18.6% body fat

alphagirl82

I signed up for a weight loss competition in the beginning of January because my weight had crept up to 163 pounds and was uncomfortable on my 5'8" frame. I'm an avid outdoorswoman and a bit of a gym rat; I hardly ever miss a day of a workout and when I do it's just because I am so sore that I physically can't take any more. I've always been on the heavier side of healthy (between 152 and 163 pounds), and the extra fat that I do have tends to accumulate around my belly and make me feel fat. I also generally eat very nutrient dense meals, but have a profound weakness for alcoholic beverages on weekends.

So, I set the goal to get down to 145 pounds by mid-April. I stopped drinking, restricted my net calories to around 1200 per day, and continued my normal workout schedule.

However, I just had my body fat tested using calipers, and, at 159 pounds, it's only 18.6%. I've heard that the minimum for athletic women is 14%. If I'm doing my calculations correctly, if I want to only lose fat but not muscle, that means that my maximum weight loss is only 7ish pounds. Does that sound right? If it is, I'm not sure it's reasonable to try to lose 14 pounds.

Has anyone else been in this situation? I suppose I could quit working out so much and try to lose some muscle weight too. Or switch up a couple of my weekly spinning classes and weight lifting classes for yoga. I'd love to hear people's viewpoints. I'm very new to this site; I just signed up for the food and exercise logs but am finding myself reading the message board posts more frequently as well.

kimmyj74

I don't know much about body fat and such, but I do think people, especially women, put too much emphasis on the number on the scale. As if that number if magic! It's more about being healthy and fit for me. Don't lose the muscle, keep working out! You know the muscle helps increase your metabolism and burn that pesky fat off your middle. I would continue to limit the calories and keep exercising. Do more cardio maybe to burn that belly fat.
Hope I helped.

lollyish

I am 23% body fat
21 kilos 67.5 lean muscles, bones and body water. I agree as well, up until today I was putting a lot of emphasis on the number on the scale rather than the measurements

Lolli1986

I recently read the following sentence in a book:

"Most of us need at least 15 to 20 per cent of our body weight as fat to be able to have any periods, and at least 20 to 25 percent to have them regularly."

On a body that's 5'8", and has well used muscle, 163 pounds sounds healthy, so that is good.

If you're going to make decisions based on a body-fat percentage, I think it's best to measure it on those scales, rather than with calipers. In the meantime, lose those 7 pounds that feel are safe to lose, and see whether you are happy with the result.

I don't see any reason to lose muscle just to drop weight? You seem like someone who likes to use those muscles, so life definitely sounds like it will be happier if they are there.

SteveTries

Calipers seem generally regarded as notoriously innacurate (though way better than scales that measure fat%) for a number of reasons:

1) each caliper is different
2) each person taking the measures will do it slightly different
3) each time you measure you may pick slightly different sites
4) there are several algortithms for the calculation which all give a different result.

I think they are a great tool myself. To minimise the above variances I perform the measurements myself, with the same calipers at the same time of day on the same day of the week.

The % probably isn't even close to what hydrostatic weighing would prove, but the variance week on week is what I focus on. When you see it going down and that your lean bodyweight isn't reducing too much then you know you are doing the right thing.

SteveTries

If you're going to make decisions based on a body-fat percentage, I think it's best to measure it on those scales, rather than with calipers.

I believe the scales (and please correct me if I am wrong) send a low level electical charge through the body and measure the returned signal and use the resistance to derive the fat percentage.

The electrical signal can be affected by sodium levels and levels of water retention giving a mis-reading.

I suppose you could minimise that effect if you were on a low carb diet and not holding any water and always measured on the same day of the week on rising.

hottottie11

I had to switch my goals when I found out I would be close to 11% bf at my goal weight. Yikes. I want to be 18% so that's about 10 more pounds. I would abandon your scale goal.

Also, if you want to maintain muscle, you need to eat more calories and protein and start lifting heavy weights. Excessive cardio is counterproductive to reducing bf while maintaining muscle.

Lolli1986

I think they are a great tool myself. To minimise the above variances I perform the measurements myself, with the same calipers at the same time of day on the same day of the week.

^ That is a great plan.

Turns out I repeated some misinformation. A student trainer told me scales were reliable within reason, but further reading suggests this student was probably wrong.

debilyn574

Don't worry about what the scale says and I wouldn't try and lose muscle just to lose pounds. I am not so confident in the body fat % measurements, as I've had mine done with the calipers and think they are inconsistent and not accurate. Mine came out to 15% and I even had 2 different people take it, but I really doubt it is that low! I am just trying to increase muscle and lose inches, when I'm satisfied with that, I'm assuming my body fat % will still be in the healthy range.

kateroot

Calipers are generally not a very accurate measure of BF%. That said, if you are pretty muscular at 5'8 and 163, I wouldn't say you need to lose much weight at all. I would focus more on inches than weight or BF%. That's not to say BF% isn't a good measure of your health.. it's just notoriously hard to measure accurately.

alphagirl82

Thanks everyone for the replies! We'll see where I end up at the end of the weight loss competition. There are quite a few people I'm competing against who could lose 40+ pounds so I doubt I will win, but at least I can use the competition to get even healthier than I've been in the past!

To be clear, when I suggested I would be willing to lose lean muscle for the competition, the goal was for it to only be temporary. The competition is based on total percent weight lost, and without muscle loss I have no chance of winning given my body fat % (which has been tested using different methods and has always fallen between 18-20%). It's only a 10 week competition so I would still have time to gain the muscle back before the mountain climbing season starts. I stand to win a few hundred dollars and two free personal training sessions if I win. I wasn't suggesting that losing muscle was a good thing; just that I'd be willing to do it temporarily, just with small changes to my habits. For instance, I weight lift 2-3 days per week with heavier weights than the other women in the class. I could drop the weights down a few pounds. I do intense spinning sessions 4 days per week. I could swap one out for a yoga class.

Again, I appreciate everyone's responses. This was my first post and has certainly gotten me thinking about how realistic my goals are.

RyanEParker

Hi there,
1200 calories seem a little low. If you are the active type then 1200 calories is certainly not enough. Lets assume you burn about 300 calories with your daily work-outs. That leaves you with 900 calories for your basic metabolic function. I can almost guarantee that you're body is going to kick up a big fuss and slow your metabolism right down. The dreaded weight loss plateau might then just happen.

The thing is, it actually happened to me when I was a little too anxious to lose weight. I hit the plateau and whatever calories I restricted just resulted in no weight loss but illness and lethargy. It was terrible. I went on a program that I'm still on and I upped my calories by 300 per day and my weight loss resumed.

I've personally lost 180lbs since Dec 2009. My blood pressure was 160/110, now its 120/80. My cholesterol was 256 mg/dL, now its 176mg/dL. I'm no longer Pre-Diabetic and I'm in the best shape of my life. It wasn't easy but I can say that everyone can do it if they have the right program.

If you're interested in my story please head over to Zdiets.net

Cheers.

Ryan E. Parker

alphagirl82

Hi Ryan,

When I said it was 1200 net calories, I meant that its net of calories burned in workouts. I'm really consuming between 1600 and 3000+ (on all day snowshoe/cross country ski/mountain climbs). You are very correct, there's no way I'd be able to sustain a 1200 calorie total intake daily!

Good for you for losing so much weight. I've personally never been medically overweight (165 pounds has been my max) but seen my mom struggle with all of those items; the pre-diabetic, high cholesterol, high blood pressure. Thanks for the info on your story and zdiets. I will read it and maybe point my mom in that direction. I'd love her to be around to play with my kids (if I ever have any!)

Cheers,
Sherrie