Please share you system/knowledge on Taking Supplements

usmcmp

sixxpoint wrote: »

If shes 93-104 lbs. and she's always sore after working out, then it is highly likely she is 1) not eating enough, and 2) not meeting her minimum protein macro.

She doesn't need supplements (aside from maybe protein and/or bcaa's). She really just needs to eat more.

I got a TDEE for her of between 1500-1750. If she's eating 1200 calories she's not that far below her TDEE. I would say that based on age she probably needs to reduce the volume of her workouts.

sixxpoint

If she's moderately active and fairly low bodyfat, which she seems to be, then her TDEE will be closer to 1800. She doesn't not too lose more weight.... not by a longshot. So she shouldn't be eating anything near 1200 calories per day.

Reduction of volume isn't the cure for the soreness. She needs to eat more to keep up with her high activity.

She's only 42, not 82.

LolBroScience

sixxpoint wrote: »

If she's moderately active and fairly low bodyfat, which she seems to be, then her TDEE will be closer to 1800. She doesn't not too lose more weight.... not by a longshot. So she shouldn't be eating anything near 1200 calories per day.

Reduction of volume isn't the cure for the soreness. She needs to eat more to keep up with her high activity.

She's only 42, not 82.

I think she is referring to the amount of volume done in a single session. For instance, compare DOMS between a GVT routine versus something lower volume.

I've never noticed increasing food intake reducing DOMS. The only thing that helped was increasing the frequency of hitting those body parts by spreading out the total volume across more sessions. Joint pain is an entirely different issue.

usmcmp

sixxpoint wrote: »

If she's moderately active and fairly low bodyfat, which she seems to be, then her TDEE will be closer to 1800. She doesn't not too lose more weight.... not by a longshot. So she shouldn't be eating anything near 1200 calories per day.

Reduction of volume isn't the cure for the soreness. She needs to eat more to keep up with her high activity.

She's only 42, not 82.

5'0", 42 years old, 95 pounds, 18% body fat, moderately active. I still get 1700 calories.

You're in your 30's. Do you recover like you did when you were in your early 20's? Think you'll recover like you did in your 30's when you reach 40?

She could increase her calories, but her body fat isn't 8% it's closer to 18% and she could lose more weight if that was her goal.

sixxpoint

usmcmp wrote: »

sixxpoint wrote: »

If she's moderately active and fairly low bodyfat, which she seems to be, then her TDEE will be closer to 1800. She doesn't not too lose more weight.... not by a longshot. So she shouldn't be eating anything near 1200 calories per day.

Reduction of volume isn't the cure for the soreness. She needs to eat more to keep up with her high activity.

She's only 42, not 82.

You're in your 30's. Do you recover like you did when you were in your early 20's? Think you'll recover like you did in your 30's when you reach 40?

She could increase her calories, but her body fat isn't 8% it's closer to 18% and she could lose more weight if that was her goal.

Absolutely, but I am consistent and make nutrition and fitness part of my daily lifestyle. Ask me again at 60, and I'll probably say no.

Aware she isn't 8%. I was being generous with approx. 15% with no thorough visual proof. Still, she is undereating... by a lot of calories.

usmcmp

sixxpoint wrote: »

usmcmp wrote: »

sixxpoint wrote: »

If she's moderately active and fairly low bodyfat, which she seems to be, then her TDEE will be closer to 1800. She doesn't not too lose more weight.... not by a longshot. So she shouldn't be eating anything near 1200 calories per day.

Reduction of volume isn't the cure for the soreness. She needs to eat more to keep up with her high activity.

She's only 42, not 82.

You're in your 30's. Do you recover like you did when you were in your early 20's? Think you'll recover like you did in your 30's when you reach 40?

She could increase her calories, but her body fat isn't 8% it's closer to 18% and she could lose more weight if that was her goal.

Absolutely, but I am consistent and make nutrition and fitness part of my daily lifestyle. Ask me again at 60, and I'll probably say no.

Aware she isn't 8%. I was being generous with approx. 15% with no thorough visual proof. Still, she is undereating... by a lot of calories.

She's under her TDEE by about 500 calories. She could close the gap more since she is lean (check out her pictures).

That's great that you recover as well as you did 10 years ago. Many people can't. Just because your ability to recover is as good as it was in your 20's doesn't mean her recovery is great in her 40's. I realize it's not 50, 60, 70 or 80.

sixxpoint

More like 600.

The problem with cutting so drastically is that you not only lose bodyfat% but you also lose a lot of muscle. Many people, especially women, don't take that into account.

usmcmp

sixxpoint wrote: »

The problem with cutting so drastically is that you not only lose bodyfat% but you also lose a lot of muscle. Many people, especially women, don't take that into account.

I understand this. I also understand how volume and intensity impact recovery. I'm not saying she shouldn't consider upping her calories, I'm saying that there's more to her issue than just her calories. Eating at TDEE wouldn't help her if she is destroying herself every session.

Christine_72

usmcmp wrote: »

Sarasmaintaining wrote: »

LolBroScience wrote: »

Sarasmaintaining wrote: »

LolBroScience wrote: »

Sarasmaintaining wrote: »

Also, a bf% of 8 percent is really low for a female and isn't really recommended. You might want to do some research on that and adjust your goal up a bit.
http://www.livestrong.com/article/134363-the-normal-percentage-body-fat-women/

It's a miscalculation if anything because that would make her more lean than female Olympia competitors.

I wonder if she forgot to put a 1 in front of the 8? Even 18% would be really low for her age though.

Possibly forgot the 1 in front (judging by her pics that would be more accurate). I don't think age has anything to do with it though... It would just make her a fairly lean female.

The article I linked actually does give percentages based on age, but I don't know if that's actually a legit thing?

Percent body fat is a number based on actual body fat compared to total body weight and has nothing at all to do with age.

8% would be completely shredded. She would have a grainy, dry and vascular look like the women who compete professionally in bodybuilding or women's physique.

Actually, I think this picture is 11% instead of 8%.

@nicfitnesszone Do you honestly resemble this picture?

ninerbuff

nicfitnesszone wrote: »

IsaackGMOON wrote: »

Hornsby wrote: »

nicfitnesszone wrote: »

Sarasmaintaining wrote: »

LolBroScience wrote: »

Sarasmaintaining wrote: »

Also, a bf% of 8 percent is really low for a female and isn't really recommended. You might want to do some research on that and adjust your goal up a bit.
http://www.livestrong.com/article/134363-the-normal-percentage-body-fat-women/

It's a miscalculation if anything because that would make her more lean than female Olympia competitors.

I wonder if she forgot to put a 1 in front of the 8? Even 18% would be really low for her age though.

8% is not a typo :-) per caliper measurement and Inbody :-)

Congrats then on being one of the leanest females on the planet. Shouldn't we be asking you questions?

8% body fat on a female lol waaaaaaaaat

OP are you prepping for a contest or something... but then that'd conflict with the idea of taking supplements, if you were entering a contest?

Thank you.

I'm 5"0' very petite. And have been within the range of 93-95lbs at most I'd say 103.5-104 for 24 years. This is my baseline and what's normal for me. During those years however, I wasn't watching what I eat (highly processed food) and my running and cycling is not consistent. When I turned 40 and type 2 DM happened I decided to "eat clean" and be consistent with my outdoor sports.

So no sir/mam just because I'm small doesn't mean I'm not normal or joining a contest. :-)

I can promise you that you're not 8% body fat. Your definition would be insane and your face "gaunt" looking. Whomever/whatever gave you that reading is highly inaccurate.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition