Lean Muscle Mass

mnwelch

I met w/ a trainer last week who said my lean muscle mass was around 140 pounds. Does that mean I will most likely never weigh under 140 pounds? My goal weight is between 140-150, but I'm curious if it is even possible for me to weigh less.

Thank you!

neanderthin

Don't worry too much with what your trainer said and continue with your goal to lose weight and yes you can achieve your goal weight.

JakeBrownVB

woah! 140 pounds of lean muscle mass on a women! how much do you weight? your height? do you lift? that seems real high. Yes it means you realistically wont weight less than about 165-170 pounds (women usually have around 20%bf when they are lean) unless you decide to intentionally crash diet and loose loads of muscle which would be a very bad thing.

grimendale

Assuming that is correct, then yes you cannot weigh less than 140 without drastic and unhealthy measures. However, I'm a 6'-1" male with a decent bit of muscle mass, and I only have a lean body mass of about 156 lbs. 140 lbs of lean mass for you sounds high.

pyrowill

That does seem quite high, what are your stats? Also it would always be worth getting a second opinion. Try going here also http://www.fitnessfrog.com/calculators/lbm-calculator.html

JakeBrownVB

yes it does sound very high. I am 168 pound male at around 15%bf.. so I only have a lean muscle mass of around 140 pounds.. but dats why im bulking

mnwelch

I thought it sounded high too.
She said I had 28% body fat (which I thought was low for me at this stage of my weight loss).
I'm 5'2 and currently weigh 190 pounds. The lowest weight I've ever been was 138 is high school and 150 in my adult years.
I have lifted before, but I haven't been lifting recently.
I've been focusing on eating better and trying to get 30 minutes of cardio in 3-5 days a week.
I was looking to start lifting again, which is why I saw the trainer.

JakeBrownVB

the average 190lb female would have had a higher body fat % than 28.. so you must be quite a naturally strong/muscular person. If the trainer has got your body fat % correct you have got a massive amount muscle and will look amazing when cut

LorinaLynn

That does seem high, but I think it's best to not get hung up on goal weights. Just continue eating right, exercising, start lifting again, and take pictures to reevaluate every month or so. If you're happy with your body before you reach 140, woohoo!

leebesstoad

If you have your body measurements (waist, hips, etc). you might want to do a quick sanity check of the bf% your trainer got for you. There are 3 bf% calculators over at Fat2FitRadio (http://www.fat2fitradio.com/tools/) where you plug in your measurements and it will give youa bf%. Remember, all bf% are approximations. ALL of them. These are fairly close to a caliper test, especially when you use all 3 and take the average. 28% does seem like it might be low to me, so checking them this way might not be a bad idea.

As a general rule, most people will also tend to lose some lean muscle mass as they lose weight. The object is to minimize that as much as possible. So even if you were at 140 pounds of lean body mass right now, that doesn't mean you would be at 140 pounds of LBM all the way down to your ideal weight. Because if your ideal weight is 140, no one has a bf% of 0. Guaranteed. But weight training is the way to minimize that loss.

But in the end, don't worry so much about the numbers, and the scales. How does it feel, how does it look. Are you making progress towards your goal? Scales and measurements are just a tool to see how you are doing. They are not the be-all, end-all.

Good luck.

neandermagnon

If you have quite a lot of weight to lose, then some methods of measuring body fat percentage can be fairly inaccurate. The equations they're based on were made using the stats of relatively lean people, i.e. already with a healthy body fat percentage. they are not a good way to measure how obese someone is once they're obese. For example, caliper methods only measure subcutaneous fat (i.e. fat under the skin) not visceral fat (fat around your organs), they assume a certain value for visceral fat based on age, but if you are obese you will have more visceral fat than it expects you to have for your age, so they will underestimate your body fat percentage.

It's a good idea to measure your body fat percentage with several methods, if they're fairly close you can take an average, if they're very different from each other, then you know they could all be out by quite a bit. It's not easy to measure body fat percentage accurately, that's why it really helps to use several methods. Visual estimates also help, Leigh Peele's blog has pictures of women at different body fat percentages, you can see if how you look matches what your trainer says your body fat percentage is or not.

If you have a lot to lose, it's better to use your waist measurement as a guide than scale weight, i.e aim for a waist size and dress size. If you really do have 140lb lean body mass, then yes 150lb would be way too low a goal weight, but if you really do have this amount of lean body mass you'd look like a female bodybuilder with very visible definition and popping veins at 150lb and look very lean at 160lb, and look fit at 170lb. So your goal weight may be higher, but it's body fat percentage that determines if you look fit, lean, etc, not actual weight.

If you have a lean body mass of 140lb, then you'd have to be tall, large framed and fairly athletic (or genetically pre-disposed to naturally have a lot of muscle)... if that's true about you then this value may be correct.......... I'm short and large framed and I've always been very strong, and my lean body mass is 101-106 (depending on how you measure body fat percentage) - most of that is genetic although I've added maybe 2-5lb LBM from heavy lifting... if you're short and/or small framed then 140lb is probably not correct.

Also, if you have more lean body mass for your height than average, then people may take you to be 10-20lb or so lighter than you actually are, because you'll have a lower body fat percentage than others at the same height/weight, and it's body fat percentage that determines how you look, not weight. If this is true about you then just ignore scale weight and go for the look that you want.

TavistockToad

That does seem high, but I think it's best to not get hung up on goal weights. Just continue eating right, exercising, start lifting again, and take pictures to reevaluate every month or so. If you're happy with your body before you reach 140, woohoo!

this

actual numbers dont matter, its how you feel that counts!

Yanicka1

I do not say that it is absolutely impossible but I am 4'11" and I have 100 pounds of lean mass. I also have been lifting for more than 2 years and have done a bulk cycle.

DrMAvDPhD

According to your stated goal and ticker you would be between 170-180 right now. In which case, unless you are an (former) professional athlete that estimate is wrong. Just eat at a caloric deficit and continue resistance training. Don't get hung up on numbers like lean mass or goal weights. Just work towards the body you want.

WendyTerry420

Keep the 140 in LBM! Of course, some of that will disappear naturally as you gradually lose. (Tissue connections no longer needed, etc.) But preserve what you have by getting plenty of protein and strength training. Don't worry about the scale. I found out my LBM was 124 pounds, and I intend to keep as much of that as possible. I changed my goal weight from 140 to 175 and will reevaluate at that point. The number on the scale is just one indicator, not the end-all, beat-all.

mnwelch

Thanks everyone!

ButterflyKristen

I would like to weigh in on this. I went to the fat to fit website (referenced above) to calculate my body fat and based on that calculation, I have 26% body fat. This, I believe is grossly inaccurate. I have done 3 bf tests using professional hydro-static testing (at Fitness Wave in Newport Beach, CA) since last November. I have been doing crossfit and kicking *kitten* on my personal records, 1 rep maxes, etc. I am pretty strong for my age (42.5) and for how long I've been doing this (1 year). First test in November 2012 was 21%, second test end of Feb. was 19.3%, 3rd and last test end of April 2013 was 17.3%. I'm sure my numbers vary slightly now, but basically should be the same.

That said, I do believe I appear fatter than I am b/c virtually ALL of my excess fat is on my hips and thighs (saddlebags). I am 5'4" and weigh 156 pounds. I have 127.7 pounds of lean body mass. I believe my hydrostatic numbers are correct b/c they are consistent over time and matched up with how I looked and how my clothes fit over that same period of time. Based on this information. I kind of WANT to believe the bigger number, b/c in my mind it would be easier to lose more weight.

Anyway, hope this was helpful. Thought I'd share my experiences with you. I recommend just getting your bf% professionally done via hydrostatic or bod pod (check your local university).