Re: Fat as Proportion of Weight Lost

August 19, 2004

Having just had my semi-annual measurement session, this is a subject I have to comment on. First some background: when I began CR (November, '02) I weighed 157. For Christmas that year, my wife gave me five sessions with her personal trainer. I've been working with him since January '03, regularly twice per week.

The first time he measured my body fat was July '03. At that time, my bf percentage was 18.3% (my weight was 146. Lost 11 pounds in eight months, from start.) Six months later (January 04), when measured again, my body fat was down to 13.1% and my weight was 135. Steady progress. Most recently (July '04) my weight had plateaued, staying at 135 but my body fat was down to 11.1%.

I was somewhat disappointed that my body fat percentage had not gone down more, given the twice weekly workouts (strength training w/ free weights & machines). I also do cardio (walking and/or jogging) 2-3 times per week. This prompted a long discussion with my trainer. He pointed out, correctly, that it was much more difficult to lose fat when there is less fat to lose. Put another way, as the total amount of body fat is reduced, any weight lost will be more lean body mass simply because there is less fat to lose.

His advice to me, if I wanted to get my percentage of body fat even lower, was to do what body builders do, which is to "bulk up" then "lean down." This would mean gaining a few pounds by eating more, then strictly controlling my diet to lose the weight gained while keeping the increased muscle. The weight lost in this process would be a higher percentage of fat than simply losing more weight from my present level. I told him, frankly, that eating more and gaining weight was out of the question.

We compromised. He recommended that I add a protein shake daily to increase my total protein intake while maintaining my present CRON diet. I accepted this solution, and dutifully trotted off to GNC and purchased a canister of whey protein powder. (I chose the chocolate flavor, in light of recent discussions about being able to tolerate the flavor of whey drinks. No problem with the taste.) The daily shake is 120 calories, but provides 23 grams of protein.

I will closely continue to monitor my weight, to insure that it does not increase. I won't know for six months whether my percentage of body fat has gone down, replaced by increased lean body mass (muscle). Meanwhile, all I have to go on is watching the amount of weight I lift increase. This is a crude indication of increased muscle mass, as "strength" can come from increased muscle efficiency as well as increased muscle mass. Either way, it is a kick to be able to press more than my body ways! Pretty cool for a 52 year old man!

Sorry for the long winded response.

Mark

-------------- Original message -------------- Hi folks:Further to this issue, it occurs to me that this can be calculated (maybe) from the WUSTL data. Unfortunately, they do not give weight and BF% for the subjects for both pre-CR and at established CR weight.But they do give data for the subjects at CR weight and for the controls, who are supposed to represent pre-CR. If the controls are a good sample, representative of the CR subjects before they started CR, then we can calculate what proportion of the weight that was lost by the WUSTL CR subjects was fat (and how much was LBM).The number based on those data is that 66% was fat; 34% LBM. Since it seems I have lost about 80% fat so far, this does suggest the proportion of fat lost will decline as fat reserves decline, as Tony had suggested. I will have a reasonably decent number for myself when I eventually get down to established CR weight, which likely will not be for another twelve months.The number for 'percentage of weight lost that is fat' is important if one wishes to figure out ahead of time what one's weight will be at whatever body fat number one is aiming for. (It cannot be calculated without it). In my case, using the 66% number, after starting at what I used to believe was my ideal weight of 172 pounds (WC/H = 0.50; BF% = 20.4) ............. at 10% body fat I will weigh ~139 pounds; and at 7% BF about 132 pounds. Difficult to believe. I haven't weighed that much since I was 14!Rodney.

August 19, 2004

Hi Mark:

Those are interesting data. It remains to be seen what happens in

the future, but the data you show certainly do not support the

proposition that the proportion of fat lost declines as fat reserves

decline.

According to those data, in dropping from 146 to 135, 82.1% of the

weight you lost was fat. Which is very consistent with what little

other data I have seen.

Then, in the period when your weight was stable at 135 you lost fat

and GAINED LBM. So the proportion of weight lost (zero) that was fat

(2.7 pounds of fat lost, 2.7 pounds of LBM gained) exceeded 100% by a

substantial margin - infinite, theoretically.

One of the problems with these numbers (at least in my case) is the

method of measurement. In the last three weeks I have measured my

BF% using the US Navy method daily at the same time each day - 7 am.

There is a three point range in my BF% calculated this way, while my

weight has been stable. The reason for the variation is that the

calculation is heavily dependent on the 'abdomen minus neck' (A-N)

measurement. Not infrequently one of these measurements goes one way

while the other goes the other. This has yielded a 1.5 " variation in

A-N. This translates into a three point fluctuation in calculated

BF% - in my case in the past few weeks a range from 15.6% to 18.6%.

The range was even greater (one calculation of 14.3%) before I got my

measuring technique carefully organized to be sure I was doing it

exactly the same each day.

When one juggles the numbers it becomes apparent that such variations

in the BF% number cause large (apparent) variations in the calculated

proportion of weight lost that is fat.

So it would be interesting to know what method your personal trainer

uses to measure your body fat. As I understand it (not very well)

DEXA and immersion are the least unreliable.

Rodney.

> Having just had my semi-annual measurement session, this is a

subject I have to comment on. First some background: when I began CR

(November, '02) I weighed 157. For Christmas that year, my wife gave

me five sessions with her personal trainer. I've been working with

him since January '03, regularly twice per week.

>

> The first time he measured my body fat was July '03. At that time,

my bf percentage was 18.3% (my weight was 146. Lost 11 pounds in

eight months, from start.) Six months later (January 04), when

measured again, my body fat was down to 13.1% and my weight was 135.

Steady progress. Most recently (July '04) my weight had plateaued,

staying at 135 but my body fat was down to 11.1%.

>

> I was somewhat disappointed that my body fat percentage had not

gone down more, given the twice weekly workouts (strength training w/

free weights & machines). I also do cardio (walking and/or jogging) 2-

3 times per week. This prompted a long discussion with my trainer. He

pointed out, correctly, that it was much more difficult to lose fat

when there is less fat to lose. Put another way, as the total amount

of body fat is reduced, any weight lost will be more lean body mass

simply because there is less fat to lose.

>

> His advice to me, if I wanted to get my percentage of body fat even

lower, was to do what body builders do, which is to " bulk up "

then " lean down. " This would mean gaining a few pounds by eating

more, then strictly controlling my diet to lose the weight gained

while keeping the increased muscle. The weight lost in this process

would be a higher percentage of fat than simply losing more weight

from my present level. I told him, frankly, that eating more and

gaining weight was out of the question.

>

> We compromised. He recommended that I add a protein shake daily to

increase my total protein intake while maintaining my present CRON

diet. I accepted this solution, and dutifully trotted off to GNC and

purchased a canister of whey protein powder. (I chose the chocolate

flavor, in light of recent discussions about being able to tolerate

the flavor of whey drinks. No problem with the taste.) The daily

shake is 120 calories, but provides 23 grams of protein.

>

> I will closely continue to monitor my weight, to insure that it

does not increase. I won't know for six months whether my percentage

of body fat has gone down, replaced by increased lean body mass

(muscle). Meanwhile, all I have to go on is watching the amount of

weight I lift increase. This is a crude indication of increased

muscle mass, as " strength " can come from increased muscle efficiency

as well as increased muscle mass. Either way, it is a kick to be able

to press more than my body ways! Pretty cool for a 52 year old man!

>

> Sorry for the long winded response.

>

> Mark

>

> -------------- Original message --------------

> Hi folks:

>

> Further to this issue, it occurs to me that this can be calculated

> (maybe) from the WUSTL data. Unfortunately, they do not give weight

> and BF% for the subjects for both pre-CR and at established CR

weight.

>

> But they do give data for the subjects at CR weight and for the

> controls, who are supposed to represent pre-CR. If the controls are

> a good sample, representative of the CR subjects before they

started

> CR, then we can calculate what proportion of the weight that was

lost

> by the WUSTL CR subjects was fat (and how much was LBM).

>

> The number based on those data is that 66% was fat; 34% LBM. Since

> it seems I have lost about 80% fat so far, this does suggest the

> proportion of fat lost will decline as fat reserves decline, as

Tony

> had suggested. I will have a reasonably decent number for myself

> when I eventually get down to established CR weight, which likely

> will not be for another twelve months.

>

> The number for 'percentage of weight lost that is fat' is important

> if one wishes to figure out ahead of time what one's weight will be

> at whatever body fat number one is aiming for. (It cannot be

> calculated without it). In my case, using the 66% number, after

> starting at what I used to believe was my ideal weight of 172

pounds

> (WC/H = 0.50; BF% = 20.4) ............. at 10% body fat I will

> weigh ~139 pounds; and at 7% BF about 132 pounds. Difficult to

> believe. I haven't weighed that much since I was 14!

>

> Rodney.

>

August 19, 2004

Hi Mark:

One additional point. The 17 subjects of the WUSTL study had BF%s of

7% I seem to remember. Yet none of them reported having to resort

to 'special effects' in order to get down there. It seems all they

had to do was restrict their calories, with ON, and wait for the fat

to drop.

Not that I know anything about your situation, but why would you be

different from the WUSTL subjects?

Or is there reason to suppose they had to do more than simply a CRON

diet?