Women: Something to Consider Regarding BF%

Weeeellllll, I take this with a grain of salt. I am not real concerned about osteoporosis but then I do plenty of weight bearing exercise, get plenty of calcium (mostly through veggies and almond milk),

AND, I am in my 40s and do not plan to have any more children, so I would be thrilled to have amoneria (of course I'm pre-menopausal anyway). My body fat is somewhere between 14.8 - 20 depending on how it's done. By calculation it's 20% by caliper its 14.8%.

haha. OP jumped down my throat for saying exactly the same thing ("I take this with a grain of salt.") Apparently it was rude of me to dismiss the original post and have a different opinion, questioning if the studies controlled for how the lower body fat was acheived, what type of exercise was being done, what type of diet was being eaten, etc.

^^^This exactly. I was surprised when I started looking into body fat at how low mine was, and got worried and looked into the health risks associated with low body fat. However, I don't think most of them apply to me. I did lots of high impact things (good for bone density) both when I was growing and now, and have always eaten rather good homecooked food. I also don't bruise easily, which is related to bone density. I'm also very regular. I think as long as we are above essential fat, get our regular cycles, and eat well we are probably just fine.

I don't disagree. If you're getting your periods and are eating healthily then it's not an issue. The problem is that most women are on BC and think they're getting a "period" when it's simply a withdrawal bleed. When at lower levels of bodyfat I highly recommend using condoms for birth control, otherwise you run the risk of not catching the tale tell sign (i.e. amenorrhea).

This is a very relevant topic for me because I would like to get pregnant in the next year.

It's true that birth control suppresses periods, but I've always been this low bf, and any time I've gone off my birth control I get my cycles. Some women naturally fall lower on the body fat spectrum.

Good message out there! Not that I was planning to achieve super low body fat, but what percentage did you go down to that caused these issues?

And here is a visual for those of us that may not know what different body fat %s look like. You see here that there are no pictures of women under 10% like there is men, and there's a reason for that. Women were meant to have some fat for hormonal processes, bone health, organ protection, insulation & need fat to absorb certain nutrients in food. Men too, but their bodies can handle low fat better than ours can.

Seriously? I'm at 32% and I look a lot more like the lady in the 40% picture. When I was under 20%, I didn't look like that one either - more like the 25% picture - and I exercised all the time.

mines looks about right for the woman at 25% but my goal is 16-17%. Again, there are other factors I would love to see that are adjacent causes to bone mineral density loss. Factors such as: thyroid issues, race (white and asian ethnicities are at higher risk), calcium intake, vit d intake, location, previous smoking history. To say that lower boy fat percentage is the cause for osteopenia/osteoporsis is almost negligent IMO. I was a DEXA tech. We recommend weight bearing exercises. For this reason I don't believe cardio effect and regular weight lifters at the same bf% would produce the same results. I don't have to the time to look up a study but weight lifting has been KNOWN to correct bone disorders (even scoliosis in some). I forget her name but that young powerlifter girl who's 21 breaking all these records back was completely recovered from weight lifting.

Also arbritary numbers like "over long term" doesn't give adequate time lines to know how long the effects would last. Also, they don't take into account people who bulk/cut cycle and bf% rises and falls in cycles.. The one paragraph article seems pretty inconclusive IMHO. And sure EXTREME bf% loss can lead to infertility and amenorrhea however most people don'thave this problem. Most people find it easier to get pregnant (especially with history of PCOS) when losing body fat and thus increasing blood circulation to reproductive organs

**also if you take calcium supplementation calcium carbonate is actually the gold standard vs calcium citrate. Better absorption occurs when taken with vit d as well

Bumping to read entire thread. Thanks

Just want to add this up here, if someone posted already, sorry for the duplicate.

http://www.niams.nih.gov/Health_Info/Bone/Bone_Health/Pregnancy/default.asp#b

It talks about breastfeeding and bone mass lose but it does come back after the breastfeeding stops.

My body fat has only ever been in the range of 18 to 22 (one time when I was 16 it dropped too low for about 6 months, but I purposely gained weight). I always had visible abs. 22 was high to me. But, I have never eaten a low calorie diet. I've always had extremely regular and healthy cycles. I don't use hormonal birth control. Getting pregnant was never difficult for me. I also don't want to have any more children. I recently had my hormones tested and they were all normal. I have a very clean bill of health from my doctor. I lift weights and eat calcium in my foods to maintain bone health for a lifetime. I'm 35.

I am sorry to hear that this happened to you. I hope you will regain health. Thanks for sharing.

But, I don't think it is unhealthy to be under 22%. I also do not think that breastfeeding is bad for health. Breastfeeding actually reduces the risk of certain cancers and is actually healthy for the mother, as well as the baby. Period loss due to malnutrition, starvation and low bodyfat is unhealthy. But, having breaks from your period due to the natural cycles of pregnancy and breastfeeding is actually healthy. That's why nuns (as a population) have such a high incidence of breast cancer and cancers of the reproductive system.

One size does not fit all.

My body fat has only ever been in the range of 18 to 22 (one time when I was 16 it dropped too low for about 6 months, but I purposely gained weight). I always had visible abs. 22 was high to me. But, I have never eaten a low calorie diet. I've always had extremely regular and healthy cycles. I don't use hormonal birth control. Getting pregnant was never difficult for me. I also don't want to have any more children. I recently had my hormones tested and they were all normal. I have a very clean bill of health from my doctor. I lift weights and eat calcium in my foods to maintain bone health for a lifetime. I'm 35.

I am sorry to hear that this happened to you. I hope you will regain health. Thanks for sharing.

But, I don't think it is unhealthy to be under 22%. I also do not think that breastfeeding is bad for health. Breastfeeding actually reduces the risk of certain cancers and is actually healthy for the mother, as well as the baby. Period loss due to malnutrition, starvation and low bodyfat is unhealthy. But, having breaks from your period due to the natural cycles of pregnancy and breastfeeding is actually healthy. That's why nuns (as a population) have such a high incidence of breast cancer and cancers of the reproductive system.

One size does not fit all.

Exactly! That was my point. It varies per person.

But, I don't think it is unhealthy to be under 22%. I also do not think that breastfeeding is bad for health. Breastfeeding actually reduces the risk of certain cancers and is actually healthy for the mother, as well as the baby. Period loss due to malnutrition, starvation and low bodyfat is unhealthy. But, having breaks from your period due to the natural cycles of pregnancy and breastfeeding is actually healthy. That's why nuns (as a population) have such a high incidence of breast cancer and cancers of the reproductive system.

Yay for breastfeeding! I have many years under my belt and am happy that it reduces my risk for cancer, as well as my children's. Interesting factoid on the nuns -- I never thought of that, but it makes sense.

I agree about energy availability and ive researched that as well; however, given that this is a calorie counting website id assume that those here are restricting their calories to some extent (of course there are exceptions). I'd rather deal with the rule rather than the exception and provide the information for those consciously trying to reach potentially unhealthy levels of bodyfat via caloric restriction.

A lot of people are restricting their calories to some extent... I am too - I'm restricting them to 2000.
I think the reason CorvusCorax77 and I stepped in was to offer a bit of alternate perspective. Not to derail the thread, but to show that the world doesn't necessarily have to end if you drop below 20%.

If you are at a low body fat, but are eating protein and getting your vitamins, you are in a much better position than if you are at a low body fat because you are starving yourself.

When I read the original post, my first reaction was fear that I was all of a sudden unhealthy. I wasn't going to post that until a number of people started escalating as to the dangers of low body fat (which started to look like fearmongering).

All I wanted to do was offer a bit of balance.

This. And I also just wanted to point out that BF% can mean a lot of things. If these studies are all based on cardio bunnies, then I don't know that it even applies to my goals.

Agreed.

I also think genetics has to play a role in whether you experience instances like what OP mentioned in her post. Creating and aiming toward goals set by BF% isn't really all that bad especially if you were really overweight/obese beforehand. It keeps me focused personally.

bump for later

bump

women who are ttc should eat full fat foods. Never eat fat free or low fat. Fat is an essential nutrient that we all need, esp if you are trying to conceive.

why do i always screw these quotes up