I still have a lot of body fat despite major weight loss??
Replies
-
Here OP:
How Much Protein?
and
Target Protein Intake Calculator
0.8 * my weight in pounds = 1.75 * my weight in kg
0.8 * my weight in kg = not enough protein (a little less than half of what I should eat based on the article/calculator)0 -
Can I just scream really loudly
YES OP START A PROGRESSIVE WEIGHT TRAINING PROGRAMME ....YESTERDAY
you will be glad you did
(Protein at 0.64g per lb of bodyweight as a minimum)0 -
From what I understand (if I'm wrong, any of the more knowledgeable members feel free to school me
) and this is put really simple, but while you're in a caloric deficit, your body is basically eating itself alive.
If you're not getting enough protein from your food sources, your body is going to eat your muscles to make up for it.
Likewise, if you're not using your muscles (from strength training, etc.) your body is going to think, "Cool, I don't really need these. Guess I'm free to eat them!
I've asked this the other day but didn't really get any answers to this. I cannot image that just eating protein will convince your body to get energy from fat reserves, not from muscles. That would be like your body is thinking: "Oh.. chickenbreast. I think I better munch away on those fat reserves then and spare the muscles." I'd think protein to build muscles, and then do exactly that: strength training. Just eating protein to preserve muscles sounds wrong.
0 -
0.8 * my weight in pounds = 1.75 * my weight in kg
0.8 * my weight in kg = not enough protein (a little less than half of what I should eat based on the article/calculator)[/quote]
.8*wt in kg is the minimum. If you are an endurance athlete or strength training then you raise it to 1.2g - 1.8g of your wt in kg.0 -
You have lost a lot but still have more to lose, so why are you surprised? These extra lbs you need to lose, they are fat. What is it you want to do? If it is to build muscle, then you need to add resistance training. If it is to get at a healthier weight and lose the final lbs, it sounds like you are doing fine.0
-
You have lost a lot but still have more to lose, so why are you surprised? These extra lbs you need to lose, they are fat. What is it you want to do? If it is to build muscle, then you need to add resistance training. If it is to get at a healthier weight and lose the final lbs, it sounds like you are doing fine.
Actually - resistance training in a defecit will most likely not be used to build muscle but to help preserve it .. admittedly as a noob she will most probably see massive strength gains and some small muscle gains though .. cos there's always those magic exceptions to the rule
But it is an important part of a weight loss regime if you want to end up looking as good as you imagine you can .. muscles are da bomb whether you can see them or not ... and that depends on your eventual body fat target0 -
Nvm.
0 -
Sounds like OP has been losing at less than 1% per week on average, so it is unlikely that she has run a huge deficit.
While not been eating a muscle sparing amount of protein, she did have large reserves of available fat and a relatively small deficit. She was also not engaging in high levels of exercise/cardio.
Therefore it is unlikely that she has lost a lot of muscle.
Some muscles that she can afford to lose since she is no longer carrying 300lbs?
Sure.
But probably nothing excessive.
The recommended daily minimum guidelines are not directed towards people who are either building muscles in a caloric surplus, or trying to preserve muscles while in a deficit.
A muscle sparing positive nitrogen balance is probably going to be achieved with an intake of between 0.8 to 1.2g of protein per lb of lean muscle mass.
Some studies claim improved results to as high 2.4g of protein per lb of lean muscle mass; many more studies claim lack of difference between the results you get by eating between 0.8g and 1g of protein per lb of lean muscle mass.
It is safe to say that the consensus seems to be "at least" 1g per lb of lean muscle mass or as a proxy to that 0.8g per lb of weight.
Google "muscle sparing protein" to find out more. The VLCD modified fast that might pop up on that search is NOT recommended by myself, though Lyle McDonald has written an extremely informative ebook discussing it and discussing how eating protein helps preserve muscles. Yes, it appears that your body does say: hungry for protein today! Have some of that chicken protein that is floating around, or catabolize some of my own heart? Ahh: I'll take the chicken. It's just so much easier to get than breaking down my own muscles!
Note that protein has 4 Cal per gram, so in reality it is quite "easy" to fit the 600 or so calories that are more than sufficient for most people targeting a normal weight range.
Note too that unless you have kidney issues, I have yet to figure out a (health related) reason as to why you would be concerned with eating a 130 to 150-ish grams of protein.
Having said all that and personally being a major procrastinator in the lifting weights department, the reality is that not only will the OP preserve lean muscle mass if she were to lift weights; but, by the sound of it, she and I both fall within the classic definition of over-weight untrained beginners.
Which means that if we were to engage in progressive weight lifting we are both likely to actually gain both strength AND muscle mass even while eating at a deficit. The OP gets a bonus for youth, I would get a bonus for being male.
