight at the
> recommended time of day. As usual YMMV Mark

What's the waist minus wrist technique? That doesn't sound
very accurate, except for maybe a small group of people.

(Heck, I have a hard time buying gloves because my wrists --
not my hands -- are so large. My heart rate monitor barely
fits on my wrist. And there's very little fat on my wrist --
it's purely bone causing the girth.)

[Tom Morley]

In article <3D8F4C0B.25E9C21B@midsouth.rr.com>, cl
<cluna@midsouth.rr.com> wrote:

> Bruce Lange wrote:
> >
> > Mine does that too, gives you about 1/2 of your adult mode
> > reading in athletic mode. I'm quite confident that I'm at
> > the higher number, 18 % rather than 9%.
> >
> > Unless I really misunderstand the technology, it's seems
> > silly for them to have two modes that can measure so
> > differently. If they both measure via electrical current,
> > and if that's good for anything, you'd think the two
> > measurements would be closer together (within 20% of each
> > other, perhaps?). But I still like the thing for tracking
> > progress. Just measure under consistent conditions. I know
> > they say not to do it first thing i the morning but this
> > works pretty well for me.
> >
> > Bruce
>
>
> You have to take into account the greater bone density
> and fat distribution patterns of the athlete vs the
> 'regular' adult

The difference -- so far as the scale is concerned -- is
mostly a difference in plasma volume.

--
Tom Morley | morley@math.gatech.edu | Same roads,
tmorley@bmtc.mindspring.com | Same rights,
http://www.math.gatech.edu/~morley | Same rules.
ICQ: 24798603 AIM: DocTDM |

[Lyle McDon]

Roger Hunter wrote:
>
> Weight freaks.

Lycra clad aerobic weenie.

Lyle

[David Cohe]

"Roger Hunter" <ronin11@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3d8f86b2$1_2@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
> Weight freaks.

I've always found the big-breasted cardio bunnies to be
very friendly, so apparently it's only the tiny penis
cardio pencil necks who are...unpleasant. Better than the
other way around :)

David
--
"However I plan to keep posting here about whatever matter I
fancy, including, as the case may be, anatomical details of
your deceased female ancestors in chronological
order."---Lysis

[Bill]

"Ken Papai" <ken@kenpapai.com> wrote in message
news:SSHj9.560682$UU1.91232@sccrnsc03...
>
> "Tom Rodgers" <tr@svi.net> wrote in message
> news:I2Gj9.1195$3%2.319320268@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
> > As they tell you with the scale, you should be naked and
> > dry when you
use
> > it. It uses electrical resistance to APPROXIMATE the body
> > fat. It's not
as
> > accurate as weighing within water, but probably more
> > accurate the
caliper
> > methods. The difference between athlete and and regular
> > adult mode is
> simply
> > a linear proportion. Actually, I use the adult reading
> > since it's larger
> and
> > will show RELATIVE changes in body fat more clearly. I
> > don't expect the scale to show exactly what my true
> > body-fat percentage is, but I can see
> it
> > go up and down with diet, exercise, dehydration, etc.
> >
> > But if yo are 6'1" and 149 pounds, you definitely have a
> > low percentage
> body
> > fat as a man. WHERE the fat distributes is not as
> > contributory as the
> total
>
> There is way too much variability here. People are small
> boned and big boned. They can be skinny and out of shape, or
> bulky and in-shape.
>
> 148 lb. 6'1" guy is likely under 10% body fat. You can also
> be 6'0" at 190 lbs and be 10%.
>
> The scales will only give you +/- 15% on its guess of
> your BF.

Bullshit!

Very accurate (within +/- 2-3% of DEXA) and offers a totally
objective method of testing. Offers consistently repeatable
results (only 1% variance with the TBF Series vs. up to 4%
in Hydrostatic Weighing). Priced at $5,500, this equipment
is inexpensive as compared to the above methods. Because the
TBF Series operates like a scale, there is literally no
burden to the patient. There is no need for a trained
technician to operate the equipment, and the entire process
takes about one minute.

Lukaski, Henry, PhD Methods for the assessment of human body
composition: traditional and new. American Society for
Clinical Nutrition. (541) 537-556-1937

Bill

[Cl]

"Tom Morley" <tmorley@bmtc.mindspring.com> wrote in
message news:tmorley-2309021655220001@user-37kad2k.dialup-
.mindspring.com...
> In article <3D8F4C0B.25E9C21B@midsouth.rr.com>, cl
> <cluna@midsouth.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > Bruce Lange wrote:
> > >
> > > Mine does that too, gives you about 1/2 of your adult
> > > mode reading in athletic mode. I'm quite confident that
> > > I'm at the higher number, 18 % rather than 9%.
> > >
> > > Unless I really misunderstand the technology, it's seems
> > > silly for
them to
> > > have two modes that can measure so differently. If they
> > > both measure
via
> > > electrical current, and if that's good for anything,
> > > you'd think the
two
> > > measurements would be closer together (within 20% of
> > > each other,
perhaps?).
> > > But I still like the thing for tracking progress. Just
> > > measure under consistent conditions. I know they say not
> > > to do it first thing i the morning but this works pretty
> > > well for me.
> > >
> > > Bruce
> >
> >
> > You have to take into account the greater bone density
> > and fat distribution patterns of the athlete vs the
> > 'regular' adult
>
>
> The difference -- so far as the scale is concerned -- is
> mostly a difference in plasma volume.

And how would that be derived?

[Ken Papai]

"Bill" <Bill@home.com> wrote in message
news:9bPj9.49313$gA4.8488@sccrnsc02...
>
> "Ken Papai" <ken@kenpapai.com> wrote in message
> news:SSHj9.560682$UU1.91232@sccrnsc03...
> >
> > "Tom Rodgers" <tr@svi.net> wrote in message news:I2Gj9.11-
> > 95$3%2.319320268@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
> > > As they tell you with the scale, you should be naked and
> > > dry when you
> use
> > > it. It uses electrical resistance to APPROXIMATE the
> > > body fat. It's
not
> as
> > > accurate as weighing within water, but probably more
> > > accurate the
> caliper
> > > methods. The difference between athlete and and regular
> > > adult mode is
> > simply
> > > a linear proportion. Actually, I use the adult reading
> > > since it's
larger
> > and
> > > will show RELATIVE changes in body fat more clearly. I
> > > don't expect
the
> > > scale to show exactly what my true body-fat percentage
> > > is, but I can
see
> > it
> > > go up and down with diet, exercise, dehydration, etc.
> > >
> > > But if yo are 6'1" and 149 pounds, you definitely have
> > > a low
percentage
> > body
> > > fat as a man. WHERE the fat distributes is not as
> > > contributory as the
> > total
> >
> > There is way too much variability here. People are small
> > boned and big boned. They can be skinny and out of shape,
> > or bulky and in-shape.
> >
> > 148 lb. 6'1" guy is likely under 10% body fat. You can
> > also be 6'0" at 190 lbs and be 10%.
> >
> > The scales will only give you +/- 15% on its guess of
> > your BF.
>
> Bullshit!

Same back to you. People who are accurately measured in their
body fat in the emmersion method and then then Tanita says
5.0% while the accurate says 6.7%? WTF? That's a whoppin' 34%
error there Doctor Bill!!

PhD or none you cannot refute that a scales method is
accurate at all. It gives a ROUGH number +/- 15% (or more )
of its value.

If you refute that then you don't know crap about basic math.

> Very accurate (within +/- 2-3% of DEXA) and offers a totally
> objective method of testing. Offers consistently repeatable
> results (only 1%
variance
> with the TBF Series vs. up to 4% in Hydrostatic Weighing).
> Priced at
$5,500,
> this equipment is inexpensive as compared to the above
> methods. Because
the
> TBF Series operates like a scale, there is literally no
> burden to the patient. There is no need for a trained
> technician to operate the
equipment,
> and the entire process takes about one minute.
>
> Lukaski, Henry, PhD Methods for the assessment of human body
> composition: traditional and new. American Society for
> Clinical Nutrition. (541) 537-556-1937
>
>
> Bill

[Tom Morley]

In article <g9Mj9.33413$VQ2.5792574@twister.midsouth.rr.com>,
"cl" <cluna@midsouth.rr.com> wrote:

> "Tom Morley" <tmorley@bmtc.mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:tmorley-2309021655220001@user-37kad2k.dialup.mindsprin-
> g.com...
> > In article <3D8F4C0B.25E9C21B@midsouth.rr.com>, cl
> > <cluna@midsouth.rr.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Bruce Lange wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Mine does that too, gives you about 1/2 of your adult
> > > > mode reading in athletic mode. I'm quite confident
> > > > that I'm at the higher number, 18 % rather than 9%.
> > > >
> > > > Unless I really misunderstand the technology, it's
> > > > seems silly for
> them to
> > > > have two modes that can measure so differently. If
> > > > they both measure
> via
> > > > electrical current, and if that's good for anything,
> > > > you'd think the
> two
> > > > measurements would be closer together (within 20% of
> > > > each other,
> perhaps?).
> > > > But I still like the thing for tracking progress. Just
> > > > measure under consistent conditions. I know they say
> > > > not to do it first thing i the morning but this works
> > > > pretty well for me.
> > > >
> > > > Bruce
> > >
> > >
> > > You have to take into account the greater bone density
> > > and fat distribution patterns of the athlete vs the
> > > 'regular' adult
> >
> >
> > The difference -- so far as the scale is concerned -- is
> > mostly a difference in plasma volume.
>
>
> And how would that be derived?

An athlete (in the tonita sense -- cardio-vascularly fit) has
more plasma volume. This significantly affects the reading,
since the conductance is mostly from electrolytes in water.

--
Tom Morley | morley@math.gatech.edu | Same roads,
tmorley@bmtc.mindspring.com | Same rights,
http://www.math.gatech.edu/~morley | Same rules.
ICQ: 24798603 AIM: DocTDM |

[Bruce]

In rec.running "Bob" <robert.mauri@remove.snet.net> wrote:

>What's the waist minus wrist technique? That doesn't sound
>very accurate, except for maybe a small group of people.

I have a US Marine chart for waist and neck and it is very
accurate for a large group of people. For women, it requires
more measurements.

[mtnclymber]

Ken Papai <ken@kenpapai.com> wrote:

> People who are accurately measured in their body fat in the
> emmersion method

You just blew you're own argument. The immersion method is
fraught with problems and is not all that accurate, even if
the do it "right". Perhaps slightly more than BIA but
they're both in the same ballpark. Try dissection if you
really gotta know.

[Tom Kunich]

"Mark Evans" <vivovoyager@worldnet.att.net> wrote in
message news:<amLj9.56419$jG2.3322552@bgtnsc05-news.ops.wo-
rldnet.att.net>...
> Carl: why not try another reliable method and compare, I
> find that using waist minus wrist then to chart gives me
> results within 2% of normal mode if I weight at the
> recommended time of day. As usual YMMV

I don't see how this can be very accurate since some people
carry a lot of fat in places other than their waists. My older
brother puts on weight on his butt while his waist doesn't
grow much. When they went around pinching all of me and
measuring all of that they told me that my body fat was 33%
which is absolutely rediculous since I'm 6'4" and less than
200 lbs. I put on weight only on my middle area.

[Andrew T H]

Believe the low reading. I can't see any way you have a lot of
fat at 6'1" and 149 lbs. I am 5'10", use the same scale, and
athlete mode gives me 4.5-5.5%. I can't see my abs well
either, I think it's just a genetic thing that the only fat on
my body is concentrated right there because I don't have any
elsewhere. Andy Hass

In rec.running Armin <armin.doesnt.want.any.spam@all> wrote:
> Carl wrote:
>> My scale died so I got myself one of those Tanita body fat
>> scales. It has athletes mode and I am wondering which
>> reading is the correct one. The scale measures 4.6% in
>> athletes mode and 9.6% in normal mode... which one is it ?
>> I tried at different time during the day and the values
>> seem to be fairly consistent...
>>
>> I am 6ft1, 149lb and am fairly athletic, exercise
>> 8-10h/week, but do not race. Each week I run 3x8miles
>> (7.30min/mile), bike 2x30 miles + 50-60mile weekend ride
>> (18-21 mph). Since my resting HR hovers around 44, I
>> thought I should use the athletes mode...
>>
>> Since I can still see and feel fat around my waist (ice
>> cream storage), I do not really believe the low reading.. I
>> can see my ribs though. How does one look with 5% fat?
>>
>>
>> -Carl

> If you "can still see and feel fat around my waist (ice
> cream storage)" then I doubt if it's 4..6% but you
> never know.

> If knowing your body fat % is really that important to you
> then have it measured at a reputable clinic and compare
> that to the values the scale gives you. Then you'll know
> far sure.

> Armin

[Cl]

Tom Kunich wrote:
>
> "Mark Evans" <vivovoyager@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> news:<amLj9.56419$jG2.3322552@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.at-
> t.net>...
> > Carl: why not try another reliable method and compare, I
> > find that using waist minus wrist then to chart gives me
> > results within 2% of normal mode if I weight at the
> > recommended time of day. As usual YMMV
>
> I don't see how this can be very accurate since some people
> carry a lot of fat in places other than their waists. My
> older brother puts on weight on his butt while his waist
> doesn't grow much. When they went around pinching all of me
> and measuring all of that they told me that my body fat was
> 33% which is absolutely rediculous since I'm 6'4" and less
> than 200 lbs. I put on weight only on my middle area.

With the assumption that BF% is being used to track prgress,
all that matters is that you first determine what your problem
areas are. Get a good set of calipers (I use Langes) and
measure the skinfold. Use the absolute skinfolds as a gauge of
your progress since it is the only thing that directly relates
to the area you are concerned with.

If you are a total fatass, you have to get yourself to a fit
level that is pleasing enough in the first place as to allow
for you to pinpoint the problem areas.

[Cl]

Tom Morley wrote:
>
> In article
> <g9Mj9.33413$VQ2.5792574@twister.midsouth.rr.com>, "cl"
> <cluna@midsouth.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > "Tom Morley" <tmorley@bmtc.mindspring.com> wrote in
> > message news:tmorley-2309021655220001@user-37kad2k.dialup-
> > .mindspring.com...
> > > In article <3D8F4C0B.25E9C21B@midsouth.rr.com>, cl
> > > <cluna@midsouth.rr.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Bruce Lange wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Mine does that too, gives you about 1/2 of your
> > > > > adult mode reading in athletic mode. I'm quite
> > > > > confident that I'm at the higher number, 18 % rather
> > > > > than 9%.
> > > > >
> > > > > Unless I really misunderstand the technology, it's
> > > > > seems silly for
> > them to
> > > > > have two modes that can measure so differently. If
> > > > > they both measure
> > via
> > > > > electrical current, and if that's good for anything,
> > > > > you'd think the
> > two
> > > > > measurements would be closer together (within 20% of
> > > > > each other,
> > perhaps?).
> > > > > But I still like the thing for tracking progress.
> > > > > Just measure under consistent conditions. I know
> > > > > they say not to do it first thing i the morning but
> > > > > this works pretty well for me.
> > > > >
> > > > > Bruce
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > You have to take into account the greater bone density
> > > > and fat distribution patterns of the athlete vs the
> > > > 'regular' adult
> > >
> > >
> > > The difference -- so far as the scale is concerned -- is
> > > mostly a difference in plasma volume.
> >
> >
> > And how would that be derived?
>
> An athlete (in the tonita sense -- cardio-vascularly fit)
> has more plasma volume. This significantly affects the
> reading, since the conductance is mostly from electrolytes
> in water.

Point being, how do you determine the volume/mass. It takes
into account fat distribution patterns and bonedensity.

[B A R R Y]

Carl wrote:
>
> My scale died so I got myself one of those Tanita body fat
> scales. It has athletes mode and I am wondering which
> reading is the correct one. The scale measures 4.6% in
> athletes mode and 9.6% in normal mode... which one is it ? I
> tried at different time during the day and the values seem
> to be fairly consistent...
>
> I am 6ft1, 149lb and am fairly athletic, exercise
> 8-10h/week, but do not race. Each week I run 3x8miles
> (7.30min/mile), bike 2x30 miles + 50-60mile weekend ride
> (18-21 mph). Since my resting HR hovers around 44, I thought
> I should use the athletes mode...
>
> Since I can still see and feel fat around my waist (ice
> cream storage), I do not really believe the low reading.. I
> can see my ribs though. How does one look with 5% fat?
>
> -Carl

I'm 6'1" 217, 37 years old, with about 14-16% body fat,
depending on when I check. My resting heart rate is also in
the 43-44 range, and I do not look fat. If I weighed 149
pounds, I'd have no problem believing the 5% number. <G>

Barry
--
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Please remove the asterisks to reply directly
==============================================
Insert lame quote of your choice here
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

[Wayne S. H]

B a r r y B u r k e J r . wrote:

> Carl wrote:
>>
>> Since I can still see and feel fat around my waist (ice
>> cream storage), I do not really believe the low reading.. I
>> can see my ribs though. How does one look with 5% fat?
>>
>> -Carl
>
> I'm 6'1" 217, 37 years old, with about 14-16% body fat,
> depending on when I check. My resting heart rate is also in
> the 43-44 range, and I do not look fat. If I weighed 149
> pounds, I'd have no problem believing the 5% number. <G>

I've known people of that height/weight that could have been
10% or more. It's called "skinny-fat". If you can see and feel
fat, you're not at 5%.

-Wayne

[Mark Evans]

you take your waist in inches minus your wrist then go to a
chart with this
# and your weight, it seems to work pretty well for me, but as
# always YMMV.
the wrist measurement is used to tell how big boned you are,
I've had to quit saying "I'm just big boned and admit I'm a
lard ass. Mark

"Bob" <robert.mauri@remove.snet.net> wrote in message
news:SJLj9.227$1H6.117569660@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com...
>
> "Mark Evans" <vivovoyager@worldnet.att.net> wrote in
> message news:amLj9.56419$jG2.3322552@bgtnsc05-news.ops.wor-
> ldnet.att.net...
> > Carl: why not try another reliable method and compare, I
> > find that using waist minus wrist then to chart gives me
> > results within 2% of normal mode if I weight at the
> > recommended time of day. As usual YMMV Mark
>
> What's the waist minus wrist technique? That doesn't sound
> very accurate, except for maybe a small group of people.
>
> (Heck, I have a hard time buying gloves because my wrists
> -- not my
hands --
> are so large. My heart rate monitor barely fits on my wrist.
> And there's very little fat on my wrist -- it's purely bone
> causing the girth.)

