how did you lose the back fat?
Options
Replies
-
LOL you misunderstood. I said if you build new lean muscle under the fat in OPs problem area that already sticks out now because of fat would sick out even more if she built new muscle underneith.
I don't think that's necessarily true. Maybe it depends on the individual rate of muscle gain/fat loss for a particular person.
I have a good amount of fat on my upper arms, thighs and calves, and since starting cardio and strength training 3 months ago, I have lost barely any inches in those three areas, but I have lost quite a few inches on my waist. And my arms and calf muscles look a lot more refined, so I can only assume that I lost enough fat and built enough muscle to show a visible difference of composition, without the size of those areas changing all that much.
"but I have lost quite a few inches on my waist. And my arms and calf muscles look a lot more refined"
Thats because you are burning fat using a weight loss deit strip the fat = more muscle definition if you have enough muscle to define that is.... Now if you were on a bulking diet as I was saying to gain more lean muscle mass then yes you would become bulky if you are already fat.
But, if I was losing muscle AND fat because I was eating in a caloric deficit, then wouldn't I lose inches in that area as well?
Sure but how does that help the op and the question at hand??
Thats because you are burning fat using a weight loss deit strip the fat = more muscle definition if you have enough muscle to define that is.... Now if you were on a bulking diet as I was saying to gain more lean muscle mass then yes you would become bulky if you are already fat.
Well, how do YOUR posts help the OP? They are not on a bulking diet, you're the one who brought it up out of nowhere :flowerforyou:0 -
LOL you misunderstood. I said if you build new lean muscle under the fat in OPs problem area that already sticks out now because of fat would sick out even more if she built new muscle underneith.
I don't think that's necessarily true. Maybe it depends on the individual rate of muscle gain/fat loss for a particular person.
I have a good amount of fat on my upper arms, thighs and calves, and since starting cardio and strength training 3 months ago, I have lost barely any inches in those three areas, but I have lost quite a few inches on my waist. And my arms and calf muscles look a lot more refined, so I can only assume that I lost enough fat and built enough muscle to show a visible difference of composition, without the size of those areas changing all that much.
"but I have lost quite a few inches on my waist. And my arms and calf muscles look a lot more refined"
Thats because you are burning fat using a weight loss deit strip the fat = more muscle definition if you have enough muscle to define that is.... Now if you were on a bulking diet as I was saying to gain more lean muscle mass then yes you would become bulky if you are already fat.
But, if I was losing muscle AND fat because I was eating in a caloric deficit, then wouldn't I lose inches in that area as well?
Sure but how does that help the op and the question at hand??
Thats because you are burning fat using a weight loss deit strip the fat = more muscle definition if you have enough muscle to define that is.... Now if you were on a bulking diet as I was saying to gain more lean muscle mass then yes you would become bulky if you are already fat.
Well, how do YOUR posts help the OP? They are not on a bulking diet, you're the one who brought it up out of nowhere :flowerforyou:
Just was answering another post from some one else then you responded.
Op wants to lose fat around the back but wants to gain muscle. Well you simply lose fat and some muscle tissue by calorie restricted diet. You gain muscle on surplus this is saying you have enough protein in your diet.0 -
To the OP I have been doing 6 days a week of Insanity and even though the scales were dropping I didn't really look any different (hour glass figure, I tend to evenly lose fat so shape stays the same but takes longer to notice clothes sizing difference) BUT I was amazed to see that my back has been the most noticeable place that the fat has gone. In 6 weeks I already have muscle definition across my back and shoulders and when I arch my back those big fat folds below the bra strap are GONE!!!!!
I think everyone loses weight differently, but for me this has been the only thing to ever make such a noticeable difference. Plus even though I have a fair bit more fat to lose I can feel all the muscles are very firm all over and I know there is a hot little body under there just screaming to be shown off!0 -
You can't spot reduce fat. Your body will lose the fat where it wants to. So just keep working on weight loss, and it should come off with time.0
-
I read once that fat goes on in layers like an onion. Seriously, it did say that. Since fat goes on in layers, it goes off in layers as well. Each of us have our own layering system. Unfortunately for me, the last place to gain is my bust, therefore, the first place I lose is of course the same.
