Are there any other thin girls who have an insanely high BF%?
Replies
-
i have a lot of body fat relative to my weight. there's a big difference between volume of fat and percentage of fat. i don't have enough fat to pose a risk to my health, i just have a lot of fat relative to my weight, that's what a BF% is. i don't think either are a risk to my health, i think losing even more weight would be.0
-
TheOwlhouseDesigns wrote: »and btw my last posting and reaction was to @more_productive who found it necessary to be rude and to send me out reading and come back when i knew more about it.
Because you do need to "[know] more about it"
It's really obvious that you don't know what you're talking about when you can't make the distinction between the volume of fat and the fat:muscle ratio...
Someone could be 60lbs and still have an abnormally high bfp if they were 40% fat0 -
@Pu_239 I can't work up a deficit, I'm underweight and I don't want to risk my health. I'm planning on maintaining and introducing lots of strength training and protein, and if that doesn't work then doing the same but on a surplus
Yes, there are others out there like you !! ^ This choice is the best thing to do to correct the bf %.
I have skinny arms and legs yet am apple shaped, so belly fat,,,ugh. I have also been told to start more heavy lifting and more protein.
Genetic are involved when we compare ourselves to friends. They seem not to have to try hard to get the firm look and eat anything.
Good Luck to you.
0 -
@Pu_239 I can't work up a deficit, I'm underweight and I don't want to risk my health. I'm planning on maintaining and introducing lots of strength training and protein, and if that doesn't work then doing the same but on a surplus
Yes, there are others out there like you !! ^ This choice is the best thing to do to correct the bf %.
I have skinny arms and legs yet am apple shaped, so belly fat,,,ugh. I have also been told to start more heavy lifting and more protein.
Genetic are involved when we compare ourselves to friends. They seem not to have to try hard to get the firm look and eat anything.
Good Luck to you.
Thank you! And good luck :-)0 -
tlflag1620 wrote: »@tlflag1620 Yeah, I should get a measurement and yes, I should post a picture but I just wouldn't be comfortable with that and I don't think that's grounds to mock me, lots of people wouldn't be comfortable with that.
I never once said my "lazy, crap-eating friends" look better than me. I said that they weigh more than me but have lower body fat percentages than me. "Superior" is a carefully selected word you've chosen to make me look bad. I said I eat far too many carbs and have only just started very light strength training, I've said that a million times.
If you think there are genetic factors determining personality traits, sexuality, shoe size, hair colour, creativity and all of the other billions of things that aren't ALL nurture but are, at least in part, influenced by nature, then you're a fool. For probably the 80th time, I'm lazy and I eat like *kitten*, and if I work hard enough, I'll get a decent BF%, that doesn't change the fact that for my height, weight, and lifestyle - poor as it is - my body fat percentage is unusually high.
You are contradicting yourself. First you were whining that you eat better and work harder than these "friends" who binge drink and sit around eating garbage, but you still have a higher bf % (keeping in mind you don't even know WHAT what your bf% actually is, and I'm guessing you have even less of a clue as to what these frenemies' bf% happens to be). Now you are saying that you are lazy and eat like *kitten* yourself. Well, which is it? Are you trying harder than these supposedly lean friends and not getting results because of some medical or genetic condition, or are you lazy and eating like *kitten* and are flabby as a direct result of that?
Do genetics play a role? Certainly. As does age, gender, insulin sensitivity, etc. But if you know that your lifestyle leaves much to be desired, and you know you have control over your lifestyle (unlike those other factors that you have no control over), why are you convinced that it will be harder for you than for most other people? Maybe these "friends" actually eat better than you and engage in some physical activity. Are you with them 24/7? Maybe they actually have better habits than you do and that explains the discrepancy. And maybe there is NO discrepancy. Having a skewed body image usually only applies to your own body - you see other people realistically, but are overly critical of yourself. To a certain extent, that impacts us all, but it seems a little over the top in this case...
