Body Fat Percentage and Age

Sued0nim
Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
edited November 21 in Health and Weight Loss
So does anybody know why acceptable body fat % increases as you get older? Is it comparitive to peer group rather than by health signs?

I posted this image in another thread and suddenly I'm wondering

Ideal-Body-Fat-Percentage-Chart3.jpg

Replies

  • ExRelaySprinter
    ExRelaySprinter Posts: 874 Member
    edited July 2015
    Funny you should post this, as i was thinking the very same thing the other day.
    I was speaking to one of my MFP Friends (who is 20 years younger than me) and we were comparing our Body Fat percentages.
    I done a bit of Googling and found this link: http://www.builtlean.com/2012/09/24/body-fat-percentage-men-women/

    Basically it says about BF and age:
    "Most body fat measurement devices will reflect higher body fat levels as the age increases. For example, a 20 year old man and a 50 year old man may have the same subcutaneous body fat measurement (fat under the skin), but the 20 year old may be 15% and the 50 year old will be at 20%. As we age, fat around the organs (visceral) and within muscle (intramuscular) tends to increase and most formulas take this into account".
  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    ExRelaySprinter wrote: »
    Funny you should post this, as i was thinking the very same thing the other day.
    I was speaking to one of my MFP Friends (who is 20 years younger then me) and we were comparing our Body Fat percentages.
    I done a bit of Googling and found this link: http://www.builtlean.com/2012/09/24/body-fat-percentage-men-women/

    Basically it says about BF and age:
    "Most body fat measurement devices will reflect higher body fat levels as the age increases. For example, a 20 year old man and a 50 year old man may have the same subcutaneous body fat measurement (fat under the skin), but the 20 year old may be 15% and the 50 year old will be at 20%. As we age, fat around the organs (visceral) and within muscle (intramuscular) tends to increase and most formulas take this into account".

    Thanks for that

    but .. that seems to make it worse

    As we age the image says a higher BF% is acceptable, but the text above says visceral fat (the more worrying) increases as we age so shouldn't acceptable BF% drop as we age not rise?

    or am I missing something?
  • ExRelaySprinter
    ExRelaySprinter Posts: 874 Member
    edited July 2015
    I'm thinking that it means due to our visceral fat increasing anyway, it is more apparent that older people will have more body fat.
    Maybe "acceptable" is the wrong word to use.
  • timtakel
    timtakel Posts: 50 Member
    The problem is, that you cant change it. While it would be better to have less, you can't change the fact.
  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    edited July 2015
    timtakel wrote: »
    The problem is, that you cant change it. While it would be better to have less, you can't change the fact.

    I don't understand what you mean by that

    of course anybody can have a lower body fat % - calorie control alongside progressive resistance work .. that's not age reliant

    My BF is around 23-24% currently and at 48 that puts me in the lean category according to that chart, whereas 3 years ago I'd have been 'ideal' .. so I'm just wondering why ..

    if that chart is based on population measures rather than health predictors, I don't get the point of it .. if I'm lean within my age group but the majority of my age group are carrying too much visceral fat for optimal health, how does that help me?
  • timtakel
    timtakel Posts: 50 Member
    Inner body fat will accumulate with age, even if you are fit and healthy - you can't change it. That's why the "normal" amount of fat is rising.
  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    timtakel wrote: »
    Inner body fat will accumulate with age, even if you are fit and healthy - you can't change it. That's why the "normal" amount of fat is rising.

    Why not?
  • rybo
    rybo Posts: 5,424 Member
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    timtakel wrote: »
    Inner body fat will accumulate with age, even if you are fit and healthy - you can't change it. That's why the "normal" amount of fat is rising.

    Why not?

    Biology
  • LumberJacck
    LumberJacck Posts: 559 Member
    edited July 2015
    deleted...
  • healthygreek
    healthygreek Posts: 2,137 Member
    Maybe a bit more body fat is protective as we grow older. like an older person is more suceptable to illness and it's good to have a bit more fat to sustain you when your appetite decreases due to illness.
  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    rybo wrote: »
    rabbitjb wrote: »
    timtakel wrote: »
    Inner body fat will accumulate with age, even if you are fit and healthy - you can't change it. That's why the "normal" amount of fat is rising.

