Fat/Muscle loss when losing weight

Tilran

Anyone have any studies or articles that show the typical loss percentage of muscle and fat during weight loss?

Basically my question is, if I lose 1 pound of weight, what percentage of that is fat and what percentage of that is muscle.

I've heard you lose 85% fat and 15% muscle per pound. So an individual who lost 100 pounds would have lost 85 pounds of fat and 15 pounds of muscle. Can anyone Confirm? Deny? Have studies that show examples?

I understand it matters on diet and exercise as well...but a general rule of thumb will help.

I know alot of us are born experts, but if you weigh in, please have proof or a solid explanation as backup to your statement.

Tilran

Bump. Comeon smarty pants...you guys got this.

Game8

It depends how quickly you lose that weight, how much you exercise, your diet (mostly protein intake) and genetics.

But lets say if you lose 1 pound a week, exercise at least 3 times a week (resistance training that is, NOT intense cardio!) and are consuming 1g of protein per pound of body weight, then the majority (95% +) will be fat loss not muscle.

Edit: Also creatine supplementation helps in muscle retention while cutting.

Tilran

It depends how quickly you lose that weight, how much you exercise, your diet (mostly protein intake) and genetics.

But lets say if you lose 1 pound a week, exercise at least 3 times a week (resistance training that is, NOT intense cardio!) and are consuming 1g of protein per pound of body weight, then the majority (95% +) will be fat loss not muscle.

Edit: Also creatine supplementation helps in muscle retention while cutting.

So let us assume there is a mix of cardio and resistance training and doing 1g of protein to LBM as opposed to body weight and no creatine...what is the rough estimate of fat loss? We talking as low as 80% fat 20% muscle or would the change not be that dramatic from your example of 95%?

Tilran

Hmm not sure if noone knows or if noone has the proof to back it up and are afraid to post.

Anyways, I'll go by the last example of 95% and estimate down to 90% with some cardio mixed in and no creatine.

WinnerVictorious

Hmm not sure if noone knows or if noone has the proof to back it up and are afraid to post.

Anyways, I'll go by the last example of 95% and estimate down to 90% with some cardio mixed in and no creatine.

alot of people on this site take it to be a proven fact that if you lose weight, you will also lose muscle unless you a) eat lots of protein and b) do strength training.

i've seen nothing scientific to support that assertion, but i haven't really gone looking for it either. it might be true. it might not be true. it seems to me that the body won't start burning muscle until it has to, which means the amount of fat/muscle burned is a function of the your BF %.

as an engineer, i'm skeptical of everything i read here unless its obvious common sense or there is some sort of plausible explanation that justifies it.

Tilran

Hmm not sure if noone knows or if noone has the proof to back it up and are afraid to post.

Anyways, I'll go by the last example of 95% and estimate down to 90% with some cardio mixed in and no creatine.

alot of people on this site take it to be a proven fact that if you lose weight, you will also lose muscle unless you a) eat lots of protein and b) do strength training.

i've seen nothing scientific to support that assertion, but i haven't really gone looking for it either. it might be true. it might not be true. it seems to me that the body won't start burning muscle until it has to, which means the amount of fat/muscle burned is a function of the your BF %.

as an engineer, i'm skeptical of everything i read here unless its obvious common sense or there is some sort of plausible explanation that justifies it.

I am in IT and I think the same as you is why I like to see scientific proof. I dont think it can be argued that when losing weight, you will lose both fat and muscle. That is a fact. What I am trying to figure out is how much of each pound on average is lost as fat and how much is lost as muscle given normal amount of cardio and weight lifting during the cut cycle.

MariaLivingFit

Sorry I don't have any articles to point you to, but wanted to share my experience. I have doing a lifting program for 10 weeks now. While my weight has stayed exactly the same, I have lost 2% of my body fat. So, wouldn't that mean that while I have lost fat, I have gained muscle? I don't think I have lost any muscle. So, in some instances, maybe you could be losing 100% fat. Like you said, it depends on what type of diet/exercise plan you are on.

WinnerVictorious

Hmm not sure if noone knows or if noone has the proof to back it up and are afraid to post.

Anyways, I'll go by the last example of 95% and estimate down to 90% with some cardio mixed in and no creatine.

alot of people on this site take it to be a proven fact that if you lose weight, you will also lose muscle unless you a) eat lots of protein and b) do strength training.

i've seen nothing scientific to support that assertion, but i haven't really gone looking for it either. it might be true. it might not be true. it seems to me that the body won't start burning muscle until it has to, which means the amount of fat/muscle burned is a function of the your BF %.

as an engineer, i'm skeptical of everything i read here unless its obvious common sense or there is some sort of plausible explanation that justifies it.

I am in IT and I think the same as you is why I like to see scientific proof. I dont think it can be argued that when losing weight, you will lose both fat and muscle. That is a fact. What I am trying to figure out is how much of each pound on average is lost as fat and how much is lost as muscle given normal amount of cardio and weight lifting during the cut cycle.

if you're at 30% BF and you start doing cardio exercise, why would the body want to burn muscle when it has so much fat stored for just such a purpose? the body is a pretty remarkable machine. i'd have a hard to believing that the body immediately starts burning muscle (which it needs) when it has so much fat readily available. that would be quite inefficient. however, if maintaining muscle mass is one of the larger contributors to daily metabolism and your daily metabolic needs decrease as you lose weight, then perhaps a portion of that is because you are losing muscle. so i can see both sides to the argument. i'm just skeptical about what's true or not until i see something more than assertions on a website full of people bragging about how their cleanse cleaned gum out of their colons that had been there since they were 6.

WendyTerry420

Hmm not sure if noone knows or if noone has the proof to back it up and are afraid to post.

Anyways, I'll go by the last example of 95% and estimate down to 90% with some cardio mixed in and no creatine.

alot of people on this site take it to be a proven fact that if you lose weight, you will also lose muscle unless you a) eat lots of protein and b) do strength training.

i've seen nothing scientific to support that assertion, but i haven't really gone looking for it either. it might be true. it might not be true. it seems to me that the body won't start burning muscle until it has to, which means the amount of fat/muscle burned is a function of the your BF %.

as an engineer, i'm skeptical of everything i read here unless its obvious common sense or there is some sort of plausible explanation that justifies it.

I don't think it is inevitable. According to the military BF/LBM, using weight and measurements, I have lost BF% while gaining LBM. Granted, it's not 100% accurate, but I think that if you lose slowly, have adequate protein, and do strength training, that there is no reason to believe you will lose any LBM at all.

Tilran

I am under the impression that outside of people who have really never lifted...you cannot gain LBM (Muscle) unless at a surplus or maintainance at best and even then it only lasts for a while. If at a deficit you will lose fat and muscle.

As far as why the body doesn't go for purely fat, I have no idea...I dont pretend to know the answer to that, but I know it is said that you will lose LBM as well as fat when losing weight. The body uses some of both for energy.

Game8

It depends how quickly you lose that weight, how much you exercise, your diet (mostly protein intake) and genetics.

But lets say if you lose 1 pound a week, exercise at least 3 times a week (resistance training that is, NOT intense cardio!) and are consuming 1g of protein per pound of body weight, then the majority (95% +) will be fat loss not muscle.

Edit: Also creatine supplementation helps in muscle retention while cutting.

So let us assume there is a mix of cardio and resistance training and doing 1g of protein to LBM as opposed to body weight and no creatine...what is the rough estimate of fat loss? We talking as low as 80% fat 20% muscle or would the change not be that dramatic from your example of 95%?

I would say as long as you're keeping it at 1lb a week, you shouldn't worry regardless.

icimani

I'm guessing no one has any 'proof' becasue there are too many variables involved.

WendyTerry420

I'm guessing no one has any 'proof' becasue there are too many variables involved.

QFT!