@tlflag1620 Yeah, I've said before it's a guesstimate - I'm not saying my claim has any credibility, I suppose I'm just saying that I have no reason to lie. I'm thin and I don't have a great diet or exercise, I don't expect to be lean, that's a given with my lifestyle. I do expect to look like other people who eat like *kitten* and don't exercise, especially since I'm thin, but I don't.
It's neither. I have a high BF% because I make no effort, obviously. My friends have a high BF% because they make no effort, obviously. Mine is higher than theirs, though, and my diet isn't nearly as poor as theirs. I'm saying that my BF% is high because of my lifestyle, and is exacerbated by my genes. I'm saying that I'd have to work harder than most people probably would have to just to look """normal""".
Now you're speculating as much as you're accusing me of doing it. Like most 20 year olds I know, they order takeaways a couple times a week and binge drink upwards of 3 times a week. I doubt they're secretly exercising and eating tins of tuna. I don't mention them because I envy them, I mentioned them as anecdotal evidence.
There are two things I've been arguing about since I started this thread;
1) Thin people can have high BF%s, especially if they eat like *kitten* and are sedentary
2) BF%, while largely determined by lifestyle, is also influenced by genes
How do you know that yours is higher than theirs if you don't know what your, or theirs, actually is??? That's insane. Maybe they carry their weight different than you. I'm a pear shaped person. My butt and thighs are likely enormous compared to yours, but my tummy is flat (when I'm not 30 weeks pregnant, as I currently am, lol). Depending on what we are wearing I may very well appear to be leaner than you, when in fact I'm not. That's why you can't make these statements without any facts. You don't know that your be % is higher than theirs because you don't know what yours is.
You are certain that your lifestyle is better (you got mad when I used the term superior, but same dif) than that of your friends. How do you know that? I was a binge drinking 20-something once upon a time. When I wasn't at the bar, I did eat healthy and did get exercise. It wasn't "secret", but if you were my friend who only really saw me out at the bar, you might have assumed that my habits were much worse than they actually were. That's all I was pointing out - you are assuming that your habits are superior to theirs, but unless you stalk them 24/7 you really don't know that (any more than you know their bad %).
I don't think you have to work harder than anyone else. Hell, you are 5'5" 110 lbs, despite poor habits. You won the genetic lottery sweetie. Most people who are "lazy and eat like *kitten*" (your words) are overweight, not underweight. I think with slight effort you could reach whatever goals you have in mind.
As for you two points, yes you can have a higher than anticipated bf%, even if you are underweight (bmi has limitations - body composition is one of them). And, yes, bf% may be somewhat influenced by genetics, BUT in your case, since you are very thin, despite poor habits, it is doubtful that is the case here. Making small changes and putting forth a small amount of effort will likely get you where you want to be. I know I was underweight when I was in my college days! Again, you won the genetic lottery- you're thin without trying. Be glad.
0 -
Gah people are rude. Don't worry about everyone arguing with you about whether or not you truly have a high bf% or distorted body image. My advice is simple: you're at a healthy weight but don't like your body composition. Obvious answer is strength training while eating at maintenance, if not above if you find that you need it. You can stay the same weight (or even gain a bit) but you'll be building muscle and losing fat, changing your body comp. That'll move you towards the leaner physique and flatter stomach you desire.0
-
stevencloser wrote: »lemonsnowdrop wrote: »OP, what you eat doesn't determine your BF% as long as you eat enough protein. Define "eat like ***."
Simple carbs/ starchy *kitten*/ sugary *kitten* will increase your BF%. You're wrong. There's a reason body builders drastically reduce their carbohydrate intake when they're cutting.
It won't if you're not eating at a surplus.
yeah, it will. if you're not eating the right amount of protein to sustain your muscle mass then you'll lose it. and if you're only eating within your maintenance and you're eating too many carbs, then you can't possibly get enough protein. that, and many other factors. isn't this like a universally accepted given? an excess of carbs is like exactly what you need to avoid to get lean
No, no you don't. No excess energy = no storage. If you could store anything you would have excess energy.0 -
more_productive wrote: »TheOwlhouseDesigns wrote: »and btw my last posting and reaction was to @more_productive who found it necessary to be rude and to send me out reading and come back when i knew more about it.
Because you do need to "[know] more about it"
It's really obvious that you don't know what you're talking about when you can't make the distinction between the volume of fat and the fat:muscle ratio...
Someone could be 60lbs and still have an abnormally high bfp if they were 40% fat
There's bones and organs and all that other crap that limit the amount of bodyfat you could possibly have.0 -
tlflag1620 wrote: »tlflag1620 wrote: »@tlflag1620 Yeah, I should get a measurement and yes, I should post a picture but I just wouldn't be comfortable with that and I don't think that's grounds to mock me, lots of people wouldn't be comfortable with that.
I never once said my "lazy, crap-eating friends" look better than me. I said that they weigh more than me but have lower body fat percentages than me. "Superior" is a carefully selected word you've chosen to make me look bad. I said I eat far too many carbs and have only just started very light strength training, I've said that a million times.
If you think there are genetic factors determining personality traits, sexuality, shoe size, hair colour, creativity and all of the other billions of things that aren't ALL nurture but are, at least in part, influenced by nature, then you're a fool. For probably the 80th time, I'm lazy and I eat like *kitten*, and if I work hard enough, I'll get a decent BF%, that doesn't change the fact that for my height, weight, and lifestyle - poor as it is - my body fat percentage is unusually high.
You are contradicting yourself. First you were whining that you eat better and work harder than these "friends" who binge drink and sit around eating garbage, but you still have a higher bf % (keeping in mind you don't even know WHAT what your bf% actually is, and I'm guessing you have even less of a clue as to what these frenemies' bf% happens to be). Now you are saying that you are lazy and eat like *kitten* yourself. Well, which is it? Are you trying harder than these supposedly lean friends and not getting results because of some medical or genetic condition, or are you lazy and eating like *kitten* and are flabby as a direct result of that?
Do genetics play a role? Certainly. As does age, gender, insulin sensitivity, etc. But if you know that your lifestyle leaves much to be desired, and you know you have control over your lifestyle (unlike those other factors that you have no control over), why are you convinced that it will be harder for you than for most other people? Maybe these "friends" actually eat better than you and engage in some physical activity. Are you with them 24/7? Maybe they actually have better habits than you do and that explains the discrepancy. And maybe there is NO discrepancy. Having a skewed body image usually only applies to your own body - you see other people realistically, but are overly critical of yourself. To a certain extent, that impacts us all, but it seems a little over the top in this case...
@tlflag1620 Yeah, I've said before it's a guesstimate - I'm not saying my claim has any credibility, I suppose I'm just saying that I have no reason to lie. I'm thin and I don't have a great diet or exercise, I don't expect to be lean, that's a given with my lifestyle. I do expect to look like other people who eat like *kitten* and don't exercise, especially since I'm thin, but I don't.
It's neither. I have a high BF% because I make no effort, obviously. My friends have a high BF% because they make no effort, obviously. Mine is higher than theirs, though, and my diet isn't nearly as poor as theirs. I'm saying that my BF% is high because of my lifestyle, and is exacerbated by my genes. I'm saying that I'd have to work harder than most people probably would have to just to look """normal""".
Now you're speculating as much as you're accusing me of doing it. Like most 20 year olds I know, they order takeaways a couple times a week and binge drink upwards of 3 times a week. I doubt they're secretly exercising and eating tins of tuna. I don't mention them because I envy them, I mentioned them as anecdotal evidence.
