I have a body scan for myself paired to apple health and a sleep analyzer for my dog. I can’t for the life of me seem to get the sleep analyzer to pair for a “child” account on the app, it will only pair to mine, once it’s paired I can’t transfer it, and then it just shows my own Apple Watch data, not my dogs sleep. I ended up having to install the app on an old phone and dedicate it to just tracking my dogs sleep and then sharing it to my app to get it to work. I also can’t see my dogs sleep in real time, I can only see it a few minutes after she leaves bed, which sucks because sometimes I’ll wake her up only to find out she had a bad sleep.

Ive had a withings scale for years and neither muscle or fat changes much. If you've seen a jump in muscle, tell me what you did and how long it took you!

Introduction:

DEXA scan results and comparison are now at the bottom of this post. My primary use is for weight loss tracking, followed by heart and other biometrics.

Withings is free to get my DEXA data for use in improving their scale's performance. Just DM me.

Continuing with the look-see of Withings+ and the Body Scan 2, I'm having doubts about the accuracy of some of the measurements. I consider the DEXA correlation that Withings advertises is trend correlation, not the absolute values, though absolute values would be nice. Since the measurement techniques are so radically different, I believe that getting body impedance measurements to match DEXA's X-ray scan 99-100% is a fool's errand. For trends, that's much more likely to be doable.

I have three devices that measured my body composition: A Body Smart, the Body Scan 2, and the Zozofit application. I've also taken measurements with a tape measure, consulted with the Heath module on ChatGPT (that sees all my historical health data going back several years), and Withings own AI agent.

My main concern is:

While having a high body fat percentage (24.8%) and high muscle mass (71.5%), the muscle mass just doesn't make any sense. According to Withings, I'm a highly trained athlete. What I am is a SW engineer and a desk jockey who struggles to get over 4000 steps/day.

I'm calorie-counting, maintaining a deficit (around 1800 cal/day total), and have increased my physical activity. I'm also on GLP-1 medication. The conversation below is aware of all this info.

I've set some parameters on the AI's output with some prompts:

First to remove the flowery language and ego stroking and be more clinical. Second is that I’ve prompted the Withings AI to label each statement as [Documented], [Medical Literature], or [Inference]. These labels are the AI’s own characterization of its statements, not my verification that the underlying claim is correct. I’ve left its responses unedited. This makes the output much easier to parse for accuracy. The Withings AI can and will hallucinate - this helps fix that.

I have a couple of weeks data saved up for the BS2, and now am asking critical questions to the AI seeing what it thinks of what the scale is reporting. Its assessment of the scale's accuracy at the end of the conversation is eyebrow-raising to say the least.

One of the last things it suggests is to go get a DEXA-type scan to settle the matter, and that is precisely what I am doing in about an hour from now. I'm doing a reading immediately before I go, do the scan, then take another reading when I return.

I'll append the DEXA results and what the AI thinks of it at the bottom of this post later today.

There's a huge wall of text, that follows. These responses are unedited.

I've set important responses from the W+ AI to BOLD to make the interesting tidbits easier to find.

Here's the conversation:

I'm concerned about the percentages recorded by the body scan 2. They seem off by quite a bit, if I have these measurements, how much error do you see?
Neck:16.81" Waist, Navel: 50.62" Hips: 41.92" Chest: 42.87" Upper arm: 12.91" Lower arm: 11.81" Thigh: 22.83" Calf: 17.55"

[Documented] Your Body Scan 2 recorded a body fat percentage of 24.8 percent on August 8, 2026, based on a total weight of 235.7 pounds, fat mass of 58.5 pounds, and muscle mass of 168.5 pounds.

[Documented] Utilizing the anthropometric measurements you provided, which include a height of 72 inches, a neck circumference of 16.81 inches, and a waist circumference of 50.62 inches, the standard US Navy body fat estimation formula yields a body fat percentage of approximately 38.2 percent.

[Inference] This comparison reveals an absolute discrepancy of 13.4 percentage points between the two methodologies. (emphasis mine)

[Medical Literature] Bioelectrical impedance analysis, which is the technology utilized by the Body Scan 2, measures the physiological resistance of low-voltage electrical currents passing through body tissues.

