Introduction:

This is a long-ass post. If you are just looking for the meat of the post, just search below for "in conclusion" and start reading there.

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:

The DEXA results make the Body Scan 2’s limitations considerably clearer.

The most obvious problem is the partitioning of body composition. On the same day, the Body Scan 2 reported approximately24.5–24.8% body fat, while DEXA measured 39.4%. That’s an error of roughly 15 percentage points. Also, the Body Scan 2 substantially overestimated lean/muscle mass. Depending on which Body Scan 2 reading is used, the scale is assigning roughly 40 pounds more tissue to the lean/muscle side of the equation than the DEXA does.

The important point isn’t that BIA and DEXA will never agree perfectly. I expected some difference before doing the scan, and the DEXA technician independently told me to expect a 5–15% difference between a consumer body-composition scale and DEXA. The issue is the direction and magnitude of the error in my particular case. The Body Scan 2 is consistently assigning a substantial amount of my fat mass to the muscle side of the equation.

Visceral fat is an even bigger problem

The visceral-fat number is particularly difficult to reconcile.

The Body Scan 2 reports a value of 5.0 on its proprietary scale, while the DEXA measured 8.22 lb of visceral adipose tissue (VAT). These aren’t directly comparable units, so I don’t want to claim that the numbers represent the same quantity.

However, Withings itself describes a visceral-fat score of 5.0 as the upper limit of normal. The DEXA result, meanwhile, puts my VAT well into the elevated range according to the reference used by the DEXA report.

So while I can’t calculate a percentage error between the two measurements, the practical problem is obvious: the Body Scan 2 gives me a visceral-fat result that suggests I’m at or near the normal range, while the DEXA identifies a substantial amount of visceral adipose tissue.

That’s not a minor calibration difference. It’s potentially a materially different interpretation of metabolic risk.

The other result I find concerning is resting metabolic rate.

The DEXA estimated my RMR at 1,712 kcal/day. The Body Scan 2 is reporting approximately 2,380 kcal/day.

That’s a difference of roughly 670 calories per day, or about 39% higher than the DEXA estimate.

I don’t consider either number to be a direct measurement of my actual daily energy expenditure. Both are estimates, and RMR/BMR calculations have their own limitations. But the discrepancy is large enough to matter if someone is using the scale’s number as an input to a weight-loss calorie target.

The likely connection to the body-composition error is fairly straightforward: if the algorithm thinks I have substantially more lean/muscle mass than I actually do, it will also tend to predict a substantially higher resting energy expenditure.

For someone actively trying to lose weight, this could be a serious problem. A person following the Body Scan 2’s calorie recommendations could potentially believe they have considerably more room to eat than they actually do, undermining the calorie deficit they’re trying to maintain.

In my case, I’m not relying on the Body Scan 2’s calorie recommendation, so this hasn’t been an issue. But for someone who does rely on it, a ~670 kcal/day difference is not trivial.

So what is the Body Scan 2 actually good at?

This is where the Withings AI’s assessment becomes interesting.

After comparing the Body Scan 2 against the DEXA, its conclusion was essentially that the scale is highly accurate for weight and hydration, but clinically inaccurate for absolute body-composition partitioning. It recommended ignoring the absolute fat and muscle percentages and using the device primarily for tracking trends.

If that’s the case, I’m left wondering what advantage the Body Scan 2 provides for my primary purpose over a considerably less expensive Withings scale.

I already have a Withings Body Smart, and it gives me very similar weight and body-composition readings. If the Body Scan 2’s own AI is telling me that its useful outputs for my purposes are primarily weight, hydration, and trends, then the Body Smart appears capable of doing much of that job.

Withings markets the Body Scan 2 as a one-stop health station covering body composition, metabolism, cardiovascular measurements, and several other biomarkers. I bought it with that those features in mind, rather than the more-specific Body Fit or simply as an expensive bathroom scale.

The DEXA comparison doesn’t give me any reason to question the ECG, SpO2, or other measurements that use different sensing methods. Those are separate measurement techniques, and the problems I’ve identified here are specifically related to how the Body Scan 2 uses BIA to estimate body composition.

But it does raise a question about the BIA-derived portion of the Body Scan 2’s health picture.

The device is substantially mis-partitioning my body mass between fat and lean tissue, and that error appears to propagate into at least one other BIA-derived metric, RMR. If the scale’s underlying impedance measurements are being translated incorrectly into body composition for someone with my particular body geometry, then the additional body-composition and metabolic metrics derived from those measurements may have similar problems.

That doesn’t mean those measurements are necessarily wrong. It means that, at least for me, the DEXA results have demonstrated that I can’t simply assume the BIA-derived numbers are accurate because they are reported with a high degree of precision.

And that brings me back to the question of value. If the Body Scan 2’s body-composition measurements are this far off from DEXA, while my much less expensive Body Smart produces broadly similar body-composition numbers, then what additional accuracy am I actually getting from the Body Scan 2’s BIA system?

The Body Scan 2 has plenty of capabilities that the Body Smart doesn’t have. I’m just simply questioning whether its substantially higher cost is justified for body-composition and BIA-derived measurements, particularly if the added Withings+ AI agent itself is telling me to ignore or treat those values with caution.

The new firmware may change this conclusion. I’m waiting to see.