There are two things I've been arguing about since I started this thread;
1) Thin people can have high BF%s, especially if they eat like *kitten* and are sedentary
2) BF%, while largely determined by lifestyle, is also influenced by genes
How do you know that yours is higher than theirs if you don't know what your, or theirs, actually is??? That's insane. Maybe they carry their weight different than you. I'm a pear shaped person. My butt and thighs are likely enormous compared to yours, but my tummy is flat (when I'm not 30 weeks pregnant, as I currently am, lol). Depending on what we are wearing I may very well appear to be leaner than you, when in fact I'm not. That's why you can't make these statements without any facts. You don't know that your be % is higher than theirs because you don't know what yours is.
You are certain that your lifestyle is better (you got mad when I used the term superior, but same dif) than that of your friends. How do you know that? I was a binge drinking 20-something once upon a time. When I wasn't at the bar, I did eat healthy and did get exercise. It wasn't "secret", but if you were my friend who only really saw me out at the bar, you might have assumed that my habits were much worse than they actually were. That's all I was pointing out - you are assuming that your habits are superior to theirs, but unless you stalk them 24/7 you really don't know that (any more than you know their bad %).
I don't think you have to work harder than anyone else. Hell, you are 5'5" 110 lbs, despite poor habits. You won the genetic lottery sweetie. Most people who are "lazy and eat like *kitten*" (your words) are overweight, not underweight. I think with slight effort you could reach whatever goals you have in mind.
As for you two points, yes you can have a higher than anticipated bf%, even if you are underweight (bmi has limitations - body composition is one of them). And, yes, bf% may be somewhat influenced by genetics, BUT in your case, since you are very thin, despite poor habits, it is doubtful that is the case here. Making small changes and putting forth a small amount of effort will likely get you where you want to be. I know I was underweight when I was in my college days! Again, you won the genetic lottery- you're thin without trying. Be glad.
I suppose I don't, it's just an observation based on what they look like but all anyone in this thread has to go on is my word. I don't have any reason to lie, and I don't think my perceptions are distorted; I have no preoccupations food or weight, this thread was just me trying to find people of a similar body type. I know it comes across as presumptive but I do spend an awful lot of time with these girls and I've seen their bodies a million times, they don't have gym memberships or exercise machines and I've asked them about their exercise habits (not to be intrusive, just literally a few minutes ago for this thread). I mean you're right I didn't mean to come across as though I have absolute knowledge of their habits, but I can confirm that they're pretty poor.
I do think genes are a factor with me, I think they are in everyone, and I've read quite a few reputable studies (most of which don't have a hypothesis) to support that.
And you're probably right, I'm being ungrateful (though I hadn't originally intended to be this defensive about the gene thing, that only started after people continually rejected the idea). Just gonna have to exercise :-( total sugar fiend lately though, gonna have to nip that in the bud.
0 -
Alligator423 wrote: »Gah people are rude. Don't worry about everyone arguing with you about whether or not you truly have a high bf% or distorted body image. My advice is simple: you're at a healthy weight but don't like your body composition. Obvious answer is strength training while eating at maintenance, if not above if you find that you need it. You can stay the same weight (or even gain a bit) but you'll be building muscle and losing fat, changing your body comp. That'll move you towards the leaner physique and flatter stomach you desire.
Thanks man, trying maintenance first then I'll see if I can introduce some more protein-heavy calories, it'll probably be easier to go that way and build some muscle mass first just as a base.0 -
lemonsnowdrop wrote: »OP, what you eat doesn't determine your BF% as long as you eat enough protein. Define "eat like ***."
Simple carbs/ starchy *kitten*/ sugary *kitten* will increase your BF%. You're wrong. There's a reason body builders drastically reduce their carbohydrate intake when they're cutting.
No. De novo lipogenesis is rare in the absence of a calorie surplus. If you're maintaining your weight, you're not eating excess calories.Only when CHO energy intake exceeds TEE does DNL in liver or adipose tissue contribute significantly to the whole-body energy economy.*
Still, if your goal is to build lean muscle mass, you should increase your protein intake. The logical way to do this without consuming more calories would be to replace some carbohydrates with protein.
*source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10365981
0 -
stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »lemonsnowdrop wrote: »OP, what you eat doesn't determine your BF% as long as you eat enough protein. Define "eat like ***."
Simple carbs/ starchy *kitten*/ sugary *kitten* will increase your BF%. You're wrong. There's a reason body builders drastically reduce their carbohydrate intake when they're cutting.
It won't if you're not eating at a surplus.
yeah, it will. if you're not eating the right amount of protein to sustain your muscle mass then you'll lose it. and if you're only eating within your maintenance and you're eating too many carbs, then you can't possibly get enough protein. that, and many other factors. isn't this like a universally accepted given? an excess of carbs is like exactly what you need to avoid to get lean
No, no you don't. No excess energy = no storage. If you could store anything you would have excess energy.
that's not universally true. what are your muscles going to replenish themselves with if you're neglecting your protein intake because you're eating too many carbs? in the situation you're proposing, you're working with a limited number of calories (maintenance), so if you're eating too many carbs then it's at the expense of your protein intake, and thus your muscle mass. your body composition can change while you're maintaining your weight, you know, the whole "abs are made in the kitchen" deal. diet is very important, and the most detrimental macronutrient to muscle mass is the carbohydrate (when eaten in excess, obviously. i'm not waging war on carbs)0 -
stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »lemonsnowdrop wrote: »OP, what you eat doesn't determine your BF% as long as you eat enough protein. Define "eat like ***."
Simple carbs/ starchy *kitten*/ sugary *kitten* will increase your BF%. You're wrong. There's a reason body builders drastically reduce their carbohydrate intake when they're cutting.
It won't if you're not eating at a surplus.
yeah, it will. if you're not eating the right amount of protein to sustain your muscle mass then you'll lose it. and if you're only eating within your maintenance and you're eating too many carbs, then you can't possibly get enough protein. that, and many other factors. isn't this like a universally accepted given? an excess of carbs is like exactly what you need to avoid to get lean
No, no you don't. No excess energy = no storage. If you could store anything you would have excess energy.
that's not universally true. what are your muscles going to replenish themselves with if you're neglecting your protein intake because you're eating too many carbs? in the situation you're proposing, you're working with a limited number of calories (maintenance), so if you're eating too many carbs then it's at the expense of your protein intake, and thus your muscle mass. your body composition can change while you're maintaining your weight, you know, the whole "abs are made in the kitchen" deal. diet is very important, and the most detrimental macronutrient to muscle mass is the carbohydrate (when eaten in excess, obviously. i'm not waging war on carbs)
Actually, people who are bulking and increasing muscle mass eat more carbs than protein. You do need an adequate amount of protein to maintain muscle during a cut, but it's easy to hit that number in a deficit while still getting plenty of carbs. The reason bodybuilders cut carbs is because they are trying to cut water weight for a competition to make everything "pop," not because it costs them their muscle.0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »lemonsnowdrop wrote: »OP, what you eat doesn't determine your BF% as long as you eat enough protein. Define "eat like ***."
Simple carbs/ starchy *kitten*/ sugary *kitten* will increase your BF%. You're wrong. There's a reason body builders drastically reduce their carbohydrate intake when they're cutting.
No. De novo lipogenesis is rare in the absence of a calorie surplus. If you're maintaining your weight, you're not eating excess calories.Only when CHO energy intake exceeds TEE does DNL in liver or adipose tissue contribute significantly to the whole-body energy economy.*
Still, if your goal is to build lean muscle mass, you should increase your protein intake. The logical way to do this without consuming more calories would be to replace some carbohydrates with protein.
*source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10365981
At no point did I say that you can possibly maintain your weight when working at a caloric surplus. You can gain fat without gaining weight, that is if you are eating a maintenance rate of calories but your macros aren't such that you can sustain your muscle mass. If you're not maintaining your muscle mass but you are maintaining your weight then you're bound to be gaining fat (simultaneous to the muscle loss). I explained this better in my last post RE macros (ingesting more carbs, as you said, will be to the detriment of your protein intake assuming you're working within the constraints of maintenance calories)0 -
stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »lemonsnowdrop wrote: »OP, what you eat doesn't determine your BF% as long as you eat enough protein. Define "eat like ***."