[F. Golight]

Whazzzthat?

Huh?

"David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net>
> I've always found the big-breasted cardio bunnies to be very
> friendly,

[Tom Morley]

In article <3D907980.83F52B4C@midsouth.rr.com>, cl
<cluna@midsouth.rr.com> wrote:

> Tom Morley wrote:
> >
> > In article
> > <g9Mj9.33413$VQ2.5792574@twister.midsouth.rr.com>, "cl"
> > <cluna@midsouth.rr.com> wrote:
> >
> > > "Tom Morley" <tmorley@bmtc.mindspring.com> wrote in
> > > message news:tmorley-2309021655220001@user-37kad2k.dial-
> > > up.mindspring.com...
> > > > In article <3D8F4C0B.25E9C21B@midsouth.rr.com>, cl
<cluna@midsouth.rr.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Bruce Lange wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Mine does that too, gives you about 1/2 of your
> > > > > > adult mode
reading in
> > > > > > athletic mode. I'm quite confident that I'm at the
> > > > > > higher
number, 18 %
> > > > > > rather than 9%.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Unless I really misunderstand the technology, it's
> > > > > > seems silly for
> > > them to
> > > > > > have two modes that can measure so differently. If
> > > > > > they both measure
> > > via
> > > > > > electrical current, and if that's good for
> > > > > > anything, you'd think the
> > > two
> > > > > > measurements would be closer together (within 20%
> > > > > > of each other,
> > > perhaps?).
> > > > > > But I still like the thing for tracking progress.
> > > > > > Just measure under consistent conditions. I know
> > > > > > they say not to do it first
thing i the
> > > > > > morning but this works pretty well for me.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Bruce
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > You have to take into account the greater bone
> > > > > density and fat distribution patterns of the athlete
> > > > > vs the 'regular' adult
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The difference -- so far as the scale is concerned --
> > > > is mostly a difference in plasma volume.
> > >
> > >
> > > And how would that be derived?
> >
> > An athlete (in the tonita sense -- cardio-vascularly fit)
> > has more plasma volume. This significantly affects the
> > reading, since the conductance is mostly from electrolytes
> > in water.
>
> Point being, how do you determine the volume/mass. It takes
> into account fat distribution patterns and bonedensity.

It doesn't really take these into account. It is just a
codunctance height, weight vs. bf% regression on a more
athletically inclined population.

My comment was mearly that the biggest difference - between
the3 fit and unful -- insofar as it affects conductance -- is
plasma volume

--
Tom Morley | morley@math.gatech.edu | Same roads,
tmorley@bmtc.mindspring.com | Same rights,
http://www.math.gatech.edu/~morley | Same rules.
ICQ: 24798603 AIM: DocTDM |

[Stephen Di]

In article <75d7c2cb.0209230522.5acca595@posting.google.com>,
celeryman88@yahoo.com (Carl) wrote:

> My scale died so I got myself one of those Tanita body fat
> scales. It has athletes mode and I am wondering which
> reading is the correct one. The scale measures 4.6% in
> athletes mode and 9.6% in normal mode... which one is it ? I
> tried at different time during the day and the values seem
> to be fairly consistent...
>
> I am 6ft1, 149lb and am fairly athletic, exercise
> 8-10h/week, but do not race. Each week I run 3x8miles
> (7.30min/mile), bike 2x30 miles + 50-60mile weekend ride
> (18-21 mph). Since my resting HR hovers around 44, I thought
> I should use the athletes mode...
>
> Since I can still see and feel fat around my waist (ice
> cream storage), I do not really believe the low reading.. I
> can see my ribs though. How does one look with 5% fat?
>
>
> -Carl

If you fall in the border, an average of the two measures
would give you the best estimate.

srd

[David Cohe]

"F. Golightly" <ny@ny> wrote:
> Whazzzthat?
>
> Huh?

You apparently understood the part you snipped: "so apparently
it's only the tiny penis cardio pencil necks who
are...unpleasant. Better than the other way around :)"

So, the part you quoted must be the confusing part:
>
> "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net>
> > I've always found the big-breasted cardio bunnies to
> > be very
friendly,

You see, Mr/Ms Golightly, in gyms there are women who do a lot
of cardio, and are occasionally referred to as "cardio
bunnies". Here in Las Vegas, a lot of the cardio bunnies are
large breasted strippers, and I have found them to be quite
friendly, if you talk to them like "regular" people, and not
drool and stumble over your words.

I was using their friendliness to contrast with the rather
unfriendly post from a member of the pencil necked cardio geek
newsgroups that I responded to.

I hope this has cleared up the issue for you. Now hurry up and
do your homework and get to bed, the short school bus will be
picking you up early tomorrow.

David
--
"Oh Lord, make my enemies ridiculous"...Voltaire

[Roger Hunt]

"David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote in message new-
s:sY9k9.1542$Nj2.126929@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...

As it appears, from your semi-coherent reply, that the
occasional gym member has a brain that can be used for
something other than grunting and counting reps, would you
care to direct it to answer this question?

Of what possible interest, to any of the groups cross, could
the ramblings of introspective weight and body image obsessed
individuals be? Isn't there a rec.rambling.egotistic.nerd
group? If not, judging from the number of replies to this
thread, there is scope for the development of one.

Regards to the 'cardio bunnies'. Sadly, I've never met a
runner who strips for her livelihood, but I live in hope.

Roger.

[John Hardt]

On 9/25/02 2:53 AM, "Roger Hunter"
<ronin11@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:

> Regards to the 'cardio bunnies'. Sadly, I've never met a
> runner who strips for her livelihood, but I live in hope.

You're not looking in the right newsgroups.

[Doug Kenne]

On Mon, 23 Sep 2002 01:22:41 -0500, Carl wrote:

> My scale died so I got myself one of those Tanita body fat
> scales. It has athletes mode and I am wondering which
> reading is the correct one. The scale measures 4.6% in
> athletes mode and 9.6% in normal mode... which one is it ? I
> tried at different time during the day and the values seem
> to be fairly consistent...
>
> I am 6ft1, 149lb and am fairly athletic, exercise
> 8-10h/week, but do not race. Each week I run 3x8miles
> (7.30min/mile), bike 2x30 miles + 50-60mile weekend ride
> (18-21 mph). Since my resting HR hovers around 44, I thought
> I should use the athletes mode...

The Tanita scales work by measuring your "Bioelectrical
Impedance", basically sending a small current up on leg and
down the other. This is why they recommend dampening your feet
before using the scale, since dry calloused feet won't conduct
electricity very well and will give you a false reading,
usually something scary like 30% fat!

Once your impedance has been measured, your body fat is
estimated by doing a table lookup. Essentially, a range of
people of different ages and either sex were tested for body
fat, both with a traditional method and the bioimpedance
method. Using this information you can create a table for each
age and sex that relates the impedance reading with the
percent body fat. As long as you are an 'average' person the
results are close to accurate.

Unfortunately, the average American is a little on the tubby
side and doesn't excecise much. If you are a chubby-tubby
trying to lose weight the 'regular' scale mode is what you
want. However, the table look-up starts to diverge from
reality when people outside the norm (unusually fit and
muscular) show up. Therefore, when you switch to athlete
mode, the scale should look at another set of tables
calibrated for fit individuals. The memory capacity on these
units it not large, so perhaps they use a heuristic instead
of another full table.

I don't worry about it too much, because for me the fat
reading can vary +/- 2% depending on the time of day, my
hydration level, and digestive system contents. I try to
measure first thing in the morning which seems to give the
most consistent results. As I've gotten visibly less fat,
the numbers do go down, so It's useful as a relative
measure. Since I don't take the numbers too seriously in
absolute terms, I am not concerned about getting a scale
with 'athlete mode'.

Doug Kennedy

[Brian Wake]

"Carl" <celeryman88@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:75d7c2cb.0209230522.5acca595@posting.google.com...
> My scale died so I got myself one of those Tanita body fat
> scales. It has athletes mode and I am wondering which
> reading is the correct one. The scale measures 4.6% in
> athletes mode and 9.6% in normal mode... which one is it ? I
> tried at different time during the day and the values seem
> to be fairly consistent...
>
> I am 6ft1, 149lb and am fairly athletic, exercise
> 8-10h/week, but do not race. Each week I run 3x8miles
> (7.30min/mile), bike 2x30 miles + 50-60mile weekend ride
> (18-21 mph). Since my resting HR hovers around 44, I thought
> I should use the athletes mode...
>
> Since I can still see and feel fat around my waist (ice
> cream storage), I do not really believe the low reading.. I
> can see my ribs though. How does one look with 5% fat?

I'm the same height as you, but 2lb lighter and with a RHR
of 38. My BF is 8-9% on normal - my scales don't have an
athlete mode.

