Tired of being skinny fat.
Options
Replies
-
I hope i'm not derailing this thread by saying this, but sometimes I dislike the term "skinny fat" because I think it can really feed into people's ED issues... they focus on "fat" and think "I need to eat less and run more!" when really it's not that their bf% is high because they have oh so much fat. Their bf% is high because they have oh so little LBM. The key is to build LBM.
And the only way to build LBM is to eat enough to build LBM and do resistance training.
Just a thought.
THANK YOU! Every time I see the term skinny-fat on here it make my BP go up a few points. The medical term for this is Normal Weight Obesity. It is when someone has a BF% in the OBESE range, yet their BMI is normal. A 20% BF on a women is nowhere near OBESE, and is very much below the top of the healthy range for most women. So what does this say to those who are striving to get into a healthy BF%, when 20% is described as gross??
A better title to this thread would have been "I want more muscles!"
Please stop misusing this term!
I sooo hear you on this.
Somehow I've tagged myself with the "skinny fat" label because it's the simplest, most readily-understandable way to describe the work I want to do on my body. I'm underweight, have a BMI of 16, and a BF% (measured yesterday) of 18.6%, yet I have mushy bits that sure weren't there 5 years ago that I want to firm up. I'm not fat by any stretch of the imagination.
And I can't say "tone", because that's a dirty word that results in a 7 pg thread hijack debating semantics. *rolls eyes*0 -
I hope i'm not derailing this thread by saying this, but sometimes I dislike the term "skinny fat" because I think it can really feed into people's ED issues... they focus on "fat" and think "I need to eat less and run more!" when really it's not that their bf% is high because they have oh so much fat. Their bf% is high because they have oh so little LBM. The key is to build LBM.
And the only way to build LBM is to eat enough to build LBM and do resistance training.
Just a thought.
THANK YOU! Every time I see the term skinny-fat on here it make my BP go up a few points. The medical term for this is Normal Weight Obesity. It is when someone has a BF% in the OBESE range, yet their BMI is normal. A 20% BF on a women is nowhere near OBESE, and is very much below the top of the healthy range for most women. So what does this say to those who are striving to get into a healthy BF%, when 20% is described as gross??
A better title to this thread would have been "I want more muscles!"
Please stop misusing this term!
I sooo hear you on this.
Somehow I've tagged myself with the "skinny fat" label because it's the simplest, most readily-understandable way to describe the work I want to do on my body. I'm underweight, have a BMI of 16, and a BF% (measured yesterday) of 18.6%, yet I have mushy bits that sure weren't there 5 years ago that I want to firm up. I'm not fat by any stretch of the imagination.
And I can't say "tone", because that's a dirty word that results in a 7 pg thread hijack debating semantics. *rolls eyes*
A woman with 18.6% body fat is, by no reasonable definition of the word, skinnyfat.0 -
A woman with 18.6% body fat is, by no reasonable definition of the word, skinnyfat.
Perhaps not, but apparently I'm not allowed to say I want to tone up the mushy bits! :noway:0 -
A woman with 18.6% body fat is, by no reasonable definition of the word, skinnyfat.
Perhaps not, but apparently I'm not allowed to say I want to tone up the mushy bits! :noway:
This is pretty offtopic, but that doesn't really mean anything. The mushy bits are fat. You can't tone up fat. You can get rid of fat.
What you really want to do is lose fat/decrease body fat percentage/etc. "Tone up the mushy bits" implies you want to replace the fat with muscle, which you can't really do. You can lose the fat and you can build muscle or vice versa. You really can't do both at the same time.
The trouble with "tone up the mushy bits" is that it implies two incorrect things:
1) That you can spot reduce at the mushy area, and
2) That you can build some significant amount of muscle while losing fat.
You can't do either of those. What you need to do is lose overall body fat, and hope that the fat you want comes off.0 -
This is pretty offtopic, but that doesn't really mean anything. The mushy bits are fat. You can't tone up fat. You can get rid of fat.
What you really want to do is lose fat/decrease body fat percentage/etc. "Tone up the mushy bits" implies you want to replace the fat with muscle, which you can't really do. You can lose the fat and you can build muscle or vice versa. You really can't do both at the same time.
The trouble with "tone up the mushy bits" is that it implies two incorrect things:
1) That you can spot reduce at the mushy area, and
2) That you can build some significant amount of muscle while losing fat.
You can't do either of those. What you need to do is lose overall body fat, and hope that the fat you want comes off.