Simple carbs/ starchy *kitten*/ sugary *kitten* will increase your BF%. You're wrong. There's a reason body builders drastically reduce their carbohydrate intake when they're cutting.
It won't if you're not eating at a surplus.
yeah, it will. if you're not eating the right amount of protein to sustain your muscle mass then you'll lose it. and if you're only eating within your maintenance and you're eating too many carbs, then you can't possibly get enough protein. that, and many other factors. isn't this like a universally accepted given? an excess of carbs is like exactly what you need to avoid to get lean
No, no you don't. No excess energy = no storage. If you could store anything you would have excess energy.
that's not universally true. what are your muscles going to replenish themselves with if you're neglecting your protein intake because you're eating too many carbs? in the situation you're proposing, you're working with a limited number of calories (maintenance), so if you're eating too many carbs then it's at the expense of your protein intake, and thus your muscle mass. your body composition can change while you're maintaining your weight, you know, the whole "abs are made in the kitchen" deal. diet is very important, and the most detrimental macronutrient to muscle mass is the carbohydrate (when eaten in excess, obviously. i'm not waging war on carbs)
Actually, people who are bulking and increasing muscle mass eat more carbs than protein. You do need an adequate amount of protein to maintain muscle during a cut, but it's easy to hit that number in a deficit while still getting plenty of carbs. The reason bodybuilders cut carbs is because they are trying to cut water weight for a competition to make everything "pop," not because it costs them their muscle.
I wasn't talking about bulking. I wasn't saying that bodybuilders cut carbs during cutting because carbs are to the detriment of their muscle mass (I said that about non-builders who aren't cutting, in a completely post, and I was talking about people who are maintaining their weight, not working at a surplus or deficit). I was saying that bodybuilders cut carbs because carbs contribute more heavily than anything else to fat stores. I beg to differ, while some body builders do that, most do it to get leaner because they know that the quickest way to do that is to temporarily limit their carbohydrate consumption.0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »lemonsnowdrop wrote: »OP, what you eat doesn't determine your BF% as long as you eat enough protein. Define "eat like ***."
Simple carbs/ starchy *kitten*/ sugary *kitten* will increase your BF%. You're wrong. There's a reason body builders drastically reduce their carbohydrate intake when they're cutting.
No. De novo lipogenesis is rare in the absence of a calorie surplus. If you're maintaining your weight, you're not eating excess calories.Only when CHO energy intake exceeds TEE does DNL in liver or adipose tissue contribute significantly to the whole-body energy economy.*
Still, if your goal is to build lean muscle mass, you should increase your protein intake. The logical way to do this without consuming more calories would be to replace some carbohydrates with protein.
*source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10365981
DNL has to do with being "carb loaded" for lack of a better term. When your glycogen stores are full and you consume more carbs. This can be true in a calorie deficit. But over all it doesn't even matter.
No, I was addressing her implied assertion that she'd store carbs as fat at energy balance.
0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »lemonsnowdrop wrote: »OP, what you eat doesn't determine your BF% as long as you eat enough protein. Define "eat like ***."
Simple carbs/ starchy *kitten*/ sugary *kitten* will increase your BF%. You're wrong. There's a reason body builders drastically reduce their carbohydrate intake when they're cutting.
No. De novo lipogenesis is rare in the absence of a calorie surplus. If you're maintaining your weight, you're not eating excess calories.Only when CHO energy intake exceeds TEE does DNL in liver or adipose tissue contribute significantly to the whole-body energy economy.*
Still, if your goal is to build lean muscle mass, you should increase your protein intake. The logical way to do this without consuming more calories would be to replace some carbohydrates with protein.
