Page 1 of 2

Realistic timeframe

Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 1:49 pm
by gtjl2007
What is a realistic length of time for a 24 year old male to go from 14% bodyfat to 10%? I'm male, 165 lbs, and eating 2000 kcal a day. My maintenance calories is 2475 kcal. I do heavy lifting with a program similar to SS and do HIIT 2x a week.


Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 2:00 pm
by Rucifer
What's your carbohydrate intake? That's really the biggest factor.

Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 2:12 pm
by gtjl2007
Around 100g. I don't want to do a Keto diet, they are disgusting.

Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 3:07 pm
by frogbyte
How do you know you're at 14%?

Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 3:14 pm
by gtjl2007
I got a three point skinfold test done at a local gym and also used a bioimpedance device several times and took a rounded average. Both readings around 14%.

Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 10:54 am
by frogbyte
Neat. So if you're trying to lose body fat why keep your carbs so high?

Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 12:19 pm
by gtjl2007
I do HIIT and heavy lifting and I am scared of not having enough energy.

Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 12:37 pm
by robertscott
with regard to your carbs, there's a T-nation article about macro-nutrient cycling by Dr Clay Hyght, i can't remember what it's called, i think something like "How All Bodybuilders Should Eat" which you might want to check out

Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 1:04 pm
by frogbyte
I went basically overnight from eating FDA style, to eating paleo. Went from maybe 300g carb to probably around 40g now. Originally I was drinking V8 before workouts cause I was worried I needed some sugar, but I never noticed a dropoff when I finally stopped that.

Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 1:08 pm
by gtjl2007
I've read somewhere that eating low carb paleo/keto/anabolic diets will not give you enough energy for endurance sports such as MMA and Rugby. Is this true? If not then I will give it a try.

Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 3:09 pm
by frogbyte
I've never noticed any negative change, and I've kept detailed records for a while. In fact since going paleo I feel the best I ever have in my life, with more energy.

Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 4:20 pm
by Rucifer
He said he's eating 100g carbs. That's not too bad. I think that's not a bad amount to loose weight on if you're lifting heavy and doing some sort of endurance training. I usually eat anywhere from 80-150 (depending on the day) and made great strides losing fat. Course it also depends on where the 100g carbs are coming from too (hopefully mostly fruits and veggies). I try to get most of my carb intake other than fruits and veggies at breakfast. I'd recommend that for you as well.

Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 4:29 pm
by pdellorto
I've done MMA training (pre-fight, hard training) on a low-carb diet. It's easier on a higher-carb diet, but not significantly. If you're trying to cut fat, cutting out starchy carbs (except possibly immediately during and post workout) is an easy way to do it.

You do need to give it a few weeks to evaluate it. The first week or so on a lowered carb diet can be tough on your energy levels, but you adjust. If you do it more than once that adaptation window gets shorter, in my experience.

Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 10:31 am
by Kenny Croxdale
gtjl2007 wrote:I got a three point skinfold test done at a local gym and also used a bioimpedance device several times and took a rounded average. Both readings around 14%.

Bioimpedance devices are incredibly inaccurate.

The validity of how accurate the three point skinfold test is dependent on how good the technician is.

The majority of those who administer skinfold test don't know what they are doing.

A good technician will use a tape measure and pen when performing the skinfold test. The tape measure is used to find the precise site to calibrate.

The tester will measure at least twice to find the right spot. They then will mark the stop with the pen and use the skinfold caliepers.

If your technician followed this protocol and was experienced, you may well be 14%.

If your technician did NOT follow that protocol, they did NOT know what they are doing.

IF you are 14% body fat at 165 lbs, that means your Lean Body Mass is 141.9 (165 X 14% = 23.1 lb of fat. 165 - 23.1 = 141.9 lb of Lean Mass).

To get down to 10% body fat, you'll need to lose 7.3 lbs of fat. (141.9 lb Lean Body Mass divided by 90% = 157.33 lb body weight. 90% would mean you'd be 10% body fat).

The problem is that you rarely lose ONLY body fat when you lose weight. From what I've seen, if you do a good job, your weight loss will more than likely be 80% body fat and 20% muscle.

That means that your probably going to have to lower you body weight to 155 lbs.

With that said, what is the reason for wanting to drop down to 10% body fat?

Kenny Croxdale

Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 11:36 am
by gtjl2007
Kenny, I'm not sure if the PT who took the skinfold test was trained properly then because he didn't use a tape measure. The bioimpedance is probably inaccurate, but I keep it as a reference point to see if I'm losing fat vs muscle mass.

10% bodyfat is just a personal preference. I prefer being leaner but I do not really want to lose mass. Is there any way I can maintain my weight while reducing bodyfat? Will one of these anabolic/paleo diets help?

I've noticed I can continue making strength gains while dieting and losing about 0.5 to 1 lb a week. I'm having around 250g of protein a day to preserve muscle mass while in caloric defecit. If I'm losing some muscle, my CNS is still improving because I've only been lifting heavy weights for about 2 years with some periods of inconsistency.