So I've been reading on here for weeks on end. (And, actually, your reply is probably more germane to the original topic than the lengthy derail about poster rudeness)
As I understand it, fat loss requires a calorie deficit -- but I can't gain much muscle eating at a deficit. And I really shouldn't lose a lot of weight, I'm already underweight and my upper body looks pretty bony.
Pretty much at a loss as to how to effectively tackle the problem.0 -
This is pretty offtopic, but that doesn't really mean anything. The mushy bits are fat. You can't tone up fat. You can get rid of fat.
What you really want to do is lose fat/decrease body fat percentage/etc. "Tone up the mushy bits" implies you want to replace the fat with muscle, which you can't really do. You can lose the fat and you can build muscle or vice versa. You really can't do both at the same time.
The trouble with "tone up the mushy bits" is that it implies two incorrect things:
1) That you can spot reduce at the mushy area, and
2) That you can build some significant amount of muscle while losing fat.
You can't do either of those. What you need to do is lose overall body fat, and hope that the fat you want comes off.
So I've been reading on here for weeks on end. (And, actually, your reply is probably more germane to the original topic than the lengthy derail about poster rudeness)
As I understand it, fat loss requires a calorie deficit -- but I can't gain much muscle eating at a deficit. And I really shouldn't lose a lot of weight, I'm already underweight and my upper body looks pretty bony.
Pretty much at a loss as to how to effectively tackle the problem.
You can do a recomp where you eat at maintenance and slowly gain muscle/lose fat or you can go on bulk/cut cycles where you gain muscle and fat then cut the fat.
The former is slow and not as efficient/effective but will not result in fat gains that you need to subsequently cut.
Either way, you will need to start (if you do not do so already) an effective progressive loading strength routine.0 -
So I've been reading on here for weeks on end. (And, actually, your reply is probably more germane to the original topic than the lengthy derail about poster rudeness)
As I understand it, fat loss requires a calorie deficit -- but I can't gain much muscle eating at a deficit. And I really shouldn't lose a lot of weight, I'm already underweight and my upper body looks pretty bony.
Pretty much at a loss as to how to effectively tackle the problem.
Depends on what your goal is and how comfortable you are with the level of fat on your body.
Not that it's my business or my decision, but you look fine in your picture. I mean, you are under 19% body fat apparently (how did you measure that?). If you want more muscle, you'll need to eat a calorie surplus and gain some fat in the process. If you want to lose the fat you have left, you'll have to eat a calorie deficit and lose a little of the muscle you have. Either way, you're going to have to do strength training (what is your routine now?).
People will get all up in arms about this, but women can get away with being skinny with a few bones showing way better than guys can. Plus, it's summer. So if I were you I'd probably be eating slightly under maintenance while lifting to chip away at the fat without touching lean mass. Then when it's time to wear more clothes start running a calorie surplus.
That assumes you want to look good now. The more efficient thing to do, in terms of recomposition, would be to run a fairly aggressive bulk now.0 -
If you want more muscle, you'll need to eat a calorie surplus and gain some fat in the process. If you want to lose the fat you have left, you'll have to eat a calorie deficit and lose a little of the muscle you have.
Disagree -- it IS possible to do a body recomp, IE: lose fat and build muscle, at maintenance calories. I know, because I've done it. It takes longer, and it'll take longer for girls than guys (we have more testosterone), but it can be done.0 -
So I've been reading on here for weeks on end. (And, actually, your reply is probably more germane to the original topic than the lengthy derail about poster rudeness)
As I understand it, fat loss requires a calorie deficit -- but I can't gain much muscle eating at a deficit. And I really shouldn't lose a lot of weight, I'm already underweight and my upper body looks pretty bony.
Pretty much at a loss as to how to effectively tackle the problem.
Depends on what your goal is and how comfortable you are with the level of fat on your body.
Not that it's my business or my decision, but you look fine in your picture. I mean, you are under 19% body fat apparently (how did you measure that?). If you want more muscle, you'll need to eat a calorie surplus and gain some fat in the process. [bold]If you want to lose the fat you have left, you'll have to eat a calorie deficit and lose a little of the muscle you have.[/bold] Either way, you're going to have to do strength training (what is your routine now?).
People will get all up in arms about this, but women can get away with being skinny with a few bones showing way better than guys can. Plus, it's summer. So if I were you I'd probably be eating slightly under maintenance while lifting to chip away at the fat without touching lean mass. Then when it's time to wear more clothes start running a calorie surplus.
That assumes you want to look good now. The more efficient thing to do, in terms of recomposition, would be to run a fairly aggressive bulk now.
Disagree with bolded statement -- it IS possible to do a body recomp, IE: lose fat and build muscle, at maintenance calories. I know, because I've done it. It takes longer, and it'll take longer for girls than guys (we have more testosterone), but it can be done.
It's almost impossibly slow for women, which is why I don't recommend it. Further, you still have zero control over where the fat comes off, which is why "tone up the mushy parts" is so meaningless. Even if you're doing successful recomp, the fat comes off where it wants to come off, not just from "the mushy parts."0 -
It's almost impossibly slow for women, which is why I don't recommend it. Further, you still have zero control over where the fat comes off, which is why "tone up the mushy parts" is so meaningless. Even if you're doing successful recomp, the fat comes off where it wants to come off, not just from "the mushy parts."
At first.... it wasn't so slow for me... BUT just like losing weight-- and losing in your toughest places last, I'm finding that recomping is similar in that aspect.
My butt and hamstring area are two tough customers!0 -
To those who actually gave me advice, thank you so much! And you guys that posted your transformation pictures, I'm really impressed. Great job.
And to those lovely stupid fcks who thinks that body shaming is okay, you can just piss the fck off. If you're not aiming for a lower bf% or getting rid of fat (or simply getting healtier), why in the world are you on this site?0 -
So I've been reading on here for weeks on end. (And, actually, your reply is probably more germane to the original topic than the lengthy derail about poster rudeness)
As I understand it, fat loss requires a calorie deficit -- but I can't gain much muscle eating at a deficit. And I really shouldn't lose a lot of weight, I'm already underweight and my upper body looks pretty bony.
Pretty much at a loss as to how to effectively tackle the problem.
Depends on what your goal is and how comfortable you are with the level of fat on your body.
Not that it's my business or my decision, but you look fine in your picture. I mean, you are under 19% body fat apparently (how did you measure that?). If you want more muscle, you'll need to eat a calorie surplus and gain some fat in the process. If you want to lose the fat you have left, you'll have to eat a calorie deficit and lose a little of the muscle you have. Either way, you're going to have to do strength training (what is your routine now?).
People will get all up in arms about this, but women can get away with being skinny with a few bones showing way better than guys can. Plus, it's summer. So if I were you I'd probably be eating slightly under maintenance while lifting to chip away at the fat without touching lean mass. Then when it's time to wear more clothes start running a calorie surplus.
That assumes you want to look good now. The more efficient thing to do, in terms of recomposition, would be to run a fairly aggressive bulk now.
Jonny- do you realize you are telling someone who is very underweight at a BMI of 16 and a BF% of less than 19%, that she must eat at a calorie deficit to lose the fat she has? Please tread carefully here, not only for her sake, but for the other young women reading this.
To the person who you are answering here- you do NOT need to eat at a deficit. Please increase your calories by increasing protein, and then you can start a lifting program to gain some more muscle mass. If you do not increase your calories, your body will start to eat what muscle tissue you have now to fuel your workouts.0 -
BF% was measured using electric impedence.Depends on what your goal is and how comfortable you are with the level of fat on your body.
Not that it's my business or my decision, but you look fine in your picture. I mean, you are under 19% body fat apparently (how did you measure that?). If you want more muscle, you'll need to eat a calorie surplus and gain some fat in the process. If you want to lose the fat you have left, you'll have to eat a calorie deficit and lose a little of the muscle you have. Either way, you're going to have to do strength training (what is your routine now?).
People will get all up in arms about this, but women can get away with being skinny with a few bones showing way better than guys can. Plus, it's summer. So if I were you I'd probably be eating slightly under maintenance while lifting to chip away at the fat without touching lean mass. Then when it's time to wear more clothes start running a calorie surplus.
That assumes you want to look good now. The more efficient thing to do, in terms of recomposition, would be to run a fairly aggressive bulk now.
I just want the pants I wore 5 years ago without a muffin-top to fit the same way again. I've gained no weight in that period of time, it just seems that my flesh has shifted around or softened up or something -- either that or a whole bunch of waistbands have magically shrunk hanging in the closet. :laugh:
I started a strength routine about 2.5 years ago, using a "home gym" type machine. I'd hit peri-menopause and wanted to preserve muscle plus maintain bone density. The only appreciable result was that my forearms took on a bit of a ropey/wiry appearance. If I was at home I'd post a particularly unattractive pic to show what I mean -- they look like skinny old lady arms.
After reading all the hype about heavy lifting for women and seeing the results posted on here, I decided to go that route and I've been at it for about 5? 6? weeks. I won't pretend that I'm able to lift "heavy", I can't even start with a 45 lb bar as I'm still struggling mightily with an OHP of 20 lbs -- which is the same weight I began with. None of my other lifts are progressing either. :sad: All of this has gained me an inch on my waist and 1.5 inches on my hips, basically the exact opposite of what I was hoping to accomplish. And the added flesh isn't nice, firm muscle tissue, it's just more soft stuff. Very frustrating!
I'm guessing that I actually have to get into "heavy" lifting to do any meaningful body recomp but I'm not going in that direction very fast.0 -
Heavy is relative. You should focus on *progression*. Try a 25 lb OHP and see how it goes, for instance.
Also, 5-6 weeks isn't going to be enough time to see any real reasults on an iscaloric recomp program. If you want to see real gains, up the calorie intake and gain some weight.0 -
Heavy is relative. You should focus on *progression*. Try a 25 lb OHP and see how it goes, for instance.
Also, 5-6 weeks isn't going to be enough time to see any real reasults on an iscaloric recomp program. If you want to see real gains, up the calorie intake and gain some weight.
I'm so wobbly, that 20 lbs is in danger of coming down on top of my head -- think I'll wait a bit on the 25lbs!
So how long does progression take anyway? I'm lifting faithfully every second day.
And I have NO problem with gaining weight as long as I don't pack on any more flab. I can't afford to replace my entire wardrobe, and there are already a few pants that I can't wear (or won't wear, because they look like I'm stuffed into them like a sausage).0 -
Heavy is relative. You should focus on *progression*. Try a 25 lb OHP and see how it goes, for instance.
Also, 5-6 weeks isn't going to be enough time to see any real reasults on an iscaloric recomp program. If you want to see real gains, up the calorie intake and gain some weight.
I'm so wobbly, that 20 lbs is in danger of coming down on top of my head -- think I'll wait a bit on the 25lbs!
So how long does progression take anyway? I'm lifting faithfully every second day.
And I have NO problem with gaining weight as long as I don't pack on any more flab. I can't afford to replace my entire wardrobe, and there are already a few pants that I can't wear (or won't wear, because they look like I'm stuffed into them like a sausage).
How many reps are you doing with the 20 lb? And what are you using, dumbbells, barbell, what? You should be able to progress quickly as a newbie.
If you gain weight, you will increase your fat mass. And you will also increase the size of the muscle hidden under it, which will increase your apparent fat even more. Not much you can do about that. You'll have to decide what you want to accomplish after looking at what is possible to accomplish.0 -
There is a lot of benefit for a female beginner to eat at maintenance while learning form and strength and progression in weight lifting. Better to wait to do a bulk once she has stopped having newbie gains and is really solid in her weight lifting program.0
-
How many reps are you doing with the 20 lb? And what are you using, dumbbells, barbell, what? You should be able to progress quickly as a newbie.
If you gain weight, you will increase your fat mass. And you will also increase the size of the muscle hidden under it, which will increase your apparent fat even more. Not much you can do about that. You'll have to decide what you want to accomplish after looking at what is possible to accomplish.
I can squeak out 5 reps, but the last one is really shaky. I'm using a 10 lb barbell, except for bench press I'm using 10 lb dumbbells (as I don't have a bench). And they're wobbly too. My upper body strength seriously sucks. I could probably increase my deadlift weight at this point; however, I really need to work on my squat form before increasing that one.
Okay, that is exactly the impression that I had of what I'd done to my body so far -- increased the volume of tissue underlying the fat and made it more apparent. NOT what I wanted. I'm a business professional and have some VERY expensive clothing. Nor do I want to go up a size for the first time in my adult life.0 -
To those who actually gave me advice, thank you so much! And you guys that posted your transformation pictures, I'm really impressed. Great job.
And to those lovely stupid fcks who thinks that body shaming is okay, you can just piss the fck off. If you're not aiming for a lower bf% or getting rid of fat (or simply getting healtier), why in the world are you on this site?
well said
And I won't speak for anyone else but my before pic was the definition of skinny fat to me!0 -
To those who actually gave me advice, thank you so much! And you guys that posted your transformation pictures, I'm really impressed. Great job.
And to those lovely stupid fcks who thinks that body shaming is okay, you can just piss the fck off. If you're not aiming for a lower bf% or getting rid of fat (or simply getting healtier), why in the world are you on this site?
100%.
Gosh I think my post got lost in all that malarky
I hope you find it.... I am in what seems to be a similar position to you.
Be patient and I would recommend getting a dexa scan done, if you can. It will help you figure out a proper strategy.
ie like me, you may not be actually trying to reduce BF but building muscle (which, if your BF is low will decrease your BF% anyway).
Best of luck!! 0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 999 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions