I ate below my BMR for 3 months, will I have lose muscle

SouthParkFan2014
SouthParkFan2014 Posts: 12
in Health and Weight Loss
In my previous post, I explained how for the first 2 months I fell for the 'magic' 1200 - 1400 calories minimum diet (i've now been using MFP for about 4 months now). Upon finding that I was severely under-eating for my size (i'm 6'1 and at the time I weighed 210lbs) and actually required around 2000 - 2100 cals just to meet by BMR, I started to put this right, and increase my caloric intake by 200-300 cals per week. I have so far experienced no weight gain and have continued a steady weight loss. However, I recently conducting a body fat % on myself and found that my flexed biceps were only 13.5 inches in circumference, and I remembered about 6 months back, when I was 228lbs (now 194lbs) and had a bicep circumference of 17 inches. Because of my poor diet early on, I was wondering if I have also experienced significant muscle loss as well as fat loss. Would you think it likely that I could lose 3.5 inches of muscle on each arm after losing 33lbs? Or would you think it to be a mixture of both fat and muscle? I certainly don't feel any weaker.

Thanks in advance.

Replies

  • SouthParkFan2014
    SouthParkFan2014 Posts: 12
    Sorry, the title of this is incorrect. It should read 2 months rather than 3.
  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,267 Member
    It was a combination of fat and muscle...
  • timrpm
    timrpm Posts: 57 Member
    Do some resistance work while you're dieting. You're more likely to keep muscle mass and burn fat that way. Probably your arms were mostly fat anyway beforehand so you won't have lost much.
  • nyiballs
    nyiballs Posts: 147 Member
    Fat resides in more places than just the belly... Losing neck or waist circumference wouldn't lead you to the same conclusion I'm with the poster above though... It is probably both.
  • SouthParkFan2014
    SouthParkFan2014 Posts: 12
    Would you think it would be more fat loss than muscle? I've always been quite strong, and i've not noticed any significant loss in strength.
  • SouthParkFan2014
    SouthParkFan2014 Posts: 12
    And would I be correct on saying any significant muscle loss would've resulted in me also get significantly weaker?
  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,267 Member
    I would gander a guess as to the percentages but if you were not eating enough protien, or enough food and not working with weights or some sort of resistence training you lost both...

    Just because strength might be the same doesn't mean you didn't lose muscle...muscle <>strength.
  • SouthParkFan2014
    SouthParkFan2014 Posts: 12
    Is this disastrous, or can it be easily reversed? Do you think integrating resistance exercises into my daily work out would fix the problem?
  • Annesoucy1957
    Annesoucy1957 Posts: 125
    Nothing is disastrous, you can easily start a routine of weight and toning training. It is always a good idea to combine exercises with dieting, more results and your body will look better in the long run.
  • SouthParkFan2014
    SouthParkFan2014 Posts: 12
    Thank god for that, this has really helped me calm my nerves down a bit now, haha.

    Thanks for the answers, guys, I really appreciate it!
  • WalkingAlong
    WalkingAlong Posts: 4,926 Member
    You always lose a mix of muscle and fat when you lose weight. Relax, you didn't break anything. There is nothing magical about eating above your BMR. Some studies find slower weight loss preserves more lean body mass, some studies find it doesn't matter much. Find a calorie level you're comfortable with for the rate of loss and the amount of food and carry on.

Categories