Need help figure out my BF%

kpiazzisi

I am 55 y/o, 164 Lb. 5-5, male. I want a "beach body look". I thought this was generally a look most guys get at 10% BF. It's where the lower abs start showing. I didn't realize that was "too low" or "unhealthy", but some on here said it was? I have had a terrible time trying to add pics, but hopefully they are visible in my profile. Plz feel free to look at them. Plz advise. If lower abs are typically 10% and you guys think I am at X%, then I will have an idea how much weight I still need to lose . Thanks in advance.

Retroguy2000

I'm not sure why you needed a second thread for the same thing, unless you feel the advice you got there wasn't what you wanted to hear, and you're hoping to hear something different. In that thread, multiple posters including myself advised you not to chase a 10% goal. Not a single poster suggested you should go ahead with that goal.

I also suggested the Navy method to estimate your body fat %, and you didn't respond, and here you are asking for help to estimate it. So try that?

I can see two pics in your profile, and especially in the main pic you look really good. I maintain you should not chase a 10% goal. Sure, get to 15% and see what you think then. I suggest get there and maintain that, and focus on retaining and building muscle.

I think some fitness influencers online have resulted in unreasonable expectations for some people. Unless you have a specific athletics/career based goal, you'll be at least as healthy and enjoying your diet and the way you look at 15% as you would at 10%.

AnnPT77

kpiazzisi wrote: »

I am 55 y/o, 164 Lb. 5-5, male. I want a "beach body look". I thought this was generally a look most guys get at 10% BF. It's where the lower abs start showing. I didn't realize that was "too low" or "unhealthy", but some on here said it was? I have had a terrible time trying to add pics, but hopefully they are visible in my profile. Plz feel free to look at them. Plz advise. If lower abs are typically 10% and you guys think I am at X%, then I will have an idea how much weight I still need to lose . Thanks in advance.

Here's a radical thought: You don't need to know how much you still need to lose.

You're slim enough now that you would be best off to lose slowly, either with a very small calorie deficit (half a pound a week loss or less) or slower than that but with more potential muscle gain upside at maintenance calories. Of course you'll want to continue with a good progressive strength training program, and overall good nutrition (especially but not exclusively protein).

That implies that nothing in your route to ideal weight changes no matter what your ideal weight or body fat turns out to be . . . except your decision about when to stop losing fat. We all see ourselves a little unclearly as our body changes, typically, but as long as you don't have major body dysmorphia, you'll know when you get to goal, and you'll see it coming a little bit beforehand. And as you get there, you'll have a better fe, el for how you stand on issues like the sustainability of that body fat level (hunger cues and whatnot).

If the methods you're using to lose now are so difficult or onerous that you're worried about whether you can stick with it long enough to reach goal . . . that's a different problem. Sooner or later, you need to find and develop routine habits you can sustain permanently in order to keep your new physique. Find those habits now, and practice them, with maybe just that small deficit alongside.

So: Lose slowly, continue gaining muscle, using permanently sustainable eating/activity habits, until you get the look you want. The specific numbers (weeks/months to goal, actual numeric goal weight, body fat percent now or then) don't matter all that much. You'll know goal when you see it. When you get there, nothing changes . . . except maybe eating a few more calories daily.

kpiazzisi

Retroguy2000 wrote: »

I'm not sure why you needed a second thread for the same thing, unless you feel the advice you got there wasn't what you wanted to hear, and you're hoping to hear something different. In that thread, multiple posters including myself advised you not to chase a 10% goal. Not a single poster suggested you should go ahead with that goal.

I also suggested the Navy method to estimate your body fat %, and you didn't respond, and here you are asking for help to estimate it. So try that?

I can see two pics in your profile, and especially in the main pic you look really good. I maintain you should not chase a 10% goal. Sure, get to 15% and see what you think then. I suggest get there and maintain that, and focus on retaining and building muscle.

I think some fitness influencers online have resulted in unreasonable expectations for some people. Unless you have a specific athletics/career based goal, you'll be at least as healthy and enjoying your diet and the way you look at 15% as you would at 10%.

No, I wasn't looking for a different answer. I was having a difficult time with this site and figuring out how to include pictures. The double post was my failed attempt to embed pics. Thank you for the compliments and for the sound advise. It seems lime just a few months ago my wife said "You're getting a little chunky". This was after I pinned her down to giving me an honest opinion after I could't comfortably fit into my sz 35 waist shorts. I don't see myself as being in "good shape". A lot of changes have happened realitively quickly (few months), so I don't know what the future is going to look like. Will I start eating healthy carbs again soon, will I eat within a window greater than 6 hours. I do feel like I am getting close to losing more and more muscle, so perhaps your right and I should slow the pace down a bit and soon transition taking in enough calories to maintain rather than lose weight. Thanks for your input.

kpiazzisi

AnnPT77 wrote: »

kpiazzisi wrote: »

I am 55 y/o, 164 Lb. 5-5, male. I want a "beach body look". I thought this was generally a look most guys get at 10% BF. It's where the lower abs start showing. I didn't realize that was "too low" or "unhealthy", but some on here said it was? I have had a terrible time trying to add pics, but hopefully they are visible in my profile. Plz feel free to look at them. Plz advise. If lower abs are typically 10% and you guys think I am at X%, then I will have an idea how much weight I still need to lose . Thanks in advance.

Here's a radical thought: You don't need to know how much you still need to lose.

You're slim enough now that you would be best off to lose slowly, either with a very small calorie deficit (half a pound a week loss or less) or slower than that but with more potential muscle gain upside at maintenance calories. Of course you'll want to continue with a good progressive strength training program, and overall good nutrition (especially but not exclusively protein).

That implies that nothing in your route to ideal weight changes no matter what your ideal weight or body fat turns out to be . . . except your decision about when to stop losing fat. We all see ourselves a little unclearly as our body changes, typically, but as long as you don't have major body dysmorphia, you'll know when you get to goal, and you'll see it coming a little bit beforehand. And as you get there, you'll have a better fe, el for how you stand on issues like the sustainability of that body fat level (hunger cues and whatnot).

If the methods you're using to lose now are so difficult or onerous that you're worried about whether you can stick with it long enough to reach goal . . . that's a different problem. Sooner or later, you need to find and develop routine habits you can sustain permanently in order to keep your new physique. Find those habits now, and practice them, with maybe just that small deficit alongside.

So: Lose slowly, continue gaining muscle, using permanently sustainable eating/activity habits, until you get the look you want. The specific numbers (weeks/months to goal, actual numeric goal weight, body fat percent now or then) don't matter all that much. You'll know goal when you see it. When you get there, nothing changes . . . except maybe eating a few more calories daily.

Great advise. Everyone on here is pretty much telling me the same thing. To basically slow down, slight or no calorie deficit and focus on training hard, building/maintaining muscle.

Retroguy2000

kpiazzisi wrote: »

Thank you for the compliments and for the sound advise. It seems lime just a few months ago my wife said "You're getting a little chunky". This was after I pinned her down to giving me an honest opinion after I could't comfortably fit into my sz 35 waist shorts. I don't see myself as being in "good shape". A lot of changes have happened realitively quickly (few months), so I don't know what the future is going to look like. Will I start eating healthy carbs again soon, will I eat within a window greater than 6 hours. I do feel like I am getting close to losing more and more muscle, so perhaps your right and I should slow the pace down a bit and soon transition taking in enough calories to maintain rather than lose weight. Thanks for your input.

Maybe a few months ago that chunky comment was valid. You've lost 22 pounds since then, and muscle definition can clearly be seen. Btw, just thinking about it now, that's 22 pounds in 4 months, which is quite a lot, and the closer you get to goal weight, the slower your loss should be.

You don't see yourself as being in good shape, compared to who? Most 55 year old men don't have your muscle mass and are often carrying a lot more fat too, certainly in this country.

Of all the weights related guys I follow on YT, probably only one of them has a body fat % in the 10% range and that's Athlean. Most of them are likely around 15%. It's very hard to guess, but I assume you're in the 17%-20% range currently. Did you try that Navy method yet?

You definitely don't want to encourage muscle loss at your age. Aim for a slow loss like Ann said, at most 0.5 pounds per week so about 250 cals per day. If you're new here, log everything you ingest as accurately as possible for a typical week without diet changes, including realistic workout calories burned estimates, and compare that with recent weeks weight loss so you can get a good idea what your maintenance level is. Then aim for 200-250 below maintenance, and re-evaluate after maybe three months. Keep doing weights frequently, and get at least 120g protein daily, or as much as 140g on workout days where you'll have additional calories to eat.

kpiazzisi

Not sure what the Navy method is, but I will research. Counting calories is tough. I do a lot of projects around the house. Today I added three sections of fence to the back yard. Who knows how many calories I burned doing that. I have no idea. Everyday is different, so I think it would be really hard to consume exactly 200 calories less then what I use everyday.

Should I still be doing the intermittent fasting? When I was 28 y/o, I got hydo tested at 9 percent and 162 Lb. I didn't really have a lot of info on dieting in 1993, I just reduced my caloric intake. Youth, intense workouts, and genetics did the rest. At 55 y/o it's a little different, but I am thankful for the progress

JBanx256

Totally legit question, not being sarcastic....

Why does it matter? I mean, even if you could possibly know an exact number, down to the decimal, would that actually change what you're doing?

What I mean is...

1. If your bodyfat is X ("too high" in terms of the number you want to see), but you really like the way you look in the mirror, are you going to keep cutting hard and making yourself miserable (and potentially risking other adverse effects - loss of lean tissue, REDS, hormonal disruptions, etc)?

2. If your bodyfat is Y (right on the nose of what you think it "should" be, or heck, even a bit lower), but you aren't satisfied with your physique, are you going to slam the brakes on your pursuit of improvement?

Different bodyfat %'s can look very different on different people. So even if you got to whatever magic number, through whatever degree of suffering necessary, you still might not be happy with the results. And the flip side is, it's entirely possible that you may work yourself into a body that you are very proud of and feel good stripping down to swim trunks on the beach with, and still be multiple % points higher than the number you were chasing.

Don't get me wrong, I've been (and heck, sometimes still am) curious about my bf %. But I also know that there is no accurate/reliable way to determine it in the first place, and that what I see in the mirror, how I feel, my performance in the gym, and how my clothes fit, ultimately matter a LOT more than any (undoubtedly false) readout on any gizmo or online calculator.

AnnPT77

kpiazzisi wrote: »

Not sure what the Navy method is, but I will research. Counting calories is tough. I do a lot of projects around the house. Today I added three sections of fence to the back yard. Who knows how many calories I burned doing that. I have no idea. Everyday is different, so I think it would be really hard to consume exactly 200 calories less then what I use everyday.

I admit it's a little more difficult, because it helps to have a very clear (experience-based) read on your calorie needs, plus solid logging skills . . . but it may not be as difficult as you're thinking.

Why do I say that?

Because it doesn't need to be exactly 200 calories every single day. It just needs to be near-abouts to 200 calories, on average, over a period of a small number of weeks.

You know whether it's working based on what shows up on the scale as a trend over several weeks.

If you don't know how many calories you burned putting up fence sections, take a wild guess based on other activity definitions. That'll be close enough. (You don't do this super often, so accuracy matters less than for exercise you do multiple times every week.)

Some days, you might put up fence sections. Some days, you might do fewer chores than usual, maybe watch football on TV most of the day or something. Estimate all of it reasonably, without stressing or obsessing, and watch the results over time. The overestimates and underestimates will tend to average out to plenty close enough.

Workably close is all you need. I intentionally (re-)lost 10-15 pounds over a period of more than a year, intentionally, eating a 150-200 calories under maintenance calorie estimate most days, and materially over maintenance on the rare special day. That's an even tighter calorie balance than striving for 200 away from maintenance every day (on average).

It worked fine. I'm not special. You can do it, in either (gain or lose) direction. Make an estimate, be patient, watch the scale trend over multiple weeks, adjust. Not that hard.

Should I still be doing the intermittent fasting? When I was 28 y/o, I got hydo tested at 9 percent and 162 Lb. I didn't really have a lot of info on dieting in 1993, I just reduced my caloric intake. Youth, intense workouts, and genetics did the rest. At 55 y/o it's a little different, but I am thankful for the progress

If the intermittent fasting makes the process easier for you, do it. If it makes it harder, don't. You might find that if you do it, you will have better workout energy if you eat relatively closer to your workouts. Or you might find the opposite - some people do. Experiment. Gain/lose-wise, it doesn't matter, other than that eating closer to your weigh-in will tend to push the scale weight a little higher than if you excrete some of the food weight long before weighing in.

Navy method calculators are all over the net. Here's one, picked at random.

https://www.calculator.net/body-fat-calculator.html

Retroguy2000

kpiazzisi wrote: »

Not sure what the Navy method is, but I will research. Counting calories is tough. I do a lot of projects around the house. Today I added three sections of fence to the back yard. Who knows how many calories I burned doing that. I have no idea. Everyday is different, so I think it would be really hard to consume exactly 200 calories less then what I use everyday.

Should I still be doing the intermittent fasting? When I was 28 y/o, I got hydo tested at 9 percent and 162 Lb. I didn't really have a lot of info on dieting in 1993, I just reduced my caloric intake. Youth, intense workouts, and genetics did the rest. At 55 y/o it's a little different, but I am thankful for the progress

Navy method doesn't take much research. I gave you links in your other thread on this very same page about how to do it.

Yes, estimating calories from workouts can be challenging, but as Ann says above you can come up with reasonable estimates. Or if you're typically doing work like fence building and other days have similar effort work, then you can bump up your daily setting from Lightly Active to Active or whatever it's called.

It's not even that important anyway. I mean, if the goal is 0.5 pounds per week loss then yes, it's about 250 calories per day. But that doesn't mean you need to know your exact TDEE, or even that you need to track calories and workout estimates. You can weigh yourself every day or two, use a running average in a spreadsheet or Libra like app (to filter out water fluctuations), and if you're on track for that loss, great. If you aren't losing, cut back a little. Don't have that daily afternoon or night time snack. Have a smaller dinner portion. Don't have that extra beer. Etc. That will be 100 or 200 calories each. Do one, two or three of those as needed. Or if you're losing too much, add one or other of those things back in.

IF is entirely up to you whether it works for you to hit your calorie goals. You'll lose the same amount of weight on IF or not, on the same amount of total calories. If your proposed IF includes entire days of fasting, I've seen reports suggesting that's not ideal for retaining muscle mass, but if you're doing 16:8 daily, it should be fine.