Body Fat% is a way off PART3

After waiting 6 months to buy an Index2, I will be returning it, as the BF readings are way off the Index1. It increased by BF 30% and it increased my wife’s BF 50%. Same settings in both Index’s. Index2 was updated to the latest firmware. Caliper readings and body image align with Index1 readings. No response from Garmin support.

vdot64 said:

No response from Garmin support.

That's not good. What was your method of attempting to contact Garmin about this issue? Garmin Support Center? Email, chat, phone call? I don't see much activity on this forum from Garmin staff, but have occasionally seen posts from Garmin-AmberD.

I finally got a reply from support, No help really, and I find it odd that they actually suggest returning it.

The original Index Scale's algorithm relied more heavily on BMI data to calculate body fat percentage, while the Index S2 uses more of the impedance data. We believe that this creates a more accurate reading of body data compared to BMI charts, but can lead to much different. 

The body composition metrics provided by Index S2 compare to known gold standard methods (Dexa scan, Bod Pod, etc.) favorably on average. However, individual users can certainly see a difference. 

We recommend following the guidelines in this FAQ to get the most accurate view of your overall body composition: Why Is My Body Composition Data Different When Compared to other Tests or Scales?

If you're still unhappy with the scale's performance after reading and following the guidelines in the article, it may be best to return the scale.

But...i can't understand that answer when if, as Garmin says, it depends more on impedance why the BF% vary enormously just changing the age?

It'd be helpful another explanation different from an automatic answer.

This demonstrates what has been apparent for a long time:the BF from this scale and it’s predecessor is BS. It’s a bog standard scale with Wi-fi and algorithm-based estimates. The impedance stuff i, well, magical thinking unless we see some evidence. 

as best i can figure, garmin have decided to ignore the problem and freely accept returns rather than doing anything about the issue - i can only assume that this is because the impedance is complete snake oil so they have no ability to do anything. how they managed to make things much worse than the 1st gen scales i don't know. they don't even seem willing to use the information they have such as "fitness age" to make a more informed guess on body composition.

there is another thread here of people clamouring to get hold of these scales so i guess there is still a good market for mugs. presumably the manufacturing costs are so low that returns are not a problem. 

I have had a comprehensive lab from UC Davis, including DEXA, all VO2 studies (at rest and physical exertion), Resting Metabolic Assessment, and more, and the Garmin ecosystem, including the Index S2, is SPOT ON.  Most of these complaints are wishful thinking.  If you want lower body fat, work harder.  NOT SNAKE OIL... just a bunch of folks disgruntled because of poor body image. Garmin knows what they're doing. Nuf said.

how do you respond to the people here who have also had DEXA scans showing results completely different to the garmin ones?

what about the people who have stated they have confirmed BF far higher than what garmin says? is that wishful thinking?

for my part, i don't really care what the number is, i'd just like to be able to trust that if the numbers change then that is a reflection of a change in my body composition. these scales do not provide that.

I am sorry to say that an, perhaps the, answer to all your questions is that the scales are a sham. They are good for sending weight to Garmin Connect and they use unconvincing and seemingly unqualified algorithms to make guesses about body composition. 

Garmin May want to present some evidence that this is not a fair assessment.