Older women and BF

bcattoes
bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
I think I weigh too much. I'm not overly worried about this since I am healthy, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't want to be thinner.

My stats - I am 52 yo, 5'5" tall, weight = 162 lbs, BF = 24%, waist = 30.5 in, hips = 39 in.

So, my concern/question is whether in trying to lose weight it would be unhealthy for me to try and lose only fat. Right now I have 123 lbs of LBM. If I were to accomplish losing only fat and reach my original goal of 147 lbs, I would be 16% BF.

My understanding is that lower BF can mean lower estrogen production in women, so that seems potentially unhealthy for someone that is fast approaching the time when estrogen production is naturally lowered (menopause).

So in my case I wonder if losing some muscle wouldn't be the best thing when losing weight. I don't think I'd want my BF to drop below 21%, which at my goal weight (147) would mean a loss of 7 lbs of LBM along with 7 lbs of fat.

It's probably unrealistic to think that I'd lose only fat anyway, but should I be striving to lose equal amounts of fat and muscle?
«13456

Replies

  • Alissakae
    Alissakae Posts: 317 Member
    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.
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    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.

    Is there any evidence for that? That we should gain as much muscle as possible, even if our BF% drops very low?

    It's by gaining muscle that I dropped by BF%. But that actually increased my weight. So you believe if I keep all this muscle while losing weight I'll be healthier even though my BF% may be too low?
  • MizTerry
    MizTerry Posts: 3,763 Member
    I had not heard that BF and estrogen were linked.
  • srk369
    srk369 Posts: 256 Member
    How did you get at 147? I would think the bf% is more important...the more LBM the better the metabolism. I think having a bf% goal is much better than a number on the scale goal.

    Keep the muscle as much as possible!!
  • henriettevanittersum
    henriettevanittersum Posts: 179 Member
    Maybe you are setting your goals too high? Check with your family doctor what a healthy ratio would be for you. Never aim for losing muscle! Start monitoring your measurements rather than your weight.
    BTW I'm 47, 181 cm (6 ft) and weigh 67 kg (147.5 lbs) with 24% BF... I work on gaining muscle (and therefor weight) because I think that will help me through menopause more than body fat will (I'll be much fitter & look much leaner).
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    I had not heard that BF and estrogen were linked.

    Yes, some estrogen is produced in fat cells. This is why some female athletes and others with very low BF% stop having periods or have difficulty conceiving.

    I tried searching on the internet and the few sites that differentied BF% recommendations for women by age listed 21% as the low end of healthy for women > 50 (assuming this mean menopausal / post menopause). If I lose only fat and reach my goal I will be well below that.

    Decent article on estrogen
    http://women.webmd.com/guide/normal-testosterone-and-estrogen-levels-in-women
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    How did you get at 147? I would think the bf% is more important...the more LBM the better the metabolism. I think having a bf% goal is much better than a number on the scale goal.

    Keep the muscle as much as possible!!

    I actually chose 147 originally because MFP made me put in a number and that was what I weighed the last time I wore my goal jeans. But at 5'5" it is not an unrealistic goal.

    My BF% is healthy but I am too big. I want to be thinner but I don't want my BF% too low. It seems the only solution is to lose both fat and LBM, but I certainly don't want to lose organs or bone, so what is left other than muscle?
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    Maybe you are setting your goals too high? Check with your family doctor what a healthy ratio would be for you. Never aim for losing muscle! Start monitoring your measurements rather than your weight.
    BTW I'm 47, 181 cm (6 ft) and weigh 67 kg (147.5 lbs) with 24% BF... I work on gaining muscle (and therefor weight) because I think that will help me through menopause more than body fat will (I'll be much fitter & look much leaner).

    I'm not sure if you read my OP but I already know my measurements and posted them.

    Why would 147 be too high a goal for me at 5'5" but not for someone that is 6 feet tall?? In order for me to reach 147 lbs and 24% BF I would have to lose LBM. Starting where I am, it is not possible to reach that by losing BF alone, as I stated in the OP.
  • srk369
    srk369 Posts: 256 Member
    One more question, where did you get the 24% bf number from? Could there be any variance in that. I'm a couple of inches shorter than you and my measurements are smaller but my bf is much higher. It could just be where we store...chest and stomach for me! My hip numbers have been shrinking pretty quickly, chest not at all and waist...slowly but surely.
  • henriettevanittersum
    henriettevanittersum Posts: 179 Member
    Maybe you are setting your goals too high? Check with your family doctor what a healthy ratio would be for you. Never aim for losing muscle! Start monitoring your measurements rather than your weight.
    BTW I'm 47, 181 cm (6 ft) and weigh 67 kg (147.5 lbs) with 24% BF... I work on gaining muscle (and therefor weight) because I think that will help me through menopause more than body fat will (I'll be much fitter & look much leaner).