Last, but not least, at some level, it should be self evident that a person who is both sedentary in their daily life and who does not engage in any exercise will not be muscular. Why would their muscles develop if they are not being used?
To me anyway, it wouldn't be surprising if a person like that would have to move towards the lower end of their healthy weight range in order to also find themselves at a healthy fat % range.0 -
AcerPink23 wrote: »Hope my question isn't confusing. I started off at exactly 300 pounds, and after a year and a half, I am now 190. I know I still have about 40-50 pounds to be at a healthy/goal weight, but something I don't understand is that I still seem to have A LOT of fat on my body despite over 100 pounds lost. I admit I don't exercise as much as I should, I go for a 60 minute walk twice a week, and that is all the exercise I've been doing through out my entire weight loss.
Majority of my weight is in my stomach and thighs, you can tell a difference, but not by as much as I would expect to see for as much weight as I've lost. I've had a few mistakes, but for the most part I've been following the diet carefully.
I've been told maybe I'm not eating enough protein or I should start building muscle? Hopefully I can get help here. What could I be doing wrong?
It sounds to me like you're having a "fat moment".
I'm sure you've also had "thin moments" where you go, "Wow, look at all the weight I've lost!"
You've got a fair way to go, but you've also come a long way.
Keep going, and take all the advice in this thread on board. Good luck!0 -
Sounds like OP has been losing at less than 1% per week on average, so it is unlikely that she has run a huge deficit.
While not been eating a muscle sparing amount of protein, she did have large reserves of available fat and a relatively small deficit. She was also not engaging in high levels of exercise/cardio.
Therefore it is unlikely that she has lost a lot of muscle.
Some muscles that she can afford to lose since she is no longer carrying 300lbs?
Sure.
But probably nothing excessive.
The recommended daily minimum guidelines are not directed towards people who are either building muscles in a caloric surplus, or trying to preserve muscles while in a deficit.
A muscle sparing positive nitrogen balance is probably going to be achieved with an intake of between 0.8 to 1.2g of protein per lb of lean muscle mass.
Some studies claim improved results to as high 2.4g of protein per lb of lean muscle mass; many more studies claim lack of difference between the results you get by eating between 0.8g and 1g of protein per lb of lean muscle mass.
It is safe to say that the consensus seems to be "at least" 1g per lb of lean muscle mass or as a proxy to that 0.8g per lb of weight.
Google "muscle sparing protein" to find out more. The VLCD modified fast that might pop up on that search is NOT recommended by myself, though Lyle McDonald has written an extremely informative ebook discussing it and discussing how eating protein helps preserve muscles. Yes, it appears that your body does say: hungry for protein today! Have some of that chicken protein that is floating around, or catabolize some of my own heart? Ahh: I'll take the chicken. It's just so much easier to get than breaking down my own muscles!
Note that protein has 4 Cal per gram, so in reality it is quite "easy" to fit the 600 or so calories that are more than sufficient for most people targeting a normal weight range.
Note too that unless you have kidney issues, I have yet to figure out a (health related) reason as to why you would be concerned with eating a 130 to 150-ish grams of protein.
Having said all that and personally being a major procrastinator in the lifting weights department, the reality is that not only will the OP preserve lean muscle mass if she were to lift weights; but, by the sound of it, she and I both fall within the classic definition of over-weight untrained beginners.
Which means that if we were to engage in progressive weight lifting we are both likely to actually gain both strength AND muscle mass even while eating at a deficit. The OP gets a bonus for youth, I would get a bonus for being male.
Last, but not least, at some level, it should be self evident that a person who is both sedentary in their daily life and who does not engage in any exercise will not be muscular. Why would their muscles develop if they are not being used?
To me anyway, it wouldn't be surprising if a person like that would have to move towards the lower end of their healthy weight range in order to also find themselves at a healthy fat % range.
I always enjoy reading your posts PAV - I find you informative and you always communicate that in a sensible and appropriate way.
But I am a little shocked .. cos in all this time I never knew you were male ....
PS you do develop muscles simply by carrying around extra weight .. it would be great to preserve these as you lose weight through progressive resistance0 -
barbecuesauce wrote: »AcerPink23 wrote: »So I should be consuming 190g or so of protein?
No. To calculate your protein you need to use you weight in kg x .8 (190/2.2=86, 86*.8=69. So 69 is the minimum you should take in. If you increase your exercise or start strength training, you can increase it 86*1.2=103.
Nope, it's .8* bodyweight in pounds, as referenced by the posters above.
It is not based on pounds, it is based on kg. This is based on the DRI (Dietary Reference Intake) which is the standard used in the USA & Canada.
RDI is based on minimums and the 0.8 is based on lbs.
