Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low Carb Health & Technical Forums > General Health
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #46   ^
Old Wed, May-19-04, 11:15
legwarmers's Avatar
legwarmers legwarmers is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 353
 
Plan: NHE
Stats: 135/133/140 Female 64"
BF:15%
Progress: -40%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by loCarbJ
Legwarmers,

According to your profile, you are trying to gain mass. Resistance training is perfect for that. Your profile also stated that you are already at 15% BF. My fitness books all tell me that a woman the age that Deanna is (not that she is old or anything) should not drop below 15% body fat.

J

P.S. I think this is a fun discussion!!!


ok not totally sure why we're discussing me right now. i'm actually older than vanity, btw.

12-14% is pretty safe.

Classification Women (%fat)
Essential Fat 10-12%
Athletes 14-20%
General Fitness 21-24%
Acceptable 25-31%
Obese 32% and higher
Source: American Council on Exercise

i totally don't understand why you would advocate she drop lean mass... i can very nearly guarantee she'll look flabbier and won't be happy with it.

plus you can't guess where the fat is gonna come off because with nearly all women estrogen prevents the fat from coming off the tush/thighs til last... and she's already described herself as a pear shape. i am built this way and i can tell you for a fact that i was a 102lb pear at one time. still had the same fat ass but had toothpick arms with no definition. lol
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #47   ^
Old Wed, May-19-04, 11:18
loCarbJ's Avatar
loCarbJ loCarbJ is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 408
 
Plan: General Low Carb
Stats: 232/162/162 Male 69 inches
BF:30%/13%/11%
Progress: 100%
Location: San Jose, CA
Default

Deanna,

Thanks for checking in....

What is your current workout schedule?

J
Reply With Quote
  #48   ^
Old Wed, May-19-04, 11:20
fridayeyes's Avatar
fridayeyes fridayeyes is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,044
 
Plan: low glycemic
Stats: // Female jkl
BF:
Progress: 69%
Default

Ok, cool - Vanity, now I think I get you

Take this with a big side of IMHO...

1) You added 'weight' but measurements didn't change. That means it was pretty much muscle and water, and you likely lost some fat in the process.

2) 23 inches on thighs. C'mon now, even as a waist that's teeny

3) Hips, butt and thighs - I strongly believe that losing fat here will be more productive than trying to lose muscle. The jiggle isn't muscle; it's fat, and fat sits *on top* of a well trained muscle, not in it or under it. Thin out that fat layer, and you'll see the muscle. Here's another strange thing - fat thighs look wide from the front; muscular thighs look thin from the front but wider when seen from the side. The measurement may even stay the same. The shape, however, looks much better when determined by muscle than by fat.

Here's a suggestion, go to a bookstore or library and get the Bill Phillips Body for Life training diary. Don't buy it, just flip through it and look at the pics. It will list the BF% of almost every owman shown, and you'll get a feel for what looks like what, and you'll be able to see 20% with little muscle vs 20% with more muscle. It will help you get an idea of what you might want to look like in terms of BF%, level of muscle, etc.

BTW, my thighs are about 2 inches bigger than yours, but my LBM is similar. The difference is that I'm in the high 20s% for BF. As for my upper arms, as I begin to get biceps, the measurement is actually decreasing.

Good luck whichever path you choose.

Cheers!

Friday
Reply With Quote
  #49   ^
Old Wed, May-19-04, 11:22
Vanity3's Avatar
Vanity3 Vanity3 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 828
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 265/247.5/145 Female 5'4.25"
BF:50%/46%/15%
Progress: 15%
Location: West Hartford, CT
Default

Cardio at 5am, either 1 hour of walking/jogging or step aerobics
Evening, either another 1/2 cardio or free weights (alternating days)

Nothing too strenuous, I don't know where the extra 7 pounds came from
Reply With Quote
  #50   ^
Old Wed, May-19-04, 11:23
legwarmers's Avatar
legwarmers legwarmers is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 353
 
Plan: NHE
Stats: 135/133/140 Female 64"
BF:15%
Progress: -40%
Default

excellent post - i couldn't have said it better friday!

good luck with your goals vanity!
Reply With Quote
  #51   ^
Old Wed, May-19-04, 11:29
loCarbJ's Avatar
loCarbJ loCarbJ is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 408
 
Plan: General Low Carb
Stats: 232/162/162 Male 69 inches
BF:30%/13%/11%
Progress: 100%
Location: San Jose, CA
Default

Legwarmers,

Thanks for the body fat ranges for women. I agree.

You are right, that woman do have a pear shape and no amount of nutritional changes or fitness changes will change that. Bummer! Being 102 lbs with a pear shape and no muscle definition would make me recommend muscle building activites.

I don't agree that Deanna would look flabbier at 140lbs with 20% BF, than at 160lbs with 20% BF. To me, she would look just as tone, there would just be less of her.

J

Last edited by loCarbJ : Wed, May-19-04 at 11:35.
Reply With Quote
  #52   ^
Old Wed, May-19-04, 11:30
fridayeyes's Avatar
fridayeyes fridayeyes is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,044
 
Plan: low glycemic
Stats: // Female jkl
BF:
Progress: 69%
Default

BTW, extra 7 lbs... when you start a new training regimen or shake up an old one, you also gain some water. I'd guess that the 7 lbs is a combo of muscle and water. It isn't likely to be fat. Water is considered part of LBM because LBM is actually anything that *isn't* fat. So guess what? If you even get constipated, you have also gained LBM, lol.
Reply With Quote
  #53   ^
Old Wed, May-19-04, 11:33
fridayeyes's Avatar
fridayeyes fridayeyes is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,044
 
Plan: low glycemic
Stats: // Female jkl
BF:
Progress: 69%
Default

BTW, I do have to disagree that 20% looks the same at 140 or 160. I can't say for Vanity specifically, but if there's too little muscle to stretch that 20% over, you can look both skinny *and* flabby. I'll have to see if I can find those pics....

