Older women and BF
Replies
-
[/quote]
From the OP: "I am not unfit, fat or flabby (well maybe a little flabby when compared to a 20 yo, but I'm much firmmer than the average 52). I exercise regularly and have been increasing intensity and my BF% is in the fitness range. I AM SIMPLY BIGGER THAN I WANT TO BE."
[/quote]
I am sorry, I guess I don't get it. You are:
fit
not fat
not flabby
BF% in the fitness range
Yet, you are bigger than you want to be.
Are you trying to change your frame? Large to medium or medium to small? If that's the case, you are doomed. I'm with the others, I'm out of here. I was very interested at first because I'm almost 52 also. But you've had some very good advice from knowledgeable folks here, and yet, you argue with all of them.0 -
I am not unfit, fat or flabby (well maybe a little flabby when compared to a 20 yo, but I'm much firmmer than the average 52). I exercise regularly and have been increasing intensity and my BF% is in the fitness range. I AM SIMPLY BIGGER THAN I WANT TO BE.
I am sorry, I guess I don't get it. You are :
fit
not fat
not flabby
BF% in the fitness range
Yet, you are bigger than you want to be.
Are you trying to change your frame? Large to medium or medium to small? If that's the case, you are doomed. I'm with the others, I'm out of here. I was very interested at first because I'm almost 52 also. But you've had some very good advice from knowledgeable folks here, and yet, you argue with all of them.
Unfortunately, I've received little advice other than "don't do it" with absolutely no reason why someone in my position should not do it. :grumble:
I've been fit and smaller before but I didn't start out bigger. I guess the lack of reasons not to drop my weight and BF% at the same time is my answer.0 -
Unfortunately, I've received little advice other than "don't do it" with absolutely no reason why someone in my position should not do it. :grumble:
I've been fit and smaller before but I didn't start out bigger. I guess the lack of reasons not to drop my weight and BF% at the same time is my answer.
People have said losing muscle mass is bad, since as you age you lose it already and it's needed for mobility and such when you get older. How is that not a reason?0 -
I weigh 162 lbs. That's not a disorder. That's overweights.
Totally disagree. There is no way in hell I'd ever consider any woman with a 24% bf as being overweight. Even less so one in her 50's.0 -
Honey, when you hit menopause your metabolism doesn't just slow down, it nose dives, crashes, and burns. You're going to need every ounce of muscle you have to maintain any type of calorie burn so you can eat. My BMR fell by a ridiculous amount and the only way I was able to raise it was by building more muscle.
Lift, and lift heavy. You won't regret it.0 -
Unfortunately, I've received little advice other than "don't do it" with absolutely no reason why someone in my position should not do it. :grumble:
I've been fit and smaller before but I didn't start out bigger. I guess the lack of reasons not to drop my weight and BF% at the same time is my answer.
People have said losing muscle mass is bad, since as you age you lose it already and it's needed for mobility and such when you get older. How is that not a reason?
Perhaps I asked the wrong question, though I've tried to reword it several times.
So, what is the answer to this question: Would it be bad for a 52 yo woman to set a goal of going from #1 to #2 (below). And if yes, why?
1. 162 lbs and 24% BF
2. 147 lbs and 22% BF0 -
Right! Exactly! BF% is a percentage. So if I lower that % wouldn't that be better, even if along the way it means I have less LBM than I started?
162 lbs and 24% BF = 123.12 LBM
147 lbs and 22% BF = 114.66 LBM
Is going from the top to the bottom going to make me skinny fat? (or is my math wrong?)
Ok, THIS I can start to get behind. Except for the arbitrary 147 number, and resulting 114 number.
If you want to lower your BF%age, I'd recommend a cut -- similar to what newme1313 suggested.
That is -- lift, eat at a slight deficit, and see how things go.
The reason people say to lift while you're cutting is to TRY to preserve as much LBM as possible. NB: if you managed to ONLY lose fat, and zero LBM, while lifting and doing everything except taking massive amounts of steroids, you'd be the first person in history to do it. You almost certainly WILL lose LBM while cutting, but that shouldn't be your goal.
You keep asking for reasons not to try to lose LBM. From BuildLean.comLosing muscle is highly undesirable because your metabolism will decrease and aesthetically, you may not look leaner even if you do lose weight.
Losing LBM does NOT mean that your thighs/hips will get smaller, by any stretch of the imagination. If your genes have determined that you're going to be pear shaped, you're pretty much going to be pear shaped.
tl;dr -- I could totally support doing a cut to attempt to get to 22%bf. You WILL lose LBM, as an unfortunate side effect. You'll probably still be pear shaped, and I hope you can learn to like that.0 -
I also feel that I weigh too much. But, when I keep toned with lifting then I think I look fairly good. I love having defined arms at my age.0
-
At our age we are already losing muscle - and need to be retaining and gaining as much as possible! Have you done any working out with weights? If not, I think it would be a very good idea.