US doesn't use kg so that should have been your first clue you are not correct.0 -
In to find later. I have the same issue as OP.0
-
barbecuesauce wrote: »AcerPink23 wrote: »So I should be consuming 190g or so of protein?
No. To calculate your protein you need to use you weight in kg x .8 (190/2.2=86, 86*.8=69. So 69 is the minimum you should take in. If you increase your exercise or start strength training, you can increase it 86*1.2=103.
Nope, it's .8* bodyweight in pounds, as referenced by the posters above.
It is not based on pounds, it is based on kg. This is based on the DRI (Dietary Reference Intake) which is the standard used in the USA & Canada.
RDI is based on minimums and the 0.8 is based on lbs.
US doesn't use kg so that should have been your first clue you are not correct.
I came across a US-based study on PubMed that used kg. I'm personally relieved because that 0.8 figure based on lbs would not be reasonably attainable for me.
0 -
Oh, and for anyone interested…that study mentions that a calorie-restricted diet containing 1.05-1.25g of protein per kg of bodyweight was more beneficial for retaining muscle mass than one having less than 0.7g. The study is focused on menopausal women, though, so there's that.
0 -
Seems like there is some good advice here about protein and strength training. Good luck with your current goals. And, seriously, nice work on losing 100+ pounds!0
-
workhardtogethard wrote: »barbecuesauce wrote: »AcerPink23 wrote: »So I should be consuming 190g or so of protein?
No. To calculate your protein you need to use you weight in kg x .8 (190/2.2=86, 86*.8=69. So 69 is the minimum you should take in. If you increase your exercise or start strength training, you can increase it 86*1.2=103.
Nope, it's .8* bodyweight in pounds, as referenced by the posters above.
It is not based on pounds, it is based on kg. This is based on the DRI (Dietary Reference Intake) which is the standard used in the USA & Canada.
RDI is based on minimums and the 0.8 is based on lbs.
US doesn't use kg so that should have been your first clue you are not correct.
I came across a US-based study on PubMed that used kg. I'm personally relieved because that 0.8 figure based on lbs would not be reasonably attainable for me.
That's just it - basing it on lbs is unobtainable for a lot of people. When I started I weighed 225, so .9 - 1 g would've been 180-225, that is way to much for the 1500-1600 calories I was eating.
I doesn't matter that I live in the Us & we us lbs, in this case you need to adjust to kg to get accurate protien intake. It is the guideline for DRI (daily recommended intake) and it is set by American nutritionists for dietiticians to use with their clients.0 -
workhardtogethard wrote: »barbecuesauce wrote: »AcerPink23 wrote: »So I should be consuming 190g or so of protein?
No. To calculate your protein you need to use you weight in kg x .8 (190/2.2=86, 86*.8=69. So 69 is the minimum you should take in. If you increase your exercise or start strength training, you can increase it 86*1.2=103.
Nope, it's .8* bodyweight in pounds, as referenced by the posters above.
It is not based on pounds, it is based on kg. This is based on the DRI (Dietary Reference Intake) which is the standard used in the USA & Canada.
RDI is based on minimums and the 0.8 is based on lbs.
US doesn't use kg so that should have been your first clue you are not correct.
I came across a US-based study on PubMed that used kg. I'm personally relieved because that 0.8 figure based on lbs would not be reasonably attainable for me.
That same study, in its lit review, noted: Diets higher in protein have been associated with greater fat-free mass retention than diets lower in protein during caloric restriction (12). In premenopausal women, loss of lean mass per kilogram of fat mass lost during a 10-week hypocaloric diet was reduced in those consuming a higher protein (1.6 vs 0.8 g/kg body weight/day) diet, suggesting an improvement in the use of fat for energy resulting in the sparing of lean mass (16).
I think it's from those data on which the .8g/lb (not /kg) recommendation was based.
0 -
@sixxpoint has a long list of sources which all seem to agree that somewhere in the 0.6 - 0.8g of protein per pound of body weight is a reasonable target for retaining muscle mass while losing weight.
So at 190 lbs, that would indicate a range of 114 - 152 g per day0 -
workhardtogethard wrote: »barbecuesauce wrote: »AcerPink23 wrote: »So I should be consuming 190g or so of protein?
No. To calculate your protein you need to use you weight in kg x .8 (190/2.2=86, 86*.8=69. So 69 is the minimum you should take in. If you increase your exercise or start strength training, you can increase it 86*1.2=103.
Nope, it's .8* bodyweight in pounds, as referenced by the posters above.
It is not based on pounds, it is based on kg. This is based on the DRI (Dietary Reference Intake) which is the standard used in the USA & Canada.
RDI is based on minimums and the 0.8 is based on lbs.
US doesn't use kg so that should have been your first clue you are not correct.
I came across a US-based study on PubMed that used kg. I'm personally relieved because that 0.8 figure based on lbs would not be reasonably attainable for me.
That's just it - basing it on lbs is unobtainable for a lot of people. When I started I weighed 225, so .9 - 1 g would've been 180-225, that is way to much for the 1500-1600 calories I was eating.
I doesn't matter that I live in the Us & we us lbs, in this case you need to adjust to kg to get accurate protien intake. It is the guideline for DRI (daily recommended intake) and it is set by American nutritionists for dietiticians to use with their clients.
As I recall - the DRI minimum recommended comes with the caveat that that recommendation is the BARE MINIMUM needed for essential body functions only. Any sort of activity increases that recommendation.
0 -
workhardtogethard wrote: »barbecuesauce wrote: »AcerPink23 wrote: »So I should be consuming 190g or so of protein?
No. To calculate your protein you need to use you weight in kg x .8 (190/2.2=86, 86*.8=69. So 69 is the minimum you should take in. If you increase your exercise or start strength training, you can increase it 86*1.2=103.
Nope, it's .8* bodyweight in pounds, as referenced by the posters above.
It is not based on pounds, it is based on kg. This is based on the DRI (Dietary Reference Intake) which is the standard used in the USA & Canada.
RDI is based on minimums and the 0.8 is based on lbs.
US doesn't use kg so that should have been your first clue you are not correct.
I came across a US-based study on PubMed that used kg. I'm personally relieved because that 0.8 figure based on lbs would not be reasonably attainable for me.
That's just it - basing it on lbs is unobtainable for a lot of people. When I started I weighed 225, so .9 - 1 g would've been 180-225, that is way to much for the 1500-1600 calories I was eating.
I doesn't matter that I live in the Us & we us lbs, in this case you need to adjust to kg to get accurate protien intake. It is the guideline for DRI (daily recommended intake) and it is set by American nutritionists for dietiticians to use with their clients.
^this! I'll have to agree with mom2kpr
and here are some more links, supporting the 0.8g per kg protein intake!
http://fnic.nal.usda.gov/fnic/interactiveDRI/ this is a DRI calculator, it is much more reliable than the ones in bodybuilding sites and the ones set from companies that try to sell protein shakes, powders etc. (yes, your life has been a lie)
https://www.iom.edu/Reports/2002/Dietary-Reference-Intakes-for-Energy-Carbohydrate-Fiber-Fat-Fatty-Acids-Cholesterol-Protein-and-Amino-Acids.aspx and a light book on macros0 -
ceoverturf wrote: »workhardtogethard wrote: »barbecuesauce wrote: »AcerPink23 wrote: »So I should be consuming 190g or so of protein?
No. To calculate your protein you need to use you weight in kg x .8 (190/2.2=86, 86*.8=69. So 69 is the minimum you should take in. If you increase your exercise or start strength training, you can increase it 86*1.2=103.
Nope, it's .8* bodyweight in pounds, as referenced by the posters above.
It is not based on pounds, it is based on kg. This is based on the DRI (Dietary Reference Intake) which is the standard used in the USA & Canada.
RDI is based on minimums and the 0.8 is based on lbs.
US doesn't use kg so that should have been your first clue you are not correct.
I came across a US-based study on PubMed that used kg. I'm personally relieved because that 0.8 figure based on lbs would not be reasonably attainable for me.
That's just it - basing it on lbs is unobtainable for a lot of people. When I started I weighed 225, so .9 - 1 g would've been 180-225, that is way to much for the 1500-1600 calories I was eating.
I doesn't matter that I live in the Us & we us lbs, in this case you need to adjust to kg to get accurate protien intake. It is the guideline for DRI (daily recommended intake) and it is set by American nutritionists for dietiticians to use with their clients.
As I recall - the DRI minimum recommended comes with the caveat that that recommendation is the BARE MINIMUM needed for essential body functions only. Any sort of activity increases that recommendation.
Exactly. If you workout consistantly or lift weights, you can increase up to 1.8g per weight in kg. The point I'm trying get across is us your weight in kg not lbs.
0 -
Protein guideline generally speaking is 0.8-1g per pound of lean body mass, not of total body weight. So if you're 190 and 45% body fat, then that would mean to target roughly between 85-105g of protein per day. Adjust for your real numbers.
And of course, you need to strength train; adding more protein alone won't do anything to preserve muscle mass if you're not strength training.
But in general, I agree with what @SergeantSausage said: You still have more fat to lose, so keep calm and carry on. You've done amazing so far, what you're doing is working, so keep at it. You'll get there.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 429 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 15 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions