Burning Muscle and Not Fat. HELP! PLEASE!

BishoBOY
BishoBOY Posts: 10 Member
in Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
This Monday, I weighed myself at 161.5 lbs and today I weigh 158.8 lbs; body fat percentage stayed at %12.5. I lift weights, do bodyweight cardio, prioritize protein, and limit junk food intake. I have no idea what I am doing wrong. Can someone help me?

Replies

  • NGentRD
    NGentRD Posts: 181 Member
    Could be fluctuations in water. Even a tanita scale or inbody machine will have the slightest inaccuracy. mon-thurs isnt a big time to see muscle loss difference. Our muscles store water so maybe you have a little depleted along with glycogen and that's why you BF hasnt dropped. Ive went from 262-257 in 4 days with my BF going up by .2% but in a few weeks I was doing the same thing and i ended up going down in BF%.
  • stanmann571
    stanmann571 Posts: 5,727 Member
    NickyGee2015 wrote: »
    Could be fluctuations in water. Even a tanita scale or inbody machine will have the slightest inaccuracy. mon-thurs isnt a big time to see muscle loss difference. Our muscles store water so maybe you have a little depleted along with glycogen and that's why you BF hasnt dropped. Ive went from 262-257 in 4 days with my BF going up by .2% but in a few weeks I was doing the same thing and i ended up going down in BF%.

    There's no way you've lost more than 3 lbs of ANYTHING over 3 days than hydration and food in process.
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,343 Member
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    You're relying on a machine that is inaccurate in reporting bf%... That's your mistake
    quiksylver296 wrote: »
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    You're relying on a machine that is inaccurate in reporting bf%... That's your mistake

    That^^
    Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »
    quiksylver296 wrote: »
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    You're relying on a machine that is inaccurate in reporting bf%... That's your mistake

    That^^

    ^^exactly^^

    ^ What they said.
  • MegaMooseEsq
    MegaMooseEsq Posts: 3,118 Member
    Assuming you're using some sort of BF measuring home device, you'll want to use it to watch your general trend, not for specific numbers. As others have noted, these devices are not terrifically accurate and can be effected by a number of things unrelated to your actual body fat %. Try to measure under as similar conditions as possible each time, and don't let yourself get hung up on any particular number or short-term fluctuation.
  • jessef593
    jessef593 Posts: 2,272 Member
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    You're relying on a machine that is inaccurate in reporting bf%... That's your mistake
    quiksylver296 wrote: »
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    You're relying on a machine that is inaccurate in reporting bf%... That's your mistake

    That^^
    Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »
    quiksylver296 wrote: »
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    You're relying on a machine that is inaccurate in reporting bf%... That's your mistake

    That^^

    ^^exactly^^

    ^ What they said.

    And continued ^^^ haha
  • 100_PROOF_
    100_PROOF_ Posts: 1,168 Member
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    You're relying on a machine that is inaccurate in reporting bf%... That's your mistake

    This 100%
  • Chieflrg
    Chieflrg Posts: 9,097 Member
    jessef593 wrote: »
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    You're relying on a machine that is inaccurate in reporting bf%... That's your mistake
    quiksylver296 wrote: »
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    You're relying on a machine that is inaccurate in reporting bf%... That's your mistake

    That^^
    Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »
    quiksylver296 wrote: »
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    You're relying on a machine that is inaccurate in reporting bf%... That's your mistake

    That^^

    ^^exactly^^

    ^ What they said.

    And continued ^^^ haha

    Feed the like/woo machine.
  • quiksylver296
    quiksylver296 Posts: 28,439 Member
    edited May 2018
    Chieflrg wrote: »
    jessef593 wrote: »
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    You're relying on a machine that is inaccurate in reporting bf%... That's your mistake
    quiksylver296 wrote: »
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    You're relying on a machine that is inaccurate in reporting bf%... That's your mistake

    That^^
    Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »
    quiksylver296 wrote: »
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    You're relying on a machine that is inaccurate in reporting bf%... That's your mistake

    That^^

    ^^exactly^^

    ^ What they said.

    And continued ^^^ haha

    Feed the like/woo machine.

    Who is woo'ing in here, anyway? Someone who doesn't know woo = bad on this site, apparently.
  • jessef593
    jessef593 Posts: 2,272 Member
    quiksylver296 wrote: »
    Chieflrg wrote: »
    jessef593 wrote: »
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    You're relying on a machine that is inaccurate in reporting bf%... That's your mistake
    quiksylver296 wrote: »
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    You're relying on a machine that is inaccurate in reporting bf%... That's your mistake

    That^^
    Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »
    quiksylver296 wrote: »
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    You're relying on a machine that is inaccurate in reporting bf%... That's your mistake

    That^^

    ^^exactly^^

    ^ What they said.

    And continued ^^^ haha

    Feed the like/woo machine.

    Who is woo'ing in here, anyway? Someone who doesn't know woo = bad on this site, apparently.

    Or they do but don't actually have any useful information to pass on. Aside from what they leaned on doctor oz :lol:

Categories