Optimal Body Fat %
- Thread starter abanger
- Start date
<div>
(abanger @ Apr. 08 2009,8:35)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">@ what body fat % is it optimal to bulk? Conversely, @ what body fat % is it optimal to cut? Is there any research behind this?</div>
Empirical evidence has shown that low body fat percentages are the best place to start when one wants to bulk. Conversely, those with high amounts of adipose tissue (higher bf%) will have an easier time shedding fat. However, all of this is specific to an individual's p-ratio.
(abanger @ Apr. 08 2009,8:35)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">@ what body fat % is it optimal to bulk? Conversely, @ what body fat % is it optimal to cut? Is there any research behind this?</div>
Empirical evidence has shown that low body fat percentages are the best place to start when one wants to bulk. Conversely, those with high amounts of adipose tissue (higher bf%) will have an easier time shedding fat. However, all of this is specific to an individual's p-ratio.
<div>
(colby2152 @ Apr. 10 2009,8:28)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Empirical evidence has shown that low body fat percentages are the best place to start when one wants to bulk. Conversely, those with high amounts of adipose tissue (higher bf%) will have an easier time shedding fat. However, all of this is specific to an individual's p-ratio.</div>
I agree that optimal is contextual, but is there a general rule of thumb backed by research? I'm familiar w/ the heuristic of cutting until you're 10%, maintaining for 4 weeks, bulking until you're 15%, maintaining again, then repeating. But I'm not really sure where these #s came from.
(colby2152 @ Apr. 10 2009,8:28)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Empirical evidence has shown that low body fat percentages are the best place to start when one wants to bulk. Conversely, those with high amounts of adipose tissue (higher bf%) will have an easier time shedding fat. However, all of this is specific to an individual's p-ratio.</div>
I agree that optimal is contextual, but is there a general rule of thumb backed by research? I'm familiar w/ the heuristic of cutting until you're 10%, maintaining for 4 weeks, bulking until you're 15%, maintaining again, then repeating. But I'm not really sure where these #s came from.
Not really. It used to be believed that being in a certain range of bodyfat percentage would improve the ratio of muscle to fat that you gain when you bulk, but turns out it's not the case. I would caution, however, not to go crazy and get too fat because as you probably know, after a point your body will begin to produce new fat cells and unless you get a wasting disease, it's pretty difficult to get rid of new fat cells.
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Before moving on to breaking calories down into protein carbs and fat, let me remind you of the impact of previous caloric restriction on your body's metabolism. If you have been "semi-dieting" for some time prior to deciding to gain weight, your body will be accustomed to fewer calories than your "normal" BMR. This will throw off your calculations a bit. The numbers the formulas give you will over estimate your caloric needs if you have been dieting prior to your diet change.
If you have been dieting, first plan to eat the calculated BMR for at least 2 weeks prior to increasing your calories to "weight gain" levels. You may find you begin to gain weight even on your calculated BMR, or at least experience an increase in resting body temp. Let your body readjust your BMR to your calculated BMR before upping the calories. After 4 weeks, then go ahead and work your way up to 500-600 calories above your calculated maintenance calories. Once again, trust me on this.
Bryan Haycock
</div>
I guess I'll integrate this w/ the 10-15 rule.
If you have been dieting, first plan to eat the calculated BMR for at least 2 weeks prior to increasing your calories to "weight gain" levels. You may find you begin to gain weight even on your calculated BMR, or at least experience an increase in resting body temp. Let your body readjust your BMR to your calculated BMR before upping the calories. After 4 weeks, then go ahead and work your way up to 500-600 calories above your calculated maintenance calories. Once again, trust me on this.
Bryan Haycock
</div>
I guess I'll integrate this w/ the 10-15 rule.
Brixtonian
Active Member
Sorry to bump this thread up again, but as in my other post, I'm looking at cutting a bit.
I'm 280lb and my bf is about 22%.
I'm 38yrs old, so - hopefully - fairly efficient metabolism.
What is my ideal daily calorie intake to lose fat, without losing too much muscle?
And what percentage of my diet should be protein?
Any advice appreciated.
Thanks
I'm 280lb and my bf is about 22%.
I'm 38yrs old, so - hopefully - fairly efficient metabolism.
What is my ideal daily calorie intake to lose fat, without losing too much muscle?
And what percentage of my diet should be protein?
Any advice appreciated.
Thanks
QuantumPositron
New Member
The body is most anabolic around 10-12%. This is due to the hormonal environment at this bodyfat percentage and not p-ratios.
<div>
(Brixtonian @ Jun. 16 2009,4:18)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">What is my ideal daily calorie intake to lose fat, without losing too much muscle?
And what percentage of my diet should be protein?
Any advice appreciated.
Thanks</div>
There is literally a metric f*ckton of equations you can use to find out your RMR.
But the old standby gets most pretty close 10-12 Kcal/Lb/day
(Brixtonian @ Jun. 16 2009,4:18)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">What is my ideal daily calorie intake to lose fat, without losing too much muscle?
And what percentage of my diet should be protein?
Any advice appreciated.
Thanks</div>
There is literally a metric f*ckton of equations you can use to find out your RMR.
But the old standby gets most pretty close 10-12 Kcal/Lb/day
Brixtonian
Active Member
<div>
(Dan Moore @ Jun. 17 2009,1:18)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">There is literally a metric f*ckton of equations you can use to find out your RMR.</div>
Tell me about it.
Thats why I'm so confused..... and still carrying too much bf
Thanks.