Muscle not only weighs more than fat, it also helps to boost your metabolism and burn off fat more efficiently. Resistance training in addition to cardio is the way to go, that and a reasonable diet.0 -
LOL you misunderstood. I said if you build new lean muscle under the fat in OPs problem area that already sticks out now because of fat would sick out even more if she built new muscle underneith.
I don't think that's necessarily true. Maybe it depends on the individual rate of muscle gain/fat loss for a particular person.
I have a good amount of fat on my upper arms, thighs and calves, and since starting cardio and strength training 3 months ago, I have lost barely any inches in those three areas, but I have lost quite a few inches on my waist. And my arms and calf muscles look a lot more refined, so I can only assume that I lost enough fat and built enough muscle to show a visible difference of composition, without the size of those areas changing all that much.
"but I have lost quite a few inches on my waist. And my arms and calf muscles look a lot more refined"
Thats because you are burning fat using a weight loss deit strip the fat = more muscle definition if you have enough muscle to define that is.... Now if you were on a bulking diet as I was saying to gain more lean muscle mass then yes you would become bulky if you are already fat.
But, if I was losing muscle AND fat because I was eating in a caloric deficit, then wouldn't I lose inches in that area as well?
Sure but how does that help the op and the question at hand??
Thats because you are burning fat using a weight loss deit strip the fat = more muscle definition if you have enough muscle to define that is.... Now if you were on a bulking diet as I was saying to gain more lean muscle mass then yes you would become bulky if you are already fat.
Well, how do YOUR posts help the OP? They are not on a bulking diet, you're the one who brought it up out of nowhere :flowerforyou:
Just was answering another post from some one else then you responded.
Op wants to lose fat around the back but wants to gain muscle. Well you simply lose fat and some muscle tissue by calorie restricted diet. You gain muscle on surplus this is saying you have enough protein in your diet.
I think what cloudbustr is trying to say is that it sounds like you're trying to discourage the OP from lifting weights, when it sounds like that's what they want to do. I just posted a link of a bodybuilder with 25 years of experience arguing 'against' the idea of eating a calorie surplus to gain muscle unless you're a professional bodybuilder who's maximized their muscular potential.0 -
bump0
-
Back to the OP. Here's another video of Steve answering questions from 'James' about a month ago, one of which being specifically if you can buid muscle while losing fat.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sL37laG2zDs
I'll give you three guesses who 'James' is.0 -
Dead lifts will help!0
-
Bump for later0
-
LOL you misunderstood. I said if you build new lean muscle under the fat in OPs problem area that already sticks out now because of fat would sick out even more if she built new muscle underneith.
I don't think that's necessarily true. Maybe it depends on the individual rate of muscle gain/fat loss for a particular person.
I have a good amount of fat on my upper arms, thighs and calves, and since starting cardio and strength training 3 months ago, I have lost barely any inches in those three areas, but I have lost quite a few inches on my waist. And my arms and calf muscles look a lot more refined, so I can only assume that I lost enough fat and built enough muscle to show a visible difference of composition, without the size of those areas changing all that much.
"but I have lost quite a few inches on my waist. And my arms and calf muscles look a lot more refined"
Thats because you are burning fat using a weight loss deit strip the fat = more muscle definition if you have enough muscle to define that is.... Now if you were on a bulking diet as I was saying to gain more lean muscle mass then yes you would become bulky if you are already fat.
But, if I was losing muscle AND fat because I was eating in a caloric deficit, then wouldn't I lose inches in that area as well?
Sure but how does that help the op and the question at hand??
Thats because you are burning fat using a weight loss deit strip the fat = more muscle definition if you have enough muscle to define that is.... Now if you were on a bulking diet as I was saying to gain more lean muscle mass then yes you would become bulky if you are already fat.