The new firmware

There is now a new Body Scan 2 firmware release in limited availability that, based on reports I’ve seen, appears to correct some, or potentially a substantial portion, of the body-fat percentage error.

I’m still running firmware 1611, so this DEXA comparison is specifically an evaluation of the device and algorithms I was using at the time of the scan. I don’t want to extrapolate these results to the latest firmware without actually testing it.

I’m therefore going to wait for the new firmware, install it when it becomes available to me, and see what happens.

That should make for a much more interesting follow-up experiment: same person, same device, same general conditions, but with a revised algorithm and a DEXA baseline against which to compare it.

For now, though, my conclusions are:

• Weight: The Body Scan 2 is extremely accurate. My DEXA weight was 235.5 lb versus approximately 235.9 lb on the scale.
• Body fat: The Body Scan 2 substantially underestimated my body fat - approximately 15 percentage points compared with DEXA.
• Lean/muscle mass: The scale correspondingly overestimated lean/muscle mass by roughly 30–40 lb, depending on exactly which scale metric is compared with DEXA’s lean tissue measurement.
• Visceral fat: The Body Scan 2’s result is not remotely reassuring when compared with the DEXA’s measured 8.22 lb of VAT, although the two measurements use different definitions and units and therefore cannot be directly converted.
• RMR: The Body Scan 2’s approximately 2,380 kcal/day estimate is about 670 kcal/day higher than the DEXA’s 1,712 kcal/day estimate. That’s potentially significant for anyone using the device’s calorie recommendations for weight loss.
• Hydration: My hydration readings have been remarkably stable, which makes them potentially useful as a trend metric, although DEXA doesn’t provide a directly equivalent measurement for comparison.
• Trends: BIA may still be useful for monitoring directional change, particularly when measurements are taken under consistent conditions. But I don’t think the DEXA results justify treating the Body Scan 2’s absolute body-fat or muscle numbers as physiologically accurate for me.
• Value: If the Body Scan 2’s principal reliable body-composition functions are weight and hydration tracking, then my much cheaper Body Smart appears to provide similar utility for those purposes.

So I’m not ready to write off the Body Scan 2 yet. The new firmware could substantially change this assessment.

But for now, the DEXA has demonstrated that the Body Scan 2 isn’t simply “a little off” for me. Its algorithm is making a very large error in how it partitions my body mass into fat and lean tissue, and that error propagates into other derived metrics such as RMR. This means that any suggestions or forecasting based upon muscle mass and RMR are also likely skewed, reducing their value as part of the W+ product.

I’ll rerun the comparison after the firmware update and see whether Withings has actually fixed the problem.

Potential workarounds

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.

Raw Data...

Metric	DEXA	Body Scan 2 / Apple Health	Difference / comment
Weight	235.5 lb	~235.9 lb	+0.4 lb - excellent agreement
Body fat %	39.4%	24.5%	−14.9 percentage points
Fat mass	90.1 lb	~57.8 lb†	~32.3 lb lower
Lean tissue / lean mass	138.3 lb	75.5% / ~178.1 lb†	~39.8 lb higher
Skeletal muscle	Not directly reported	38.3 lb	Different definitions
Bone mass	7.0 lb bone mineral content	3.7% / ~8.7 lb†	Not necessarily equivalent
Water mass	Not separately reported	51.1%	No direct DEXA equivalent
Arm fat	33.3%	23.2%	~10.1 pp lower
Torso/trunk fat	46.7%	26.8%	~19.9 pp lower
Leg fat	30.2%	21.0%	~9.2 pp lower
Visceral fat	8.22 lb VAT	5.0 / 20	Different units/definition; not directly comparable. Less than 5.0 is called "good" by Withings, More than 3.3 lb is considered "high health risk"
Android fat	51.6%	-	No direct BS2 equivalent
Gynoid fat	33.9%	-	No direct BS2 equivalent
RMR	1,712 kcal/day	2,380 kcal/day	Affected by muscle mass - these are both estimations

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

Playing around with the scale and options, you can get a detailed list of biometrics if you tell Withings to export all your data (what Withings is collecting from you):

Data dump

I haven't bothered to sign up yet for their API to see what is available there, but you can see this data by going to:

User Icon (Top Left of app) -> Gear Icon (top right) -> Export all health data

Just putting this up because people were interested in what readings the scale is taking - though this may not be all of them.

Paging u/TeamWithings, something is seriously wrong with W+ support...

UPDATE 2:

tldr: Withings offers sharing of W+ subscriptions as a cost benefit for families, but doesn't actually let you set them up.

I've gotten some useless advice via email again. The CS rep keeps telling me to add a user profile - which hasn't existed in the app for a year or so, and the W+ benefits will be shared.

No.

Then they told me that individual accounts cannot share W+ benefits. That remains to be seen, but I've been told by several people here that it does indeed work this way on the scales they received from Withings.

According to their "Managing your plan" page:

Plan Details

The details of a Withings+ plan will be different depending on which account is viewing the plan.

 If you are the primary purchaser of the plan, you will see a detailed breakdown of the plan including the subscription start date, the next billing date, the plan's billing cycle (yearly or monthly), and the plan's payment rate.

 If you are an additional user of the Withings+ plan (i.e. your device was installed after the primary purchaser's), you will see a more simple breakdown which shows the subscription start date and duration. 

I tried this. Deleted the scale off the accounts, added myself (primary), installed the scale on an additional user - no go.

So I went to the chatbot and worked my way to a rep. And this is what they told me:

Thank you very much for your patience while waiting. I would like to explain in more detail how the Withings+ membership works. The membership is linked specifically to the primary account holder, who is typically the first person to set up the scale that comes with the subscription. Once this primary user has completed the initial setup process, it is possible to add other members of the household to the main account*. These additional users will then be able to access all the premium features included in the Withings+ subscription whenever they use the same scale.* This setup is designed to allow multiple family members or household profiles to share a single subscription seamlessly, making it convenient and cost-effective for everyone in the home to benefit from the premium services*.*

Great. Gave account info, everything looks good. Then we ran into the profile issue again. They insisted that individual accounts won't work:

To clarify, the scale can recognize multiple users individually based on their profiles, so your data and the other users' data will not be mixed together. However, for the Withings+ subscription benefits to be shared, all users need to be under the same primary account. This means they would use the same account credentials, but the scale can still differentiate between users through their profiles.

Awesome, so all I need to do is remove them from sharing, have them hop on the scale, and the scale will recognize them as a new user and I can set them up... right?

No.

Any user other than a named user is listed as "Guest" and these measurements are not synced online. Nor do they show up on my account as weights that are not assigned to a user, like my body smart does.

So I am right back to where I started.

UPDATE:

No word from Withings yet, but I am getting feedback from some users that they can share W+ benefits. So far, these users have either been on the insider program with a 1 year complimentary W+ subscription or ordered their scale with a W+ account at the same time. I'm waiting to verify that last piece of information.

ORIGINAL POST:

I have had support messages out to Withings regarding my 1 month trial subscription and their past messages stating Withings+ is meant to be shared among family members.

See: https://www.reddit.com/r/withings/s/aps8OKpSxj

This appeared to be the case, but from feedback I am now getting from support - it's now impossible to do so. They don't make this claim, but they keep giving me instructions that no longer work because they no longer allow a user to set up profiles under their account.

The W+ sharing system is set up for use with a main account and sub-profiles. That is: the main account signs up, and all sub profiles get to "share" the benefits, even though they are not subscribers.

The problem with this is Withings did away with profiles due to privacy concerns (unless it is a child) and no longer allow setting up profiles - every adult must now have their own email and account. They even encouraged users to migrate profiles to individual accounts.

You could set up a child profile, but the birth year is restricted to 2010 and younger, and things don't work well (or at all) for many features because features are tied to age (typically 18-22 for full access).

Using the web portal, an option exists to set up profiles, but if you try, it says "maximum number exceeded" because that maximum number is set to "1".

So, there's no choice but to set up individual accounts.

According to support, if they all have individual accounts, they all must subscribe individually and cannot share.

It's been this way for a while now, yet they don't advertise it, and support sends out outdated info on how to fix it - by setting up profiles that don't exist anymore.

So instead of paying $99/yr and having my 2 additional family members join in (this makes the cost more palatable) I'm now looking at $297/yr.

Just a heads up for those looking to use W+ with family members.

If they are looking at paywalling features in their flagship products to drive up subscriptions, they should look at fixing this issue first.

If the situation changes, I'll update with additional info.

Body Scan added because flair is required, and Withings+ (W+) was being used with the Body Scan 2.

There's been a lot of debate on the usefulness (or better yet, value) of Withings+. I did a dive into it to answer questions, and did some work to try to determine how useful it is. Let's say I want to give it a fair shake to show off what it can do.

It appears to serve several functions:

1. Interprets data and explains it using non-technical terms
2. Gives helpful suggestions and encouragement when looking at this data
3. Does forecasting - such as for weight loss - or when will I hit my goal?
4. Serves as a general health coach.
5. Allows consultation with a nutritionist, a sleep study center, and professional ECG readings (this differs depending on region & devices)
6. For the EU folks only, it extends your warranty for as long as your subscription is active.

One nagging question: At $99/yr (or €99/yr), is that per account? What if I have a family with several members? Do they all have to have W+ accounts?

The official answer is YES you can share it with family - with conditions:

1. It has to be a multi-user device
2. It has to be purchased from the Withings website

Official responses are below for reference:

https://support.withings.com/hc/en-us/community/posts/38149163753361-Does-every-adult-in-my-household-need-a-withings-plus-membership

https://www.reddit.com/r/withings/comments/1qp77of/withings_family_account/

Good news, but my Body Scan 2 meets all the above requirements and there's no shared W+ features with any of my family members. I have been told by several people that it does work for them. I have a support message to Markus asking what the issue may be. I'll follow up with any developments.

For me, this is a big deal, because shared among the three of us, the annual cost is much more palatable. If sharing is not permitted, it's $297 for three accounts, which is excessive.

On to W+ itself. I am used to exporting my health data and using an AI (Chat-GPT) to look over and interpret the data. I can say right off the bat, W+ is no ChatGPT, but it is good at what it does.

One thing W+ does is populate that Readiness tab. This may or may not require the use of the AI, I'm thinking most of the metrics are just calculated. The AI feedback is shown where the metrics are surrounded by a purple box and the text underneath is the AI generated feedback.

I've recently come back from a lengthy trip to Asia, and at my age, jet lag is horrible (now on week 2 and still struggling). So all my sleep and readiness numbers are in the toilet. Lets take a look:

Readiness tab

So for this - I have a Withings Sleep Pad, an Apple Watch Ultra 3, BPM Vision, and a Body Scan 2 all supplying information to the app. The only metric it did not use was the wrist temperature from the watch. Instead it wants the body temperature recorded from a Withings Scanwatch. There is no AI interpreted data on this tab that I can see.

Under Go Further, it asks a question or offers a feedback survey.

Essentially this is just a health dashboard explaining why I feel so tired and shagged out.

Another tab is the BodyPath tab. Currently this is accessible under certain conditions - my Body Scan 2 scale made this appear after I added it - and it is visible to W+ and non W+ users. The only difference is the W+ badge next to the title (if subscribed) and everything under "Recommendations" is blurred out so you cannot read it.

The data, however IS there. They just obscure it with a blur filter unless you pay for the service.

The \"full\" W+ Experience

Below is what you see without a W+ subscription, you can see that chart is the same as what is in the image above.

Example of obscured data - \"The Paywall\"

One thing of note for Body Scan 2 users: The Heart Age, which is listed as a W+ feature, is currently available to non-subscribers. Honestly the blurred data makes the app look ugly. This is apparently still being worked on as app updates are making changes here and there.

Now on to the AI.

Withings does not disclose which backend they are using for their AI agent. My lengthy experience with ChatGPT tells me the output is not generated from that LLM, and working with ChatGPT, it appears it is not Claude either, but most likely a version of Gemini - specifically Gemini Flash.

The AI seems quite capable to me in understanding requests. It defaults to (in its own words) "Helpful, polite, respectful, and clear" responses. I do, personally, find the output a bit wordy with excessive affirmation. Added words and phrases that make the response longer just to add a warm, friendly feel. And the overall wordiness of the responses. It spends a lot of time talking about the capabilities of the various Withings devices you have.

Anyhow, here is a short conversation I had about weight progress and how it responds to my input:

A conversation about activity and weight loss

It's tedious to read that flowery response. The good thing about it is you can change that. And it will remember that preference. I gave it the prompt "I like my output cold and in a clinical-style. Assume I know how my devices work." It dramatically changes the output. Here's an example:

Default output on the left vs. \"clinical\" output on the right

Contradicting my previous complaint of wordiness, the clinical output wound up being longer. But all that info was info, I found the density of the information much better this way and prefer the clinical output over the default output, and this change alone increased my opinion of the AI tools for the better.

Here's one on my sleep metrics:

Sleep analysis, default output on left, clinical on the right

Two observations with the above: It either mistook my Sleep Analyzer for an Aura Sensor or hallucinated it. The data it references is from the Sleep Analyzer.

The other observation is it is recalling that I told it (see above) that I had jet lag a couple days ago during a conversation on water weight gain. This is rather nice. I then told it that my daily steps are not accurate on workdays because my employer does not allow personal electronic devices to be worn during the workday.

Other things of note:

It will do forecasting (when will I hit my target weight?) and output data points.

It will not:

Print tables or graphs.

Print out anything other than plain, unformatted text.

While this may depend a lot on the time of usage, the response time to a prompt can take up to 30 seconds at times.

It also does not like questions related to subjects other than health data, and will steer you towards it if you ask it off topic questions. It also is very tight-lipped about its capabilities and configuration. It did give this helpful bit of information:

So it does have Internet access

So it is not a canned AI limited only to a sandbox. This is good to know.

As a final bit of info, I was asking it about the biomarkers it could get from the Body Scan 2. It could get quite a bit, but some things (water weight, visceral fat) were not available. I asked it about Glucose Resilience - it mentioned it as a general concept. Looking at the app, I see it uses Nerve score and visceral fat to calculate it - so I told it my Visceral Fat score (it already knew my nerve score) and asked it to give me my Glucose Resilience score.

The response was an 8-page long meltdown with the AI flipping out talking to itself trying to satisfy my request. It ultimately failed after several minutes, and my apologies to Withings for the horrendous amount of tokens that must have wasted. 😄

I hope this was informative for anyone curious about the Withings+ features. There appear to be further enhancements coming. Any specific questions I can answer below.

EDIT: Fixed spelling errors.

This is a repost of my earlier “Yet another BS2 Review (US Model)” with some additional information and now comparisons of what you get with and without Withings+. Reddit ate all the images in my last post. Here they are again, more screenshots, more comparisons.

You will find my Withings+ observations... enlightening.

The Body Scan 2 arrived a few hours ago, and I've just finished setting it up and playing with it.

My initial setup was without Withings+, and I have to admit, it's not as bad as I thought it could be, but their method of blocking features leaves something to be desired...

First off: Setup.

Post setup screen

​Setup went without a hitch. It did a firmware update just before finishing (updated to 1611, so it's not the latest), rebooted and it was ready for use. The app helpfully tries to walk you through the get familiar process, but if you skip through a bunch of it (deliberately or not) you will miss enabling certain functions. Make sure you go through the tutorial.

This is more than just pointing out features - you enable a bunch gf them here too. Go through this carefully!

​Overall the setup was painless and smooth.

The first measure on the scale was a longevity scan. It did not take as long as I expected it to, mainly because the ECG tutorial was skipped.

Nonetheless, SpO2, and all other non-weight readings were completed without error. Yes, the scale did in fact measure everything (except ECG) on the first try without any errors. I went into settings and enabled the ECG and other health measurements and took another scan. This was longer, it also had no errors... but that's not the annoying part...

https://preview.redd.it/0ijxphwktveh1.png?width=660&format=png&auto=webp&s=47b0fe71ae9f0520c8db8467f3a71254cba061d1

Unlike Apple, Withings' devices need a prescription for the ECG function to work. So you take a reading on a rather uninformative ECG screen so the app can send it off for approval. The annoying bit? I already have a device with ECG capabilities from Withings (US BeamO), and apparently that is not good enough. I need to get another approval.

​Any users shared on the scale also need to take and submit an ECG (and wait) to use this feature too. Past experience tells me that it takes less than 24 hours to get an approval.

Adding the scale opens up a whole bunch of screens in the app I've never seen before with my Body Smart scale. BodyPath appears, and here is where you first see a glimpse of the paywall.

​Scroll down a bit and you get this:

That W+ only shows up after you subscribe.

There's a lot of screen blur in use here too. Let's look at the "Progression" screen (Withings+ is on the right):

Progression: Without Withings+ and With Withings+

​That blurred screen isn't just a placeholder over a fake image. That weight "peak" shows up in my data. The data already there on the phone, and all they are doing with Withings+ is not obscuring it with a blur filter...

Seriously, that's what they are doing. Paying for W+ doesn't get you extra metrics, those metrics are all already there - it just removes a blur filter that deliberately obscures data that is already available to you...

Yes, Withings is enshittifying the app and user experience to drive up W+ subscriptions. On a $600 scale!

BodyPath screen - on the left, without W+ the blank area is blurred data from the right W+ screen.

The above screen is pretty much the same way. I don't have the blurred screen images because I didn't think they were worthwhile to capture prior to starting the W+ trial. But trust me, it looks very similar to the previous image - with the data already pre-rendered and covered with a blur filter..

There's more issues than just with Withings+...

​The above shows the calorie burn screen, with macros. The app has no problem getting the total calorie expenditure for the day based off of your activity, but nothing nutrition-wise.

Above you see the caloric intake and caloric burn rates. This is cool - I have caloric and macronutrient info in Apple health... but wait... Due to a partnership with MyFitnessPal, the app will only import this data from MFP, which is another paid service at around $79/yr. The only macros it claims to input are: calories, fat, carbs and protein - all already available in Apple Health. The burn calculation comes from Apple Health data though - heavy activity days show a higher calorie need.

MFP also has a free mode where they have over time reduced the feature set to push people towards subscription. Despite the limitations of the free mode, MFP is usable enough because their database search is quite good for calorie tracking. Using MFP in free mode works OK, but the data is a bit slow to import. It eventually gets there:

When integrated with MyFitnessPal. Yes, that's all you get.

The only "extra" thing it brings in is dividing up calories by meal and a snack category. Everything it really needs is available in Apple Health (and I assume similar tools on the Android side). I find this limitation of being locked into MFP for nutrition info a serious misstep by Withings.

They really screwed up here big time. My digital kitchen scale's app does all that MFP does, and it does it for free. I can scan barcodes and use AI to examine pictures of a meal to get nutritional info. None of this is usable in Withings' ecosystem. This is a killer feature of the app, making it a one-stop spot to see how you are progressing - like on a weight loss regimen. W+ or not, without MFP, it's totally useless.

There's another tab with more useful information: "Health"

The new health tab - prior to ECG approval

​As you can see, I had no problems with vascular age. Heart age is supposed to be a W+ feature, but it is not marked as such here. It is disabled because it needs the ECG to function.

After 22 hours, the ECG usage was approved, and the data became available:

Now unlocked and visible, without Withings+ (note: no \"+\" marker

Glucose Resilience is greyed out, as expected - it's a coming feature - and is marked as a W+ feature.

Vascular Age screen

Vascular age and Heart age have a nice explanation of the meaning of these metrics, but neither has any Withings+ info added. What you see is what you get.

Heart Age, not part of Withings+?

Glucose resilience is there and blurred - I wonder if/when it is enabled, it will be on everyone's app and only unblurred for W+ users? Time will tell.

The Body Intelligence/Lifestyle Intelligence tabs show a bunch of activities for lifestyle, some coming soon, and under Body Intelligence, show the below info:

Body Intelligence - and a concerning observation

Notice something odd? BodyPath is listed as Withings+, yet earlier I showed that BodyPath is readily available for non-W+ users. Yes it is paywalled on this screen. After starting the W+ trial, this just brings up the same BodyPath screens we saw earlier.

So, is BodyPath being available a bug? Is Heart Age being available a bug? Will these be rug-pulled in a future software update? Something to be aware of.​

Here is where we get the first hint of body composition. I'm "Robust" - high body fat and very high skeletal muscle:

According to the skeletal muscle, I'm an Olympic athlete!

While I don’t have an issue with the body fat percentage so far, I do have a problem with the skeletal muscle. I lead a sedate lifestyle working at a desk and am about 8 months info a GLP-1 regimen. "Highly trained athlete" - using Withings' own words - no, I don't buy that at all. However, I know I am retaining quite a bit of water at the moment - perhaps that is affecting it? Several measurements later, and the numbers are pretty stable. Body fat looks believable. I'll need to go and do a DEXA and compare.

The first look at the body composition screen. The trends make sense, lets look at the biomarkers:

Body Composition - there are no Withings+ features here either

BMI looks good, BMR looks reasonable, Visceral Fat is in line with my Body Smart's numbers (5.5 vs 5.4), Lean Mass is off by 2.3 lbs (172.2 vs. 174.5). Skeletal muscle mass is a BS 2 only measurement and looks to be too high, Bone Mass is the same as the Body Smart, and water mass is a bit lower (119.8 vs 122.2). Unfortunately, I do not have a DEXA.

Here's the 6-zone muscle and fat distribution:

Fat and Muscle - side-by-side

Hopefully, these visuals will help those who are wondering what the scale is like with and without Withings+. It's not that bad missing the W+ features.

Compared to a single-lead ECG like on the BeamO, the BS2 produces really clean output of all 6 channels. On the page that displays the ECG, you can export it all into a PDF:

ECG page - no W+ features aside from submitting the ECG to be read by a cardiologist

I do have to say the hardware for the scale is superb. It's heavy, the UI on the handle is really nice, done in the style of the BPM Vision - clean and simple. I should note that the UI is still being worked on as the firmware is still being updated somewhat regularly on this scale.

Firmware 1661 is out, but I do not know if this is regional or being rolled out. My scale as of a few moments ago, still says 1611 is the latest version.

No technical problems with the scale. Unlike other users, I have no problems getting readings. It just works.

The scale is now shared with two additional family members. It has no trouble distinguishing them from each other and no one is having problems with any of the measurements.

Both users have the ECG unlocked after 26 hours.

Regarding Withings+

Markus from Withings says that a 30 day trial of W+ is available to people who buy the scale. I could not find evidence of this anywhere aside from purchasing the scale with a subscription. In the app and the website they offer subscriptions with zero days or 14 day trial.

I finally found out how to get the 30 days - yes, you need to subscribe to get it:

Open the app
Click on the round icon with your initials in the upper left
On the profile screen, tap the gear on the upper right.
Go to "manage subscriptions"
Here it offers a 30 day trial with a subscription.

There's a bug on this screen. If you use regular credit card, it works fine. If using Apple Pay, it attempts to charge €0.00 for the subscription.

I really wanted to see if that would work, but I just used my card.

I really wanted to see additional value brought in with Withings+. Seeing the data obscured by a blur filter unless you pay for a subscription is disappointing. It's a paywall. They don't supply you with new metrics when you subscribe, they just unhide them. There's also the possibility that several features will be yanked for non-subscribers once they notice the bugs in BodyPath and Heart Age.

The only other thing they give you is AI generated words of encouragement and observations about certain trends in your health data. It's friendly and non-threatening in its tone, but I want clinical and the cold, hard truth. You can get much better insights using ChatGPT's free mode if you dare to let it look at your Apple health records. Those trends are already available in Apple Health - for free.

Still, the potential is definitely there, I can see what they are trying to do with it. It is not worth the money, not by a long shot. I now feel that it should have been included at no cost for users who bought the scale. I'll keep observing it for a couple more weeks, but now I'm looking to cancel it unless it somehow gets a lot better.

Whether I cancel or not depends on how it affects other users of the scale. Otherwise it's $99/yr to unblur a few screens.

 

Looks like Reddit deleted all my pictures ☹️
I'll repost this with updated screenshots later tonight.

The Body Scan 2 arrived a few hours ago, and I've just finished playing with it.

My initial setup is without Withings+, and I have to admit, it's not as bad as I thought it could be, but their method of blocking features leaves something to be desired...

First off: Setup.

​Setup went without a hitch. It did a firmware update just before finishing (updated to 1611, so it's not the latest), rebooted and it was ready for use. The app helpfully ties to walk you through the get familiar process, but if you skip through a bunch of it (deliberately or not) you will miss enabling certain functions. Make sure you go through the tutorial.

​Overall the setup was painless and smooth.

The first measure on the scale was a longevity scan. It did not take as long as I expected it to, mainly because the ECG tutorial was skipped.

Nonetheless, SpO2, and all other non-weight readings were completed without error. Yes, the scale did in fact measure everything (except ECG) on the first try without any errors. I went into settings and enabled the ECG and other health measurements and took another scan. This was longer, it also had no errors... but that's not the annoying part...

Unlike Apple, Withings' devices need a prescription for the ECG function to work. So you take a reading on a rather uninformative ECG screen so the app can send it off for approval. The annoying bit? I already have a device with ECG capabilities from Withings (US BeamO), and apparently that is not good enough. I need to get another approval.

​Any users shared on the scale also need to take and submit an ECG (and wait) to use this feature too. Past experience tells me that it takes less than 24 hours to get an approval.

Adding the scale opens up a whole bunch of screens in the app I've never seen before with my Body Smart scale. BodyPath appears, and here is where you first see a glimpse of the paywall.

​Scroll down a bit and you get this:

​That blurred screen isn't just a placeholder. That weight "peak" shows up in my data. The data is already there on the phone, and they are obscuring it with a blur filter.

It gets worse...

Above you see the caloric intake and caloric burn rates. This is cool - I have caloric and macronutrient info in Apple health... but wait... Due to a partnership with MyFitnessPal, the app will only import this data from MFP, which is another paid service at around $79/yr. The only macros it claims to input are: calories, fat, carbs and protein - all already available in Apple Health. The burn calculation comes from Apple Health data though - heavy activity days show a higher calorie need.

They really screwed up here big time. My digital kitchen scale does all MFP does, and it does it for free. I can scan barcodes and use AI to examine pictures of a meal to get nutritional info. None of this is usable in Withings' ecosystem. This is a killer feature of the app, making it a one-stop spot to see how you are progressing - like on a weight loss regimen. W+ or not, without MFP, it's totally useless.

​The above shows the calorie burn screen, with macros. The app has no problem getting the total calorie expenditure for the day off of your activity, but nothing nutrition-wise.

There's another tab with more useful information: "Health"

​As you can see, I had no problems with vascular age. Heart age is supposed to be a W+ feature, but it is not marked as such here. It is probably disabled as it likely needs the ECG to function.

Glucose Resilience is greyed out, as expected - it's a coming feature - and is marked as a W+ feature.

The Body Intelligence/Lifestyle Intelligence tabs show a bunch of activities for lifestyle, and under Body Intelligence, show the the below info:

​Here is where we get the first hint of body composition. I'm "Robust" - high body fat and very high skeletal muscle:

​While I don;t have an issue with the body fat percentage so far, I do have a problem with the skeletal muscle. I lead a sedate lifestyle working at a desk and am about 8 months info a GLP-1 regimen. "Highly trained athlete" - Withings' own words indeed. However, I know I am retaining quite a bit of water at the moment.

​The first look at the body composition screen. The trends make sense, lets look at the biomarkers:

​BMI looks good, BMR looks reasonable, Visceral Fat is in line with my Body Smart's numbers (5.5 vs 5.4), Lean Mass is off by 2.3 lbs (172.2 vs. 174.5). Skeletal muscle mass is a BS 2 measurement, Bone Mass is the same as the Body Smart, and water mass is a bit lower (119.8 vs 122.2). Unfortunately, I do not have a DEXA.

Here's the 6-zone muscle and fat distribution:

​​Hopefully, these visuals will help those who are wondering what the scale is like without Withings+. It's not that bad. I'll have to come back when the ECG is approved to look a bit further into the heart stuff.

So the numbers I am getting for the body composition look reasonable to me. Skeletal muscle is the only outlier, and I do not yet know if it is due to water retention or not. Time will tell.

No technical problems with the scale. It just works.

Any questions? Feel free to ask below. If I see any other features or issues crop up, I'll update this post.

EDIT:

Fixed some spelling errors.

Additional info:

ECG Approval came after 22 hours. This activated ECG and Heart Age. Oddly enough, Heart Age, which is a W+ feature is unlocked on my device despite not having W+. You can see the screenshot of this below in the replies.

Firmware 1661 is out, but I do not know if this is regional or being rolled out. My scale as of a few moments ago, still says 1611 is the latest version.

MyFitnessPal Integration brings in calories expended, fat, carbs, and protein. All values that can be imported from Apple Health without having to subscribe to an expensive partner app. Despite the limitations of the free mode, MFP is usable enough because their database search is quite good for calorie tracking.

The only "extra" thing it brings in is dividing up calories by meal and a snack category. I find this limitation of being locked into MFP for nutrition info a serious misstep by Withings.

The scale is now shared with two additional family members. It has no trouble distinguishing them from each other and no one is having problems with any of the measurements.

Neither of them has their ECG approved yet, but that may happen any time now.

EDIT 2:

All users have the ECG unlocked after 26 hours.

EDIT 3:

Markus from Withings says that a 30 day trial of W+ is available to people who buy the scale. I could not find evidence of this anywhere aside from purchasing the scale with a subscription. In the app and the website they offer subscriptions with zero days or 14 day trial.

I finally found out how to get the 30 days - yes, you need to subscribe to get it:

Open the app
Click on the round icon with your initials in the upper left
On the profile screen, tap the gear on the upper right.
Go to "manage subscriptions"
Here it offers a 30 day trial with a subscription.

There's a bug on this screen. If you use regular credit card, it works fine. If using Apple Pay, it attempts to charge €0.00 for the subscription.

I really wanted to see if that would work, but I just used my card.

Initial impressions are neutral to negative. The blurred screens I mentioned above are there - unblurred.

Yes, the data is there and displayed on your phone, they just apply a blur filter over it if not subscribed so you cannot read it. I'll supply an example this afternoon.

A lot of the other data is applying scores to various tabs: body, heart, activity, sleep, etc. and AI generated messages of encouragement or observations on the particular biomarker you are examining. It tries to be encouraging and inoffensive and succeeds at that. I'd prefer it if it were more clinical in its analysis.

The potential is definitely there, I can see what they are trying to do with it.