(Dan Moore @ Jun. 17 2009,1:18)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">There is literally a metric f*ckton of equations you can use to find out your RMR.</div>
Tell me about it.
Thats why I'm so confused..... and still carrying too much bf
Thanks.
<div>
(QuantumPositron @ Jun. 18 2009,4:51)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">The body is most anabolic around 10-12%. This is due to the hormonal environment at this bodyfat percentage and not p-ratios.</div>
cos the Pratios hve nothing to do with hormones...
(QuantumPositron @ Jun. 18 2009,4:51)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">The body is most anabolic around 10-12%. This is due to the hormonal environment at this bodyfat percentage and not p-ratios.</div>
cos the Pratios hve nothing to do with hormones...
<div>
(Brixtonian @ Jun. 18 2009,9:03)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE"><div>
(Dan Moore @ Jun. 17 2009,1:18)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">There is literally a metric f*ckton of equations you can use to find out your RMR.</div>
Tell me about it.
Thats why I'm so confused..... and still carrying too much bf
Thanks.</div>
That's because it's not only FFM that accounts for TEE. There are a ton of studies that look at how FM accounts for additional energy requiremetns as well. Albeit these all point out that the need for including FM is largely dependant on the amounts of FM to begin with.
In normal BF% subjects the need for including FM in the equation isn't as crucial. But if accuracy is your goal???
1) Cunningham JJ. Bodycomposition as a determinant of energy expenditure: a synthetic review and a proposed general prediction equation. Am J Clin Nutr 1991;54:963-9
2) Mifflin MD, St Jeor ST, Hill LA, Scott BJ, Daugherty SA, Koh YO. A new predictive equation for resting energy expenditure in healthy individuals. Am J Clin Nutr 1990;51:241-7
3) Ferraro R, Ravussin E. Fat mass in predicting resting metabolic rate. Am J Clin Nutr 1992;56:848-56
4) Cunningham JJ. A reanalysis of the factors influencing basal metabolic rate in normal adults. Am J Clin Nutr 1980;33:2372-4
5) Ravussin E, Lillioja S, Anderson TE, Christin L, Bogardus C. Determinants of 24-hour energy expenditure in man. Methods and results using a respiratory Chamber. J Clin Invest 1986;78:1586-78
6) Nelson KM, Weinsier RL, Long CL, Schulz Y. Prediction of resting energy expenditure from fat-free and fat mass. Am J Clin Nutr 1992;56:848-56
7) Garrow JS, Webster J. Are pre-obese people energy thrifty? Lancet 1985;1:670-1
8) Nielsen S, Hensrud DD, Romanski S, Levine JA, Burguera B, Jenson MD. Body composition and resting enegy expenditure in humans: role of fat, fat-free mass and extracellular fluid In J Obes Relat Metab 2000;24:1153-7
9) Bernstein RS, Thornton JC, Yang MU. Prediction of resting metabolic rate in obese patients. Am J Clin Nutr 1983;37:595-602
10) Dionne I, Despres JP< Bouchard C, Tremblay A. Gender difference in the effect of body composition on energy metabolism. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 1999;23:312-9
Plus quite a few more
(Brixtonian @ Jun. 18 2009,9:03)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE"><div>
(Dan Moore @ Jun. 17 2009,1:18)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">There is literally a metric f*ckton of equations you can use to find out your RMR.</div>
Tell me about it.
Thats why I'm so confused..... and still carrying too much bf
Thanks.</div>
That's because it's not only FFM that accounts for TEE. There are a ton of studies that look at how FM accounts for additional energy requiremetns as well. Albeit these all point out that the need for including FM is largely dependant on the amounts of FM to begin with.
In normal BF% subjects the need for including FM in the equation isn't as crucial. But if accuracy is your goal???
1) Cunningham JJ. Bodycomposition as a determinant of energy expenditure: a synthetic review and a proposed general prediction equation. Am J Clin Nutr 1991;54:963-9
2) Mifflin MD, St Jeor ST, Hill LA, Scott BJ, Daugherty SA, Koh YO. A new predictive equation for resting energy expenditure in healthy individuals. Am J Clin Nutr 1990;51:241-7
3) Ferraro R, Ravussin E. Fat mass in predicting resting metabolic rate. Am J Clin Nutr 1992;56:848-56
4) Cunningham JJ. A reanalysis of the factors influencing basal metabolic rate in normal adults. Am J Clin Nutr 1980;33:2372-4
5) Ravussin E, Lillioja S, Anderson TE, Christin L, Bogardus C. Determinants of 24-hour energy expenditure in man. Methods and results using a respiratory Chamber. J Clin Invest 1986;78:1586-78
6) Nelson KM, Weinsier RL, Long CL, Schulz Y. Prediction of resting energy expenditure from fat-free and fat mass. Am J Clin Nutr 1992;56:848-56
7) Garrow JS, Webster J. Are pre-obese people energy thrifty? Lancet 1985;1:670-1
8) Nielsen S, Hensrud DD, Romanski S, Levine JA, Burguera B, Jenson MD. Body composition and resting enegy expenditure in humans: role of fat, fat-free mass and extracellular fluid In J Obes Relat Metab 2000;24:1153-7
9) Bernstein RS, Thornton JC, Yang MU. Prediction of resting metabolic rate in obese patients. Am J Clin Nutr 1983;37:595-602
10) Dionne I, Despres JP< Bouchard C, Tremblay A. Gender difference in the effect of body composition on energy metabolism. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 1999;23:312-9
Plus quite a few more