Well, how do YOUR posts help the OP? They are not on a bulking diet, you're the one who brought it up out of nowhere :flowerforyou:
Just was answering another post from some one else then you responded.
Op wants to lose fat around the back but wants to gain muscle. Well you simply lose fat and some muscle tissue by calorie restricted diet. You gain muscle on surplus this is saying you have enough protein in your diet.
I think what cloudbustr is trying to say is that it sounds like you're trying to discourage the OP from lifting weights, when it sounds like that's what they want to do. I just posted a link of a bodybuilder with 25 years of experience arguing 'against' the idea of eating a calorie surplus to gain muscle unless you're a professional bodybuilder who's maximized their muscular potential.
Not at all and
And
Lyle McDonald
"Since I’m talking about body fat, I might as well address another very common cause of poor muscle gain and that’s trainees who fear putting on even an ounce of body fat. They’ll deliberately keep their calories low all the time and then wonder why they aren’t magically synthesizing muscle mass out of thin air. At this point, I’m not even including the folks who want to lose fat and gain muscle at the same time.
The simple physiological fact is that, to gain muscle, you have to provide not only the proper training stimulus, but also the building blocks for the new tissue. This means not only sufficient protein (see below) but also sufficient calories and energy. While it’s wonderful to hope that the energy to build new muscle will be pulled out of fat cells, the reality is that this rarely happens (there are some odd exceptions such as folks beginning a program, and those returning from a layoff)."
Read on.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/muscle-gain-mistakes.html
NSCA Essentials of Personal Training:
"Although Wheather clients can gain muscle and lose body fat simultaineously depends primarly on their level of training; however, it is unlikely that trained persons who already possess a relatively low percentage of body fat can achieve body mass reduction without losing some lean body mass"
and I POSTED this earlier .
"(among severely detrained couch potatoes) reverse the effect of disuse by adding a couple of pounds of muscle initially, but losing it during the ensuing weeks of -1000 calories per day dieting."
NSCA Essentials of Personal Training:
"For weight gain in the form of muscle mass, a combination of diet and progressive resistance training is essentual. How ever, genetic predispositionk, body type, and compliance determine the client's progress. Muscle tissue is approximately 70% water 22% protein and 8% fatty acids and glycogen. If all the extra calories consumed are used for muscle growth during resistance training, then about 2500 extra kilocalories are required for each 1-pound (0.45 kilogram) increase in lean tissue. The includes the energy needed for tissue assimilation as well as the energy expended during resistance training. Thus, 350 to 700 kcal above dailyl requirements would supply the the calories needed to support a 1 to 2 ound (0.49-to 0.9-kilogram) weekly gain in lean tissue as well as the energy requirements of the resistance training program."
To give you an idea what experts came up with NSCA E.o.T. read on
http://www.nsca-lift.org/nscapdf/download/Text_CPT.pdf0 -
the back is the last place anyone loses body fat.. to have a lean back is more impressive than a six pack for that reason.0
-
the back is the last place anyone loses body fat.. to have a lean back is more impressive than a six pack for that reason.
Well, my back is leaner than my belly, and I definitely had a back roll. So...I guess not always.0 -
I think it depends on body type, back fat was the first thing I started losing, don't ask me about my thighs and arms though. :P0
-
Just browsing...0
-
[/quote]
Just was answering another post from some one else then you responded.
Op wants to lose fat around the back but wants to gain muscle. Well you simply lose fat and some muscle tissue by calorie restricted diet. You gain muscle on surplus this is saying you have enough protein in your diet.
[/quote]
I think what cloudbustr is trying to say is that it sounds like you're trying to discourage the OP from lifting weights, when it sounds like that's what they want to do. I just posted a link of a bodybuilder with 25 years of experience arguing 'against' the idea of eating a calorie surplus to gain muscle unless you're a professional bodybuilder who's maximized their muscular potential.