You can get observations like this (or possibly better) with ChatGPT in a free account if you are brave enough to let it have access to Apple Health data.

Whether I cancel or not depends on how it affects other users of the scale. Otherwise it's $99/yr to unblur a few screens.

All references/links mentioning the Body Scan 2 have been removed and the old "Coming Soon" landing page for the Body Scan 2 redirects you to the Body Fit:

https://www.withings.com/us/en/landing/body-scan-2

The only references for the BS 2 now are the support pages. Prior to this there were links to the BS2 in their scales section as "coming soon".

I'm hoping this is pre-launch cleanup and not bad news.

EDIT:

The EU site shows the BS 2 is now available for sale.

EDIT 2:

Withings confirmed BS 2 goes on sale next week in the US. It was a site cleanup.

EDIT 3:

This arrived in email an hour or two ago:

https://preview.redd.it/8epc2pqbdd6h1.png?width=436&format=png&auto=webp&s=e68c981629adabc95b914f209661f6d562b4886f

I've had a BPM Connect for a couple years and sidelined it ages ago when it would give me nonsensical BP readings. My BPM Vision, on the other hand, pretty much matches the BPM my doctor uses (within 3-5 points systolic, 1-2 points diastolic). I've compared it three times already, and I trust its output.

The BPM Connect, when tested at the Dr's office came out 30+ points higher systolic and the diastolic was within 3-5 points. There's a big difference between 130 and 160 - and my experience is not unique, many people complained about accuracy issues.

But sometimes when I use the Connect, it give good readings - so what gives?

My guess was the BPM Connect is overly sensitive to cuff placement.

So I had a lot of spare time today and did an experiment.

So here is the experiment:

Sitting in the correct posture for BP readings. Three measurements are taken back-to back with approx. 20-30 seconds rest between measurements (to record results). No posture change or cuff adjustments during the three readings. Cuff tightness is enough that 2 fingers fit snugly underneath.

1. Do the BP Connect - just slap it on the arm and let it sit where it wants to, the white box is centered along the artery.
2. Then switch to a different device (Vision) - record in the same way. Cuff goes where it wants to sit, and the target point is centered along the artery.
3. Then switch back to the Connect, placing the cuff with 1" of clearance between the bottom of the cuff and the inner fold of the elbow. In this way, neither the cuff nor the white box touches the forearm.
4. Switch back to the Vision - record as I did in step 2.
5. Switch to the Connect, place the cuff on as in step 1.
6. Switch back to the Vision - record as i did in step 2 and 4.
7. Switch back to the Connect, record as i did in step 3.
8. Finally, wrap up with the BPM Vision, as I did in steps 2, 4, and 6.

Here are the results:

https://preview.redd.it/j82d14ximd3h1.png?width=586&format=png&auto=webp&s=eece45b66dc7b77065e3576c0afb70f6a6ea47e5

With the BPM Connect lower on the arm, it was getting wildly different readings, even back-to-back (132-122-117). When mounted higher on the arm, the readings were much more reasonable.

For validated upper-arm home blood pressure monitors (both of these are), the generally accepted accuracy target is about: +/- 5 mmHg mean error with standard deviation ≤ 8 mmHg during validation testing (AAMI/ESH/ISO standards). +/- 3 mmHg is considered excellent.

It looks like the BPM Connect when placed (at least on my anatomy) at least 1" above the elbow gets me within that +/- 5 mmHg error band. Quite a few measurements are within 3 mmHg (all typically higher than the Vision).

With the cuff placed lower on the arm, I am duplicating the irregular and high readings I and others have reported before.

Now there are some instances where the readings jump switching from one to another - like when the Vision was reporting 108 to jump to 116 on the Connect - while I try to minimize moving around, swapping cuffs and taking a measurement right afterwards.

It was a bit frustrating to get that cuff in the right position for that 1st set of measurements on the Connect, as it seems to me to be unusually high.

All that movement can cause the BP to rise. This is why I bracketed the Connect's measurements with the Vision, which also showed that elevated BP.

While I am not claiming the Connect has no problems, this might be contributing to the issues people are seeing with it. Other BPMs don't seem to have an issue with the arm placement as long as the cuff is centered over the artery and the cuff isn't deformed when the arm is bent.

It's still a design flaw.

If you have one and have accuracy issues, try placing it higher on the arm and see if the results get better. If the cuff or the white box touch your forearm, even slightly, you are pretty much guaranteed to get a crappy reading.

I'm curious if other see the same thing I do,

The Withings site has the Body Scan 2 support pages up. Already one difference between the EU and US models: Nerve Health Score is EU only. US has Electrodermal Activity.

Info page for the EU model has quite a bit of info describing how it works and why it's important, the US page is dumbed down quite a bit, probably to keep the FDA at bay. Yet it looks like it is the same measurement and scale with just a name change.

https://support.withings.com/hc/en-us/sections/42614337148049-BodyScan-2

So far, this is the only obvious documented difference.

Sorry, there's no BeamO flair, so I picked the closest thing...

Browsing the FDA website looking for signs of movement on this device and saw this link:

https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06351761

A recent update back in February of 2026 the BeamO completed trials of their Afib detection. First new/updated entry I've seen for this device in a while.

Now hoping the FDA has what it needs to clear it soon.