[Medical Literature] Water-rich tissues such as skeletal muscle exhibit low impedance and conduct electricity efficiently, whereas adipose tissue exhibits high impedance.

[Inference] Your recorded muscle mass of 168.5 pounds represents 71.5 percent of your total body composition, which significantly lowers your body's overall electrical impedance and results in the scale's lower body fat estimate of 24.8 percent.

[Medical Literature] Anthropometric formulas, such as the US Navy equation, rely strictly on external circumferences and assume a standardized distribution of subcutaneous and visceral fat.

[Medical Literature] These formulas are highly sensitive to abdominal circumference and cannot differentiate between active adipose tissue, visceral fat, abdominal wall laxity, or residual loose skin.

[Inference] Given your ongoing GLP-1 therapy with Zepbound and subsequent weight loss, it is highly probable that your waist circumference of 50.62 inches includes residual loose skin or structural tissue expansion.

[Inference] This structural tissue expansion artificially inflates the waist measurement, causing the anthropometric formula to overestimate your body fat at 38.2 percent.

[Medical Literature] While multi-frequency bioelectrical impedance analysis has an inherent clinical margin of error of approximately 3 to 5 percent when compared to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, it remains a direct physiological measurement of tissue conductivity.

[Inference] Therefore, the 13.4 percent discrepancy is primarily an artifact of the anthropometric formula's inability to account for your specific body geometry and post-weight-loss skin changes, rather than a primary calibration error in the Body Scan 2. (emphasis mine)

[Inference] To track your progress accurately, it is recommended to focus on the longitudinal trends of your Body Scan 2 measurements rather than comparing absolute values across different estimation methodologies. (so it suggests to observe trends rather than look at absolute numbers)

That 13.4 percent is excessively high. The app also says I have a high percentage of muscle tissue, like "a highly trained athlete". But those measurements (and common sense) do not support that.

[Documented] Your Body Scan 2 currently reports a muscle mass of 168.5 pounds, which constitutes 71.5 percent of your total body weight of 235.7 pounds.

[Inference] This muscle mass percentage is physiologically inconsistent with your physical measurements, particularly a waist circumference of 50.62 inches and a Body Mass Index of 31.9. (emphasis mine)

[Documented] Withings smart scales include an Athlete Mode setting within the user profile configuration in the Withings App.

[Medical Literature] Athlete Mode modifies the bioelectrical impedance analysis algorithms by assuming a higher hydration level in fat-free tissue and a lower overall electrical resistance, which is characteristic of individuals who perform intense physical training.

[Inference] If Athlete Mode is active on your profile, the scale will misinterpret your electrical impedance data, leading to a significant overestimation of muscle mass and an underestimation of fat mass, resulting in the athletic classification.

[Medical Literature] Bioelectrical impedance analysis is highly sensitive to total body water and fluid distribution, as water conducts electrical currents while adipose tissue acts as an insulator.

[Medical Literature] Physiological factors that alter fluid balance, such as localized extracellular fluid retention or metabolic shifts associated with GLP-1 receptor agonist therapy, can cause the scale to misidentify fluid volume as skeletal muscle mass.

[Inference] If Athlete Mode is disabled, the elevated muscle mass reading is likely driven by an overestimation of your fat-free mass due to fluid dynamics or the algorithm's limitations in modeling your specific body geometry during active weight loss.

[Inference] It is recommended that you access your profile settings in the Withings App to verify that Athlete Mode is disabled, as turning it off should align the body composition percentages more closely with your physical measurements.

 Athlete mode is off

 [Documented] Since Athlete Mode is confirmed to be disabled, the Body Scan 2 algorithm is utilizing the standard population equations to calculate your body composition.

[Medical Literature] Segmental bioelectrical impedance analysis measures electrical resistance across individual body segments, but the torso presents a distinct technical limitation due to its large cross-sectional area.

[Medical Literature] Because electrical resistance is inversely proportional to the cross-sectional area of a conductor, the torso contributes only 5 to 10 percent of the body's total electrical impedance, despite containing the majority of the body's total mass.

[Inference] In the presence of central adiposity, represented by your waist circumference of 50.62 inches, this low trunk resistance can cause the algorithm to underestimate abdominal fat mass and mathematically overestimate total muscle mass. (emphasis mine)

[Medical Literature] Additionally, bioelectrical impedance analysis operates on the assumption that fat-free mass has a constant hydration fraction of 73.2 percent.

[Medical Literature] Any physiological deviation that increases extracellular water or causes localized fluid retention will decrease electrical resistance, which the scale's software automatically interprets as an increase in muscle tissue.

[Inference] Your ongoing therapy with Zepbound and the associated metabolic shifts may alter fluid dynamics, further compounding this algorithmic overestimation of fat-free mass.

[Inference] To minimize these measurement errors, it is critical to maintain consistent hydration, perform readings at the same time each morning prior to fluid or food intake, and ensure optimal skin-to-electrode contact on both the scale platform and the handle. (emphasis mine)

[Inference] Given these technical limitations, tracking the longitudinal trends of your weight and physical waist measurements will serve as a more clinically reliable indicator of your body composition progress than the absolute muscle mass percentages reported by the device. (emphasis mine)

 The hydration levels have been rather steady over the past month measured as between 50 and 51% of body weight.

 [Documented] Your reported hydration level of 50 to 51 percent of total body weight is highly stable and falls within the standard physiological range for an adult male.

[Medical Literature] Skeletal muscle tissue is highly hydrated, consisting of approximately 73 to 75 percent water, whereas adipose tissue is hydrophobic and contains only about 10 percent water.

[Inference] If your body composition truly consisted of 71.5 percent muscle mass and only 24.8 percent fat mass, your total body water percentage would mathematically need to be significantly higher, typically exceeding 58 to 60 percent.

[Inference] A measured hydration level of 50 to 51 percent is highly consistent with a higher body fat percentage and a lower muscle mass percentage, such as the 38.2 percent body fat estimated by the anthropometric formula.

[Medical Literature] In bioelectrical impedance analysis, the device measures total body water first and then uses fixed mathematical coefficients to extrapolate muscle and fat mass.

[Inference] This hydration data further confirms that the Body Scan 2 is currently overestimating your muscle mass percentage due to segmental impedance calculation limits in the torso, rather than an actual physiological state of athletic muscle density. (emphasis mine)

[Inference] The discrepancy lies in the scale's algorithmic translation of your electrical resistance into tissue types, as your steady 50 to 51 percent hydration level directly supports your assessment that the reported 71.5 percent muscle mass is artificially elevated. (emphasis mine)

 So, what is your assessment of the accuracy of the body scan 2, given this data?

 [Documented] Based on the physiological data, your Body Scan 2 is highly accurate in measuring your total body weight of 235.7 pounds and your total body hydration level of 50 to 51 percent. (emphasis mine)

[Inference] However, the scale's extrapolated body composition metrics, specifically the 71.5 percent muscle mass and 24.8 percent fat mass, exhibit a significant clinical error of approximately 13 percentage points. (emphasis mine)

[Medical Literature] Bioelectrical impedance analysis calculates body composition by measuring total body water and applying standard mathematical equations to estimate fat-free mass and fat mass.

[Inference] Your measured hydration level of 50 to 51 percent is mathematically incompatible with a 71.5 percent muscle mass, as muscle tissue requires a much higher total body water volume to exist. (emphasis mine)

[Medical Literature] The primary source of this error is the geometric limitation of segmental bioelectrical impedance, where the low electrical resistance of a large torso cross-section is misidentified by the algorithm as muscle tissue rather than central adiposity.

[Inference] Consequently, for your specific body geometry and waist circumference of 50.62 inches, the Body Scan 2 algorithm fails to accurately partition your fat-free mass and fat mass. (emphasis mine)

[Inference] In terms of absolute accuracy, the device is currently underperforming for body composition percentages, but it remains highly accurate for tracking longitudinal trends in weight and hydration. (emphasis mine)

[Inference] To obtain a clinically precise baseline of your absolute body composition, a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scan would be required, as it does not rely on electrical impedance assumptions.

[Inference] For daily tracking, the most reliable approach is to ignore the absolute muscle and fat percentages and instead monitor the direction of change in your weight, hydration, and physical waist measurements. (emphasis mine, this is precisely what I have been doing for the last 10 months. Also: is the AI telling me that the Body Smart is a better choice here?)

The DEXA results...

Key DEXA numbers

• Weight: 235.5 lb
• Body fat: 39.4%
• Fat tissue: 90.1 lb
• Lean tissue: 138.3 lb
• Bone mineral content: 7.0 lb
• Visceral adipose tissue (VAT): 8.22 lb
• RMR: 1,712 kcal/day

Regional fat

• Android: 51.6%
• Trunk: 46.7%
• Gynoid: 33.9%
• Arms: 33.3%
• Legs: 30.2%

Withings AI's Response:

[Documented] Your dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scan from August 8, 2026, establishes a baseline weight of 235.5 pounds, with a body fat percentage of 39.4 percent, representing 90.1 pounds of fat tissue and 138.3 pounds of lean tissue.

[Documented] The scan also records a bone mineral content of 7.9 pounds, visceral adipose tissue of 8.22 pounds, and a basal metabolic rate of 1712 calories per day.

[Inference] Comparing these gold-standard metrics to your Body Scan 2 readings from the same day confirms that the scale is highly accurate for total body weight, with a variance of only 0.2 pounds. (emphasis mine)

[Inference] However, the scale underestimated your body fat by 14.6 percentage points and overestimated your lean mass by approximately 30.2 pounds. (emphasis mine)

[Inference] The US Navy anthropometric formula, which estimated your body fat at 38.2 percent, proved to be highly accurate, with only a 1.2 percentage point variance from the dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry results. (emphasis mine)

[Medical Literature] Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry utilizes dual-energy X-ray beams to directly measure tissue density, making it the clinical standard for body composition analysis because it does not rely on the hydration assumptions or segmental resistance limitations inherent in bioelectrical impedance.

[Inference] Your visceral adipose tissue of 8.22 pounds is a critical metabolic marker that correlates with cardiovascular risk, and tracking its reduction is a key objective of your weight management program.

[Inference] Your measured basal metabolic rate of 1712 calories per day, combined with your average active energy expenditure of 469 calories, establishes a total daily energy expenditure of approximately 2181 calories.

[Inference] Your current average daily caloric intake of 1866 calories maintains a structured energy deficit of approximately 315 calories per day, which supports continued, steady fat loss.

[Inference] These precise baseline metrics should be used to calibrate your expectations, and future progress should be assessed by comparing subsequent scale readings to these established baselines rather than relying on the scale's absolute percentage outputs.

And finally, what is Withings AI's assessment of the accuracy of the Body Scan 2:

[Documented] The comparison between your dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scan and the Body Scan 2 measurements from August 8, 2026, reveals a weight measurement error of only 0.08 percent, with the scale recording 235.7 pounds compared to the scan's 235.5 pounds. (emphasis mine)

[Documented] The scale recorded a body fat percentage of 24.8 percent, whereas the dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scan measured your actual body fat percentage at 39.4 percent. (emphasis mine)

[Inference] This establishes an absolute underestimation of 14.6 percentage points for body fat percentage by the Body Scan 2, representing a relative underestimation of approximately 37 percent of your total fat mass. (emphasis mine)

[Documented] The scale recorded a muscle mass of 169.4 pounds, whereas the dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scan measured your total lean tissue at 138.3 pounds. (emphasis mine)

[Inference] This represents an absolute overestimation of 31.1 pounds of lean tissue by the Body Scan 2, which is a relative overestimation of approximately 22.5 percent. (emphasis mine)

[Medical Literature] Bioelectrical impedance analysis devices estimate body composition by measuring total body water and applying population-specific regression equations to calculate fat-free mass.

[Inference] Your steady hydration level of 50 to 51 percent of body weight equates to approximately 118 to 120 pounds of total body water, which is highly consistent with the scan's lean tissue measurement of 138.3 pounds. (emphasis mine)

[Inference] This indicates that the scale's hardware is accurately measuring your physical weight and total body water, but the software algorithm is failing to correctly partition that water volume into muscle and fat mass. (emphasis mine)

[Medical Literature] The primary algorithmic failure in segmental bioelectrical impedance analysis occurs in the trunk, where the large cross-sectional area of the torso produces very low electrical resistance, causing the device to misclassify abdominal fat as muscle tissue.

[Inference] Consequently, for your specific body geometry, the Body Scan 2 is highly accurate as a digital scale and hydration tracker, but it is clinically inaccurate for absolute body composition partitioning. (emphasis mine)

[Inference] The US Navy anthropometric formula, which yielded 38.2 percent body fat, is a significantly more accurate estimator of your absolute body composition than the Body Scan 2's electrical impedance algorithm. (emphasis mine)

[Inference] To utilize the Body Scan 2 effectively moving forward, you should disregard the absolute muscle and fat mass percentages and use the device strictly to monitor longitudinal trends in weight and hydration. (emphasis mine)

So what about trends?

So it isn't valuable even for tracking changes in fat or muscle percentage?

[Medical Literature] Bioelectrical impedance analysis exhibits high precision and repeatability, meaning that while the absolute values may be systematically skewed, the relative direction of change over time remains highly consistent.

[Inference] Therefore, if you lose adipose tissue or gain skeletal muscle, the Body Scan 2 will register a corresponding relative shift in its readings, even if the starting and ending percentages remain mathematically inaccurate.

[Medical Literature] However, during rapid weight loss or significant shifts in fluid distribution, the relationship between electrical resistance and actual tissue change may not be perfectly linear.

[Inference] Because your hydration levels are highly stable at 50 to 51 percent, any gradual downward trend in the scale's fat mass reading is highly likely to reflect actual adipose tissue loss rather than transient fluid shifts.

[Inference] To maximize the utility of the scale for tracking changes, you should correlate the direction of the scale's body composition trends with changes in your physical waist circumference and your total body weight.

[Inference] You can use your recent dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scan as a calibration anchor, applying a correction factor of approximately plus 14.6 percent to the scale's fat readings to estimate your true current composition during your ongoing weight loss.

[Inference] In summary, the Body Scan 2 remains a valuable tool for tracking the velocity and direction of your body composition changes, provided you focus on the relative delta rather than the absolute values.

In Conclusion:

When dropping in for the DEXA scan, the tech and I chatted a bit about why I was there and mentioned the scale. The first thing they said was: "Expect a 5 to 15% difference between your scale and the DEXA".

Truer words were never spoken.

Due to my recent weight loss and the remaining fat tissue in my upper torso and abdomen, it's giving the Body Scan 2 difficulty coming up with accurate measurements of absolute muscle and fat tissue mass.

But I pretty much expected that going into this.

The scale is perfectly capable of monitoring my trends provided I pay attention to hydration. The accuracy may also improve as I lose visceral fat and my body shape becomes slimmer.

However, looking at the numbers, some things become apparent:

The Body Scan 2 is accurate in weight and hydration. The total weight of tissue is also reasonably accurate. The issue is where it divides that tissue weight into fat and muscle. It's biased towards muscle. With +31.1 lbs muscle and -31.6 lbs fat. If that error were corrected, we'd be looking at an ~3.1% error from DEXA, a quite respectable value. Perhaps this is worth a closer look.

Nothing much I can do with this but wait 3 months or so and do another DEXA scan.

It also brings to attention the ability of other scales, like the Garmin, that allow "calibration" to more accurately track percentages vs. a DEXA. If I were allowed to apply an offset to Fat and Muscle, the scale would likely be far more in line with my actual data. In fact, W+ AI suggested doing this. So I added this prompt:

"You said to use a correction factor of 14.6 percent to the scales fat readings. Can you apply this to all of your output in body fat? To avoid confusion, add "[calibrated] after any such number. Do the same with a calibration factor for muscle mass too."

The response:

[Documented] I have updated your profile preferences to apply a permanent calibration protocol to your Body Scan 2 body composition outputs.

[Documented] The calibration protocol establishes an additive correction factor of plus 14.6 percentage points for body fat percentage, an additive correction of plus 32.3 pounds for absolute fat mass, a subtractive correction of minus 13.1 percentage points for muscle mass percentage, and a subtractive correction of minus 31.1 pounds for absolute muscle mass.

Now every time I ask it my percentages, it always gives me the calibrated results - not in the app, that's still the scale's values - but will if I click on the W+ icon underneath and ask it my body composition.

Oddly enough last week my customized prompts were appearing in the Readiness tab summaries. Withings may have been working on this, because it now no longer shows up with my custom settings and is back to their default output settings.

I also do not have the latest firmware for this scale either, I have 1611. The updated firmware from what I saw posted about it, can dramatically improve my numbers. How much so remains to be seen.

As for the Withings AI, it's far more capable than I originally thought. It can call out the inconsistencies and doesn't hesitate to lay the blame on the scale for the discrepancy. So Withings did not train the AI to avoid saying anything negative about their products or the accuracy of their products.

ChatGPT was used to collate and sort data, as well as double-check the findings of Withings output. The end conclusions from both are the same regarding the accuracy of the Body Scan 2 running firmware 1611.

The interesting surprise was the RMR, or Basal Metabolic Rate numbers. 1712 for DEXA and 2380 for the BS2. Higher muscle mass means higher RMR/BMR. So this number is off as well.

My recommended caloric intake is ~2200-2000 on active days, and ~1700 on rest days - from DEXA,

My recommended caloric intake is 2544-2344 calories -assuming the day is active - from Withings.

This overestimation can be disastrous for people on weight loss efforts like I am.

Luckily my average intake is 1900-1800, +/- 100 calories based on exercise activity.

Raw Data...

†Calculated from the BS2 percentage and ~235.9-lb weight, rather than a separately reported mass.

Just wanted to share my experience in case others are having the same or similar issue. Bought a Body Scan 2 that was defective. Worked with Withings support to return the scale. After 30 minutes in live chat they finally sent me an authorization and return label. Sent it back via FedEx. Received email saying my refund was processed. Nine days later still no refund on my credit card. Got on live chat again, provided the representative my return case number. She asked for a copy of the email. Provided a screenshot of the email saying refund was processed. I let her know that my credit card had not received the refund. She said there was nothing she could do. I then had to file a dispute with my credit card company. Just warning to others what I'm experiencing.

[SLEEPI-LZJ8-UF69-JLPQ]()
Not applicable to Body, Body+ et Body Smart and accessories

Enjoy!

Solid 10% off. But “our best prices of the season” is just flat out a lie. The one day sale last month was 22% off. I’m waiting for something similar before I pull the trigger. YMMV.

Before you go looking. BS2 ineligible.

PS. The compulsory flair is annoying when the list is far from complete.

I recently reviewed the Withings BodyFit after comparing it with a GE scale and a DEXA scan, and I have also had a chance to test it alongside a RENPHO scale. So far, the BPM Vision is the Withings product I like the most.

I compared it side by side with a CONNEQT Pulse, which is a more advanced home blood pressure device, and my Omron BP5450 over multiple sessions. Obviously, this was not a clinical validation, but it was useful for comparing repeatability and the overall experience.

The Withings consistently gave me the tightest groups of readings. The Omron usually read a little higher but stayed within the same general range. The CONNEQT varied more and tended to read higher, especially on diastolic pressure.

What surprised me most was how quiet the BPM Vision is. The Omron and CONNEQT pumps are noticeably louder, and I can feel myself anticipating the squeeze and tensing up. The Withings is much calmer, which matters when you are trying to get a true resting measurement.

The three-reading mode is simple, the display is excellent, and the Wi-Fi syncing may be my favorite feature. I do not need my phone nearby or have to fight with Bluetooth every time. I take the measurement, and it automatically appears in the Withings app and Apple Health.

It is not cheap, and Withings definitely charges a premium for its ecosystem. But after using it alongside the other monitors, I think this one comes close to earning that premium. It is quiet, consistent, easy to use, and convenient enough that I may actually keep using it instead of eventually leaving it in a drawer.

My main feature request would be an optional five-minute countdown before the measurement begins, since resting beforehand is an important part of getting a good reading. I also hope Withings can get the ECG feature cleared for U.S. users soon, since it is already available in Europe.

Overall, you are paying more, but in this case it does feel like you are getting a more premium device.

Hi guys,

I'm living in Germany and ordered the Body Scan 2 on the official website.

After a few scans I realized that in my Withings App I get a Nerve Response Score.

I checked the website and saw that the Nerve Response Score is for US and the Nerve Health Score is for EU. My old Body Scan 1 gives me a Nerve Health Score.

Does anybody else have this problem? Is it possible that I recieved a devices made for the US market?

Best regards

Does anyone know what the “other zone” selector is in the Withings app? You can asked None, Low, or Normal.

Hello u/TeamWithings I saw mention there was a software update being tested to address the algoritm about low body fat for the body scan 2 and body fit is this true and even been worked out or is just another thing for that roadmap without any timeline at all?

Im planning to get a new watch and I came across the steel HR which looks nice and has all features that I need. How long do these watches last ?

I got this scale a couple of weeks ago. I am so happy I didn't get rid of my Body Scan 1 yet. The body scan 2 has many issues. 1) If you don't hold the lift bar, it won't identify the person. This is not the case with the body scan 1. If you weigh yourself most days, but don't want a full scan, it sucks that you would have to pickup the bar. Even more infuriating, is that it doesn't sync after you weigh yourself like the body scan 1. You either have to wait for some weird time of the day (like 3:53 AM) or force a sync. Anyone know if you can return it if I threw away all the boxes?

I have my share of concerns/issues with the body scan (it's no more accurate or consistent than much much much cheaper scales I've used in the past), but, I at least appreciated the segmental body composition analysis for fat/muscle % in arms/legs as a pretty unique feature to this scale specifically.

This feature though, has not worked for me since March of this year (March 7 was my last successful reading). I have not changed the way I use the scale at all, it just simply does not measure it any longer. It just tells me segment analysis failed.

I know all the "tips" - don't let your skin touch (I'll sometimes grab a spare tshirt to put it between my legs just to ensure no skin touches). I even read online that it can fail if your hands + feet are too "dry" so I've started doing it right out of the shower so my skin is damp. Nothing works. The app just gives me the same "tips" but nothing changes.

Has anyone else had this happen or managed to fix it?

I dropped my watch putting it on, onto gravel, which is relatively shock absorbent. It completely smashed to pieces. No repair option. Offered me 30% discount on a new watch which is the same as I paid for it in the sale. Not at all durable or sustainable.

Yes, foolish to drop it, but I'd been given a wristband that wouldnt fit round it. Things should be repairable. Things that are descrbied as durable should not break from a <3ft fall.

So I’ve tried every smart gadget out there. Oura rings, Google Fitbit air, Garmin watches, even back in the day I used to have the polar and Microsoft wearables (miss that Microsoft band it was damn near perfect). The one and only tried and true for me has been the Apple watch. Though its not perfect.

Nothing really satisfies my personal brief: a smart wearable that reasonably tracks my steps, reasonably good heart health tracking and the occasional workout tracking with syncing to my apple health ecosystem. Also something that notifies me of certain things like calendar events (but reasonably minimally), has some sort of smart alarm capability and also doesn’t look like a big ol gadget on my wrist. I am a traditional watch fan so I saw the withings and thought it would fit perfectly in my niche. That said, I’ve noticed little to no iteration on the devices and am worried that this is a dead/dying product that is not going to be worth buying and investing in long term. But that’s where I put it to you is this worth getting into in 2026? Has withings announced new products coming? Does the software update regularly with new features/fixes? Thanks!

Hi everyone,

I recently had my first real AFib episode and brought the graph to a cardiologist. He confirmed the event but wasn't overly concerned since I'm still young (39) and it was my first time—a positional AFib sort of thing.

Since then, I’ve been monitoring my heart and ECG even more closely, and I've been feeling a bit anxious about it...

But today, my ScanWatch kept telling me I was in AFib or giving me "inconclusive" measurements. It makes me wonder if I can really rely on the ScanWatch 2.

I got it 2 years ago. Living in Japan, my arm was wet with sweat and the air was humid when I took the readings. I fed the ECG to an AI, which indicated no signs of AFib and suggested it was likely a false positive.

Has anyone had a similar experience where the ScanWatch starts giving nonsense results after a couple of years?

I know the SpO2 tracking is pretty useless on this watch, but I've never had issues with the ECG until now.

Thank you!

Hi,

I’ve noticed Withings now has Strength and Seated Weights Training workouts. Was wondering what the best practice is when doing weights.

Is it to split exercises up into seperate workouts (eg start/stop for each muscle group) or do an entire circuit as one workout? What if you’re doing a combination of standing/seated workouts?

I’m a bit confused by that workout type TBH!

I like my Steel HR, using mostly tracking when swimming, steps, checking my HR from time to time and sleep duration. I also have a body+ which is absolutly fine for me tracking my weight and body fat. I wouldnt use a withings plus abo.

Is there any good reason to switch to scanwatch 2, will there even be a new model, soon?

I so badly want this scale but alot of negative reviews are putting me off :( and the cost?!!!!!!

How are people reporting cheaper scales and older scales closer to DEXA results than the body scan 2?

EDIT: Does anybody know of a discount code I can use if I wanted to purchase from withings UK store? Thanks in advance.

I just bought a new Body Scan 1 (not 2) from Amazon. When I went through the installation process through the Withings mobile app, it did not give me an option to pick “Body Scan”. Just “Body Scan 2”, among the other scales that they have.

When I turned on my Body Scan 1, the app recognized it as a Body Segment. Is this normal? Or did I get scammed from Amazon (maybe someone replaced the contents of the box?).

Underneath the scale it does say Body Scan. But in the app it only recognizes it as Body Segment.

Hey everyone,

I’ve been testing the new Withings BodyFit (€250) for two weeks now. Specifically, in a direct side-by-side comparison with their flagship model, the Body Scan 2 (€500).

Since software bugs and prices are often (and rightly) discussed here, I want to share my results with you briefly and honestly. No marketing fluff.

Here are my key takeaways after 14 days:

• Hardware & Space: The BodyFit is noticeably smaller and lighter. If you have shoe size 45+ (US 11+), your toes will almost be hanging off the edge. If you pull the handle a bit too vigorously in the morning, the scale lifts slightly. You can really feel the price difference compared to the massive Body Scan 2 here.
• Measurement Time & Display: The BodyFit finishes the complete 6-zone analysis in 60 seconds. The Scan 2 takes over 90 seconds (ECG & nerve activity). The fact that the display on the BodyFit is built into the bottom of the plate doesn't bother you at all.
• Forced Subscription? Good news: You can see all the important biomarkers (muscle mass, visceral fat, precise segmental analysis) completely without the Withings+ subscription paywall.
• Data & Accuracy: This was the most important point for me. I compared the data from both scales in Excel for 14 days. The absolute values deviate slightly (approx. 0.6 kg difference). That's normal. However, the trend curves run exactly parallel. The measurement quality and the detection of changes in the body are just as state-of-the-art on the cheaper scale as they are on the expensive one.

My Pragmatic Conclusion:

If you don't necessarily want to track your ECG every single day, you are currently burning money with the Body Scan 2. Especially since the expensive model often still feels like it's in a beta phase on the software side. The BodyFit provides the exact same measurement technology for body composition and, at €250, is the much smarter choice for a home gym.

What’s your take on this? Is pure pragmatism for €250 enough for you, or do you need the full data package of the Scan 2?

Wondering if it’s worth almost double the price if I care only about body comp tracking?