--
Brian Wakem

[Ken Papai]

"Doug Kennedy" <news4@kennedy.tzo.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2002.09.25.16.47.28.194121.1421@kennedy.tzo.com...
> On Mon, 23 Sep 2002 01:22:41 -0500, Carl wrote:
>
> > My scale died so I got myself one of those Tanita body fat
> > scales. It has athletes mode and I am wondering which
> > reading is the correct one. The scale measures 4.6% in
> > athletes mode and 9.6% in normal mode... which one is it ?
> > I tried at different time during the day and the values
> > seem to be fairly consistent...
> >
> > I am 6ft1, 149lb and am fairly athletic, exercise
> > 8-10h/week, but do not race. Each week I run 3x8miles
> > (7.30min/mile), bike 2x30 miles + 50-60mile weekend ride
> > (18-21 mph). Since my resting HR hovers around 44, I
> > thought I should use the athletes mode...
>
> The Tanita scales work by measuring your "Bioelectrical
> Impedance", basically sending a small current up on leg and
> down the other. This is why they recommend dampening your
> feet before using the scale, since dry calloused feet won't
> conduct electricity very well and will give you a false
> reading, usually something scary like 30% fat!
>
> Once your impedance has been measured, your body fat is
> estimated by doing a table lookup. Essentially, a range of
> people of different ages and either sex were tested for body
> fat, both with a traditional method and the bioimpedance
> method. Using this information you can create a table for
> each age and sex that relates the impedance reading with the
> percent body fat. As long as you are an 'average' person the
> results are close to accurate.

All in all then it's pretty useless right? (at least for
at-home use since no one sane would throw away all that money
at something so inaccurate)

Thanks, Ken

> Unfortunately, the average American is a little on the tubby
> side and doesn't excecise much. If you are a chubby-tubby
> trying to lose weight the 'regular' scale mode is what you
> want. However, the table look-up starts to diverge from
> reality when people outside the norm (unusually fit and
> muscular) show up. Therefore, when you switch to athlete
> mode, the scale should look at another set of tables
> calibrated for fit individuals. The memory capacity on these
> units it not large, so perhaps they use a heuristic instead
> of another full table.
>
> I don't worry about it too much, because for me the fat
> reading can vary +/- 2% depending on the time of day, my
> hydration level, and digestive system contents. I try to
> measure first thing in the morning which seems to give the
> most consistent results. As I've gotten visibly less fat,
> the numbers do go down, so It's useful as a relative
> measure. Since I don't take the numbers too seriously in
> absolute terms, I am not concerned about getting a scale
> with 'athlete mode'.
>
> Doug Kennedy

[Bill]

"Brian Wakem" <no@email.com> wrote in message
news:amsu6j$91bph$1@ID-112158.news.dfncis.de...
>
> "Carl" <celeryman88@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:75d7c2cb.0209230522.5acca595@posting.google.com...
> > My scale died so I got myself one of those Tanita body fat
> > scales. It has athletes mode and I am wondering which
> > reading is the correct one. The scale measures 4.6% in
> > athletes mode and 9.6% in normal mode... which one is it ?
> > I tried at different time during the day and the values
> > seem to be fairly consistent...
> >
> > I am 6ft1, 149lb and am fairly athletic, exercise
> > 8-10h/week, but do not race. Each week I run 3x8miles
> > (7.30min/mile), bike 2x30 miles + 50-60mile weekend ride
> > (18-21 mph). Since my resting HR hovers around 44, I
> > thought I should use the athletes mode...
> >
> > Since I can still see and feel fat around my waist (ice
> > cream storage), I do not really believe the low reading..
> > I can see my ribs though. How does one look with 5% fat?
>
>
> I'm the same height as you, but 2lb lighter and with a RHR
> of 38. My BF
is
> 8-9% on normal - my scales don't have an athlete mode.

Are you sure that you are not just dead? <g>

Bill

[Bill]

"Ken Papai" <ken@kenpapai.com> wrote in message
news:Hank9.588478$UU1.104654@sccrnsc03...
>
> "Doug Kennedy" <news4@kennedy.tzo.com> wrote in message
> news:pan.2002.09.25.16.47.28.194121.1421@kennedy.tzo.com...
> > On Mon, 23 Sep 2002 01:22:41 -0500, Carl wrote:
> >
> > > My scale died so I got myself one of those Tanita body
> > > fat scales. It has athletes mode and I am wondering
> > > which reading is the correct one. The scale measures
> > > 4.6% in athletes mode and 9.6% in normal mode... which
> > > one is it ? I tried at different time during the day and
> > > the values seem to be fairly consistent...
> > >
> > > I am 6ft1, 149lb and am fairly athletic, exercise
> > > 8-10h/week, but do not race. Each week I run 3x8miles
> > > (7.30min/mile), bike 2x30 miles + 50-60mile weekend ride
> > > (18-21 mph). Since my resting HR hovers around 44, I
> > > thought I should use the athletes mode...
> >
> > The Tanita scales work by measuring your "Bioelectrical
> > Impedance", basically sending a small current up on leg
> > and down the other. This is why they recommend dampening
> > your feet before using the scale, since dry calloused feet
> > won't conduct electricity very well and will give you a
> > false reading, usually something scary like 30% fat!
> >
> > Once your impedance has been measured, your body fat is
> > estimated by
doing
> > a table lookup. Essentially, a range of people of
> > different ages and either sex were tested for body fat,
> > both with a traditional method and the bioimpedance
> > method. Using this information you can create a table for
> > each age and sex that relates the impedance reading with
> > the percent body fat. As long as you are an 'average'
> > person the results are close
to
> > accurate.
>
> All in all then it's pretty useless right? (at least for
> at-home use since no one sane would throw away all that
> money at something so inaccurate)
>
> Thanks, Ken

As usual Pappy doesn't know what he is talking about.

Bill

[Brian Wagn]

Roger Hunter wrote:
>
> Regards to the 'cardio bunnies'. Sadly, I've never met a
> runner who strips for her livelihood, but I live in hope.

That's because stripping gets them kicked off the cross
country team, or don't you follow the news?

[Roger Hunt]

"John Hardt" <jhardt@columbus.rr.com> wrote in message
news:B9B6D976.3AB0%jhardt@columbus.rr.com...
> On 9/25/02 2:53 AM, "Roger Hunter"
> <ronin11@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Regards to the 'cardio bunnies'. Sadly, I've never met a
> > runner who
strips
> > for her livelihood, but I live in hope.
>
> You're not looking in the right newsgroups.

What would be the point? With my small penis I doubt I could
satisfy a stripping midget...........

[Mike Laton]

Doug Kennedy <news4@kennedy.tzo.com> wrote in
news:pan.2002.09.25.16.47.28.194121.1421@kennedy.tzo.com:

>
> I don't worry about it too much, because for me the fat
> reading can vary +/- 2% depending on the time of day, my
> hydration level, and digestive system contents. I try to
> measure first thing in the morning which seems to give the
> most consistent results. As I've gotten visibly less fat,
> the numbers do go down, so It's useful as a relative
> measure. Since I don't take the numbers too seriously in
> absolute terms, I am not concerned about getting a scale
> with 'athlete mode'.
>
> Doug Kennedy
>
Good thing you don't because I was a participant in a UBC
study on body fat whose objective was to determine how to make
skinfold measurements more accurate. The reason ad hoc
measures are so inaccurate is that much of your body fat is
between organs in the body and not just under the skin (hey I
forget all the good words beyond subcutaneous). To do this the
group, a sample of many body types, were weighed, measured,
poked and given MRIs plus some sort of x-ray, etc, etc. Net
out is that they never considered using Bioelectrical
Impedance it was deemed to be not even it the ballpark.

[Reuben Hic]

> You have to take into account the greater bone density
> and fat distribution patterns of the athlete vs the
> 'regular' adult

I wonder about inseam. If current goes up one leg and down the
other, and the resistance measured according to any formula or
chart, wouldn't a 180cm person built like a daschound with X%
body fat have a different number than someone of the same
height and %BF but longer inseam?

I would disregard the numbers as meaning true body fat as far
as bragging rights in the locker room, and use the displayed
number as "units" or an index for subsequent measurements.

BTW - a man with <5%BF, you could do an anatomy lesson on him
- no ice cream storage in Gray's.

[F. Golight]

Wow David you actually talk to Cardio Bunnies with big
breasts. Do you talk with small Cardio Bunnies with
small breasts?

Huh?

"David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net>

> You see, Mr/Ms Golightly, in gyms there are women who do a
> lot of cardio, and are occasionally referred to as "cardio
> bunnies". Here in Las Vegas, a lot of the cardio bunnies are
> large breasted strippers, and I have found them to be quite
> friendly, if you talk to them like "regular" people, and not
> drool and stumble over your words.
>
> I was using their friendliness to contrast with the rather
> unfriendly post from a member of the pencil necked cardio
> geek newsgroups that I responded to.
>
> I hope this has cleared up the issue for you. Now hurry up
> and do your homework and get to bed, the short school bus
> will be picking you up early tomorrow.
>
> David
> --
> "Oh Lord, make my enemies ridiculous"...Voltaire

[David Cohe]

"F. Golightly" <ny@ny.ny> wrote in message
news:amt2ms0pou@enews4.newsguy.com...
> Wow David you actually talk to Cardio Bunnies with big
> breasts. Do
you talk
> with small Cardio Bunnies with small breasts?

