Maybe I'm recomping?

dirtyrose2007 · February 2015

I recently heard the term recomping, so I decided to do a little research. And it seems to fit what is happening with me right now. My weight is the same as where I started two months ago, but I have lost over 5% body fat. (I use online tools because that is what I have most readily available to me.) Based on the online calculator I have lost 8.7 lbs of fat and gained 8.7 lbs of lean muscle mass. Inches are melting off (for example, I've lost 2 inches from my hips, 2.5 inches from my waist), but the weight is not coming off. I believe that the number on the scale is not what is most important, AND I also know that I have to get some of this weight off.

So if I understand recomping, then it means that I am eating at my TDEE. Based on online calculators my TDEE is between 1964-2323 (depending on the model used) and I am eating at the lowest end of that (and sometimes even below). I'm struggling with the idea of cutting my calories. When I have had them lower, I didn't have the energy to get through my days.

Here are the questions that I have:
* Should I just cut the calories and force my body to adjust, or should I have more patience and see what happens?

heybales · February 2015

First, clarification.

There is Fat Mass (FM), and there is Lean Body Mass (LBM is everything but fat).

There is no such thing as lean muscle mass - unless you are talking to your butcher.

Despite some recent commercials using that term and other places - you have no control over how much fat happens to be stored in your muscle, which isn't much really unless you do endurance cardio. The fat is on TOP of your muscle, and when lost, you see the muscle more.
Some muscle just genetically has more fat in it - you can't control that.

So I gain 7 lbs of LBM in 4 hrs after a long summer bike ride. Meaning I drank back some of the 10 lbs I lost during the ride. Yes, water is LBM.

Second, commentary or BF% readings.

Unless a Bodpod or hydrostatic or DEXA scan, measuring and BIA methods are at best 5% accurate, closer to 10% usually, and if you aren't presenting the same hydrated body, worse than that.

Meaning your 5% is well within the margin of error, though you obviously did lose some during that time.
Just don't want you to get discouraged when it equally jumps up a big amount for some reason based on change of water weight.

Now, you say 2 months eating at this higher level, if you can get our your reports, what is the actual average, not range, 1 number?
Actually, looking at each month separately, what was the number for each month?

Has the exercise routine been the same during this time, and other activity level been about the same for each of those months?

Because while the changes aren't going to be as great as the measurements may sound like, you likely could be eating at maintenance making great changes. Outside eating in surplus, maintenance is the next best way to.

But indeed, if you need fat gone and extra weight off the knees - it's not a great way.

And only during the start of lifting routine can you actually lose fat and make progress at the same time - but that won't happen later.
So if the start of lifting is eating at maintenance, later trying to lose just fat, your performance will suffer. Better to do it at the start and fast as possible.

So whatever actual eating levels you come up with for each of those months, and no weight has been lost, then indeed, need to take a deficit of the 15% then from that figure.

Do you weigh all foods you eat, except liquids?

dirtyrose2007 · February 2015

Thanks for responding! Let me see if I can be more clear.

Yes LBM. I called it the wrong thing. The website says it uses the Covert Bailey to come up with this. I know that it is not the best for measuring body fat, but it is what I've got. So while it may not be valid, it is reliable in helping me to see changes over time.

The exercises have been relatively the same (cardio-20 min 3-5 times per week; weight lifting-30 min 3 times per week; pilates-60 min once per week; stretching-30-60 min once per week). I change up routines, intensities, and muscle groups worked so that my body does not get used to doing the same exact thing over and over again. In January I was able to start going to a gym so I have had access to more equipment and heavier weights than I did the month prior. My other routines are always changing (school, work, family, etc), there is no real extended consistent schedule in my life in regards to these areas (and yes, stress levels are high, which I have been told can effect weight loss).

I remember when I started trying to do EM2WL before, I was gaining weight eating at the higher calories, but still seeing inches come off. Because of scheduling and frustration I did not stick to it and resorted back to comfort food eating to get through. This time around my weight trends downward for a couple of weeks then spikes back up to where I first began (but I'm also seeing inches lost again). And this is where my confusion and frustration is occurring now. I'm wondering if I need to have patience... is this typical? Or is it time for me to try something else?

Besides decreasing my calories I've thought about my exercise routine. As much as I love lifting weights, I'm wondering if I lifted less often and replaced that with some cardio whether I'd see a difference?

mymodernbabylon · February 2015

Don't do it. Don't replace with cardio. You want to hold onto the muscle you have, not lose more by becoming a cardio bunny (it is also a stressor & you are doing plenty of cardio).

From what I can see in your pic, you are already quite fit and don't have a huge amount of fat to lose/weight to lose. I would continue on eating and lifting (making sure you do something progressive so you are forcing your muscles to work hard - thus needing repair) - if you are eating at TDEE then you will slowly lose some fat and possibly gain some muscle. It's much slower than a lot of people like, but seeing as you are quit trim already, it's probably going to work well for you. Otherwise, you'd have to do a cut/bulk cycle to get more muscle and lose more fat, which is also a tough thing to do.

I would also stop paying too much attention to the scale - if you are losing inches than you are losing fat. Here's a great story to read about this: http://www.nerdfitness.com/blog/2011/07/21/meet-staci-your-new-powerlifting-super-hero/

heybales · February 2015

Besides the great advice above with so little to lose, I'd also re-examine that desire to change up the exercise.

That is a myth that it makes that big a difference, which is only partially true on workouts that have a high level of skill to them, and the difference isn't that great anyway.

Like Zumba. Most start out very inefficient, get efficient, but then there is no real way to increase intensity, as you can only swing your arms/legs so fast, and you don't pick up weights. And if you are losing weight, you stop burning as much for several reasons then.

But lifting, don't switch it up, progress and add more weight. You want to become more efficient so you can add even more. You need to progressively overload so body even has a need to repair, and a desire to build more muscle when tapped out on existing.

Cardio - depends on what it is. Most people have run since a little kid, efficiency doesn't improve much until you have the muscle and cardio system to go faster.
Pilates, eh, engaging more muscles for support may make it feel easier, but it's still the same level of effort if the same weight doing moves, so burning the same amount.

I'd actually cut down on cardio on lifting days, and do more lifting, confirm it's full body and really tapping you out completely. Cardio on between days should be easy to aid repair, along with that stretching or pilates perhaps.

Now, if you really have 63 lbs to get down to realistic healthy weight (not some imagined healthy weight, like high school, or other people, ect), then you do need to take a deficit from whatever the real current eating level is.

And don't be thinking of a goal range. That's as bad as the gals that say they only eat 1200 and gain weight. Totally not including the binge days of 1800-2400 couple days a week.

Really add up average eating level just in case it's higher than the goal was and you think it is.

Use this site to track your BF%, since it uses 3 formula's for women, and different measuring sites for each one. The avg can be better.
www.gymgoal.com/dtool_fat.html

Or just use my spreadsheet on my profile page, same formula's there for the BF Calc.
After looking over sample data on Simple Setup tab, erase all the yellow cells only, and put in your own data for the BF Calc. You can log progress on the Progress tab.
On the Progress tab too, far right, is a place to put a month worth of eating levels, to see what results based TDEE would be.

dirtyrose2007 · February 2015

Thank you for the response and the compliment @mymodernbabylon‌. I actually do have quite a bit of weight to lose (I'm only 5'5" and in my profile picture, which was taken about 2 weeks ago, I'm 191 pounds). Health concerns that are the only reason I'm paying attention to the number on the scale, and why I'm wanting that number to go down.

Thank you both ( @heybales‌ and @mymodernbabylon‌ ) for your wise feedback and resources... I've got my homework cut out for me

mymodernbabylon · February 2015

Wow. You carry your weight amazingly well - I would have put you at a much lower weight. And that's good - it means you probably don't have to lose as much 'weight' as you think you, as you may have more muscle than some (honestly, I think you look like you have less fat than I do at 5'6" and 148 - check out my bikini pics from the summer).

williams969 · February 2015

Yes to this ^^^! Use those circumference based BF% formulas to at least get an idea of how much LBM you're at. I'd venture to guess you don't even have 63lbs of fat on you--and generally, burning off muscle to get the scale to a certain number isn't doing us any favors. You may be pleasantly surprised to see you're closer than you think to a high level of fitness (BF% wise)--which translates to less amount to lose.

dirtyrose2007 · February 2015

Thanks everyone! I have been told that I carry my weight well and typically people do not guess that I am as heavy as I am. @heybales‌ I appreciate you putting together such a comprehensive worksheet. Unfortunately I'm even more confused now than I was before because from what I was gathering from the feedback I had gotten so far, cutting my calories was looking like my best option. But the numbers from the spreadsheet suggest I should probably increase my calories.

So here are some of the discrepancies:

According to the spreadsheet my suggested goal weight is 5 pounds less than what I was striving for (125 pounds instead of 130), so instead of losing 63 pounds I'd be looking at needing to lose 68 pounds.

The spreadsheet uses an average between the US Navy and the Covert Bailey (whereas I was using only the Covert Bailey) to calculate body fat percentage - so it is 3.28% higher than what I had calculated, with me having 6 pounds more fat mass than what I had calculated.

I had used the Scooby's Workshop website to calculate my cut value {in my initial post I called it my TDEE but that was incorrect} which was between 1964-2323 depending on the model used (i.e., Mifflin-St Jeor=1964 calories, Harris-Benedict=2032 calories, Katch McArdle=2131 calories, Cunningham=2323 calories). The number that I set as my goal was 1964 calories because 1. it was the lowest and 2. I did not trust the body fat percentages I calculated, thus I did not trust the Katch-McArdle and Cunningham calculations because they both require a body fat percentage. The spreadsheet however uses the Katch-McArdle and calculated my eating goal to be 2194.

So here are some issues marinating in my head:
1. my LBM is 131.2 (according to the spreadsheet) / 137.5 (according to my calculations) - both of which are higher than my original weight goal of 130 lbs (which was based on something I found online) and the suggested weight goal from the spreadsheet of 125 lbs. I hadn't actually realized or thought about the fact that I would have to break down muscle to get down this low. Good catch @williams969‌ !
2. maybe I'm still eating too low of calories

heybales · February 2015

1 - very true, those goal weights are for those that have never seen it, like always large their whole life. I included it after many questions on what was healthy goal weight, and those are the figures out there from medical sites.

Now, LBM is NOT muscle mass, it's also water, blood volume, ect, everything NOT fat.
You will lose LBM as you lose fat - you don't need as much blood volume for one thing, or water in general. You will burn less daily moving around less weight, so unless doing endurance cardio, you will store less carbs with attached water.

But, since water management is a decent part of your BMR - no need to lose it early!

So keep the goal weight at suggested or your 5 lbs more, doesn't really matter because you are going to just take 15% off suggested TDEE. 10 lbs from goal weight you may decide this is great place to be.

But those 2 BF formula's together give an indication how accurate they may be. Did you get warning that you may not measure well, or you do?

And 3.28% BF higher is still within realm of inaccuracy. As you lose weight, that becomes more accurate.

Use the BF% in that field though, the Katch BMR is better used if available, because even with 5% accuracy of BF, the number doesn't change that much. But it can be very different than Mifflin sometimes, depending on your fitness level or prior dieting attempts.

You may indeed get to eat more.

Just use the TDEE given, and take out 15% for eating goal. The activity calculator is still more accurate than 5 rough levels.

After a month of accurate logging, you use the TDEE calculator on the Progress tab, and discover your true TDEE for whatever level of activity you were doing.
Adjust monthly as weight drops.

Eat More 2 Weigh Less

Maybe I'm recomping?

Replies

Categories