My boss is 50 and has been doing crossfit for a few months. She is a size 6 or 8 now and has a better body than most women in their 20s who wear a 6 or 8.
Weights all the way!0 -
This is a question you should be asking a medical professional, not a forum board0
-
you're stressing over losing estrogen, but not muscle? I believe you may need both and should do everything in your power to keep both.0
-
Unfortunately, I've received little advice other than "don't do it" with absolutely no reason why someone in my position should not do it. :grumble:
I've been fit and smaller before but I didn't start out bigger. I guess the lack of reasons not to drop my weight and BF% at the same time is my answer.
People have said losing muscle mass is bad, since as you age you lose it already and it's needed for mobility and such when you get older. How is that not a reason?
Perhaps I asked the wrong question, though I've tried to reword it several times.
So, what is the answer to this question: Would it be bad for a 52 yo woman to set a goal of going from #1 to #2 (below). And if yes, why?
1. 162 lbs and 24% BF
2. 147 lbs and 22% BF
I think there is a problem because you're obsessing over numbers and it's getting in the way of the big picture.
What happens if you get to the exact point you wanted to be, your perfect ideal physique, and you're 147.2 lbs and 21.5% BF?
With the exception of competitions where such things matter (so BF for physique models and weight for weight class competitions) when you start getting close to your goal the specific number shouldn't be the only focus. "I'll be perfect when I get to 135" "I want 6% BF so I can have abs and get laid". I'm not saying you said those things (you didn't) but it's an extension over the obsession of specific numbers.
You want to be smaller, you've said so youself. You mentioned fitting into certain clothes. Cut weight and exercise until you hit those goals (assuming it's not to get into a size negative six or whatever). Go by the mirror. Keep track of your weight and bodyfat and if you start losing too much or your BF% gets too low then consider changing your tactics. You're 24% right now, you're not going to wake up tomorrow or even 3 months from now and be 15%. Get regular checkups, and ask you're doctor if you start dipping too low into the teens.
That's what everyone here is saying. You don't need to plan ahead for a specific weight and BF% that you don't even know if you'll hit.0 -
OP, you seem to disagree with every response given so far.
So what do *you* think the answer is?
This! Geeez.
Lift weights as heavy as you can. I'm 60 and lifting is an integral part of my fitness. Lifting stimulates your metabolism, helps increase bone mass and stabilize your skeletal structure. Read, "Younger Next Year"
I'm not trying to be disagreeable but it seems as if no one is getting my point. Many seem to not even have read my original post or any of my responses. I DO NOT NEED TO GAIN MUSCLE. I DO NOT NEED TO IMPROVE BONE MASS.
These things are fine. I am simply too big. I'm asking if anyone knows any other way to get smaller safely without losing muscle. I simply want to be a smaller version of my current self.
If my goal is to be thinner and around 22-23% BF it seems to be the only way to do that is to lose both fat and LBM. The only LBM that it's safe to lose is muscle. When I lost this muscle I'd still have a higher BF% than I do now.
Can anyone offer a different solution to reach MY goal?
Lifting heavy weight will make you smaller. It may not make you lose weight but you will get smaller.
As women age they LOOSE bone mass to varying degrees. Lifting weights NOW helps to minimize the consequences of the loss.0 -
<
IN DANGER ZONE!
0 -
Unfortunately, I've received little advice other than "don't do it" with absolutely no reason why someone in my position should not do it. :grumble:
I've been fit and smaller before but I didn't start out bigger. I guess the lack of reasons not to drop my weight and BF% at the same time is my answer.
People have said losing muscle mass is bad, since as you age you lose it already and it's needed for mobility and such when you get older. How is that not a reason?
Perhaps I asked the wrong question, though I've tried to reword it several times.
So, what is the answer to this question: Would it be bad for a 52 yo woman to set a goal of going from #1 to #2 (below). And if yes, why?
1. 162 lbs and 24% BF
2. 147 lbs and 22% BF
I think there is a problem because you're obsessing over numbers and it's getting in the way of the big picture.
What happens if you get to the exact point you wanted to be, your perfect ideal physique, and you're 147.2 lbs and 21.5% BF?
...
That's what everyone here is saying. You don't need to plan ahead for a specific weight and BF% that you don't even know if you'll hit.
If I got to my perfect ideal physique and met your example, I would have lost 7.268 lbs of LBM. Which I would be fine with, but it would seem everyone else on this thread would think it unhealthy.
