Cutting after bulking?

monikker

So I've never been in a position to cut, mainly because I've never bulked up, which is my big goal right now. I'm weight training and eating at a surplus and all. I've never weighed more than 130 lbs, I'm at about 5'8" and I'm female. Not really worried about the body fat percentage thing, I think bulking and gaining muscle is perfect for me.

Reading about bulking, I see that the next step after bulking is cutting - at what point would I know to cut, and does that just mean to go down in calorie intake? I'm assuming when I'm on the muscular side and have some extra fat, then it would make sense to cut. But you still lift weights and stay muscular? The whole point of cutting is to get lean and stay strong? I guess that would be the point where you do more cardio and still lift, but not quite as much. Right now I'm mainly lifting weights and then topping off the workout with moderate cardio on the treadmill for about 10 min.

mustgetmuscles1

Its really a personal preference. When you are bulking you are adding muscle and fat. When you get to a point where you are unhappy with the amount of body fat you have you can either diet to remove it or switch to maintenance and try to remove it while still making a little muscle gain.

You keep lifting the way you always did but be prepared for some slow down in progression and recovery. Some people do fine with strength but some have trouble staying as strong while cutting.

alereck

I'm having a hard time with this. I'm trying to build muscle but I add a few hundred calories and all that happens is I lose my flat stomach and gain fat on my thighs :-/

Should I just keep going until the muscles start to show up more? I can see improvement but there is definately more fat coming than muscle. I do watch my macros (I've been bad the last month with kids being out of school and all) but I'm pretty consistent otherwise, plenty of protein and carbs - low fat. Weight has stayed the same, it's just how I look that has changed, it was hard getting rid of the extra fat, I just don't want too much of it back.

DavidDBZS

Just keep going until you feel it's a good idea to stop.

Chrisparadise579

alerek. If you only add about 100 calories at a time until you see less than a pound a week gained that is the rate you want to bulk at. That will be your fat gain minimal

monikker

I read that the muscles will show up visibly in certain parts more than others where the muscles are bigger, like the chest, thighs and glutes. So maybe that is normal and your other body parts just need more time to catch up visibly. But I dunno.

chrisdavey

I'm having a hard time with this. I'm trying to build muscle but I add a few hundred calories and all that happens is I lose my flat stomach and gain fat on my thighs :-/

Should I just keep going until the muscles start to show up more? I can see improvement but there is definately more fat coming than muscle. I do watch my macros (I've been bad the last month with kids being out of school and all) but I'm pretty consistent otherwise, plenty of protein and carbs - low fat. Weight has stayed the same, it's just how I look that has changed, it was hard getting rid of the extra fat, I just don't want too much of it back.

Are your lifts increasing?

The first place you will gain fat for most women is butt/thighs and for men is the stomach. Just like this is the last place you typically lose it from.

As long as your surplus isn't too large (and IMO it shouldn't ever be for a female as the muscle building process is so slow) then I wouldn't worry about it.

It's like guys worrying about having visible abs year round. It's a sure fire way to stay at the same strength/LBM level basically.

cliffshaw

There is probably quite a bit of information out there on bulking and cutting. If not on this site check out bodybuilding.com.
My wife started competing at the beginning of the year and is currently between show's and has been bulking up (again) since her May show. When she bulks she is eating 3800 calories with half of those being carbs (good carbs, lots of veggies and some fruits). When she cuts she'll drop somewhere to 1800-2400 calories (depends on how many weeks til show time) and her carbs will drop to about 30% if her daily calorie intake.
Every one is different, but that at least gives you an idea of what things to look at. Me, I'm slowly gaining about a half a pound of week eating about 2800 calories a day. I can't eat the carbs like her or the number of calories or I'd gain too much fat way too quickly. You'll have to play with your total calories and ratio's both during bulking and cutting to find out what works best for you.

Hope this helps.

Springfield1970

I'm having a hard time with this. I'm trying to build muscle but I add a few hundred calories and all that happens is I lose my flat stomach and gain fat on my thighs :-/

Should I just keep going until the muscles start to show up more? I can see improvement but there is definately more fat coming than muscle. I do watch my macros (I've been bad the last month with kids being out of school and all) but I'm pretty consistent otherwise, plenty of protein and carbs - low fat. Weight has stayed the same, it's just how I look that has changed, it was hard getting rid of the extra fat, I just don't want too much of it back.

Hi, perhaps I can help. My goal was to bulk for strength and speed for triathlon so I didn't want to carry to much weight, and look more sporty, particularly in my bottom half. It was a challenge as my body loves to cling on to fat as I had under eaten a lot in my years, and am 43.

I cut down to 16/17% body fat first. It looked not so good, not curvy, but it was lean and ran the fastest time for 5k 21 minutes. I am 5'7" and was 123lbs. Bmi was 19. I wanted to be low body fat, because I hate being big (I'm fine boned) and I'd read a lot that you gain more muscle than fat on a bulk if you are lean first. The theory is that the ratio proportionally leans towards more fat gain the fatter you are and the longer you bulk. I believe this, but have no proof.

Anyway, as women can only gain approx .25lb per week and that's with a heavy lifting whole body routine 3 x hours per week, and you get the tag along fat with it, I added 1/2 lb of weight per week which is 1700 cals divided by 7 about 250 extra cals per day on top of maintenance.

This is one of the times that you have to be diligent as anything (especially bulking over Xmas and on holiday in Hawaii lol!). I already knew my daily maintenance goal without exercise was 1750 from keeping records during my cut. I added my exercise calories (tries to do minimum cardio to keep things simple) and my lifting calories.(difficult to work out) and as planned gained .5 lb a week.

This game is only for the obsessed!

I gained up to 132lb then have slowly cut since feb as I'm training hard for triathlon and don't want injuries. So I lost about a pound a month.

All in all I've lost about 10% body fat since I started a couple of years ago, and gained a few pounds muscle. I've taken about 20 years off my look. I was a wobbly pear with bingo wings before!

For me, I was in a hurry to get back to cutting as fat effects performance in triathlon, I can't stand tight fitting clothes, and I believe that a bulk gets to a point where there is too much fat being gained. But it is also worth doing properly over months. I did it for about 3 months. I enjoyed it, it was great feeling like food was building something valuable, and I knew I was doing my bones, organs, skin, hair, teeth the world of good.

Sarauk2sf

As women cannot gain much muscle, we should really look to do a slow bulk - only 1 - 2lb a month at most.

A 'rule of thumb' is to stop bulking at about 25% body fat (individual context applies though), or when you get to a point where you are not comfortable with the fat gain (or if you have a specific event in mind).

You then eat at a deficit. You should ensure that you continue weight training to preserve as much muscle mass as you can while dieting. Often volume gets cut slightly however to make more allowances for recovery while on a deficit. I would also recommend upping protein (but that is really dependent on where you protein is currently).

_Terrapin_

bump---

cliffshaw

As women cannot gain much muscle, we should really look to do a slow bulk - only 1 - 2lb a month at most.

A 'rule of thumb' is to stop bulking at about 25% body fat (individual context applies though), or when you get to a point where you are not comfortable with the fat gain (or if you have a specific event in mind).

Not sure I agree with this line of thinking. As I mentioned earlier everybody is different - I get that. You can take 10 different people put them on the same routine and diet and come up with 10 different results. The key is to find what works for you.

I do know my wife went from 123lbs at show time in May to 136-138 currently with about 1% gain in body fat. At show time she was about 10.5% and is currently around 11.5%. Her experience and my observation is that women can pack on lean muscle mass fairly quickly. Sure they will likely plateau quicker, but clean eating and a calorie surplus coupled with weight training will get you there. I read all the time that it don't matter what type of calories you are consuming. Many even advise ice cream as a way to bulk quickly. I disagree if your goal is to put on lean muscle mass. Excess carbs will be converted to fat stores. You have to play with your macros to find the right levels for your body where your are utilizing your carbs for normal body functions as well as muscle growth without a large surplus to be stored away.

Side note: if you haven't already get a body comp done at a local gym. I think my wife pay $10-15 for one: well worth it and a lot more accurate than the do-it-yourself methods. That way you can measure your relative muscle/fat gain compared to your overall weight gain as you are bulking.

3laine75

So jealous.....bulking is great. Just keep at it till you feel uncomfortable with the amount of fat you've gained. This could take weeks or months, it's a personal preference thing. You might be lucky enough to be one of the people who doesn't need to cut.

You want enough of a surplus to get optimum muscle gain but not enough to pile on the fat too quick - I'd go for a 0.5 lb gain (as, generally, women can gain 0.25 muscle)

Sarauk2sf

As women cannot gain much muscle, we should really look to do a slow bulk - only 1 - 2lb a month at most.

A 'rule of thumb' is to stop bulking at about 25% body fat (individual context applies though), or when you get to a point where you are not comfortable with the fat gain (or if you have a specific event in mind).

Not sure I agree with this line of thinking. As I mentioned earlier everybody is different - I get that. You can take 10 different people put them on the same routine and diet and come up with 10 different results. The key is to find what works for you.

I do know my wife went from 123lbs at show time in May to 136-138 currently with about 1% gain in body fat. At show time she was about 10.5% and is currently around 11.5%. Her experience and my observation is that women can pack on lean muscle mass fairly quickly. Sure they will likely plateau quicker, but clean eating and a calorie surplus coupled with weight training will get you there. I read all the time that it don't matter what type of calories you are consuming. Many even advise ice cream as a way to bulk quickly. I disagree if your goal is to put on lean muscle mass. Excess carbs will be converted to fat stores. You have to play with your macros to find the right levels for your body where your are utilizing your carbs for normal body functions as well as muscle growth without a large surplus to be stored away.

Side note: if you haven't already get a body comp done at a local gym. I think my wife pay $10-15 for one: well worth it and a lot more accurate than the do-it-yourself methods. That way you can measure your relative muscle/fat gain compared to your overall weight gain as you are bulking.

Women just do not have the testosterone to 'pack on muscle'. What device was used to estimate BF%? She was 10.5% BF?

Also, excess calories will be converter to fat - not just excess carbs.

ETA: LBM is not just muscle btw.

At 10.5% BF (assuming this is correct), she would have 110lb LBM. At the 11.5%, she would have 121lb LBM. There is no way a natural already lean female (and I assume not new to training) will add 11lb of muscle in less than 2 months. LBM....quite possibly. LBM also includes water weight. Up your carbs - you up your water weight.

Springfield1970

As women cannot gain much muscle, we should really look to do a slow bulk - only 1 - 2lb a month at most.

A 'rule of thumb' is to stop bulking at about 25% body fat (individual context applies though), or when you get to a point where you are not comfortable with the fat gain (or if you have a specific event in mind).

Not sure I agree with this line of thinking. As I mentioned earlier everybody is different - I get that. You can take 10 different people put them on the same routine and diet and come up with 10 different results. The key is to find what works for you.

I do know my wife went from 123lbs at show time in May to 136-138 currently with about 1% gain in body fat. At show time she was about 10.5% and is currently around 11.5%. Her experience and my observation is that women can pack on lean muscle mass fairly quickly. Sure they will likely plateau quicker, but clean eating and a calorie surplus coupled with weight training will get you there. I read all the time that it don't matter what type of calories you are consuming. Many even advise ice cream as a way to bulk quickly. I disagree if your goal is to put on lean muscle mass. Excess carbs will be converted to fat stores. You have to play with your macros to find the right levels for your body where your are utilizing your carbs for normal body functions as well as muscle growth without a large surplus to be stored away.

Side note: if you haven't already get a body comp done at a local gym. I think my wife pay $10-15 for one: well worth it and a lot more accurate than the do-it-yourself methods. That way you can measure your relative muscle/fat gain compared to your overall weight gain as you are bulking.

What you are claiming is pretty much impossible. There's no way a woman can gain 13 pounds of muscle in two months. Also, do the maths. 1% of body weight is 1.3ishlb (10.5% to 11.5), and for her to have gained 13lb of muscle and 1lb of fat doesn't compute.

More likely she was a higher body fat to start with. I've been 123lb and 16% body fat and was emaciated. I'm 5'7".

She gained 13/15lb since May. 2/2.5lb muscle, 2-5lb fat and the rest food in gut from higher calorie eating (she must have been eating 500 cals more per day than before), glycogen in liver and muscles, water, and denser bone. I calculate she added between 2-5lb of fat so a jump of 1.5-3% fat.

I may add the gym devices are as bad as the scale fat counter you have at home. Not recommended either.

You are preaching to the converted by the way. Excess calories are needed for muscle growth, and carbohydrate is needed to transport the amino acids into the muscle (the protein). Clean eating has nothing to do with it. Calorie control and adequate carbs do, along with the heavy lifting.

cliffshaw

As women cannot gain much muscle, we should really look to do a slow bulk - only 1 - 2lb a month at most.

A 'rule of thumb' is to stop bulking at about 25% body fat (individual context applies though), or when you get to a point where you are not comfortable with the fat gain (or if you have a specific event in mind).

Not sure I agree with this line of thinking. As I mentioned earlier everybody is different - I get that. You can take 10 different people put them on the same routine and diet and come up with 10 different results. The key is to find what works for you.

I do know my wife went from 123lbs at show time in May to 136-138 currently with about 1% gain in body fat. At show time she was about 10.5% and is currently around 11.5%. Her experience and my observation is that women can pack on lean muscle mass fairly quickly. Sure they will likely plateau quicker, but clean eating and a calorie surplus coupled with weight training will get you there. I read all the time that it don't matter what type of calories you are consuming. Many even advise ice cream as a way to bulk quickly. I disagree if your goal is to put on lean muscle mass. Excess carbs will be converted to fat stores. You have to play with your macros to find the right levels for your body where your are utilizing your carbs for normal body functions as well as muscle growth without a large surplus to be stored away.

Side note: if you haven't already get a body comp done at a local gym. I think my wife pay $10-15 for one: well worth it and a lot more accurate than the do-it-yourself methods. That way you can measure your relative muscle/fat gain compared to your overall weight gain as you are bulking.

Women just do not have the testosterone to 'pack on muscle'. What device was used to estimate BF%? She was 10.5% BF?

Also, excess calories will be converter to fat - not just excess carbs.

ETA: LBM is not just muscle btw.

At 10.5% BF (assuming this is correct), she would have 110lb LBM. At the 11.5%, she would have 121lb LBM. There is no way a natural already lean female (and I assume not new to training) will add 11lb of muscle in less than 2 months. LBM....quite possibly. LBM also includes water weight. Up your carbs - you up your water weight.

You haven't said anything I disagree with. I'm not sure what they use to measure her body mass: all I can say is they take about a dozen different measurements and plug the number into a computer.

I was not implying that all her weight gain was mostly muscle: if that was the case there would be no reason to cut down to the mid 120's. I was trying to convey the fact that women (as well as guys) can add muscle w/o putting on a whole lot of body fat as well. Certainly a lot of the weight will be water weight, thus the need to cut so the muscle definition is more evident.

The biggest point I was trying to make (and not necessarily in response to your post) is that you can bulk up w/o eating all the junk food. There seems to be a camp that advocates eating whatever you want to pack on as much weight as possible and then cutting back after you've hit the target weight. I'm more an advocate for bulking by upping the calories while still eating healthier/cleaner food. Certainly the gains will be slower, and it takes more work to monitor and adjust your macros, but the final cutting will be much less difficult.

Sarauk2sf

As women cannot gain much muscle, we should really look to do a slow bulk - only 1 - 2lb a month at most.

A 'rule of thumb' is to stop bulking at about 25% body fat (individual context applies though), or when you get to a point where you are not comfortable with the fat gain (or if you have a specific event in mind).

Not sure I agree with this line of thinking. As I mentioned earlier everybody is different - I get that. You can take 10 different people put them on the same routine and diet and come up with 10 different results. The key is to find what works for you.

