How to I reduce the fat around my waist?

wrote:
On Jul 5, 10:03 pm, Bill Eitner wrote:
wrote:
Ok.. I just kept wondering if there was actually some product devised
to measure health..
Yes, it's called a medical examination.

It does not seem impossible though....
Something that can meter
1. Breathing quality
2. Weight
3. Height
4. Strength
Just guessing
Don't confuse health and fitness.

It's possible to be healthy and unfit
or fit and unhealthy. Health in the
most basic sense is the absence of disease,
whereas fitness is performance oriented.

Treat the two (health and fitness) as
separate entities with separate gauging
criteria.

I surely understand that.. I was just wondering about a device being
able to measure both...

If you understand that health and fitness are
separate yet are seeking a single device/test
for both, you are in conflict/contradiction.
There will never be such a device because there
are too many variables.

This will surely be a wish list for the scientists to come up with a
compact device... that's able to measure that..

Devices exist that help gauge both health and
fitness. However, health and fitness are complex
and require multiple tests. For example, blood
pressure and blood glucose after an overnight
fast are measures of health. Resting pulse is
a measure of both cardiovascular health and fitness.
These three tests as well as body temperature can
all be performed by the patient/client using
compact devices. Bodyweight, BMI, body composition
(bodyfat percentage), and waist/hip ratio can
all be calculated by the client (do-it-yourself)
using compact devices. There's also a lot to be said
for simply asking yourself how you feel. Are you
pain-free and able-bodied? Can you do the things
you want to do? Can you do everything you feel
a person your age should be able to do? A single,
non-invasive test can never hope to encompass all
of that.

I have been seeing in
the discovery channel various instruments that has plucked a human
with censors all over the body and the man is made to run over a
thread mill.. but this is some what an instrument that surely measures
health and fitness both at the same time. i am talking about..

There is no single measure of health or fitness,
and especially not both at the same time. That
treadmill test was measuring something specific,
possibly a cardiovascular stress test. That's
one measure of one area of health.

but just wondering about a compact version of the same that could sell
in the market.

One test isn't enough, but if it was resting pulse
rate, which can be measured using a compact device,
is a single test that can be interpreted as a measure
of both health and fitness. Using the same device,
a pulse monitor, a second test can be performed that
is another gauge of health and fitness. Exercise
vigorously so that the pulse rate increases quite
a bit, then stop and measure how long it takes for
the pulse rate to return to the resting rate. The
faster that happens the higher the level of health
and fitness.

LD
http://forums.familylobby.com
(Your True Family Discussions)

On Fri, 06 Jul 2007 11:56:48 -0700, Bill Eitner wrote:


I'm really happy with my pressure sensor scale and
bioelectric impedance bodyfat monitor. Height is
basically a constant. You can have someone help
you measure height. Then you plug that into a
formula for BMI or enter it into a device that
calculates BMI, bodyfat percentage, body water,
etc. I was skeptical of the consistency of digital
scales with built-in bioelectric impedance bodyfat
testing. With enough research I discovered and
bought separate units with which I'm completely
satisfied. Their consistency is excellent.
The scale is a Conair model WW-39 (Weight Watchers
branded), and the bodyfat/BMI device is an Omron
HBF-306. I'm not concerned with absolute accuracy
so much as being able to determine the trend of
small changes. I'm trying to lose fat and gain
muscle at the same time. To do that I need devices
with fine resolution (the ability to gauge small
changes) and excellent consistency (immediately
repeated measurements return the same readings)
more than absolute accuracy so long as I continue
to use the same instruments.

For basic BMI and health a knowledge of your height,
a decent scale, and a tape measure are good enough.
Height and weight determine BMI, and a tape measure
can be used for waist/hip ratio and basic bodyfat
(aka body composition) testing. The book "Protein
Power" has what I think is an excellent chapter on
determining body composition using age and weight
and bodypart circumference measurements.


I was given a link to a home body fat calculator that I think does a
pretty decent job.

http://www.healthcentral.com/cholest...-2774-143.html

And the reason I think so is that I just had my skin fold measurements
done, and the results from that and the results from the calculator
using girth measurements were very, very close! (.3% different)

I have a good, though older, Tanita BF scale... and it reads about 10%
higher than actual BF. Consistent as all get out though! And weight is
spot on.

--
Cynthia
262/238.5/152

Cynthia P wrote:
On Fri, 06 Jul 2007 11:56:48 -0700, Bill Eitner wrote:


I'm really happy with my pressure sensor scale and
bioelectric impedance bodyfat monitor. Height is
basically a constant. You can have someone help
you measure height. Then you plug that into a
formula for BMI or enter it into a device that
calculates BMI, bodyfat percentage, body water,
etc. I was skeptical of the consistency of digital
scales with built-in bioelectric impedance bodyfat
testing. With enough research I discovered and
bought separate units with which I'm completely
satisfied. Their consistency is excellent.
The scale is a Conair model WW-39 (Weight Watchers
branded), and the bodyfat/BMI device is an Omron
HBF-306. I'm not concerned with absolute accuracy
so much as being able to determine the trend of
small changes. I'm trying to lose fat and gain
muscle at the same time. To do that I need devices
with fine resolution (the ability to gauge small
changes) and excellent consistency (immediately
repeated measurements return the same readings)
more than absolute accuracy so long as I continue
to use the same instruments.

For basic BMI and health, a knowledge of your height,
a decent scale, and a tape measure are good enough.
Height and weight determine BMI, and a tape measure
can be used for waist/hip ratio and basic bodyfat
(aka body composition) testing. The book "Protein
Power" has what I think is an excellent chapter on
determining body composition using age and weight
and bodypart circumference measurements.


I was given a link to a home body fat calculator that I think does a
pretty decent job.

http://www.healthcentral.com/cholest...-2774-143.html

And the reason I think so is that I just had my skin fold measurements
done, and the results from that and the results from the calculator
using girth measurements were very, very close! (.3% different)

That's a good calculator--similar to the one in the
Protein Power book. The only downside to the
calculators is obtaining accurate and consistent data.
The same can be said of skin fold bodyfat testing.
Over the years I've done both. That's why I decided
to go with bioelectric impedance now. Even if the
accuracy isn't spot on, the convenience and consistency
of some of the newer hand held units is appealing.

I have a good, though older, Tanita BF scale... and it reads about 10%
higher than actual BF. Consistent as all get out though! And weight is
spot on.

That's the general consensus; some scales seem to be
significantly inaccurate when it comes to bodyfat.
There's something to be said about sensing
through the hands rather than the feet. Some of
the newer devices use the hands rather than the feet,
or they use both hands and feet. I believe the
condition of peoples hands are more consistent
than their feet--especially in the morning when
walking on cold surfaces and/or showering. In a
word, I think better accuracy can be had through
hand held units or by averaging both hand and foot
based measurements (assuming the soles of the feet
are not too cold, hard, wet or dry). The high-end
Omron scale does both hands and feet. In some
reviews it is claimed to be inaccurate. I wouldn't
be surprised to find that it's the foot measurements
that are the problem. The hand held (hands only)
Omron unit that I use has received very few negative
reviews. The vast majority find it to be very
consistent and generally accurate. It's a popular
tool in many health/fitness facilities. I'm glad
the bioelectric impedance method exists and that
the consumer grade devices seem to be improving.

On Jun 21, 6:54 am, wrote:
Hi,

How do I reduce the fat around my waist region?

LDhttp://forums.familylobby.com
(Your True Family Discussions)

Hi there
we dont believe in magic diets or magic pills the only way is a life
changing eating habit....otherwise you can loose with anything out
there but pounds will be back one way or another....
Doug mentioned that the low carb didnt work for him, i wonder if he
knows all carbs food out there... like my husband, he cut some liquors
(didnt know there were carbs as well) and after a long term change his
heath now goes side by side with his weight.
Let me know if you want me to email a doctors report on this subject
included with our life change RESET program.
take care
tania

On Jul 7, 11:13 pm, Bill Eitner wrote:
wrote:
On Jul 5, 10:03 pm, Bill Eitner wrote:
wrote:
Ok.. I just kept wondering if there was actually some product devised
to measure health..
Yes, it's called a medical examination.

It does not seem impossible though....
Something that can meter
1. Breathing quality
2. Weight
3. Height
4. Strength
Just guessing
Don't confuse health and fitness.

It's possible to be healthy and unfit
or fit and unhealthy. Health in the
most basic sense is the absence of disease,
whereas fitness is performance oriented.

Treat the two (health and fitness) as
separate entities with separate gauging
criteria.

I surely understand that.. I was just wondering about a device being
able to measure both...

If you understand that health and fitness are
separate yet are seeking a single device/test
for both, you are in conflict/contradiction.
There will never be such a device because there
are too many variables.

This will surely be a wish list for the scientists to come up with a
compact device... that's able to measure that..

Devices exist that help gauge both health and
fitness. However, health and fitness are complex
and require multiple tests. For example, blood
pressure and blood glucose after an overnight
fast are measures of health. Resting pulse is
a measure of both cardiovascular health and fitness.
These three tests as well as body temperature can
all be performed by the patient/client using
compact devices. Bodyweight, BMI, body composition
(bodyfat percentage), and waist/hip ratio can
all be calculated by the client (do-it-yourself)
using compact devices. There's also a lot to be said
for simply asking yourself how you feel. Are you
pain-free and able-bodied? Can you do the things
you want to do? Can you do everything you feel
a person your age should be able to do? A single,
non-invasive test can never hope to encompass all
of that.

I have been seeing in
the discovery channel various instruments that has plucked a human
with censors all over the body and the man is made to run over a
thread mill.. but this is some what an instrument that surely measures
health and fitness both at the same time. i am talking about..

There is no single measure of health or fitness,
and especially not both at the same time. That
treadmill test was measuring something specific,
possibly a cardiovascular stress test. That's
one measure of one area of health.


Well I saw an instrument that measures pulse-rate, blood pressure
another that measures diabetes ...


can't there be by no chance ...... something near what I am wishing

On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 12:01:09 -0700, Bill Eitner wrote:

Cynthia P wrote:
On Fri, 06 Jul 2007 11:56:48 -0700, Bill Eitner wrote:


I'm really happy with my pressure sensor scale and
bioelectric impedance bodyfat monitor. Height is
basically a constant. You can have someone help
you measure height. Then you plug that into a
formula for BMI or enter it into a device that
calculates BMI, bodyfat percentage, body water,
etc. I was skeptical of the consistency of digital
scales with built-in bioelectric impedance bodyfat
testing. With enough research I discovered and
bought separate units with which I'm completely
satisfied. Their consistency is excellent.
The scale is a Conair model WW-39 (Weight Watchers
branded), and the bodyfat/BMI device is an Omron
HBF-306. I'm not concerned with absolute accuracy
so much as being able to determine the trend of
small changes. I'm trying to lose fat and gain
muscle at the same time. To do that I need devices
with fine resolution (the ability to gauge small
changes) and excellent consistency (immediately
repeated measurements return the same readings)
more than absolute accuracy so long as I continue
to use the same instruments.

For basic BMI and health, a knowledge of your height,
a decent scale, and a tape measure are good enough.
Height and weight determine BMI, and a tape measure
can be used for waist/hip ratio and basic bodyfat
(aka body composition) testing. The book "Protein
Power" has what I think is an excellent chapter on
determining body composition using age and weight
and bodypart circumference measurements.


I was given a link to a home body fat calculator that I think does a
pretty decent job.

http://www.healthcentral.com/cholest...-2774-143.html

And the reason I think so is that I just had my skin fold measurements
done, and the results from that and the results from the calculator
using girth measurements were very, very close! (.3% different)

That's a good calculator--similar to the one in the
Protein Power book. The only downside to the
calculators is obtaining accurate and consistent data.
The same can be said of skin fold bodyfat testing.
Over the years I've done both. That's why I decided
to go with bioelectric impedance now. Even if the
accuracy isn't spot on, the convenience and consistency
of some of the newer hand held units is appealing.


Well, I've had no luck at all getting consistent skin folds, so I had
my trainer do it. Then I used the site to kind of double-check. Since
the numbers seem relatively consistent, I figure they are, at least,
ballpark and my trainer probably knows what she is doing with the skin
folds.

And, as my Tanita scale has been pretty consistent with the readings
it gives, I now know roughly what to subtract to get a fairly close
idea. Info I didn't have before.



I have a good, though older, Tanita BF scale... and it reads about 10%
higher than actual BF. Consistent as all get out though! And weight is
spot on.

That's the general consensus; some scales seem to be
significantly inaccurate when it comes to bodyfat.
There's something to be said about sensing
through the hands rather than the feet. Some of
the newer devices use the hands rather than the feet,
or they use both hands and feet. I believe the
condition of peoples hands are more consistent
than their feet--especially in the morning when
walking on cold surfaces and/or showering. In a
word, I think better accuracy can be had through
hand held units or by averaging both hand and foot
based measurements (assuming the soles of the feet
are not too cold, hard, wet or dry). The high-end
Omron scale does both hands and feet. In some
reviews it is claimed to be inaccurate. I wouldn't
be surprised to find that it's the foot measurements
that are the problem. The hand held (hands only)
Omron unit that I use has received very few negative
reviews. The vast majority find it to be very
consistent and generally accurate. It's a popular
tool in many health/fitness facilities. I'm glad
the bioelectric impedance method exists and that
the consumer grade devices seem to be improving.


That's interesting. I had heard that the hand held Omron units were
pretty good, I've been tempted to buy one, but wasn't really sure it
was going to give me any better data than the scale I already own. And
it's just something else to have to find a spot for, LOL!

Mainly, I use the Tanita to judge trends, and the current trend is
downwards, YEAH!


--
Cynthia
262/238/152

Cynthia P wrote:
On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 12:01:09 -0700, Bill Eitner wrote:

Cynthia P wrote:
On Fri, 06 Jul 2007 11:56:48 -0700, Bill Eitner wrote:


I'm really happy with my pressure sensor scale and
bioelectric impedance bodyfat monitor. Height is
basically a constant. You can have someone help
you measure height. Then you plug that into a
formula for BMI or enter it into a device that
calculates BMI, bodyfat percentage, body water,
etc. I was skeptical of the consistency of digital
scales with built-in bioelectric impedance bodyfat
testing. With enough research I discovered and
bought separate units with which I'm completely
satisfied. Their consistency is excellent.
The scale is a Conair model WW-39 (Weight Watchers
branded), and the bodyfat/BMI device is an Omron
HBF-306. I'm not concerned with absolute accuracy
so much as being able to determine the trend of
small changes. I'm trying to lose fat and gain
muscle at the same time. To do that I need devices
with fine resolution (the ability to gauge small
changes) and excellent consistency (immediately
repeated measurements return the same readings)
more than absolute accuracy so long as I continue
to use the same instruments.

For basic BMI and health, a knowledge of your height,
a decent scale, and a tape measure are good enough.
Height and weight determine BMI, and a tape measure
can be used for waist/hip ratio and basic bodyfat
(aka body composition) testing. The book "Protein
Power" has what I think is an excellent chapter on
determining body composition using age and weight
and bodypart circumference measurements.

I was given a link to a home body fat calculator that I think does a
pretty decent job.

http://www.healthcentral.com/cholest...-2774-143.html

And the reason I think so is that I just had my skin fold measurements
done, and the results from that and the results from the calculator
using girth measurements were very, very close! (.3% different)
That's a good calculator--similar to the one in the
Protein Power book. The only downside to the
calculators is obtaining accurate and consistent data.
The same can be said of skin fold bodyfat testing.
Over the years I've done both. That's why I decided
to go with bioelectric impedance now. Even if the
accuracy isn't spot on, the convenience and consistency
of some of the newer hand held units is appealing.


Well, I've had no luck at all getting consistent skin folds, so I had
my trainer do it. Then I used the site to kind of double-check. Since
the numbers seem relatively consistent, I figure they are, at least,
ballpark and my trainer probably knows what she is doing with the skin
folds.

I have no luck with skin folds either anymore.
I've lost a lot of weight and now have loose
skin that skews skin fold and even circumference
(tape measure) measurements.

And, as my Tanita scale has been pretty consistent with the readings
it gives, I now know roughly what to subtract to get a fairly close
idea. Info I didn't have before.

One of these days I'll go to the local university
(Stanford) and undergo hydrostatic (underwater)
weighing. Then I'll compare that to what the
bioelectric impedance device says. At least
that's what I keep threatening to do. ;-)

I have a good, though older, Tanita BF scale... and it reads about 10%
higher than actual BF. Consistent as all get out though! And weight is
spot on.
That's the general consensus; some scales seem to be
significantly inaccurate when it comes to bodyfat.
There's something to be said about sensing
through the hands rather than the feet. Some of
the newer devices use the hands rather than the feet,
or they use both hands and feet. I believe the
condition of peoples hands are more consistent
than their feet--especially in the morning when
walking on cold surfaces and/or showering. In a
word, I think better accuracy can be had through
hand held units or by averaging both hand and foot
based measurements (assuming the soles of the feet
are not too cold, hard, wet or dry). The high-end
Omron scale does both hands and feet. In some
reviews it is claimed to be inaccurate. I wouldn't
be surprised to find that it's the foot measurements
that are the problem. The hand held (hands only)
Omron unit that I use has received very few negative
reviews. The vast majority find it to be very
consistent and generally accurate. It's a popular
tool in many health/fitness facilities. I'm glad
the bioelectric impedance method exists and that
the consumer grade devices seem to be improving.


That's interesting. I had heard that the hand held Omron units were
pretty good, I've been tempted to buy one, but wasn't really sure it
was going to give me any better data than the scale I already own. And
it's just something else to have to find a spot for, LOL!

I agree. If the soles of your feet are in good
condition, or at least a consistent condition
when the measurements are made, the scale is probably
okay for judging trends.

The original clinical bioelectric impedance method
used one hand and one foot so that the electric
current would flow though as much of the body as
possible. The hands and feet measurements are not
as thorough because they focus on the upper (hands
method) or lower (feet method) body. That brings
us back to the consensus that the consumer grade
units should be used to see trends and not thought
of as highly accurate. With that in mind, it
probably doesn't matter whether it's hands or feet
as long as the measurement variables that are under
our control are kept as consistent as possible.

Mainly, I use the Tanita to judge trends, and the current trend is
downwards, YEAH!

Tomorrow (Monday) morning is my official weigh in and
bodyfat measurement for the week. I lost a couple of
pounds over this last week and am curious to see what
they were composed of. I train hard with weights, am
slowly getting stronger, and I get plenty of protein,
so I hope that the loss is mostly fat. The tricky
thing is water weight. Water is in the lean mass
category, so a water loss looks like a lean mass loss.
With that in mind, consistency with regard to hydration,
sodium and carbohydrate in the diet improve the consistency
of bioelectric impedance bodyfat measurements.

Fun stuff all of this.

On Jul 7, 11:13 pm, Bill Eitner wrote:
wrote:
On Jul 5, 10:03 pm, Bill Eitner wrote:
wrote:
Ok.. I just kept wondering if there was actually some product devised
to measure health..
Yes, it's called a medical examination.

It does not seem impossible though....
Something that can meter
1. Breathing quality
2. Weight
3. Height
4. Strength
Just guessing
Don't confuse health and fitness.

It's possible to be healthy and unfit
or fit and unhealthy. Health in the
most basic sense is the absence of disease,
whereas fitness is performance oriented.

Treat the two (health and fitness) as
separate entities with separate gauging
criteria.

I surely understand that.. I was just wondering about a device being
able to measure both...

If you understand that health and fitness are
separate yet are seeking a single device/test
for both, you are in conflict/contradiction.
There will never be such a device because there
are too many variables.

This will surely be a wish list for the scientists to come up with a
compact device... that's able to measure that..

Devices exist that help gauge both health and
fitness. However, health and fitness are complex
and require multiple tests. For example, blood
pressure and blood glucose after an overnight
fast are measures of health. Resting pulse is
a measure of both cardiovascular health and fitness.
These three tests as well as body temperature can
all be performed by the patient/client using
compact devices. Bodyweight, BMI, body composition
(bodyfat percentage), and waist/hip ratio can
all be calculated by the client (do-it-yourself)
using compact devices. There's also a lot to be said
for simply asking yourself how you feel. Are you
pain-free and able-bodied? Can you do the things
you want to do? Can you do everything you feel
a person your age should be able to do? A single,
non-invasive test can never hope to encompass all
of that.

Hmm humans are tooooooo good ... I am sure that it is not easy to
device one.. But nothing is impossible.. When man invent devices that
can go to different galaxies. This is just a small thing.

The thing is there's not much of awareness about this requirement. If
there was one I am sure it would have been there in the market. The
problem now days are that people invest into ideas that sell

LD

wrote:
On Jul 7, 11:13 pm, Bill Eitner wrote:
wrote:
On Jul 5, 10:03 pm, Bill Eitner wrote:
wrote:
Ok.. I just kept wondering if there was actually some product devised
to measure health..
Yes, it's called a medical examination.
It does not seem impossible though....
Something that can meter
1. Breathing quality
2. Weight
3. Height
4. Strength
Just guessing
Don't confuse health and fitness.
It's possible to be healthy and unfit
or fit and unhealthy. Health in the
most basic sense is the absence of disease,
whereas fitness is performance oriented.
Treat the two (health and fitness) as
separate entities with separate gauging
criteria.
I surely understand that.. I was just wondering about a device being
able to measure both...
If you understand that health and fitness are
separate yet are seeking a single device/test
for both, you are in conflict/contradiction.
There will never be such a device because there
are too many variables.

This will surely be a wish list for the scientists to come up with a
compact device... that's able to measure that..
Devices exist that help gauge both health and
fitness. However, health and fitness are complex
and require multiple tests. For example, blood
pressure and blood glucose after an overnight
fast are measures of health. Resting pulse is
a measure of both cardiovascular health and fitness.
These three tests as well as body temperature can
all be performed by the patient/client using
compact devices. Bodyweight, BMI, body composition
(bodyfat percentage), and waist/hip ratio can
all be calculated by the client (do-it-yourself)
using compact devices. There's also a lot to be said
for simply asking yourself how you feel. Are you
pain-free and able-bodied? Can you do the things
you want to do? Can you do everything you feel
a person your age should be able to do? A single,
non-invasive test can never hope to encompass all
of that.

Hmm humans are tooooooo good ... I am sure that it is not easy to
device one.. But nothing is impossible.. When man invent devices that
can go to different galaxies. This is just a small thing.

It's nice that you have faith in man and an upbeat
attitude, but many physics limitations in our universe
are a long way from being solved or worked around.
Many who are in the know feel that some are just
to vast to ever be solved. A book you might want
to read is: "The Physics of Star Trek." It gets
into the realities of developing warp drive,
transporter technology, and maybe even the medical
scanning devices that were used in the show. It's
been a while since I read it. To summarize, in the
areas of communications and computers we've met and/or
exceeded the technology of the original series. In
the areas of space travel, local travel (transporter),
weapons, shielding, and medical technology we aren't
much closer than we were 40 years ago when the original
series aired. The problems in those areas are just
too daunting. The laws of physics stand in the way
and are just too big to ever be moved out of the way.
Don't take my word for it, read the book and see if you
don't feel differently about this after you've read it.

The thing is there's not much of awareness about this requirement. If
there was one I am sure it would have been there in the market. The
problem now days are that people invest into ideas that sell

You don't think a device like that would sell or that
a dozen companies would jump at the chance to manufacture
such a device if the technology existed?

Such a device does exist--it's called a pulse monitor
(or even a wrist or stop watch). If you're going to
rely on one test, it might as well be resting pulse.
Average is 72 beats per minute. Anything under 60
is considered athletic and quite healthy. For example,
Lance Armstrong the champion cyclist is said to have a
resting pulse of 40 or even less. At the other end,
anything over 100 raises a flag.

Here's an excerpt from an article on pulse testing:

Why It Is Done

Your pulse is checked to:

* See how well the heart is working. In an emergency situation,
your pulse rate can help find out if the heart is pumping enough blood.
* Help find the cause of symptoms, such as an irregular or rapid
heartbeat (palpitations), dizziness, fainting, chest pain, or shortness
of breath.
* Check for blood flow after an injury or when a blood vessel may
be blocked.
* Check on medicines or diseases that cause a slow heart rate. Your
doctor may ask you to check your pulse every day if you have heart
disease or if you are taking certain medicines that can slow your heart
rate, such as digoxin or beta-blockers (like propranolol or atenolol).

(And here's the one that's of most interest to you)

* Check your general health and fitness level. Checking your pulse
rate at rest, during exercise, or immediately after vigorous exercise
can give you important information about your overall fitness level.

Here's the entire article:
http://www.webmd.com/heart-disease/Pulse-Measurement

On Jul 10, 2:07 am, Bill Eitner wrote:
wrote:
On Jul 7, 11:13 pm, Bill Eitner wrote:
wrote:
On Jul 5, 10:03 pm, Bill Eitner wrote:
wrote:
Ok.. I just kept wondering if there was actually some product devised
to measure health..
Yes, it's called a medical examination.
It does not seem impossible though....
Something that can meter
1. Breathing quality
2. Weight
3. Height
4. Strength
Just guessing
Don't confuse health and fitness.
It's possible to be healthy and unfit
or fit and unhealthy. Health in the
most basic sense is the absence of disease,
whereas fitness is performance oriented.
Treat the two (health and fitness) as
separate entities with separate gauging
criteria.
I surely understand that.. I was just wondering about a device being
able to measure both...
If you understand that health and fitness are
separate yet are seeking a single device/test
for both, you are in conflict/contradiction.
There will never be such a device because there
are too many variables.

This will surely be a wish list for the scientists to come up with a
compact device... that's able to measure that..
Devices exist that help gauge both health and
fitness. However, health and fitness are complex
and require multiple tests. For example, blood
pressure and blood glucose after an overnight
fast are measures of health. Resting pulse is
a measure of both cardiovascular health and fitness.
These three tests as well as body temperature can
all be performed by the patient/client using
compact devices. Bodyweight, BMI, body composition
(bodyfat percentage), and waist/hip ratio can
all be calculated by the client (do-it-yourself)
using compact devices. There's also a lot to be said
for simply asking yourself how you feel. Are you
pain-free and able-bodied? Can you do the things
you want to do? Can you do everything you feel
a person your age should be able to do? A single,
non-invasive test can never hope to encompass all
of that.

Hmm humans are tooooooo good ... I am sure that it is not easy to
device one.. But nothing is impossible.. When man invent devices that
can go to different galaxies. This is just a small thing.

It's nice that you have faith in man and an upbeat
attitude, but many physics limitations in our universe
are a long way from being solved or worked around.
Many who are in the know feel that some are just
to vast to ever be solved. A book you might want
to read is: "The Physics of Star Trek." It gets
into the realities of developing warp drive,
transporter technology, and maybe even the medical
scanning devices that were used in the show. It's
been a while since I read it. To summarize, in the
areas of communications and computers we've met and/or
exceeded the technology of the original series. In
the areas of space travel, local travel (transporter),
weapons, shielding, and medical technology we aren't
much closer than we were 40 years ago when the original
series aired. The problems in those areas are just
too daunting. The laws of physics stand in the way
and are just too big to ever be moved out of the way.
Don't take my word for it, read the book and see if you
don't feel differently about this after you've read it.

The thing is there's not much of awareness about this requirement. If
there was one I am sure it would have been there in the market. The
problem now days are that people invest into ideas that sell

You don't think a device like that would sell or that
a dozen companies would jump at the chance to manufacture
such a device if the technology existed?

Such a device does exist--it's called a pulse monitor
(or even a wrist or stop watch). If you're going to
rely on one test, it might as well be resting pulse.
Average is 72 beats per minute. Anything under 60
is considered athletic and quite healthy. For example,
Lance Armstrong the champion cyclist is said to have a
resting pulse of 40 or even less. At the other end,
anything over 100 raises a flag.

Here's an excerpt from an article on pulse testing:

Why It Is Done

Your pulse is checked to:

* See how well the heart is working. In an emergency situation,
your pulse rate can help find out if the heart is pumping enough blood.
* Help find the cause of symptoms, such as an irregular or rapid
heartbeat (palpitations), dizziness, fainting, chest pain, or shortness
of breath.
* Check for blood flow after an injury or when a blood vessel may
be blocked.
* Check on medicines or diseases that cause a slow heart rate. Your
doctor may ask you to check your pulse every day if you have heart
disease or if you are taking certain medicines that can slow your heart
rate, such as digoxin or beta-blockers (like propranolol or atenolol).

(And here's the one that's of most interest to you)

* Check your general health and fitness level. Checking your pulse
rate at rest, during exercise, or immediately after vigorous exercise
can give you important information about your overall fitness level.

Here's the entire article:
http://www.webmd.com/heart-disease/Pulse-Measurement

Great article .. I never knew having a pulse below 60 is good
health....

You mean slower the heart rate better is the health..

COool..

LD