Yes. But they aren't the strippers.
>
> Huh?

Exactly.

David
>
>
> "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net>
>
> > You see, Mr/Ms Golightly, in gyms there are women who do a
> > lot of cardio, and are occasionally referred to as "cardio
> > bunnies". Here
in
> > Las Vegas, a lot of the cardio bunnies are large breasted
strippers,
> > and I have found them to be quite friendly, if you talk
> > to them
like
> > "regular" people, and not drool and stumble over your
> > words.
> >
> > I was using their friendliness to contrast with the rather
unfriendly
> > post from a member of the pencil necked cardio geek
> > newsgroups
that I
> > responded to.
> >
> > I hope this has cleared up the issue for you. Now hurry up
> > and do
your
> > homework and get to bed, the short school bus will be
> > picking you
up
> > early tomorrow.
> >
> > David
> > --
> > "Oh Lord, make my enemies ridiculous"...Voltaire
> >
>

[David Cohe]

"Roger Hunter" <ronin11@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> As it appears, from your semi-coherent reply, that the
> occasional
gym member
> has a brain that can be used for something other than
> grunting and
counting
> reps, would you care to direct it to answer this question?

Uuhhgg! Aahhgh!!
>
> Of what possible interest, to any of the groups cross,
> could the
ramblings
> of introspective weight and body image obsessed
> individuals be?
Isn't there
> a rec.rambling.egotistic.nerd group? If not, judging
> from the
number of
> replies to this thread, there is scope for the
> development of one.

No possible interest. I was commenting on the rudeness of the
original poster.
>
> Regards to the 'cardio bunnies'. Sadly, I've never met
> a runner
who strips
> for her livelihood, but I live in hope.

Strippers don't run. Bad for the enhanced breasts. They do
non-bouncy cardio at the gym, in spandex and full make-up.
They ignore the pencil necked cardio geeks. Sorry.

David

[Scorpio Ph]

Doug Kennedy <news4@kennedy.tzo.com> wrote in message
news:<pan.2002.09.25.16.47.28.194121.1421@kennedy.tzo.com>...
> On Mon, 23 Sep 2002 01:22:41 -0500, Carl wrote:
>
> > My scale died so I got myself one of those Tanita body fat
> > scales. It has athletes mode and I am wondering which
> > reading is the correct one. The scale measures 4.6% in
> > athletes mode and 9.6% in normal mode... which one is it ?
> > I tried at different time during the day and the values
> > seem to be fairly consistent...
> >
> > I am 6ft1, 149lb and am fairly athletic, exercise
> > 8-10h/week, but do not race. Each week I run 3x8miles
> > (7.30min/mile), bike 2x30 miles + 50-60mile weekend ride
> > (18-21 mph). Since my resting HR hovers around 44, I
> > thought I should use the athletes mode...
>
> The Tanita scales work by measuring your "Bioelectrical
> Impedance", basically sending a small current up on leg and
> down the other. This is why they recommend dampening your
> feet before using the scale, since dry calloused feet won't
> conduct electricity very well and will give you a false
> reading, usually something scary like 30% fat!
>
> Once your impedance has been measured, your body fat is
> estimated by doing a table lookup. Essentially, a range of
> people of different ages and either sex were tested for body
> fat, both with a traditional method and the bioimpedance
> method. Using this information you can create a table for
> each age and sex that relates the impedance reading with the
> percent body fat. As long as you are an 'average' person the
> results are close to accurate.
>
> Unfortunately, the average American is a little on the tubby
> side and doesn't excecise much. If you are a chubby-tubby
> trying to lose weight the 'regular' scale mode is what you
> want. However, the table look-up starts to diverge from
> reality when people outside the norm (unusually fit and
> muscular) show up. Therefore, when you switch to athlete
> mode, the scale should look at another set of tables
> calibrated for fit individuals. The memory capacity on these
> units it not large, so perhaps they use a heuristic instead
> of another full table.
>
> I don't worry about it too much, because for me the fat
> reading can vary +/- 2% depending on the time of day, my
> hydration level, and digestive system contents. I try to
> measure first thing in the morning which seems to give the
> most consistent results. As I've gotten visibly less fat,
> the numbers do go down, so It's useful as a relative
> measure. Since I don't take the numbers too seriously in
> absolute terms, I am not concerned about getting a scale
> with 'athlete mode'.
>
> Doug Kennedy

Based on my scale's reported differences between "male" and
"female", if I grew a penis, I would drop double-digits of bf%
Still not worth it, but it makes me think the calculations are
pretty worthless.

[Katra]

David Cohen wrote:
>
> "F. Golightly" <ny@ny.ny> wrote in message
> news:amt2ms0pou@enews4.newsguy.com...
> > Wow David you actually talk to Cardio Bunnies with big
> > breasts. Do
> you talk
> > with small Cardio Bunnies with small breasts?
>
> Yes. But they aren't the strippers.
> >
> > Huh?
>
> Exactly.
>
> David

Damn I love your posts!!! ROFL!!! Just spewed tequila across
the keyboard dammit!!!

<hugs> Kat

--
>^,,^< Cats-haven Hobby Farm >^,,^< Katra@centurytel.net
>>^,,^<

"There are many intelligent species in the Universe, and they
are all owned by cats!" --Asimov

Custom handcrafts, Sterling silver beaded jewelry http:-
//cgi3.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewListedItems&us-
erid=katra

[Stephen Di]

In article <3D8F4C0B.25E9C21B@midsouth.rr.com>, cl
<cluna@midsouth.rr.com> wrote:

> You have to take into account the greater bone density
> and fat distribution patterns of the athlete vs the
> 'regular' adult

How do the fat distribution patterns differ between the two?

Stephen Diamond

[Stephen Di]

In article <tmorley-2409022022360001@user-38lcj2j.dialup.mind-
spring.com>, tmorley@bmtc.mindspring.com (Tom Morley) wrote:

> My comment was mearly that the biggest difference - between
> the3 fit and unful -- insofar as it affects conductance --
> is plasma volume

Wouldn't greater plasma volume increase conductance, resulting
(if that's the key factor) in underestimating that adiposity
of the athlete? But, it works the other way round, apparently.

Stephen Diamond

[Mark]

"David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> writes:
>I've always found the big-breasted cardio bunnies to be very
>friendly,

Um, they're leggy, tightly-clad, midriff-baring cardio
bunnies. When do you have time, with all that other stuff
going on, to look up to see the breasts?

[David Cohe]

"Mark" <whopkins@alpha2.csd.uwm.edu> wrote:
> "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> writes:
> >I've always found the big-breasted cardio bunnies to
> >be very
friendly,
>
> Um, they're leggy, tightly-clad, midriff-baring cardio
> bunnies.
When do you
> have time, with all that other stuff going on, to look up to
> see the breasts?

You have to. Those puppies could put an eye out.

David

[Whittles]

"David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote in message new-
s:bxJl9.1666$Sm1.102856@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>
> "Mark" <whopkins@alpha2.csd.uwm.edu> wrote:
> > "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> writes:
> > >I've always found the big-breasted cardio bunnies to
> > >be very
> friendly,
> >
> > Um, they're leggy, tightly-clad, midriff-baring cardio
> > bunnies.
> When do you
> > have time, with all that other stuff going on, to look up
> > to see the breasts?
>
> You have to. Those puppies could put an eye out.
>
> David
> >

It's all fun and games until you detach a retina

Whit

[Cl]

"whittles" <wsdf@asdf.com> wrote in message
news:an831r$bq30h$1@ID-152085.news.dfncis.de...
>
> "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote in
> message news:bxJl9.1666$Sm1.102856@newsread2.prod.itd.e-
> arthlink.net...
> >
> > "Mark" <whopkins@alpha2.csd.uwm.edu> wrote:
> > > "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> writes:
> > > >I've always found the big-breasted cardio bunnies to be
> > > >very
> > friendly,
> > >
> > > Um, they're leggy, tightly-clad, midriff-baring cardio
> > > bunnies.
> > When do you
> > > have time, with all that other stuff going on, to look
> > > up to see the breasts?
> >
> > You have to. Those puppies could put an eye out.
> >
> > David
> > >
>
> It's all fun and games until you detach a retina
>
> Whit

So is a detached retina the cause of the old wives tale of
yanking it and going blind?

[William Br]

In article
<sY9k9.1542$Nj2.126929@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
"David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:

>
> You see, Mr/Ms Golightly, in gyms there are women who do a
> lot of cardio, and are occasionally referred to as "cardio
> bunnies". Here in Las Vegas, a lot of the cardio bunnies are
> large breasted strippers,

Ok thats it! I am coming out there for a visit. You have
an extra bedroom Dave? You going to be my tour guide? You
know my email!

--
Will Brink

http://www.brinkzone.com/ http://www.aboutsupplements.com/

[William Br]

In article <3d915d4d_1@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com>, "Roger
Hunter" <ronin11@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:

Our introspective weight and body image obsessed individuals
can kick your introspective weight and body image obsessed
individuals ass.

> "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote in
> message news:sY9k9.1542$Nj2.126929@newsread2.prod.itd.e-
> arthlink.net...
>
> As it appears, from your semi-coherent reply, that the
> occasional gym member has a brain that can be used for
> something other than grunting and counting reps, would you
> care to direct it to answer this question?
>
> Of what possible interest, to any of the groups cross, could
> the ramblings of introspective weight and body image
> obsessed individuals be? Isn't there a
> rec.rambling.egotistic.nerd group? If not, judging from the
> number of replies to this thread, there is scope for the
> development of one.
>
> Regards to the 'cardio bunnies'. Sadly, I've never met a
> runner who strips for her livelihood, but I live in hope.
>
> Roger.

--
Will Brink

http://www.brinkzone.com/ http://www.aboutsupplements.com/

[David Cohe]

"William Brink" <wbrink@*remove*earthlink.net> wrote:
> "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > You see, Mr/Ms Golightly, in gyms there are women who do a
> > lot of cardio, and are occasionally referred to as "cardio
> > bunnies". Here
in
> > Las Vegas, a lot of the cardio bunnies are large breasted
strippers,
>
> Ok thats it! I am coming out there for a visit. You have
> an extra
bedroom
> Dave? You going to be my tour guide? You know my email!

But that would just be wrong to do to you. After all, a
certain well-armed Easterner once wrote: "Vegas sucks the soul
out of a person."

I would feel so guilty :)

David

[Bent]

On Thu, 03 Oct 2002 13:31:53 GMT, wbrink@*remove*earthlink.net
(William Brink) wrote:

>In article <3d915d4d_1@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com>, "Roger
>Hunter" <ronin11@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
>
>Our introspective weight and body image obsessed individuals
>can kick your introspective weight and body image obsessed
>individuals ass.
>
Maybe, but they can outrun you! ;-)

[William Br]

In article <3d91ad58$1_2@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com>,
"Roger Hunter" <ronin11@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:

> "John Hardt" <jhardt@columbus.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:B9B6D976.3AB0%jhardt@columbus.rr.com...
> > On 9/25/02 2:53 AM, "Roger Hunter" <ronin11@tiscali.co.uk>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Regards to the 'cardio bunnies'. Sadly, I've never met a
> > > runner who
> strips
> > > for her livelihood, but I live in hope.
> >
> > You're not looking in the right newsgroups.
>
> What would be the point? With my small penis I doubt I could
> satisfy a stripping midget...........

Running will do that to a person...

--
Will Brink

http://www.brinkzone.com/ http://www.aboutsupplements.com/

[William Br]

In article <3D92A18F.71BFA6D0@centurytel.net>, Katra
<Katra@centurytel.net> wrote:

> David Cohen wrote:
> >
> > "F. Golightly" <ny@ny.ny> wrote in message
> > news:amt2ms0pou@enews4.newsguy.com...
> > > Wow David you actually talk to Cardio Bunnies with big
> > > breasts. Do
> > you talk
> > > with small Cardio Bunnies with small breasts?
> >
> > Yes. But they aren't the strippers.
> > >
> > > Huh?
> >
> > Exactly.
> >
> > David
>
>
> Damn I love your posts!!! ROFL!!! Just spewed tequila across
> the keyboard dammit!!!

Clean it up with one of your 74 cats...

--
Will Brink

http://www.brinkzone.com/ http://www.aboutsupplements.com/

[James Lloy]

"bent" <dbhbmw@nospam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:2jiopu43mi2i05gu5fvhre3bdo8hst6q6t@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 03 Oct 2002 13:31:53 GMT,
> wbrink@*remove*earthlink.net (William Brink) wrote:
>
> >In article <3d915d4d_1@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com>,
> >"Roger Hunter" <ronin11@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >Our introspective weight and body image obsessed
> >individuals can kick
your
> >introspective weight and body image obsessed
> >individuals ass.
> >
> Maybe, but they can outrun you! ;-)

[James Lloy]

"bent" <dbhbmw@nospam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:2jiopu43mi2i05gu5fvhre3bdo8hst6q6t@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 03 Oct 2002 13:31:53 GMT,
> wbrink@*remove*earthlink.net (William Brink) wrote:
>
> >In article <3d915d4d_1@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com>,
> >"Roger Hunter" <ronin11@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >Our introspective weight and body image obsessed
> >individuals can kick
your
> >introspective weight and body image obsessed
> >individuals ass.
> >
> Maybe, but they can outrun you! ;-)

[James Lloy]

"bent" <dbhbmw@nospam.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:2jiopu43mi2i05gu5fvhre3bdo8hst6q6t@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 03 Oct 2002 13:31:53 GMT,
> wbrink@*remove*earthlink.net (William Brink) wrote:
>
> >In article <3d915d4d_1@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com>,
> >"Roger Hunter" <ronin11@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >Our introspective weight and body image obsessed
> >individuals can kick
your
> >introspective weight and body image obsessed
> >individuals ass.
> >
> Maybe, but they can outrun you! ;-)

Not necessarily over a short distance, which is what counts.
Many lifters sprint for cardio. :) --James

[David Cohe]

"bent" <dbhbmw@nospam.comcast.net> wrote:
> wbrink@*remove*earthlink.net (William Brink) wrote:
> >
> >Our introspective weight and body image obsessed
> >individuals can
kick your
> >introspective weight and body image obsessed
> >individuals ass.
> >
> Maybe, but they can outrun you! ;-)

Many of the regulars in MFW, including Will, are well armed,
so you better run faster than 1000 feet/second :)~

David

[Lucas Buck]

On Thu, 03 Oct 2002 13:30:26 GMT, wbrink@*remove*earthlink.net
(William Brink) wrote:

>In article <3D92A18F.71BFA6D0@centurytel.net>, Katra
><Katra@centurytel.net> wrote:
>
>> David Cohen wrote:
>> >
>> > "F. Golightly" <ny@ny.ny> wrote in message
>> > news:amt2ms0pou@enews4.newsguy.com...
>> > > Wow David you actually talk to Cardio Bunnies with big
>> > > breasts. Do
>> > you talk
>> > > with small Cardio Bunnies with small breasts?
>> >
>> > Yes. But they aren't the strippers.
>> > >
>> > > Huh?
>> >
>> > Exactly.
>> >
>> > David
>>
>>
>> Damn I love your posts!!! ROFL!!! Just spewed tequila
>> across the keyboard dammit!!!
>
>
>Clean it up with one of your 74 cats...

A tip from Martha: cats is more absorbent if you first toss
them in the dryer for 30 minutes on high with 2 sheets of
Bounce per cat.

[Roger Hunt]

"James Lloyd" <jimh67@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:UGYm9.5686$1k5.215586@news1.west.cox.net...
> > >Our introspective weight and body image obsessed
> > >individuals can kick
> your
> > >introspective weight and body image obsessed
> > >individuals ass.

> > Maybe, but they can outrun you! ;-)

> Not necessarily over a short distance, which is what counts.
> Many lifters sprint for cardio. :)

I'd simply expose my small penis and make good my escape
whilst you were lying convulsed with laughter on the floor.

[Katra]

William Brink wrote:
>
> In article <3D92A18F.71BFA6D0@centurytel.net>, Katra
> <Katra@centurytel.net> wrote:
>
> > David Cohen wrote:
> > >
> > > "F. Golightly" <ny@ny.ny> wrote in message
> > > news:amt2ms0pou@enews4.newsguy.com...
> > > > Wow David you actually talk to Cardio Bunnies with big
> > > > breasts. Do
> > > you talk
> > > > with small Cardio Bunnies with small breasts?
> > >
> > > Yes. But they aren't the strippers.
> > > >
> > > > Huh?
> > >
> > > Exactly.
> > >
> > > David
> >
> >
> > Damn I love your posts!!! ROFL!!! Just spewed tequila
> > across the keyboard dammit!!!
>
> Clean it up with one of your 74 cats...
>
> --
> Will Brink
>
> http://www.brinkzone.com/ http://www.aboutsupplements.com/

34. :-)

Kat

--
>^,,^< Cats-haven Hobby Farm >^,,^< Katra@centurytel.net
>>^,,^<

"There are many intelligent species in the Universe, and they
are all owned by cats!" --Asimov

Custom handcrafts, Sterling silver beaded jewelry http:-
//cgi3.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewListedItems&us-
erid=katra

[Brian Wagn]

David Cohen wrote:
>
> Many of the regulars in MFW, including Will, are well armed,
> so you better run faster than 1000 feet/second :)~

Some of the rest are also well armed, so Will better be
be able to get a good grouping at a high rate of fire
while ducking for cover, and remember, bodybuilders make
bigger targets.

[Lee Michae]

"James Lloyd" <jimh67@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:UGYm9.5686$1k5.215586@news1.west.cox.net...
>
> "bent" <dbhbmw@nospam.comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:2jiopu43mi2i05gu5fvhre3bdo8hst6q6t@4ax.com...
> > On Thu, 03 Oct 2002 13:31:53 GMT,
> > wbrink@*remove*earthlink.net (William Brink) wrote:
> >
> > >In article <3d915d4d_1@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com>,
> > >"Roger Hunter" <ronin11@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> > >
> > >Our introspective weight and body image obsessed
> > >individuals can kick
> your
> > >introspective weight and body image obsessed
> > >individuals ass.
> > >
> > Maybe, but they can outrun you! ;-)
>
> Not necessarily over a short distance, which is what counts.
> Many lifters sprint for cardio. :)

I thought they sprinted for roids.