I do know my wife went from 123lbs at show time in May to 136-138 currently with about 1% gain in body fat. At show time she was about 10.5% and is currently around 11.5%. Her experience and my observation is that women can pack on lean muscle mass fairly quickly. Sure they will likely plateau quicker, but clean eating and a calorie surplus coupled with weight training will get you there. I read all the time that it don't matter what type of calories you are consuming. Many even advise ice cream as a way to bulk quickly. I disagree if your goal is to put on lean muscle mass. Excess carbs will be converted to fat stores. You have to play with your macros to find the right levels for your body where your are utilizing your carbs for normal body functions as well as muscle growth without a large surplus to be stored away.

Side note: if you haven't already get a body comp done at a local gym. I think my wife pay $10-15 for one: well worth it and a lot more accurate than the do-it-yourself methods. That way you can measure your relative muscle/fat gain compared to your overall weight gain as you are bulking.

Women just do not have the testosterone to 'pack on muscle'. What device was used to estimate BF%? She was 10.5% BF?

Also, excess calories will be converter to fat - not just excess carbs.

ETA: LBM is not just muscle btw.

At 10.5% BF (assuming this is correct), she would have 110lb LBM. At the 11.5%, she would have 121lb LBM. There is no way a natural already lean female (and I assume not new to training) will add 11lb of muscle in less than 2 months. LBM....quite possibly. LBM also includes water weight. Up your carbs - you up your water weight.

You haven't said anything I disagree with. I'm not sure what they use to measure her body mass: all I can say is they take about a dozen different measurements and plug the number into a computer.

I was not implying that all her weight gain was mostly muscle: if that was the case there would be no reason to cut down to the mid 120's. I was trying to convey the fact that women (as well as guys) can add muscle w/o putting on a whole lot of body fat as well. Certainly a lot of the weight will be water weight, thus the need to cut so the muscle definition is more evident.

The biggest point I was trying to make (and not necessarily in response to your post) is that you can bulk up w/o eating all the junk food. There seems to be a camp that advocates eating whatever you want to pack on as much weight as possible and then cutting back after you've hit the target weight. I'm more an advocate for bulking by upping the calories while still eating healthier/cleaner food. Certainly the gains will be slower, and it takes more work to monitor and adjust your macros, but the final cutting will be much less difficult.

Where did I way that women could not gain muscle without adding a lot of fat? What exactly were you disagreeing with in my post then?

cliffshaw

As women cannot gain much muscle, we should really look to do a slow bulk - only 1 - 2lb a month at most.

A 'rule of thumb' is to stop bulking at about 25% body fat (individual context applies though), or when you get to a point where you are not comfortable with the fat gain (or if you have a specific event in mind).

[/quote]

Where did I way that women could not gain muscle without adding a lot of fat? What exactly were you disagreeing with in my post then?
[/quote]

Your original statement of bulking to 25% body fat seemed to me to imply that bulking automatically means putting on a lot of body fat. If I incorrectly inferred that I apologize. I know that women carry more body fat then men - i get that. But again, I don't buy into the notion that bulking has to means putting on a lot of body fat (I view 25% as a lot). As I mentioned in my last post one can certainly bulk eating cleanly and not packing on a lot of fat in the process: it just takes longer and more effort. Again, as you post seemed to imply, it really depends on your individual goals and time frame.

CrescentCityGirl

Saving for later : )

Sarauk2sf

As women cannot gain much muscle, we should really look to do a slow bulk - only 1 - 2lb a month at most.

A 'rule of thumb' is to stop bulking at about 25% body fat (individual context applies though), or when you get to a point where you are not comfortable with the fat gain (or if you have a specific event in mind).

Where did I way that women could not gain muscle without adding a lot of fat? What exactly were you disagreeing with in my post then?

Your original statement of bulking to 25% body fat seemed to me to imply that bulking automatically means putting on a lot of body fat. If I incorrectly inferred that I apologize. I know that women carry more body fat then men - i get that. But again, I don't buy into the notion that bulking has to means putting on a lot of body fat (I view 25% as a lot). As I mentioned in my last post one can certainly bulk eating cleanly and not packing on a lot of fat in the process: it just takes longer and more effort. Again, as you post seemed to imply, it really depends on your individual goals and time frame.

I did not imply that bulking automatically means putting on a lot of body fat - I said that as a rule of thumb, you should not go beyond 25%. Also, you may view 25% as a lot, but it is in the healthy weight range. 10.5% for a woman is not however,

My post actually suggested that you limit weight gain - which would imply that you should not aim to put on a lot of fat.

Edited to fix quotes.

LolBroScience

As women cannot gain much muscle, we should really look to do a slow bulk - only 1 - 2lb a month at most.

A 'rule of thumb' is to stop bulking at about 25% body fat (individual context applies though), or when you get to a point where you are not comfortable with the fat gain (or if you have a specific event in mind).

Where did I way that women could not gain muscle without adding a lot of fat? What exactly were you disagreeing with in my post then?

Your original statement of bulking to 25% body fat seemed to me to imply that bulking automatically means putting on a lot of body fat. If I incorrectly inferred that I apologize. I know that women carry more body fat then men - i get that. But again, I don't buy into the notion that bulking has to means putting on a lot of body fat (I view 25% as a lot). As I mentioned in my last post one can certainly bulk eating cleanly and not packing on a lot of fat in the process: it just takes longer and more effort. Again, as you post seemed to imply, it really depends on your individual goals and time frame.

First, you have a tainted view of body fat percentage on a woman. Secondly, the rate of gain isn't dictated by the type of food you are eating. It is dependent upon the amount of the caloric surplus.

Sara's advice is spot on. It is much more difficult for women to add lean mass, hence it wouldn't make sense to recommend a rapid gain approach as most of it will be fat gain.

*Edited because I'm a nitwit and can't quote correctly.

BombshellPhoenix

In for slow and steady bulking.

cliffshaw

[/quote]

First, you have a tainted view of body fat percentage on a woman. Secondly, the rate of gain isn't dictated by the type of food you are eating. It is dependent upon the amount of the caloric surplus.

Sara's advice is spot on. It is much more difficult for women to add lean mass, hence it wouldn't make sense to recommend a rapid gain approach as most of it will be fat gain.

*Edited because I'm a nitwit and can't quote correctly.
[/quote]

"Tainted View" - That's unfounded and untrue. 10-11% body fat is totally in the normal range for Athletic women. The woman I used as an example (my wife) is exactly that: Athletic. To say that is unhealthy is also incorrect, given that she an Athletic novice bodybuilder.
Although I stated 25% was high, it is indeed considered normal or acceptable for females. http://www.humankinetics.com/excerpts/excerpts/normal-ranges-of-body-weight-and-body-fat

Provided these posts continue to have value and offer the free exchange of information and opinions I'd be more than happy to keep discussing this. However, if you feel the need to condemn my views or opinions with your own unsubstantiated opinions I'll simply move along.

Yeah - I know I can't quote correctly as well.

3laine75

You're just wrong, cliffshaw - don't take it so bad.

25% is perfectly normal and healthy for a woman. 11%'is not.

Sarauk2sf

First, you have a tainted view of body fat percentage on a woman. Secondly, the rate of gain isn't dictated by the type of food you are eating. It is dependent upon the amount of the caloric surplus.

Sara's advice is spot on. It is much more difficult for women to add lean mass, hence it wouldn't make sense to recommend a rapid gain approach as most of it will be fat gain.

*Edited because I'm a nitwit and can't quote correctly.

"Tainted View" - That's unfounded and untrue. 10-11% body fat is totally in the normal range for Athletic women. The woman I used as an example (my wife) is exactly that: Athletic. To say that is unhealthy is also incorrect, given that she an Athletic novice bodybuilder.
Although I stated 25% was high, it is indeed considered normal or acceptable for females. http://www.humankinetics.com/excerpts/excerpts/normal-ranges-of-body-weight-and-body-fat

Provided these posts continue to have value and offer the free exchange of information and opinions I'd be more than happy to keep discussing this. However, if you feel the need to condemn my views or opinions with your own unsubstantiated opinions I'll simply move along.

Yeah - I know I can't quote correctly as well.

Also, look at the link you provided - 10% is at the very bottom of the range in table 13.2B - and only for a few sports. This therefore is not the 'normal' range - it is at the extreme end of the range.

Adding to be clearer - 10 - 11% may be ok for some women at the end of their prep when they are ready to go on stage - it is not healthy for the vast majority of the population and it is not healthy to sustain for any length of time. It is definitely not something that should be expounded as healthy for people making or reading posts here.

Edited to fix quotes

MonsterToBe

First, you have a tainted view of body fat percentage on a woman. Secondly, the rate of gain isn't dictated by the type of food you are eating. It is dependent upon the amount of the caloric surplus.

Sara's advice is spot on. It is much more difficult for women to add lean mass, hence it wouldn't make sense to recommend a rapid gain approach as most of it will be fat gain.

*Edited because I'm a nitwit and can't quote correctly.

"Tainted View" - That's unfounded and untrue. 10-11% body fat is totally in the normal range for Athletic women. The woman I used as an example (my wife) is exactly that: Athletic. To say that is unhealthy is also incorrect, given that she an Athletic novice bodybuilder.
Although I stated 25% was high, it is indeed considered normal or acceptable for females. http://www.humankinetics.com/excerpts/excerpts/normal-ranges-of-body-weight-and-body-fat

Provided these posts continue to have value and offer the free exchange of information and opinions I'd be more than happy to keep discussing this. However, if you feel the need to condemn my views or opinions with your own unsubstantiated opinions I'll simply move along.

Yeah - I know I can't quote correctly as well.

Also, look at the link you provided - 10% is at the very bottom of the range in table 13.2B - and only for a few sports. This therefore is not the 'normal' range - it is at the extreme end of the range.

Adding to be clearer - 10 - 11% may be ok for some women at the end of their prep when they are ready to go on stage - it is not healthy for the vast majority of the population and it is not healthy to sustain for any length of time. It is definitely not something that should be expounded as healthy for people making or reading posts here.

Edited to fix quotes

In addition, female athletes that sustain bodyfat percentages lower than 16% for any length of time need to be aware of the associated risks. Amenorrhea is one of them, as reaching such low bf % can potentially involve incurring such extreme energy deficits that normal reproductive function cannot be sustained. And if the reduced intake drops calcium intake too low, the body will leach calcium from the bones to supply the muscles with the calcium needed for movement, which can cause early onset osteoporosis or osteopoenia.

Many athletes educate themselves on these and related issues and intelligently manage the amount of time they spend at low bf levels, but many others don't and the consequences can be severely impairing, especially in later life. Who wants to be an old woman who has to worry about breaking a bone just by bumping into a table?

Personally, I'll stick with my favorite strength sport, and I'm aiming for about 20-22% -- at which point I'll be one smokin' hot grandma!!!

LolBroScience

Yep, that 10% range is some stage ready stuff. You're not walking around at that all day every day.

As a male, sure.

usmcmp

monikker

So, if my goal is to be a competitive athlete then I assume I want to be in the 14-20% range. I have no idea what my body fat % is right now. But let's say it's over 20%, then I still want to bulk because I'm so puny muscle-wise ... and then, will want to cut or go back to a maintenance calorie level later? I assume that will lower my BF% if it is too high.

monikker

Also, if I'm actually in the 14-20% range right now as I am, I still want to bulk to gain muscle...so some fat will come with that and bump up my BF%...so I may want to cut later anyway to bring it down. Kinda confusing, is hitting a target BF% really this important for tracking my weight and muscle gains? I guess it helps me know how much muscle I've gained. I dunno.

3laine75

The bodyfat thing (being sub 24 before bulking) means you'll get optimal muscle gain, muscle/fat ratio. I thought it was rubbish but proved myself wrong