    Why not?

    Biology

    How does age impact on the amount of fat stored in cells around the organs? its not like we create more adipose cells as we age is it? I thought that was fixed .. maybe it's the proportion of fat?

    But say you're at a healthy weight and follow a resistance programme to preserve / increase muscle mass do you maintain that it's 'biology' and not lifestyle?

    any source for this?
  • ExRelaySprinter
    ExRelaySprinter Posts: 874 Member
    edited July 2015
    @rabbitjb Well this study (from the link below) showed that weight training can reduce visceral fat from certain areas of the body.

    More info here:

    http://www.precisionnutrition.com/visceral-fat-location
  • PeachyCarol
    PeachyCarol Posts: 8,029 Member
    edited July 2015
    healthygreek wrote: »
    Maybe a bit more body fat is protective as we grow older. like an older person is more suceptable to illness and it's good to have a bit more fat to sustain you when your appetite decreases due to illness.

    That was my vague take-away from an in-depth report I saw on aging a while back. My memory is terrible, though. I realize saying that is ironic in a thread on aging.

  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    PeachyCarol wrote: »
    healthygreek wrote: »
    Maybe a bit more body fat is protective as we grow older. like an older person is more suceptable to illness and it's good to have a bit more fat to sustain you when your appetite decreases due to illness.

    That was my vague take-away from an in-depth report I saw on aging a while back. My memory is terrible, though.

    age huh? :bigsmile:
  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    ExRelaySprinter wrote: »
    @rabbitjb Well this study (from the link below) showed that weight training can reduce visceral fat from certain areas of the body.

    More info here:

    http://www.precisionnutrition.com/visceral-fat-location

    @ExRelaySprinter that was an interesting read .. thank you
  • earlnabby
    earlnabby Posts: 8,171 Member
    edited July 2015
    healthygreek wrote: »
    Maybe a bit more body fat is protective as we grow older. like an older person is more suceptable to illness and it's good to have a bit more fat to sustain you when your appetite decreases due to illness.

    Let me search around and see if I can find it, but I remember a year or two ago reading a study of older women (age 70+) which said that those with a little body fat were healthier than those with less as well as those who were overweight. It helped keep the bones stronger and less brittle and kept the systems warmer and provided continuous energy which allowed their bodies to function better (which fits with your comment about having stores to sustain and heal better during illness). I remember my Mom bringing it up because she had dropped about 10 lb from her normal adult weight (5'2" lady who was in the low 120's and had dropped to 108 which is low for her, even though she has shrunk to under 5". She is also just shy of 95 years old now). She has put on a couple of pounds and is now 112.

  • pollypocket1021
    pollypocket1021 Posts: 533 Member
    edited July 2015
    healthygreek wrote: »
    Maybe a bit more body fat is protective as we grow older. like an older person is more suceptable to illness and it's good to have a bit more fat to sustain you when your appetite decreases due to illness.

    Not quite.

    Higher percentage of visceral fat, at any age, is associated with an increase in all cause morbidity and mortality and increases insulin resistance.

    We have some clues as to why visceral (and subcutaneous) fat increases with age. Aromatase inhibitors in men will cause an increase in subcutaneous fat. Women with PCOS have a tendency to carry fat intraperitoneally, compared to women without PCOS. Those trends shed some light of some of the changes that occur with age that portend an increase in visceral fat.

    I don't have time to cite sources at this point, but I will come back to do so.
  • mitch16
    mitch16 Posts: 2,113 Member
    The journal article I found says that it's related to weight gain rather a true age-related increase...

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8440839

    However, if age-related muscle loss does occur, even without weight gain you would see a shift from lean body mass to higher body fat as a percentage of total mass.
  • Timorous_Beastie
    Timorous_Beastie Posts: 595 Member
    From a pure vanity standpoint, there's a quote attributed to Catherine Deneuve that goes something like, "After a certain age, you have to chose between your fanny* and your face."

    * NOT the UK meaning of fanny, I hope. ;)

    I'd rather have slightly higher BF and not have the face of the Crypt Keeper. I'm not saying that all (even any) more "mature" women with low BF have old faces, just that mine tends to look drawn when my BF gets below 20. But I also look like crap above 30.
  • bubaluboo
    bubaluboo Posts: 2,098 Member
    edited July 2015
    My impression is that this is based on the theory that if someone maintains there fitness at a certain level from say 20s to 40s they would automatically have a higher BF% at the end due to age related loss of LBM, Therefore you could be very fit at 20 and equally fit at 40 but have a higher BF%. In order to keep the same %BF you'd have to up your game over the years and perhaps be fitter than previously?

    Also, looking at how perfectly symmetrically the graphs are it looks to me like ideal, slim, fit are based on normal distribution for each age band. A normal distribution for each age group may have been drawn up so what is considered 'average' in 20s or in 40s etc is determined and then everything else added or deducted from that. Thus everything gets skewed according to the average BF at that age group. There would be in my opinion serious flaws in that approach but since everything follows the trend of the average BF% it seems highly likely.
  • yopeeps025
    yopeeps025 Posts: 8,680 Member
    Sounds like they assume the older you get the less active you become.
  • professionalHobbyist
    professionalHobbyist Posts: 1,316 Member
    Going all controversial...

    Lower carb fasted long term cardio does increase your mitochondrial capacity and fat for fuel efficiency.

    Please google this yourself before telling me it is not true. No desire to argue with MFP armchair experts.

    You can get leaner. Calorie deficit and increased capacity to burn body fat as fuel will lean you out.

    No magic, just work.


  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    professionalHobbyist wrote: »
    Going all controversial...

    Lower carb fasted long term cardio does increase your mitochondrial capacity and fat for fuel efficiency.

    Please google this yourself before telling me it is not true. No desire to argue with MFP armchair experts.

    You can get leaner. Calorie deficit and increased capacity to burn body fat as fuel will lean you out.

    No magic, just work.


    oh sweet irony
  • Liftng4Lis
    Liftng4Lis Posts: 15,151 Member
    professionalHobbyist wrote: »
    Going all controversial...

    Lower carb fasted long term cardio does increase your mitochondrial capacity and fat for fuel efficiency.

    Please google this yourself before telling me it is not true. No desire to argue with MFP armchair experts.

    You can get leaner. Calorie deficit and increased capacity to burn body fat as fuel will lean you out.

    No magic, just work.


    No thanks.

    OP, I'm going to go with it's due to weight gain. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8440839
  • ExRelaySprinter
    ExRelaySprinter Posts: 874 Member
    edited July 2015
    Timorous_Beastie wrote: »
    From a pure vanity standpoint, there's a quote attributed to Catherine Deneuve that goes something like, "After a certain age, you have to chose between your fanny* and your face."

    I'd rather have slightly higher BF and not have the face of the Crypt Keeper.

    Yes, exactly. Lol
    This is one of the reasons i wouldn't want to lose too much weight or a lot more body fat.
    It's good to find a nice balance.
  • discretekim
    discretekim Posts: 314 Member
    I didn't read all the responses. But my thought is you lose muscle and bone as you age, so what replaces it.
  • nvmomketo
    nvmomketo Posts: 12,019 Member
    I'm guessing this is one of those things that they changed to fit society and not because it is actually true - sort of like how clothing sizes have changed to fit our fatter society. Anyway, according to that chart, for my age I am ideal.... um no. I am 5'8", 174 lbs and I can feel my back jiggle when I run. I am far from ideal, about 30-40lbs from ideal (depending on muscle changes).

    I think the line should be much more vertical. JMO
  • mitch16
    mitch16 Posts: 2,113 Member
    What I would really love to see is this chart layered over the height/weight charts (kind of like the ones the pediatrician uses for children)--so much more useful than a BMI chart.

    Which reminds me--I really need to get my body fat % checked now that I'm close to maintaining...
This discussion has been closed.

Categories