All famous scansAll famous scansAll famous scansAll famous scansAmerican rugby player - Instagram Profile
Ilona Maher is an American rugby sevens player and an Olympic medallist with the United States women's team. She is also, by some distance, the most-followed rugby player in the world, with an audience built on short, funny videos made from inside the squad and on a sustained public argument that a muscular, heavy, visibly powerful female athlete is exactly what the sport requires. That second thing has made her a genuinely influential figure well beyond rugby, and she has carried it into mainstream television and modelling work.
The scan shows a powerfully built frame. At 177 cm and 90 kg with a body fat percentage of 34.1%, the figures describe an athlete carrying substantial mass, which in sevens is the point: collisions, tackles and rucks are won by momentum. The "Apple" classification indicates weight distributed around the midsection with less waist definition, a shape common in contact-sport athletes whose training loads the trunk for stability rather than for taper.
A visual estimation of the areas of your body with a higher likelihood of containing more fat than others -- not a measurement. This feature is experimental; treat the heatmap as an indication, not a clinical finding. Accuracy is best at the extremes of body-fat percentage, weaker in the middle, and atypical body shapes (athletic builds, pregnancy, etc.) may not be modelled well.
| Metric | Value vs reference | Reference | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lateral lean?Accurate to about ±2-3° in a single scan -- camera tilt is the main confounder. Trending against your own history (same setup) is more reliable than the absolute number. For best accuracy, make sure the camera was level while scanning. | +0.5° | 0° = vertical (frontal knees-to-head axis) | natural — upright |
| Head forward offset?Accurate to about ±1-2 cm in a single scan -- camera tilt and head rotation (looking up / down / sideways) are the main confounders. Trending against your own history (same setup) is more reliable than the absolute number. For best accuracy, look straight ahead and keep the camera level while scanning. | Upload a side picture to get this metric | 0 = ear in line with the spine axis (no forward head) | — |
| Forward/back lean?Accurate to about ±2-3° in a single scan -- camera tilt is the main confounder. Trending against your own history (same setup) is more reliable than the absolute number. For best accuracy, make sure the camera was level while scanning. | Upload a side picture to get this metric | 0° = vertical (side knees-to-head axis) | — |
| Shoulder tilt?Accurate to about ±2-3° in a single scan -- camera tilt is the main confounder. Trending against your own history (same setup) is more reliable than the absolute number. For best accuracy, make sure the camera was level while scanning. | +0.2° | 0° = level (frontal) | natural — balanced |
| Hip tilt?Accurate to about ±2-3° in a single scan -- camera tilt is the main confounder. Trending against your own history (same setup) is more reliable than the absolute number. For best accuracy, make sure the camera was level while scanning. | -0.4° | 0° = level (frontal) | natural — balanced |
| Segment | Left width | Right width | Δ vs symmetric | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Upper arm Biceps / triceps | 9.9 cm | 9.2 cm | +8.2% | natural — left side larger |
| Forearm Forearm flexors | 6.9 cm | 7.9 cm | -13.5% | notable — right side larger |
| Thigh Quadriceps | 14.8 cm | 18.3 cm | -21.2% | significant — right side largerlow confidenceA single front-facing photo can't tell a genuinely larger limb from one simply rotated toward the camera, and small limbs like the forearm swing a lot — so a large difference here is more likely a measurement artifact than a real asymmetry. A full-body scan (front + back) averages this out and is far more reliable. |
BodyWHAT uses its own proprietary, neural-network-based technology to estimate your body-fat percentage and other body-composition metrics directly from your photos. These in-house models are combined with established anthropometric methods; the published methods and reference ranges below inform and calibrate those estimates.
BodyWHAT's figures are estimates for general fitness and education — not medical advice or a diagnosis. They draw on established methods and published reference ranges:
Always consult a qualified healthcare professional before making decisions about your health.
Processed in 84.0 seconds
Sign in to join the conversation. Sign in
Loading…