    I'm not sure if you read my OP but I already know my measurements and posted them.

    Why would 147 be too high a goal for me at 5'5" but not for someone that is 6 feet tall?? In order for me to reach 147 lbs and 24% BF I would have to lose LBM. Starting where I am, it is not possible to reach that by losing BF alone, as I stated in the OP.
  • bcattoes
    bcattoes Posts: 17,299 Member
    One more question, where did you get the 24% bf number from? Could there be any variance in that. I'm a couple of inches shorter than you and my measurements are smaller but my bf is much higher. It could just be where we store...chest and stomach for me! My hip numbers have been shrinking pretty quickly, chest not at all and waist...slowly but surely.

    I had a DEXA scan several months ago and it was pretty close to my scale (scale 24.1, DEXA 23.8). Scale has dropped a few decimals since but 24% is pretty close.

    I'm a pear. Big hips, booty and thighs.
  • henriettevanittersum
    henriettevanittersum Posts: 179 Member
    Oops... you misunderstood. I meant, you seem to want to dictate to your body what to loose (or where to lose from). i don't think it works that way. you either lose BF and gain muscle, or lose both... Why is the weight so important to you if you loose the BF and gain lean muscle? Muscle takes up less space than fat, that's why measuring and tracking inches works better for some. I hope I make myself clear, silly ESL....
  • srk369
    srk369 Posts: 256 Member
    One more question, where did you get the 24% bf number from? Could there be any variance in that. I'm a couple of inches shorter than you and my measurements are smaller but my bf is much higher. It could just be where we store...chest and stomach for me! My hip numbers have been shrinking pretty quickly, chest not at all and waist...slowly but surely.

    I had a DEXA scan several months ago and it was pretty close to my scale (scale 24.1, DEXA 23.8). Scale has dropped a few decimals since but 24% is pretty close.

    I'm a pear. Big hips, booty and thighs.

    Ok, I had a bod bod a couple of months ago...mine matched my scale also, so that has made it easy to follow the progress and know the bf was dropping. I've also lost very little LBM.

    I'm not sure, other than crash diet quick loss ways, which I won't do, how you would lose LBM. I would say keep going and and maybe try adjusting your exercise. I know I have no control over how the bf comes off, but for me I really think running and strenght training is helping to shape my legs better. I think lbm is too important to your body to actually try to lose it. Good luck!
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    I have to admit I am a little confused. You are at a healthy weight and a healthy body fat. The rest is 'vanity pounds' - which I totally get as I have/had the same goal. So why do you just not go with what you look like in the mirror. Why are you forcing yourself into an arbitrary number of 147lb?
  • jofjltncb6
    jofjltncb6 Posts: 34,415 Member
    OP, you seem to disagree with every response given so far.

    So what do *you* think the answer is?
  • 2aycocks
    2aycocks Posts: 415 Member
    I think I weigh too much. I'm not overly worried about this since I am healthy, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't want to be thinner.

    My stats - I am 52 yo, 5'5" tall, weight = 162 lbs, BF = 24%, waist = 30.5 in, hips = 39 in.

    So, my concern/question is whether in trying to lose weight it would be unhealthy for me to try and lose only fat. Right now I have 123 lbs of LBM. If I were to accomplish losing only fat and reach my original goal of 147 lbs, I would be 16% BF.

    My understanding is that lower BF can mean lower estrogen production in women, so that seems potentially unhealthy for someone that is fast approaching the time when estrogen production is naturally lowered (menopause).

    So in my case I wonder if losing some muscle wouldn't be the best thing when losing weight. I don't think I'd want my BF to drop below 21%, which at my goal weight (147) would mean a loss of 7 lbs of LBM along with 7 lbs of fat.

    It's probably unrealistic to think that I'd lose only fat anyway, but should I be striving to lose equal amounts of fat and muscle?

    STOP!!!!! First of all, at age 52 you probably don't pump out much estrogen anyway, if any. I'm 56 and have never been told or even heard that losing body fat lowers your estrogen.

    Secondly, and you can check this out for yourself, you NEED muscle to help prevent osteoporosis.

    You are about to hit menopause and let me tell you, you WILL gain weight! And losing it is much harder. So start NOW with weight loss AND strength training of some kind. Trust me, in a year or two, it will be much harder if you dont!!
  • 2aycocks
    2aycocks Posts: 415 Member
    Oops... you misunderstood. I meant, you seem to want to dictate to your body what to loose (or where to lose from). i don't think it works that way. you either lose BF and gain muscle, or lose both... Why is the weight so important to you if you loose the BF and gain lean muscle? Muscle takes up less space than fat, that's why measuring and tracking inches works better for some. I hope I make myself clear, silly ESL....

    At your age, if you lose BF and muscle both, what you will be left with is some pretty unattractive HANGING LOOSE SKIN.
  • MyChocolateDiet
    MyChocolateDiet Posts: 22,281 Member
    OP, you seem to disagree with every response given so far.

    So what do *you* think the answer is?

    I think it's this
    How did you get at 147? I would think the bf% is more important...the more LBM the better the metabolism. I think having a bf% goal is much better than a number on the scale goal.

    Keep the muscle as much as possible!!

    I actually chose 147 originally because MFP made me put in a number and that was what I weighed the last time I wore my goal jeans. But at 5'5" it is not an unrealistic goal.

    My BF% is healthy but I am too big. I want to be thinner but I don't want my BF% too low. It seems the only solution is to lose both fat and LBM, but I certainly don't want to lose organs or bone, so what is left other than muscle?

    aaaand I never even knew that was an option?
  • MyChocolateDiet
    MyChocolateDiet Posts: 22,281 Member
    I think I weigh too much. I'm not overly worried about this since I am healthy, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't want to be thinner.

    My stats - I am 52 yo, 5'5" tall, weight = 162 lbs, BF = 24%, waist = 30.5 in, hips = 39 in.

    So, my concern/question is whether in trying to lose weight it would be unhealthy for me to try and lose only fat. Right now I have 123 lbs of LBM. If I were to accomplish losing only fat and reach my original goal of 147 lbs, I would be 16% BF.

    My understanding is that lower BF can mean lower estrogen production in women, so that seems potentially unhealthy for someone that is fast approaching the time when estrogen production is naturally lowered (menopause).

    So in my case I wonder if losing some muscle wouldn't be the best thing when losing weight. I don't think I'd want my BF to drop below 21%, which at my goal weight (147) would mean a loss of 7 lbs of LBM along with 7 lbs of fat.

    It's probably unrealistic to think that I'd lose only fat anyway, but should I be striving to lose equal amounts of fat and muscle?

    It seems only "potentially" unhealthy if it reaches whatever level would cause this reported problem. Perhaps a little google research would turn up what BF number produces this outcome and you can judge for yourself whether you are even in any danger of reaching that low of a BF now or any time soon. I bet the outcome will put your mind at ease and let you venture forth into preserving your muscle while you slim down further if you still consider that a priority afterward.
  • Otterluv
    Otterluv Posts: 9,083 Member
    I, too, am confused. Why don't you just shoot to be a certain size? That way you can focus on losing bodyfat, ditch the scale, and get where you want to be without worrying about some arbitrary number.

    Losing LBM just to see a certain # on the scale seems foolhardy and counterproductive.
  • BeachIron
    BeachIron Posts: 6,490 Member
    This is honestly one of those situations where with just the stats you've given it is difficult to figure out why you are unhappy. PIctures would help in this situation.
  • BeachGingerOnTheRocks
    BeachGingerOnTheRocks Posts: 3,927 Member
    Nevermind. My reading comp is worthless today apparently.

    21% is very low for 52 years old. According to charts I've read, 24% is still in the lean/underfat category.
  • Crankstr
    Crankstr Posts: 3,958 Member
    I think I weigh too much. I'm not overly worried about this since I am healthy, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't want to be thinner.

    My stats - I am 52 yo, 5'5" tall, weight = 162 lbs, BF = 24%, waist = 30.5 in, hips = 39 in.

    So, my concern/question is whether in trying to lose weight it would be unhealthy for me to try and lose only fat. Right now I have 123 lbs of LBM. If I were to accomplish losing only fat and reach my original goal of 147 lbs, I would be 16% BF.

    My understanding is that lower BF can mean lower estrogen production in women, so that seems potentially unhealthy for someone that is fast approaching the time when estrogen production is naturally lowered (menopause).

    So in my case I wonder if losing some muscle wouldn't be the best thing when losing weight. I don't think I'd want my BF to drop below 21%, which at my goal weight (147) would mean a loss of 7 lbs of LBM along with 7 lbs of fat.

    It's probably unrealistic to think that I'd lose only fat anyway, but should I be striving to lose equal amounts of fat and muscle?

    STOP!!!!! First of all, at age 52 you probably don't pump out much estrogen anyway, if any. I'm 56 and have never been told or even heard that losing body fat lowers your estrogen.

    Secondly, and you can check this out for yourself, you NEED muscle to help prevent osteoporosis.

    You are about to hit menopause and let me tell you, you WILL gain weight! And losing it is much harder. So start NOW with weight loss AND strength training of some kind. Trust me, in a year or two, it will be much harder if you dont!!

    all of this.

    I don't even know what to say, it's shocking to me that you would even consider wanting to lose LBM when it will happen to us as we age...and it is HARD for women to put on muscle...You WANT to keep your muscle.

    Why not try to maintain your LBM and lose body fat, and evaluate when you get closer to the desired %?
  • sweetzoejane
    sweetzoejane Posts: 153 Member
    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.

    Is there any evidence for that? That we should gain as much muscle as possible, even if our BF% drops very low?

    It's by gaining muscle that I dropped by BF%. But that actually increased my weight. So you believe if I keep all this muscle while losing weight I'll be healthier even though my BF% may be too low?

    Is there evidence of this? Of course there is. There isn't even any controversy about whether or not this happens. There is even a name for it - it's called sarcopenia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarcopenia).

    As for evidence that you should retain your LBM and do more strength training:

    http://rd.springer.com/article/10.2165/00007256-200030040-00002
    http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=1470126
    https://www.thieme-connect.com/ejournals/abstract/10.1055/s-2007-973024
    http://jap.physiology.org/content/78/4/1425.short
    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749379703001776
  • rml_16
    rml_16 Posts: 16,414 Member
    I had not heard that BF and estrogen were linked.
    Makes sense since women stop having a period below a certain BF% and even at a too-high BF%.
  • BeachGingerOnTheRocks
    BeachGingerOnTheRocks Posts: 3,927 Member
    Look, OP, hold on to as much LBM as you can. You'll lose bone density if you start losing too much LBM. If you don't believe me, as an orthopedist.

    24% on a 52 year old woman is very little visible fat.
  • pasofan
    pasofan Posts: 29 Member
    I am 57yrs old- 5'5" At 158 lbs my primary care doc ( a lady in her 50's ) told me I was 20 lbs over weight.
  • skinnyjenn
    skinnyjenn Posts: 1
    Please do not lose any LBM! In fact your measurements seem very healthy to me for an older woman - I don't think you need to lose anything. If you indeed carry your weight in your butt and thighs then its a good thing because you don't carry your fat around your organs which is worse for your health.

    Why do you still feel that you need to be smaller? I would seriously ask myself this question if I were you.
  • 5ftnFun
    5ftnFun Posts: 948 Member
    I am 57yrs old- 5'5" At 158 lbs my primary care doc ( a lady in her 50's ) told me I was 20 lbs over weight.

    With all due respect, this is not about you! You may very well be overweight & need to drop a few. The OP says that she had a body scan that indicates she is in the normal range for HER. Her questions are (though confusing but I think I'm following) are about losing some vanity lbs and how it may/may not affect hormones, and how she can do this without losing more muscle. And she had a question about building muscle & how it may make the scale go up, which is not what she wants. If I'm wrong, someone correct me.
  • BeachIron
    BeachIron Posts: 6,490 Member
    I am 57yrs old- 5'5" At 158 lbs my primary care doc ( a lady in her 50's ) told me I was 20 lbs over weight.

    With all due respect, this is not about you! You may very well be overweight & need to drop a few. The OP says that she had a body scan that indicates she is in the normal range for HER. Her questions are (though confusing but I think I'm following) are about losing some vanity lbs and how it may/may not affect hormones, and how she can do this without losing more muscle. And she had a question about building muscle & how it may make the scale go up, which is not what she wants. If I'm wrong, someone correct me.

    Perhaps she is trying to make the OP's numbers make sense, to her. It helps to understand better when determining how to answer. TBH, I'm in a similar quandary which is why I think pictures would be helpful here.

Categories