*source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10365981
At no point did I say that you can possibly maintain your weight when working at a caloric surplus. You can gain fat without gaining weight, that is if you are eating a maintenance rate of calories but your macros aren't such that you can sustain your muscle mass. If you're not maintaining your muscle mass but you are maintaining your weight then you're bound to be gaining fat (simultaneous to the muscle loss). I explained this better in my last post RE macros (ingesting more carbs, as you said, will be to the detriment of your protein intake assuming you're working within the constraints of maintenance calories)
No, that's not how it works. If you're eating enough calories to maintain your weight, your muscle doesn't just waste away, and you don't just magically gain fat because you're eating carbs.
People who are bulking eat a ridiculous amount of carbs in addition to protein.
Carbs are not stored as fat in the absence of a caloric surplus. They're the body's favorite source of immediate use energy.
0 -
stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »lemonsnowdrop wrote: »OP, what you eat doesn't determine your BF% as long as you eat enough protein. Define "eat like ***."
Simple carbs/ starchy *kitten*/ sugary *kitten* will increase your BF%. You're wrong. There's a reason body builders drastically reduce their carbohydrate intake when they're cutting.
It won't if you're not eating at a surplus.
yeah, it will. if you're not eating the right amount of protein to sustain your muscle mass then you'll lose it. and if you're only eating within your maintenance and you're eating too many carbs, then you can't possibly get enough protein. that, and many other factors. isn't this like a universally accepted given? an excess of carbs is like exactly what you need to avoid to get lean
No, no you don't. No excess energy = no storage. If you could store anything you would have excess energy.
that's not universally true. what are your muscles going to replenish themselves with if you're neglecting your protein intake because you're eating too many carbs? in the situation you're proposing, you're working with a limited number of calories (maintenance), so if you're eating too many carbs then it's at the expense of your protein intake, and thus your muscle mass. your body composition can change while you're maintaining your weight, you know, the whole "abs are made in the kitchen" deal. diet is very important, and the most detrimental macronutrient to muscle mass is the carbohydrate (when eaten in excess, obviously. i'm not waging war on carbs)
Actually, people who are bulking and increasing muscle mass eat more carbs than protein. You do need an adequate amount of protein to maintain muscle during a cut, but it's easy to hit that number in a deficit while still getting plenty of carbs. The reason bodybuilders cut carbs is because they are trying to cut water weight for a competition to make everything "pop," not because it costs them their muscle.
I wasn't talking about bulking. I wasn't saying that bodybuilders cut carbs during cutting because carbs are to the detriment of their muscle mass (I said that about non-builders who aren't cutting, in a completely post, and I was talking about people who are maintaining their weight, not working at a surplus or deficit). I was saying that bodybuilders cut carbs because carbs contribute more heavily than anything else to fat stores. I beg to differ, while some body builders do that, most do it to get leaner because they know that the quickest way to do that is to temporarily limit their carbohydrate consumption.
Excess calories contribute to fat stores, not one specific macro. I'm also curious about your claims about gaining fat and losing muscle at maintenance calories based on macros - could you link to study about that?0 -
If you are not eating enough protein your body will dip into your muscles as a protein store. Muscle waste can occur in the absence of a caloric deficit. What do you suppose will replace it if you're not eating any protein but eating enough in terms of calories, carbs and fat to maintain your weight?
I said nothing about bulking, I don't understand why I would have done, doesn't support my argument at all (nor does it bear any relevance to it).0 -
yeah, it's to do with muscle protein synthesis (the process that maintains your muscle mass). when you're not eating enough protein, the process is much less efficient and results in muscle wasting.
http://www.livestrong.com/article/462651-will-you-lose-muscle-if-you-dont-eat-enough-protein-lift-weights/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24477298
the former (or at least, the introductory part of the former) explains the effect of muscle protein synthesis on muscle mass, the latter explains the link between the consumption (or lack thereof) of protein on muscle protein synthesis.
P.S. sorry, i know livestrong isn't really a reputable source, but it does have some nice references.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393K Introduce Yourself
- 43.7K Getting Started
- 260.1K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.8K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 415 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.9K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.6K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.5K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions