Dexa scan in Dublin without a referral

Jambonjunior

Hi is there any where in Dublin that I can book a Dexa scan without a referral?

(I don't have a gp)

j@utis

I'm interested in that too.

Jambonjunior

I haven't been able to find anywhere yet

The Davestator

Dexa scanners are being used less due to exposure to x rays. Lots of top teams are moving to the newer generation of high end Inbody / Tanita scanners which are about 98% as accurate as a dexa.

Jambonjunior

Are they something that you buy yourself rather than book in?

Really all I'm looking for is an accurate way to get fat and muscle composition

Jambonjunior

I found a place that will do a Dexa without a referral but it's in Limerick

https://bodyscanireland.setmore.com/

The Davestator

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120511907#Comment_120511907

Some gyms offer them for about 10 or 20 euro.

Cill94

There's no accurate measure of bodyfat or muscle mass. Even the DEXA has pretty significant measurement errors.

If you want to know how healthy you are, there are better, cheaper proxies for that. Bloods, waist circumference, BMI.

Most people don't need a DEXA to tell them what they already know.

https://weightology.net/the-pitfalls-of-body-fat-measurement-part-6-dexa/#:~:text=The%20error%20rates%20vary%20by,and%20disease%20state%20of%20subjects.

Mellor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120525726#Comment_120525726

Waist circumference and BMI not are pretty big, obvious issues. Dexa is not the hyper accurate assessment that people make it out to be. But it is the most accurate measurement that is practical. Extreme outliers will have more errors. But for most people id Dexa says you are 20% bf, then you are probably around 20%. If you train and it later says you are 15%, then you probably lost around 5%.

Body fat isn't a static property. It changes over the course of the day. It doesn't really need to be super accurate. It's guide.

Cill94

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120526200#Comment_120526200

Personally I think those errors of measurement are pretty poor for the expense of a scan that's claiming to tell you what your body fat is.

For numbers, I prefer to track waist circumf and weight, as you can see weekly changes in those that are fairly indicative of fat loss when combined with photos.

If someone wants to pay to have the DEXA attach an inaccurate body fat% number to that then fair enough.

Mellor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120527767#Comment_120527767

I think the inaccuracies in that article are very overstated.

The hydration point. Of course hydration changes the results of a BF% assessment. Hydration changes your BF%. The other issue is that all the assumption is that a 4 compartment model is perfect, and any deviation is an error. That's not necessarily the case. Most of the other issues can be elimianted by using the same dexa machine, same calibration etc. And being weighted under the same conditions.

Weight is useful to track regular changes. But over a long period, ifa person has had phases of weight loss and muscle gain. It's hard to quantify that with weight alone. Dexa provides addition information, that likely accurate to less than 1%

Cill94

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120528210#Comment_120528210

The hydration point. Of course hydration changes the results of a BF% assessment. Hydration changes your BF%.

I'm not sure what you mean by this? Being more or less hydrated doesn't change the amount of actual fat tissue on your body.

The other issue is that all the assumption is that a 4 compartment model is perfect, and any deviation is an error.

I wouldn't say a 4C model is perfect. It is considered to be more accurate than DXA though, so I think comparing DXA to it is fair enough.

Most of the other issues can be elimianted by using the same dexa machine, same calibration etc. And being weighted under the same conditions. Dexa provides addition information, that likely accurate to less than 1%

That 1% figure doesn't seem consistent with studies I've seen, which have used that level of standardisation you mention. Happy to read research that's contrary. What's the issue with the studies in the post I linked?

Mellor

I'm not sure what you mean by this? Being more or less hydrated doesn't change the amount of actual fat tissue on your body.

Yes of course not. But BF% and a measure of fat mass. It a ratio between fat mass and fat free mass. Which is affected by hydration.

I recommend that people use Dxa to measure fat mass rather than bf%. Should completely eliminate the hydration issue.

I wouldn't say a 4C model is perfect. It is considered to be more accurate than DXA though, so I think comparing DXA to it is fair enough.

4C is an estimate based on a few measurements. They are plugged into a formula, they’re more than one formula option. Meaning the same measurements can produce different 4C results. That alone makes the accuracy a vague range rather than a precise value. I’d really like to know what the range is.

Some of the measurements are bio-impedance, another is actually Dexa. BIA is notoriously inaccurate. We also say Dxa is inaccurate. Generally when there is uncertainty in any value in a formula, that uncertainty is present in the end result. Curious how 4C avoids that.

Im not saying it’s not better. I’m just not convinced it right to set it as the 100% accurate benchmark.

That 1% figure doesn't seem consistent with studies I've seen, which have used that level of standardisation you mention. Happy to read research that's contrary. What's the issue with the studies in the post I linked?

one referee to difference between models, types of machine, calibration. Those can be eliminated as I sad. But also no different to difference in formulas used for 4C, Or Harris Benedict vrs Mifflin-St Jeor.

One was a study of body builders. I think it’s a huge error to assume 4C formulas for the general population are 100% accurate.

In general I think they focus too much on bf%. I like to the data for mass differences.

j@utis

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120511930#Comment_120511930

There's also a place in Wexford I believe (1h10min drive for me), I'll try to book an appointment with them soon.

I'm interested in getting Dexa scan for bone density measurement too, not just BF %.

j@utis

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120492509#Comment_120492509

The exposure to radiation is very very minimal, the radiation dose about the same as long haul flight of 8 hrs, I haven't heard anybody cancelling their fancy vacation because of that.

MickyBest

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120566201#Comment_120566201

This is much less than in a classic X-ray machine. I have heard that an X-ray machine can be used for one person no more than 4 times a year. Can a Dexa be used more often?

The Davestator

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120566201#Comment_120566201

I didn't say anyone cancelled their vacation! I said that some sports organisations are moving away from Dexa, which they are. Was at FIBO in Germany a few weeks back and some of the new kit from different suppliers in this space is so impressive.

Jambonjunior

Is there any alternatives available to use in Ireland?

j@utis

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120566177#Comment_120566177

Okay, that place in Wexford only does bone density scans. So, it only leaves us with one place in Ireland for Dexa body composition scans and it's in Limerick which is a pity because I'd interested in getting that done at least once a year.

Jambonjunior

I still haven't managed to find a dexa without referral