Body Type Test (Quiz) Results 1103 – Body Type Two (BT2) Female (Woman), Generation Z

11 thoughts on “Body Type Test (Quiz) Results 1103 – Body Type Two (BT2) Female (Woman), Generation Z”

1. Comment #4933

   Hi Emma:
   
   Thanks for your Fellow One Research Participant, The Four Body Types’ Free Body Type Quiz/Test Calculator submission.
   
   Please carefully review the above post.
   
   After reviewing your Body Type Quiz data and images it appears you are a Body Type Two (BT2) with at least likely underdeveloped thoracic 6, thoracic 7, thoracic 12, lumbar 1, lumbar 2, lumbar 3, lumbar 4, and lumbar 5 vertebrae. Your BT1 Classic Arch and Dimples do not look fully developed. Being a BT2 is supported by your statements, "If/when I put fat weight on my body, it is most likely that I will put the fat weight on in relation to: midriff/abdomen/belly, upper chest/pectoral/breast, as accurately as I can figure." and "I was at my heaviest weight when I reached 198 pounds at age 16. The most weight I ever lost was 26 pounds when I was 17. I have not been successful at keeping all that weight off to date. I gained back 18 of those pounds in a span of 8 month(s)." along with "After reviewing my body, I am experiencing and/or have experienced skinny fat including thin fat, cellulite, crepey skin, loose/saggy skin, and/or normal weight obesity, in general, relative to: upper leg/inner thighs as far as I can tell." Things are further supported by your moderate risk BMI. It is possible you are actually a Body Type Three (BT3).
   
   Please answer the following:
   
   Looking at the BT1 Dimples and Classic Arch here https://fellowone.com/fellow-one-research/the-four-body-types/
   
   A. On a scale of 1-10, 10 being 100% fully developed, how Developed are your Body Type One (BT1) Dimples?
   B. On a scale of 1-10, 10 being 100% fully developed, how Developed is your Body Type One (BT1) Classic Arch?
   
   All the years of your life, from 0-20, should be clearly represented in your answers in a range of years (For Example: If you are a 24 year old Body Type Two (BT2), but were a BT1 early on in your life, but then became a BT2, then you would answer with something like — BT1 = 0-17 years, BT2 = 18-24, years). After double-checking the images here https://fellowone.com/fellow-one-research/the-four-body-types/
   
   C. What years of your life did you look like a Body Type One (BT1), if any?
   D. What years of your life did/have you looked like a Body Type Two (BT2)?
   E. What years of your life did you look like a Body Type Three (BT3), if any?
   F. What years of your life did you look like a Body Type Four (BT4), if any?
   
   G. On a scale of 1-10, 10 being 100% True, True or False? Every human body is born the same, with the same muscle mass and development, as per every Standard Science/Scientific Human Body Anatomy Book Body Type One (BT1). Obesity and/or skinny fat (thin fat, cellulite, crepey skin, loose skin, saggy skin, normal weight obesity) are solely/only about poor diet, laziness/no exercise, and unhealthy lifestyle habits.
   
   H. On a scale of 1-10, 10 being 100% True, True or False? The spine/vertebrae (posture) & muscle/muscle mass are main, vital components in the scaffolding, structure, & metabolism of the human body as well as it’s balance, health, & appearance, no less, and directly affects body type (one of The Four Body Types).
   
   I. On a scale of 1-10, 10 being 100% True, True or False? Mainstream science and medical doctors are right, all any human being has to do to lose weight & look like a Standard Scientific Human Anatomy Book Body Type One (BT1) is reduce daily calorie intake & increase daily calorie burn.

   Log in to Reply

   • Comment #4938

     A. 0
     B. 8
     C. 0-14 years
     D. 14-20 years
     E. N/A
     F. N/A
     G. 1, False
     H. 7, True
     I. 6

     Log in to Reply

2. Comment #4934

   1. On a scale of 1-10, 10 being Makes Real Logical And Reasonable Sense, how Logical And Reasonable would you say the Fellow One Research variables and data are, as you understand them now?
   
   2. As per #1, Why?
   

   3. What could be done better to help better explain and show the research data to date?

   Log in to Reply

   • Comment #4939

     1. 9
     2/3. Analyzing lifestyle and diet seems like a good way to assess body type I just wish there was more emphasis on genetics. When I was BT1 I never had back dimples, even when I was at my fittest. That could mean that they were still underdeveloped but I believe that genetically I am just not capable of having back dimples. I also think the information was a little wordy which made it a little difficult to understand. But the pictures helped. It would also be better if there was a larger variation of pictures.

     Log in to Reply

     • Comment #4940

       Yes, correct, a lack of muscle/muscle mass is genetics/DNA/genes. The reason that you do not have Dimples is because you are lacking muscles/muscle mass relative to the thoracic 8, thoracic 12, lumbar 1, lumbar 2, lumbar 3, lumbar 4, lumbar 5, and sacrum vertebrae, no less. In place of that muscles/muscle mass is some form of skinny fat - skinny fat defined as cellulite, thin fat, crepey skin, loose skin, saggy skin, and/or normal weight obesity.
       
       Because you have skinny fat in place of muscles/muscle mass, your scientifically calculated Standard Mifflin St Jeor Equation BMR of 1705.34 is likely incorrect (see FORMR score above). BMR (basal metabolic rate) is the number of calories daily your specific body needs to function.
       
       Science recognizes that 1 pound of muscle mass burns six (6) calories daily, but 1 pound of fat mass (including skinny fat) only burns 2-3 calories. Fat, including skinny fat, burns fewer calories. Your Adjusted Mifflin St Jeor Formula BMR (see FORMR score above) is 1678.05, which includes skinny fat in the equation. Thus, your BMR is somewhere between 1705.34 and 1678.05 calories relative to your body type, as currently identified as a Body Type Two (BT2). If you are in fact a Body Type Three (BT3), then you would likely have more skinny fat and need even fewer BMR calories daily.
       
       Skinny fat is genetic.
       
       Lack of muscles/muscle mass is genetic.
       
       All of which affects posture, vertebrae et al. But it all starts with genes/genetics/DNA.
       
       If you have skinny fat where there should be muscles/muscle mass, that is genetics.
       
       Can you help us understand why you think there is not enough emphasis on genetics/DNA?

       Log in to Reply

       • Comment #4941

         I might have misunderstood some of the information that was presented. I thought that the study was saying that everyone should have back dimples since it is a defining characteristic of BT1. I was previously under the assumption that back dimples were genetic and if an individual is not born with them then they cannot develop them regardless of muscle mass. I now understand what the information was saying that muscle mass and distribution is genetic but can be impacted by lifestyle as well. Sorry, that was a misunderstanding on my end.

         Log in to Reply

         • Comment #4942

           The Dimples and Classic Arch are, indeed, defining characteristics of a Body Type One (BT1) -- HOWEVER, it is mainstream science and medical doctors who say that all human beings are born in a Standard Scientific Human Body Anatomy Book Body Type One (BT1) (see attached) and, when well within their safe Body Mass Index (BMI) weight range have those defining characteristics - as the Standard Scientific Human Body Anatomy Book Body Type One (BT1) is the only body type that they recognize. Even if you are diagnosed with a malformation, abnormality, or underdevelopment, you are still a Standard Scientific Human Body Anatomy Book Body Type One (BT1), just with a specific diagnosis. It is all genetics, because that is what defines each individual human body: genetics/DNA/genes.
           
           Our research says and shows the opposite, that there are The Four Body Types. We offer actual publically available scientific data, anyone can engage and join the conversation for free (free subscriber account). We are the only science-based and scientifically calculated Body Type Science anywhere.
           
           Scientific Body Type Science Research Data - https://www.fellowone.com/category/fellow-one-research/the-four-body-types/body-type-science/body-type-quiz/research-data/
           
           Science-Based Knowledge Base - https://www.fellowone.com/category/fellow-one-research/spiritual-science/council-advice/best-daily-life-advice/insights-from-gnosis
           
           Would you say that vertebrae and muscles/muscle mass underdevelopment along with skinny fat is common in your family relative to the thoracic 8, thoracic 12, lumbar 1, lumbar 2, lumbar 3, lumbar 4, lumbar 5, and sacrum vertebrae, no less? Are there any other vertebrae that you might suspect as being typically underdeveloped, in terms of your family genetics/DNA?

           

           Log in to Reply

           • Comment #4943

             In my family, yes there is typically underdevelopment in the mentioned vertebrae. Even in family members with higher muscle mass, the arch and dimples are not present. Generally in my family, the whole thoracic vertebrae is underdeveloped since the spine/ back of most of my family members have a mild curve.

             Log in to Reply

             • Comment #4944

               For those family members with higher muscle mass:
               
               1) a) Do they have any obvious muscle definition in the upper, mid, lower abodminal/midriff/stomach area - any sign of a BT1 six-pack or the like, such as this BT1? b) On a scale of 1-10, 10 being 100% defined, how defined would you say, on average, your family is in terms of the thoracic 8, thoracic 12, lumbar 1, lumbar 2, lumbar 3, lumbar 4, and lumbar 5 vertebrae?
               
               2) a) Do most of your family members still have obvious skinny fat and/or fat, even with more muscle mass, relative to those vertebrae? b) On a scale of 1-10, 10 being 100% Skinny Fat or/and Fat, how much Skinny Fat and/or Fat would you say, on average, your family has relative to the thoracic 8, thoracic 12, lumbar 1, lumbar 2, lumbar 3, lumbar 4, and lumbar 5 vertebrae? c) How about the sacrum vertebra, is fat and/or skinny fat in any form (like maybe cellulite) common in your family? d) Relative to the sacrum vertebra, on a scale of 1-10, 10 being 100% Skinny Fat and/or Fat, how much Skinny Fat or Fat would you say, on average, your family has?
               
               3) Finally, as the thoracic 8, thoracic 12, lumbar 1, lumbar 2, lumbar 3, lumbar 4, lumbar 5 vertebrae are directly relative to the stomach and intestines, no less, are digestive/gut issues or bowel issues at all a problem in your family?

               Log in to Reply

               • Comment #4951

                 1a. Yes, those in my family with higher muscle mass do have a defined stomach area.
                 1b. On average, I would say 4/5. For those with higher muscle mass, it would likely be an 8.
                 
                 2a. No, those with higher muscle mass do not have fat relative to those vertebrae.
                 The majority do.
                 2b. For those with higher muscle mass, probably a 1 or 2. For the rest of my family, 8.
                 2c. Yes
                 2d. 9
                 
                 3. Yes, stomach problems are very common in my family.

                 Log in to Reply

                 • Comment #4954

                   All very helpful. Thank you.

                   Log in to Reply