Losing 30% BF with weights..Possible and if so, how long?

kassiebby1124
kassiebby1124 Posts: 927 Member
edited January 25 in Health and Weight Loss
This could be a completely stupid question but! I'm about 50 (I don't know the actual number) percent body fat right now and my goal is 18%. My question is: Eating at a deficit and lifting heavy w/minimal cardio will reduce BF, but on "average" how long would it take? I currently weight 190..something. But I don't believe in the scale. I go by how clothes fit. From your person experience, how long as it taken? I've been lifting heavily inconsistently since I want to say December. Now I'm becoming more consistent. Since the weather is getting better, I plan to start swimming more. I know I can't spot reduce, so I'm just aiming for overall change.

Thanks so much. (:

Replies

  • yarwell
    yarwell Posts: 10,477 Member
    if you weigh 200 at 50% fat that's 100 of fat free mass or FFM

    if you kept all the FFM then at 20% fat you would weigh 125 lbs

    That's 75 lbs to lose - at an average rate of 1.5 lbs/week you're looking at a year, and that may be a shade optimistic.
  • kassiebby1124
    kassiebby1124 Posts: 927 Member
    if you weigh 200 at 50% fat that's 100 of fat free mass or FFM

    if you kept all the FFM then at 20% fat you would weigh 125 lbs

    That's 75 lbs to lose - at an average rate of 1.5 lbs/week you're looking at a year, and that may be a shade optimistic.
    Hm thank you c: I dunno if I want to weight 125 xD
    I may adjust my goals. Thank you though (:
  • shadow2soul
    shadow2soul Posts: 7,692 Member
    if you weigh 200 at 50% fat that's 100 of fat free mass or FFM

    if you kept all the FFM then at 20% fat you would weigh 125 lbs

    That's 75 lbs to lose - at an average rate of 1.5 lbs/week you're looking at a year, and that may be a shade optimistic.
    Hm thank you c: I dunno if I want to weight 125 xD
    I may adjust my goals. Thank you though (:

    Are you sure your around 50%? Or are you just taking a random guess.

    If you take measurements, there are calculators online that will give you an estimate based on the measurements.
    US navy method seems to be closest to accurate for me.

    Example:
    I'm 5'4"
    195.4lbs
    caliper estimated bf% (using 3 testing spots) : 37%
    US navy method(measurements): 38.79%
    Covert Baily method(measurements): 32.85%
  • kassiebby1124
    kassiebby1124 Posts: 927 Member
    if you weigh 200 at 50% fat that's 100 of fat free mass or FFM

    if you kept all the FFM then at 20% fat you would weigh 125 lbs

    That's 75 lbs to lose - at an average rate of 1.5 lbs/week you're looking at a year, and that may be a shade optimistic.
    Hm thank you c: I dunno if I want to weight 125 xD
    I may adjust my goals. Thank you though (:

    Are you sure your around 50%? Or are you just taking a random guess.

    If you take measurements, there are calculators online that will give you an estimate based on the measurements.
    US navy method seems to be closest to accurate for me.

    Example:
    I'm 5'4"
    195.4lbs
    caliper estimated bf% (using 3 testing spots) : 37%
    US navy method(measurements): 38.79%
    Covert Baily method(measurements): 32.85%
    The last time I checked was I think in February or March and I was at 47%
    Obviously, that was a while ago. But we used one of those electric calculator things you hold on to.
  • shadow2soul
    shadow2soul Posts: 7,692 Member
    if you weigh 200 at 50% fat that's 100 of fat free mass or FFM

    if you kept all the FFM then at 20% fat you would weigh 125 lbs

    That's 75 lbs to lose - at an average rate of 1.5 lbs/week you're looking at a year, and that may be a shade optimistic.
    Hm thank you c: I dunno if I want to weight 125 xD
    I may adjust my goals. Thank you though (:

    Are you sure your around 50%? Or are you just taking a random guess.

    If you take measurements, there are calculators online that will give you an estimate based on the measurements.
    US navy method seems to be closest to accurate for me.

    Example:
    I'm 5'4"
    195.4lbs
    caliper estimated bf% (using 3 testing spots) : 37%
    US navy method(measurements): 38.79%
    Covert Baily method(measurements): 32.85%
    The last time I checked was I think in February or March and I was at 47%
    Obviously, that was a while ago. But we used one of those electric calculator things you hold on to.

    I think you should check again. My guess is you are probably closer to 40% now. :flowerforyou:

    Those can be very inaccurate. The readings can vary depending on how much water you drink.
  • kassiebby1124
    kassiebby1124 Posts: 927 Member
    if you weigh 200 at 50% fat that's 100 of fat free mass or FFM

    if you kept all the FFM then at 20% fat you would weigh 125 lbs

    That's 75 lbs to lose - at an average rate of 1.5 lbs/week you're looking at a year, and that may be a shade optimistic.
    Hm thank you c: I dunno if I want to weight 125 xD
    I may adjust my goals. Thank you though (:

    Are you sure your around 50%? Or are you just taking a random guess.

    If you take measurements, there are calculators online that will give you an estimate based on the measurements.
    US navy method seems to be closest to accurate for me.

    Example:
    I'm 5'4"
    195.4lbs
    caliper estimated bf% (using 3 testing spots) : 37%
    US navy method(measurements): 38.79%
    Covert Baily method(measurements): 32.85%
    The last time I checked was I think in February or March and I was at 47%
    Obviously, that was a while ago. But we used one of those electric calculator things you hold on to.

    I think you should check again. My guess is you are probably closer to 40% now. :flowerforyou:

    Those can be very inaccurate. The readings can vary depending on how much water you drink.
    :D I'd love it if I was closer to 40. thank you very much (: I guess I'll have to break out the measuring tape
  • yarwell
    yarwell Posts: 10,477 Member
    one way of looking at it is your "thin twin" - is the 125 lb 20% fat version credible ? if so then the start point may be ok.

    If 125 is silly for a 5'-2" woman at 20% fat (?) then it would need more fat free mass to work and your current % fat would be lower.

    How many of the equations are based on 200 lb women is one question - I doubt it featured in the US Navy for example.
  • kassiebby1124
    kassiebby1124 Posts: 927 Member
    one way of looking at it is your "thin twin" - is the 125 lb 20% fat version credible ? if so then the start point may be ok.

    If 125 is silly for a 5'-2" woman at 20% fat (?) then it would need more fat free mass to work and your current % fat would be lower.

    How many of the equations are based on 200 lb women is one question - I doubt it featured in the US Navy for example.
    I'm 5'4, if that helps any
This discussion has been closed.