[/quote]
Not at all and
And
Lyle McDonald
"Since I’m talking about body fat, I might as well address another very common cause of poor muscle gain and that’s trainees who fear putting on even an ounce of body fat. They’ll deliberately keep their calories low all the time and then wonder why they aren’t magically synthesizing muscle mass out of thin air. At this point, I’m not even including the folks who want to lose fat and gain muscle at the same time.
The simple physiological fact is that, to gain muscle, you have to provide not only the proper training stimulus, but also the building blocks for the new tissue. This means not only sufficient protein (see below) but also sufficient calories and energy. While it’s wonderful to hope that the energy to build new muscle will be pulled out of fat cells, the reality is that this rarely happens (there are some odd exceptions such as folks beginning a program, and those returning from a layoff)."
Read on.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/muscle-gain-mistakes.html
NSCA Essentials of persoanl training:
"Although Wheather clients can gain muscle and lose body fat simultaineously depends primarly on their level of training; however, it is unlikely that trained persons who already possess a relatively low percentage of body fat can achieve body mass reduction without losing some lean body mass"
But I said this earlier .
"(among severely detrained couch potatoes) reverse the effect of disuse by adding a couple of pounds of muscle initially, but losing it during the ensuing weeks of sub-1000 calories per day dieting."
[/quote]
***@Shock_Wave - From what I am reading on here it doesn't say you need a surplus of calories to gain muscle....To quote from above "This means not only sufficient protein (see below) but also sufficient calories and energy" Sufficient is different than a surplus...& at the end it says it is possible to add a couple of pounds initially but it lose it if eating under 1000 cals/day...This does NOT mean that if you are eating sufficiently for your weight, height, etc. that you will lose this muscle....I know this b/c I am lifting & gaining muscle (not body builders muscles) and eating the right calories for me on a daily basis but not a surplus at all but way above 1000 cals/day....I just had to get in here & say what I see....You don't need a SURPLUS of calories to gain muscle.
Or am I reading this all wrong?0 -
Shock_wave, a few exceptions, such as people who haven't trained before or haven't trained in a long time suddenly becomes a LOT of people in the company of a bunch of people trying to lose weight on a forum designed for those people who are those exceptions. Also, nobody mentioned how many calories they are eating, but I certainly hope for their sake that it's not sub-1000 calories. Heck, I couldn't even eat sub-2000 calories without having food dreams.0
-
Shock_wave, a few exceptions, such as people who haven't trained before or haven't trained in a long time suddenly becomes a LOT of people in the company of a bunch of people trying to lose weight on a forum designed for those people who are those exceptions. Also, nobody mentioned how many calories they are eating, but I certainly hope for their sake that it's not sub-1000 calories. Heck, I couldn't even eat sub-2000 calories without having food dreams.
OMG that was just sayin that you can lose that weight gained around a certain time by eating -1000 cals.
We dont know how much OP trains we dont know OP weight loss diet restrictions. We just know that she wanted to lose body fat around her back and she wanted to gain muscle so I wrote her simple ways to do this. OP can take it or leave it I dont care either way but it would work.
Also LOL at food dreams as those really make me hungry some thing fierce. :bigsmile:0 -
***@Shock_Wave - From what I am reading on here it doesn't say you need a surplus of calories to gain muscle....To quote from above "This means not only sufficient protein (see below) but also sufficient calories and energy" Sufficient is different than a surplus...& at the end it says it is possible to add a couple of pounds initially but it lose it if eating under 1000 cals/day...This does NOT mean that if you are eating sufficiently for your weight, height, etc. that you will lose this muscle....I know this b/c I am lifting & gaining muscle (not body builders muscles) and eating the right calories for me on a daily basis but not a surplus at all but way above 1000 cals/day....I just had to get in here & say what I see....You don't need a SURPLUS of calories to gain muscle.
Or am I reading this all wrong?
ok ok ready my edit I added NSCA For weight gain in the form of muscle mass. Also read the lyle link as he will explain more than just what I wrote up top.0 -
bump0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 400 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
- 988 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions