Re: BMI/Body Fat Percentage

[Guest guest]

I am inclined to agree that %BF is a useful metric for setting a redline for

amount of restriction. While certainly easier to define and determine than

set point (whatever that may be). There is plenty of slop in popular

measurements of BF.

A little extra BF is useful as a safety margin should we become ill or

injured. Further with all the young folks getting interested in CR a little

extra BF could be useful for women of reproductive age and inclination. I

would expect degree of CR to have an impact on both male and female

fertility so if you are actively trying to have more children CR may be

counter productive.

I recall one very small (non-human) study where they identified a shorter

length of pregnancy term in females who were restricted before pregnancy.

Apparently nutrition before during and even after if nursing, can have an

impact on the child's development.

I do not claim expertise in these matters and offer my comments as a

personal opinion. If you are considering reproduction I would advise doing

some research yourself and drawing your own conclusions.

JR

PS.. My wrist measured just over 7 " , I always though I had big bones :-).

-----Original Message-----

From: Rodney [mailto:perspect1111@...]

Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2003 10:52 AM

Subject: [ ] BMI/Body Fat Percentage

Hi guys:

Another thought about BMI/body fat percentage:

I seem to remember Walford saying that under CRON body fat percentage

could be expected to drop eventually to about half its set point

value.

I also seem to remember he said it should definitely not drop below a

certain value - I think for males that may have been 6%, and higher

than that for females.

So, another factor to consider in deciding the appropriate end point

BMI (in addition to, or instead of, taking into account wrist

circumference) might be to permit it to fall to 18 to 20 *** only so

long as Walford's downside limit on body fat percentage is not

exceeded ***.

Any thoughts on this?

Rodney.

[Guest guest]

On Sat, 29 Nov 2003, john roberts wrote:

> I am inclined to agree that %BF is a useful metric for setting a redline for

> amount of restriction. While certainly easier to define and determine than

> set point (whatever that may be). There is plenty of slop in popular

> measurements of BF.

>

> A little extra BF is useful as a safety margin should we become ill or

> injured. Further with all the young folks getting interested in CR a little

> extra BF could be useful for women of reproductive age and inclination. I

> would expect degree of CR to have an impact on both male and female

> fertility so if you are actively trying to have more children CR may be

> counter productive.

>

> I recall one very small (non-human) study where they identified a shorter

> length of pregnancy term in females who were restricted before pregnancy.

> Apparently nutrition before during and even after if nursing, can have an

> impact on the child's development.

>

> I do not claim expertise in these matters and offer my comments as a

> personal opinion. If you are considering reproduction I would advise doing

> some research yourself and drawing your own conclusions.

>

> JR

>

> PS.. My wrist measured just over 7 " , I always though I had big bones :-).

I've only recently started working on this CRON thing. I'll be first to admit

I've had lapses.

Although avoiding dairy products to become a pseudo vegan I think has helped.

Lot of calories in those. Plus cutting out those yummy pasta dinners.

Anyway, what I find interesting is that I've always weighed around 140 to 150.

142 last I checked.

Punched that into the BMI chart, and that puts me well above the 18-20 range.

For a BMI of 19.7 I'd have to weigh 130 pounds.

Tried the frame size thing. Wrist of 6.5 " exactly which puts me at either small

or medium frame.

That places their " ideal " weight at 144-160.

However, when I've tried the body fat thing using the wildly inaccurate skin

fold measurement, I've tended to hover around 5%, even in the past.

So, having trouble working out a weight target. Should I even bother? Is 130

safe? Is there a fairly cheap method to work out my body fat level once n for

all?

> -----Original Message-----

> From: Rodney [mailto:perspect1111@...]

> Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2003 10:52 AM

>

> Subject: [ ] BMI/Body Fat Percentage

>

>

> Hi guys:

>

> Another thought about BMI/body fat percentage:

>

> I seem to remember Walford saying that under CRON body fat percentage

> could be expected to drop eventually to about half its set point

> value.

>

> I also seem to remember he said it should definitely not drop below a

> certain value - I think for males that may have been 6%, and higher

> than that for females.

>

> So, another factor to consider in deciding the appropriate end point

> BMI (in addition to, or instead of, taking into account wrist

> circumference) might be to permit it to fall to 18 to 20 *** only so

> long as Walford's downside limit on body fat percentage is not

> exceeded ***.

>

> Any thoughts on this?

>

> Rodney.

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hi ,

You are at a great weight for your health. To look better you need

to gain about ten pounds so up to you to decide if you wish to be

slightly healthier or slightly better looking. It is unlikely you

need to drop any more weight so if you wish to lower your BF you

would be better off going to the gym and gaining some muscle.

Give up on determining body fat as all affordable methods do not

work. One of the scales that lists BF can, however, show you trends

so consider getting such a scale if you wish to see which way your

BF is headed with any change in diet or exercise.

Toni

>

> > I am inclined to agree that %BF is a useful metric for setting a

redline for

> > amount of restriction. While certainly easier to define and

determine than

> > set point (whatever that may be). There is plenty of slop in

popular

> > measurements of BF.

> >

> > A little extra BF is useful as a safety margin should we become

ill or

> > injured. Further with all the young folks getting interested in

CR a little

> > extra BF could be useful for women of reproductive age and

inclination. I

> > would expect degree of CR to have an impact on both male and

female

> > fertility so if you are actively trying to have more children CR

may be

> > counter productive.

> >

> > I recall one very small (non-human) study where they identified

a shorter

> > length of pregnancy term in females who were restricted before

pregnancy.

> > Apparently nutrition before during and even after if nursing,

can have an

> > impact on the child's development.

> >

> > I do not claim expertise in these matters and offer my comments

as a

> > personal opinion. If you are considering reproduction I would

advise doing

> > some research yourself and drawing your own conclusions.

> >

> > JR

> >

> > PS.. My wrist measured just over 7 " , I always though I had big

bones :-).

>

> I've only recently started working on this CRON thing. I'll be

first to admit I've had lapses.

> Although avoiding dairy products to become a pseudo vegan I think

has helped. Lot of calories in those. Plus cutting out those yummy

pasta dinners.

>

> Anyway, what I find interesting is that I've always weighed around

140 to 150. 142 last I checked.

> Punched that into the BMI chart, and that puts me well above the

18-20 range.

> For a BMI of 19.7 I'd have to weigh 130 pounds.

>

> Tried the frame size thing. Wrist of 6.5 " exactly which puts me

at either small or medium frame.

> That places their " ideal " weight at 144-160.

>

> However, when I've tried the body fat thing using the wildly

inaccurate skin fold measurement, I've tended to hover around 5%,

even in the past.

>

> So, having trouble working out a weight target. Should I even

bother? Is 130 safe? Is there a fairly cheap method to work out my

body fat level once n for all?

>

>

> > -----Original Message-----

> > From: Rodney [mailto:perspect1111@y...]

> > Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2003 10:52 AM

> >

> > Subject: [ ] BMI/Body Fat Percentage

> >

> >

> > Hi guys:

> >

> > Another thought about BMI/body fat percentage:

> >

> > I seem to remember Walford saying that under CRON body fat

percentage

> > could be expected to drop eventually to about half its set point

> > value.

> >

> > I also seem to remember he said it should definitely not drop

below a

> > certain value - I think for males that may have been 6%, and

higher

> > than that for females.

> >

> > So, another factor to consider in deciding the appropriate end

point

> > BMI (in addition to, or instead of, taking into account wrist

> > circumference) might be to permit it to fall to 18 to 20 ***

only so

> > long as Walford's downside limit on body fat percentage is not

> > exceeded ***.

> >

> > Any thoughts on this?

> >

> > Rodney.

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Hi Kyber:

I don't think anyone can categorically say that it is known exactly

how to determine a target weight. I will be delighted for someone

to correct me about this if I am mistaken!

My recollection is that Walford said something like: " ....... but

do not let your body fat get below ..... percent ...... " . It came

across, speaking from memory, as a rather 'urgent' tone.

[Perhaps this is the quote, from using the Amazon text search

feature: " ... and it should not be allowed to get below 5% for men

and 10 to 15 percent for women ...... " P. 227]

So, for the sake of safety, it might be best to satisfy yourself what

the number Walford specifies is, and check by the definitive method,

whatever that is (flotation?) what your body fat is when you weigh,

say, 135 lbs or 140 lbs.

If it turns out that you have 5% body fat at 135 lbs that would

suggest you don't want to go lower than that, for example.

Rodney.

> However, when I've tried the body fat thing using the wildly

inaccurate skin fold measurement, I've tended to hover around 5%,

even in the past.

>

> So, having trouble working out a weight target. Should I even

bother? Is 130 safe? Is there a fairly cheap method to work out my

body fat level once n for all?