[Lucas Buck]

On Thu, 03 Oct 2002 20:49:23 GMT, "David Cohen"
<sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:

>"whittles" <sdfsd@sdfsd.com> wrote:
>> David Cohen <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> > "bent" <dbhbmw@nospam.comcast.net> wrote:
>> > > wbrink@*remove*earthlink.net (William Brink) wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >Our introspective weight and body image obsessed
>> > > >individuals
>can
>> > kick your
>> > > >introspective weight and body image obsessed
>> > > >individuals ass.
>> > > >
>> > > Maybe, but they can outrun you! ;-)
>> >
>> > Many of the regulars in MFW, including Will, are well
>> > armed, so
>you
>> > better run faster than 1000 feet/second :)~
>> >
>> > David
>>
>> Be careful David. Somebody might call you "obsessed".
>
>True. I'll change the topic to "when good dogs go bad".
>
>David

There are no bad dogs. There are only, uh, axioms that
lead nowhere.

[Lucas Buck]

On Thu, 03 Oct 2002 21:55:56 GMT, Brian Wagner
<brian.wagner@cle.philips.com> wrote:

>whittles wrote:
>>
>> Most people shoot elk with rifles.
>>
>> Most people (in civilian shootings) shoot people with
>> handguns.
>>
>There are .50 cal handguns, and the law allows hunting large
>hooved game with .45ACP, .357, .40S&W, and 10mm, as long as
>the barrel's at least 5".

Not everywhere.

And even where legal, it's a bad idea. (Except with a Casull)

[J . Thiess]

In article <bu2ppus8ea74jdbj9f3j9kg0tgfe0tnqal@4ax.com>, Lucas
Buck wrote:
> On Thu, 03 Oct 2002 13:30:26 GMT,
> wbrink@*remove*earthlink.net (William Brink) wrote:
>
>>In article <3D92A18F.71BFA6D0@centurytel.net>, Katra
>><Katra@centurytel.net> wrote:
>>
>>> David Cohen wrote:
>>> >
>>> > "F. Golightly" <ny@ny.ny> wrote in message
>>> > news:amt2ms0pou@enews4.newsguy.com...
>>> > > Wow David you actually talk to Cardio Bunnies with big
>>> > > breasts. Do
>>> > you talk
>>> > > with small Cardio Bunnies with small breasts?
>>> >
>>> > Yes. But they aren't the strippers.
>>> > >
>>> > > Huh?
>>> >
>>> > Exactly.
>>> >
>>> > David
>>>
>>>
>>> Damn I love your posts!!! ROFL!!! Just spewed tequila
>>> across the keyboard dammit!!!
>>
>>
>>Clean it up with one of your 74 cats...
>
> A tip from Martha: cats is more absorbent if you first toss
> them in the dryer for 30 minutes on high with 2 sheets of
> Bounce per cat.

I remember reading a couple of years ago about a place in
Florida that would freeze-dry your pets for you, with the
idea that you would keep muffy on the mantle forever after.
I wonder if anyone ever attached a handle and turned one
into a mop.

J.

[Whittles]

David Cohen <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:-
SLZm9.6592$lV3.647309@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>
> "bent" <dbhbmw@nospam.comcast.net> wrote:
> > wbrink@*remove*earthlink.net (William Brink) wrote:
> > >
> > >Our introspective weight and body image obsessed
> > >individuals can
> kick your
> > >introspective weight and body image obsessed
> > >individuals ass.
> > >
> > Maybe, but they can outrun you! ;-)
>
> Many of the regulars in MFW, including Will, are well armed,
> so you better run faster than 1000 feet/second :)~
>
> David

Be careful David. Somebody might call you "obsessed".

Whit

[Rob S.]

"Brian Wagner" <brian.wagner@cle.philips.com> wrote in message
news:3D9C75D2.50D79FF3@cle.philips.com...
> David Cohen wrote:
> >
> > Many of the regulars in MFW, including Will, are well
> > armed, so you better run faster than 1000 feet/second :)~
>
> Some of the rest are also well armed, so Will better be be
> able to get a good grouping at a high rate of fire while
> ducking for cover, and remember, bodybuilders make bigger
> targets.

That probably won't happen if he's lugging a revolver. The
first shot will be pretty good, but the rest, well...

Rob

[Xavier Ona]

"Lee Michaels" <leemichaels*nada-spam*@attbi.com> wrote in
message news:tU_m9.26830$xI5.5067@sccrnsc02...
>>
> I thought they sprinted for roids.

depends. you talking steroids or hemorrhoids?

[David Cohe]

"Brian Wagner" <brian.wagner@cle.philips.com> wrote:
> David Cohen wrote:
> >
> > Many of the regulars in MFW, including Will, are well
> > armed, so
you
> > better run faster than 1000 feet/second :)~
>
> Some of the rest are also well armed, so Will better be
> be able to
get a
> good grouping at a high rate of fire while ducking for
> cover, and remember, bodybuilders make bigger targets.

<most muscular front pose>Bullets have a harder time achieving
adequate penetration in our bulging manly bodies. And that's
just our women.

David

[David Cohe]

"whittles" <sdfsd@sdfsd.com> wrote:
> David Cohen <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > "bent" <dbhbmw@nospam.comcast.net> wrote:
> > > wbrink@*remove*earthlink.net (William Brink) wrote:
> > > >
> > > >Our introspective weight and body image obsessed
> > > >individuals
can
> > kick your
> > > >introspective weight and body image obsessed
> > > >individuals ass.
> > > >
> > > Maybe, but they can outrun you! ;-)
> >
> > Many of the regulars in MFW, including Will, are well
> > armed, so
you
> > better run faster than 1000 feet/second :)~
> >
> > David
>
> Be careful David. Somebody might call you "obsessed".

True. I'll change the topic to "when good dogs go bad".

David
--
"This is the worse forum alive."- kev2112

[Brian Wagn]

David Cohen wrote:
>
> <most muscular front pose>Bullets have a harder time
> achieving adequate penetration in our bulging manly bodies.
> And that's just our women.

You're no more muscular than an elk, and they go down
with one shot.

[Whittles]

Brian Wagner <brian.wagner@cle.philips.com> wrote in message
news:3D9CB115.7D4EEFD8@cle.philips.com...
> David Cohen wrote:
> >
> > <most muscular front pose>Bullets have a harder time
> > achieving adequate penetration in our bulging manly
> > bodies. And that's just our women.
>
> You're no more muscular than an elk, and they go down with
> one shot.
>

Most people shoot elk with rifles.

Most people (in civilian shootings) shoot people with
handguns.

hth

Whit

[Brian Wagn]

whittles wrote:
>
> Most people shoot elk with rifles.
>
> Most people (in civilian shootings) shoot people with
> handguns.
>
There are .50 cal handguns, and the law allows hunting large
hooved game with .45ACP, .357, .40S&W, and 10mm, as long as
the barrel's at least 5".

[Whittles]

Brian Wagner <brian.wagner@cle.philips.com> wrote in message
news:3D9CBC1D.F620F499@cle.philips.com...
> whittles wrote:
> >
> > Most people shoot elk with rifles.
> >
> > Most people (in civilian shootings) shoot people with
> > handguns.
> >
> There are .50 cal handguns, and the law allows hunting large
> hooved game with .45ACP, .357, .40S&W, and 10mm, as long as
> the barrel's at least 5".
>

That's wonderful, but it doesn't negate what I said.

Whit

[F. Golight]

Why is this garbage still being crossposted?

Huh?

"Lucas Buck" <eriptide@earthlink.NOSPAM.net>
> There are no bad dogs. There are only, uh, axioms that lead
> nowhere.

[Katra]

Lucas Buck wrote:
>
> On Thu, 03 Oct 2002 13:30:26 GMT,
> wbrink@*remove*earthlink.net (William Brink) wrote:
>
> >In article <3D92A18F.71BFA6D0@centurytel.net>, Katra
> ><Katra@centurytel.net> wrote:
> >
> >> David Cohen wrote:
> >> >
> >> > "F. Golightly" <ny@ny.ny> wrote in message
> >> > news:amt2ms0pou@enews4.newsguy.com...
> >> > > Wow David you actually talk to Cardio Bunnies with
> >> > > big breasts. Do
> >> > you talk
> >> > > with small Cardio Bunnies with small breasts?
> >> >
> >> > Yes. But they aren't the strippers.
> >> > >
> >> > > Huh?
> >> >
> >> > Exactly.
> >> >
> >> > David
> >>
> >>
> >> Damn I love your posts!!! ROFL!!! Just spewed tequila
> >> across the keyboard dammit!!!
> >
> >
> >Clean it up with one of your 74 cats...
>
> A tip from Martha: cats is more absorbent if you first toss
> them in the dryer for 30 minutes on high with 2 sheets of
> Bounce per cat.

I used one of the fuzzier ones to dust the front of the china
cabinet the other day as a joke in front of one of the
neighbors that is installing my floor. :-) It was his idea and
I decided to take him seriously just for grins... Amber was a
very tolerant kitty and it worked better than my regular
duster. <G> I may use Amber as a duster a bit more often!

Kat

--
>^,,^< Cats-haven Hobby Farm >^,,^< Katra@centurytel.net
>>^,,^<

"There are many intelligent species in the Universe, and they
are all owned by cats!" --Asimov

Custom handcrafts, Sterling silver beaded jewelry http:-
//cgi3.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewListedItems&us-
erid=katra

[Lucas Buck]

On Fri, 04 Oct 2002 00:39:49 -0500, Katra
<Katra@centurytel.net> wrote:

>> >Clean it up with one of your 74 cats...
>>
>> A tip from Martha: cats is more absorbent if you first toss
>> them in the dryer for 30 minutes on high with 2 sheets of
>> Bounce per cat.
>
>I used one of the fuzzier ones to dust the front of the
>china cabinet the other day as a joke in front of one of
>the neighbors that is installing my floor. :-) It was his
>idea and I decided to take him seriously just for grins...
>Amber was a very tolerant kitty and it worked better than
>my regular duster. <G> I may use Amber as a duster a bit
>more often!
>
>Kat

If, as with the ostrich feathers, you find that Amber also
has a dual use as a sex toy, please, please, do not
provide details.

[Lucas Buck]

On Fri, 04 Oct 2002 07:59:54 GMT, "whittles"
<sdfsd@sdfsd.com> wrote:

>Katra <Katra@centurytel.net> wrote in message
>news:3D9D4981.769A6151@centurytel.net...
>>
>>
>> whittles wrote:
>> >
>> > Brian Wagner <brian.wagner@cle.philips.com> wrote in
>> > message news:3D9CBC1D.F620F499@cle.philips.com...
>> > > whittles wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > Most people shoot elk with rifles.
>> > > >
>> > > > Most people (in civilian shootings) shoot people with
>> > > > handguns.
>> > > >
>> > > There are .50 cal handguns, and the law allows hunting
>> > > large hooved
>game
>> > > with .45ACP, .357, .40S&W, and 10mm, as long as the
>> > > barrel's at least 5".
>> > >
>> >
>> > That's wonderful, but it doesn't negate what I said.
>> >
>> > Whit
>>
>> Tch! Real men use Compound bows....
>>
>> Kat

P'shaw - REAL men use their guns to turn the 10th century
types into serfs.

Or in Whit's case, _surfs_.

>There was a bank robber in Hawaii who robbed the bank with a
>compound bow (and an arrow as well).
>
>Cops came to the scene and asked the bank teller if she would
>be able to recognize him if she saw him again.
>
>She says: "recognize him? He banks here! " And proceeded to
>provide the guy's signature card.
>
>Ah, the wonders of crystal meth.
>
>That's my compound bow story
>
>Whit

Did they give him compound interest?

Lucas

* story would have been better had the teller been a guy
named William

[Katra]

whittles wrote:
>
> Brian Wagner <brian.wagner@cle.philips.com> wrote in message
> news:3D9CBC1D.F620F499@cle.philips.com...
> > whittles wrote:
> > >
> > > Most people shoot elk with rifles.
> > >
> > > Most people (in civilian shootings) shoot people with
> > > handguns.
> > >
> > There are .50 cal handguns, and the law allows hunting
> > large hooved game with .45ACP, .357, .40S&W, and 10mm, as
> > long as the barrel's at least 5".
> >
>
> That's wonderful, but it doesn't negate what I said.
>
> Whit

Tch! Real men use Compound bows....

Kat

--
>^,,^< Cats-haven Hobby Farm >^,,^< Katra@centurytel.net
>>^,,^<

"There are many intelligent species in the Universe, and they
are all owned by cats!" --Asimov

Custom handcrafts, Sterling silver beaded jewelry http:-
//cgi3.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewListedItems&us-
erid=katra

[Whittles]

Katra <Katra@centurytel.net> wrote in message
news:3D9D4981.769A6151@centurytel.net...
>
>
> whittles wrote:
> >
> > Brian Wagner <brian.wagner@cle.philips.com> wrote in
> > message news:3D9CBC1D.F620F499@cle.philips.com...
> > > whittles wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Most people shoot elk with rifles.
> > > >
> > > > Most people (in civilian shootings) shoot people with
> > > > handguns.
> > > >
> > > There are .50 cal handguns, and the law allows hunting
> > > large hooved
game
> > > with .45ACP, .357, .40S&W, and 10mm, as long as the
> > > barrel's at least 5".
> > >
> >
> > That's wonderful, but it doesn't negate what I said.
> >
> > Whit
>
> Tch! Real men use Compound bows....
>
> Kat

There was a bank robber in Hawaii who robbed the bank with a
compound bow (and an arrow as well).

Cops came to the scene and asked the bank teller if she would
be able to recognize him if she saw him again.

She says: "recognize him? He banks here! " And proceeded to
provide the guy's signature card.

Ah, the wonders of crystal meth.

That's my compound bow story

Whit

[Katra]

whittles wrote:
>
> Katra <Katra@centurytel.net> wrote in message
> news:3D9D4981.769A6151@centurytel.net...
> >
> >
> > whittles wrote:
> > >
> > > Brian Wagner <brian.wagner@cle.philips.com> wrote in
> > > message news:3D9CBC1D.F620F499@cle.philips.com...
> > > > whittles wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Most people shoot elk with rifles.
> > > > >
> > > > > Most people (in civilian shootings) shoot people
> > > > > with handguns.
> > > > >
> > > > There are .50 cal handguns, and the law allows hunting
> > > > large hooved
> game
> > > > with .45ACP, .357, .40S&W, and 10mm, as long as the
> > > > barrel's at least 5".
> > > >
> > >
> > > That's wonderful, but it doesn't negate what I said.
> > >
> > > Whit
> >
> > Tch! Real men use Compound bows....
> >
> > Kat
>
> There was a bank robber in Hawaii who robbed the bank with a
> compound bow (and an arrow as well).
>
> Cops came to the scene and asked the bank teller if she
> would be able to recognize him if she saw him again.
>
> She says: "recognize him? He banks here! " And proceeded to
> provide the guy's signature card.
>
> Ah, the wonders of crystal meth.
>
> That's my compound bow story
>
> Whit

LOL! There is never any accounting for idiots...

Kat

--
>^,,^< Cats-haven Hobby Farm >^,,^< Katra@centurytel.net
>>^,,^<

"There are many intelligent species in the Universe, and they
are all owned by cats!" --Asimov

Custom handcrafts, Sterling silver beaded jewelry http:-
//cgi3.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewListedItems&us-
erid=katra

[William Br]

In article
<4TZm9.6599$lV3.651100@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
"David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:

> "William Brink" <wbrink@*remove*earthlink.net> wrote:
> > "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > > You see, Mr/Ms Golightly, in gyms there are women who do
> > > a lot of cardio, and are occasionally referred to as
> > > "cardio bunnies". Here
> in
> > > Las Vegas, a lot of the cardio bunnies are large
> > > breasted
> strippers,
> >
> > Ok thats it! I am coming out there for a visit. You have
> > an extra
> bedroom
> > Dave? You going to be my tour guide? You know my email!
>
> But that would just be wrong to do to you. After all, a
> certain well-armed Easterner once wrote: "Vegas sucks the
> soul out of a person."
>
> I would feel so guilty :)

You didnt mention friendly strippers. I am now ready for a
little soul sucking.

>
> David

--
Will Brink

http://www.brinkzone.com/ http://www.aboutsupplements.com/

[Lucas Buck]

On Fri, 04 Oct 2002 13:26:41 GMT, Brian Wagner
<brian.wagner@cle.philips.com> wrote:

>Lucas Buck wrote:
>>
>> And even where legal, it's a bad idea. (Except with a
>> Casull)
>
>Friend of mine grew up in Western PA. There was one guy in
>town who got a trophy buck every year. He was a runner. He'd
>dress from head to foot in fluorescent orange, strap on a
>.45, and go running through the woods. Inevitably, the
>dominant buck in the area would be drawn to the noise of
>something large traveling so boldly through his territory,
>and it would come find him. When it did, he'd charge it,
>firing when he got within about 15 ft. Of course, because he
>was strictly a cardio type, he needed help dragging it out.

Uh, a .45ACP ain't gonna kill a "trophy buck". Your friend was
bullshitting you.

[Brian Wagn]

William Brink wrote:
>
> In article
> <4TZm9.6599$lV3.651100@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
> "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > "William Brink" <wbrink@*remove*earthlink.net> wrote:
> > > "David Cohen" <sammiesdad@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > You see, Mr/Ms Golightly, in gyms there are women who
> > > > do a lot of cardio, and are occasionally referred to
> > > > as "cardio bunnies". Here
> > in
> > > > Las Vegas, a lot of the cardio bunnies are large
> > > > breasted
> > strippers,
> > >
> > > Ok thats it! I am coming out there for a visit. You have
> > > an extra
> > bedroom
> > > Dave? You going to be my tour guide? You know my email!
> >
> > But that would just be wrong to do to you. After all, a
> > certain well-armed Easterner once wrote: "Vegas sucks the
> > soul out of a person."
> >
> > I would feel so guilty :)
>
> You didnt mention friendly strippers. I am now ready for a
> little soul sucking.