I've stated a few times that 147 is a random, though not unrealistic number. I'm not married to it. I just want to be thinner.0 -
You are at 24% body fat in which you fall in the range of optimal range for women. You shouldn't lose anymore weight. If you are only focusing on fat loss, building or maintaining muscle should be your goal. Weight loss does not always equal fat loss. What are some of the reasons to be thinner?0
-
OP, you seem to disagree with every response given so far.
So what do *you* think the answer is?
This! Geeez.
Lift weights as heavy as you can. I'm 60 and lifting is an integral part of my fitness. Lifting stimulates your metabolism, helps increase bone mass and stabilize your skeletal structure. Read, "Younger Next Year"
I'm not trying to be disagreeable but it seems as if no one is getting my point. Many seem to not even have read my original post or any of my responses. I DO NOT NEED TO GAIN MUSCLE. I DO NOT NEED TO IMPROVE BONE MASS.
These things are fine. I am simply too big. I'm asking if anyone knows any other way to get smaller safely without losing muscle. I simply want to be a smaller version of my current self.
If my goal is to be thinner and around 22-23% BF it seems to be the only way to do that is to lose both fat and LBM. The only LBM that it's safe to lose is muscle. When I lost this muscle I'd still have a higher BF% than I do now.
Can anyone offer a different solution to reach MY goal?
Lifting heavy weight will make you smaller. It may not make you lose weight but you will get smaller.
As women age they LOOSE bone mass to varying degrees. Lifting weights NOW helps to minimize the consequences of the loss.
A woman does not have to lose bone mass. My DEXA says I have not lost any.0 -
If I got to my perfect ideal physique and met your example, I would have lost 7.268 lbs of LBM. Which I would be fine with, but it would seem everyone else on this thread would think it unhealthy.
I've stated a few times that 147 is a random, though not unrealistic number. I'm not married to it. I just want to be thinner.
Yes, but people have also said that you will lose LBM already when you cut. You don't need to plan for it. Assuming that your goal weight is still healthy, you should be fine cutting weight. Just don't plan to lose LBM on top of what you'll lose naturally when you cut.0 -
A woman does not have to lose bone mass. My DEXA says I have not lost any.
You missed the point. Again.
Come talk to us in 20 or 30 years, and tell us that your bone density is fine.
But at that point, it'll be too late to fix it.
What you do NOW will affect your bone density when you're in your 80's, and REALLY want it.
But you don't seem to be listening to anyone.....0 -
This is a question you should be asking a medical professional, not a forum board
I work in an office filled with medical professionals. They mostly just say if you want to lose weight eat less.0 -
I don't need to be smaller. I want to be smaller.
Then that's a personal decision and a matter of preference, and you're going to have to deal with the consequences of achieving your desires, however those may end up working themselves out. You gotta be happy with it, in the end, because you have to live with it. I would caution you, though, that from where I sit, your issue seems to be with your mind rather than your body, but I understand how overwhelming body image can be, especially when it gets to the point where you're just not comfortable in your own skin.
I'd personally rather weigh a bit more and maintain strength and health, going into my latter years, to prevent actual health problems such as strength/independency loss, osteoporosis and so forth, but to each their own.
On the other hand, maybe it might help if you begin focusing on what your body can do, rather than how it looks, and focus on fitness goals rather than scale numbers, etc. It's the only thing that's working for me, truth be told. Find your inner BAMF she-beast and let her come out and play, and see where that gets you.
At 52, with everything you've said so far, as far as your health goes, I'd say thank your lucky stars and maybe don't push it too hard, because you're miles ahead of the game already, comparatively speaking, by not having any health issues on your hands to speak of. That may not seem like an achievement to you, but it nonetheless is one. You've obviously either taken very good care of yourself or have great genes (or both), and so maybe don't tempt fate in your pursuit of some ideal that's not realistic to achieve without giving up something that's going to cost you more than you bargained for in the end.
Cheers. :flowerforyou:
This. Could not have said that any better!0 -
A woman does not have to lose bone mass. My DEXA says I have not lost any.
You missed the point. Again.
Come talk to us in 20 or 30 years, and tell us that your bone density is fine.
But at that point, it'll be too late to fix it.
What you do NOW will affect your bone density when you're in your 80's, and REALLY want it.
But you don't seem to be listening to anyone.....
OMG!! I am listening but it would seem no one is listening to me. I lift weights. I do planks, pushups, tricep dips, squats, lunges, burpees, mountain climbers, and other calisthenics. I do Turbo Fire which includes a lot of plyometrics (just as good, if not better, for maintaining bone as weights). I hike, I bike, I run, I climb, I jump. I make sure I get enough calcium, vitamin D, magnesium, zinc and other nutritents. I am NOT in the danger zone for losing bone.0 -
Troll OP is trolling.0
-
If I got to my perfect ideal physique and met your example, I would have lost 7.268 lbs of LBM. Which I would be fine with, but it would seem everyone else on this thread would think it unhealthy.
I've stated a few times that 147 is a random, though not unrealistic number. I'm not married to it. I just want to be thinner.
Yes, but people have also said that you will lose LBM already when you cut. You don't need to plan for it. Assuming that your goal weight is still healthy, you should be fine cutting weight. Just don't plan to lose LBM on top of what you'll lose naturally when you cut.
I don't exactly know what is involved in a "cut". I'm just looking to lose some weight.0 -
This is a question you should be asking a medical professional, not a forum board
I work in an office filled with medical professionals. They mostly just say if you want to lose weight eat less.
First off, let me say I'm 57 and would love to have your LBM and BF%. I'm 5'8", weigh 155. My LBM is 109.2 and BF% is too high at 30.2%. I only tell you that to say I would highly recommend you meet with a dietician that specializes in sports nutrition. I first met with mine in December and I told her my goal was to get down to 22% BF. I will tell you she thought that was a very agressive goal for someone my age and said 24-25% would be very acceptable. She then gave me a goal of increasing my LBM to 112-116 pounds. She further broke it down and said if you reach 112 LBM you would need to weigh 143 lb to be at 22% and if you reach 116 lbm you would need to weigh 149. She gave me suggestions on how many calories to consume, how much protein, when to eat the protein etc. After three months, I did increase my lean weight to 109.2 and dropped the fat weight from 49.8 lbs to 47.2. Bottom line, I think you would benefit from a sports nutritionist to reach your goals. I understand the need to keep improving.0 -
Troll OP is trolling.
Trolling for what exactly? It's my post. It would seem you are trolling just to get a pic of me but with nothing to offer.0 -
Troll OP is trolling.
Trolling for what exactly? It's my post. It would seem you are trolling just to get a pic of me but with nothing to offer.
You only post threads that you use to fight with people. Several knowledgeable people have posted here and you once again chose to fight with them rather than listening. Either you're a troll or you need counseling. And honestly, I'm pretty sure that your pictures would prove my point that your numbers are wrong. You pulled them out of thin air to start a thread to fight with people.
So, you are a troll. Period.0 -
This is a question you should be asking a medical professional, not a forum board
I work in an office filled with medical professionals. They mostly just say if you want to lose weight eat less.
First off, let me say I'm 57 and would love to have your LBM and BF%. I'm 5'8", weigh 155. My LBM is 109.2 and BF% is too high at 30.2%. I only tell you that to say I would highly recommend you meet with a dietician that specializes in sports nutrition. I first met with mine in December and I told her my goal was to get down to 22% BF. I will tell you she thought that was a very agressive goal for someone my age and said 24-25% would be very acceptable. She then gave me a goal of increasing my LBM to 112-116 pounds. She further broke it down and said if you reach 112 LBM you would need to weigh 143 lb to be at 22% and if you reach 116 lbm you would need to weigh 149. She gave me suggestions on how many calories to consume, how much protein, when to eat the protein etc. After three months, I did increase my lean weight to 109.2 and dropped the fat weight from 49.8 lbs to 47.2. Bottom line, I think you would benefit from a sports nutritionist to reach your goals. I understand the need to keep improving.
Yeah, maybe that's the answer. I've only got a little bit of help here. I guess I didn't really think my situation would so unusual, but I suppose it is more common to need to increase LBM to reach a lower BF%.
It seems unrealistic to think I'll put on much more muscle at this point, though.0 -
Troll OP is trolling.
Trolling for what exactly? It's my post. It would seem you are trolling just to get a pic of me but with nothing to offer.
You only post threads that you use to fight with people. Several knowledgeable people have posted here and you once again chose to fight with them rather than listening. Either you're a troll or you need counseling. And honestly, I'm pretty sure that your pictures would prove my point that your numbers are wrong. You pulled them out of thin air to start a thread to fight with people.
So, you are a troll. Period.
Call me all the names you want. You won't answer my questions and I'm not giving you a pic. Yet you are still here.0 -
Troll OP is trolling.
Trolling for what exactly? It's my post. It would seem you are trolling just to get a pic of me but with nothing to offer.
You only post threads that you use to fight with people. Several knowledgeable people have posted here and you once again chose to fight with them rather than listening. Either you're a troll or you need counseling. And honestly, I'm pretty sure that your pictures would prove my point that your numbers are wrong. You pulled them out of thin air to start a thread to fight with people.
So, you are a troll. Period.
Call me all the names you want. You won't answer my questions and I'm not giving you a pic. Yet you are still here.
I don't want your pic. You're a troll.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions