S2 Body Fat not accurate

You possibly do not have properly set the Upload Time Zone in User Setting of GC Web. Either change it, or change the date in the CSV file accordingly

Upload Time Zone is set to "(GMT-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada)", or, my TZ. Changing it to "2022-11-06" doesn't work, nothing gets imported. 

I created another import for "2022-11-03"and it got imported as "2022-11-02".

Seems like a bug.

For me, it works as long as the date format in the CVS is 2022.11.04; any other date format won't work, even if I select it from the options; just managed to import 2 years of data from excel this way, ftw. 

So, like everyone else on this thread, very inconsistent and what looks to be wrong numbers.

What I can't get my head around is that if you add up the Skeletal Muscle Mass, the Bone Mass and Fat Mass (derive from fat %age and weight), you should get your total weight (Water Content is inherent in Muscle and Fat mass and so should be ignored).

So, for my example, I weigh 88Kg. So, my measurements are (according to the scales)

• Skeletal Muscle Mass = 34kg
• Bone Mass = 4.8kg
• Fat %age = 24.8% = 21.82kg (88*24.8%)

When you add all that up, you get 60.62Kg. 

If I google for typical values of Skeletal Muscle Mass for my age, it should be around 73 - 86% of my total weight. Now, I am no muscle man but I am also not particularly skinny either.

I know the body weight measure is about right (I wish it were lower but hey ho). So, working backwards from the numbers (assuming Fat %age is accurate for now) 

1. The Bone mass = 4.8kg
2. Fat Mass = 21.82kg
3. Total = 26.62kg

Therefore (assuming the Fat Percentage is correct), my Skeletal Muscle Mass should be 88kg - 26.62kg = 61.38kg (as opposed to 34kg from the scale)

Basically, it would appear that there is something very wrong with the Skeletal Muscle Mass calculation. The Bone Mass looks about right (I do a lot of Squash so probably pretty impacted bones), Fat looks a little unflattering but I would not say I am "ripped", but the Skeletal empirically is way off.

How does this work out for others?

There seems to be another factor to take into account. The height.

I don't change it(only the age) but I have read here that some people changed their height to get more accurate results

I was kind of thinking about this as well, but the problem I'm having is that I'm not sure how the scale is measuring water. I'm not sure it's including water weight in muscle, fat, and bone. Just this week I gained 2.1 lbs and in trying to figure out if it was muscle or fat, I looked at the averages for fat, muscle, and water for the week. Based on averages I gained 1 lb water, 1/2 lb fat, 1/2 lb muscle, and .1 lb bone mass. Frankly I think the numbers are hard to figure out because of water and that's why the totals don't seem to make sense. I'm obviously not positive, but that's my theory at the moment. 

If you do a bit of search on google, another scale manufacturer has a useful explainer - basically the water content is ignored as it is measured in the bio-impedance (fat and muscle have water, bone doesn't;). So, in theory I guess if the weight changes due to water loss, then the measurements will reflect that (does fat dehydrate quicker than muscle?).

As for height, it is considered in the algorithm (you can search for the rough algorithm but height, age, sex and bioimpedance appear to be the inputs). Based on my results, either the bioimpedance measurement is wrong and needs calibrating or the overall algorithm is implemented incorrectly.

If you fiddle with the height, it will change the output but the algorithm will be wrong.

trux, have you figured out any other values that can be added? For example, lean mass, water, etc? I'd add that data form my old cheap scale, too, if you know the CSV value names to add to the file. Thanks!

I would love to know the same thing tbh

Only the weight, BMI, and fat percentage data can be imported in the CSV.