This is totally not a slam at you, J. Just a difference of opinion after having seen lots of pics.
Reply With Quote
  #54   ^
Old Wed, May-19-04, 11:36
Built's Avatar
Built Built is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 3,661
 
Plan: Metabolic Surge
Stats: 170/139/? Female 5'8"
BF:
Progress: 100%
Location: Canada's Wet Coast
Default

Friday,
Quote:
2) 23 inches on thighs. C'mon now, even as a waist that's teeny

My thighs are 24.5 inches, so I agree - 23 inch thighs aren't big.

Quote:
Here's another strange thing - fat thighs look wide from the front; muscular thighs look thin from the front but wider when seen from the side. The measurement may even stay the same. The shape, however, looks much better when determined by muscle than by fat.



And this has been my experience since building up my quads and hams - my thighs no longer rub together like they did when I was running, and they are deep rather than wide.

Plus, with the lovely big hammies and quads I've put on, I have a nice big furnace to burn energy all day long.

But hey, some folks would prefer to restrict calories. À chacun son goût , I suppose. Me, I like to eat.
Reply With Quote
  #55   ^
Old Wed, May-19-04, 11:39
Vanity3's Avatar
Vanity3 Vanity3 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 828
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 265/247.5/145 Female 5'4.25"
BF:50%/46%/15%
Progress: 15%
Location: West Hartford, CT
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fridayeyes
3) Hips, butt and thighs - I strongly believe that losing fat here will be more productive than trying to lose muscle. The jiggle isn't muscle; it's fat, and fat sits *on top* of a well trained muscle, not in it or under it. Thin out that fat layer, and you'll see the muscle. Here's another strange thing - fat thighs look wide from the front; muscular thighs look thin from the front but wider when seen from the side. The measurement may even stay the same. The shape, however, looks much better when determined by muscle than by fat.


Okay great, you understand me. I appreciate it! Now how do I get there? What type of exercising is right for me? Low impact? or high impact? Resistance training, non resistance? High reps low weight or high weight low reps? I've heard it all? But which is accurate for me? I'm pretty much a textbook pear. Some should have already figured out a solution for this.

I already own the Edward Jackowski book, Hold it, your exercising wrong; so I'll be reading that tonight. Plus I just called my local library about the book "slow burn' that Locarbj recommended. Hopefully it will bring me closer to an answer.

But if you want to know what I want to look like, I'll show you.


Now compare that to the pictures in my gallery...how can I get to this point?
Reply With Quote
  #56   ^
Old Wed, May-19-04, 11:40
loCarbJ's Avatar
loCarbJ loCarbJ is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 408
 
Plan: General Low Carb
Stats: 232/162/162 Male 69 inches
BF:30%/13%/11%
Progress: 100%
Location: San Jose, CA
Default

Fridayeyes,

I think I understand you to mean that people who don't exercise and have low body fat ranges don't look as good as people with slightly higher body fat ranges that do exercise. I can agree with that. But I do know that Deanna is a regular exerciser.

I would reccommend that she increase her level of exercise during her body shaping to prevent the situation that you eluded to.

J

P.S. G2G, CU L8R
Reply With Quote
  #57   ^
Old Wed, May-19-04, 11:45
fridayeyes's Avatar
fridayeyes fridayeyes is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,044
 
Plan: low glycemic
Stats: // Female jkl
BF:
Progress: 69%
Default

http://www.bodyforlife.com/finisher...mp=connie_ruble

Here's one example. In the first pic, the woman is at 20% at 151 lbs, but does not look particularly toned, esp in the lower body. *friday apologizes to the anonymous woman*

She lost a total of 13 lbs and gained 4 of muscle, for a net loss of 9 lbs. Personally (and no offense meant to anyone at 12%), I don't want to go as low on BF as the woman in the pic did.

Another sample pic where the woman starts at 20%:

http://www.bodyforlife.com/finisher...g_and_jayne_cox
Reply With Quote
  #58   ^
Old Wed, May-19-04, 11:53
Vanity3's Avatar
Vanity3 Vanity3 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 828
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 265/247.5/145 Female 5'4.25"
BF:50%/46%/15%
Progress: 15%
Location: West Hartford, CT
Default

Thanks fridayeyes for the links, it helps me to better illustrate my point

Jayne’s body fat went from 19.6% to 13.5%;

Now I look like the before picture (almost exactly) how do I get to the after picture? What should my workouts consist of? I'm hearing so many opposing points. Where do I begin?
Reply With Quote
  #59   ^
Old Wed, May-19-04, 11:54
fridayeyes's Avatar
fridayeyes fridayeyes is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,044
 
Plan: low glycemic
Stats: // Female jkl
BF:
Progress: 69%
Default

*grins* Vanity, honey... that ass in the pic you like? It's round. Round is thick muscle with a bit of fat over it.

J - yeah, she exercises, so she probably won't have to worry about flab - but - losing 16 lbs of mass might be too much. At a height of 5'4"? Well, I'd have to see it.

Since this will be a journey anyway, my suggestion is to keep training for your marathon. That means distance/endurance just like you're doing. I do believe that resistance training on top of it will help you lose fat. I *don't* believe that low weight, many reps will help you lose fat, or that extra cardio beyond your marathon training will help you lose fat.

My qualifications: 3 years of obsessive reading and 37 years in a female body. That being said, every body is a little different, and you may need to experiment to see what works best for you.

Cheers!

Friday
Reply With Quote
  #60   ^
Old Wed, May-19-04, 11:56
Vanity3's Avatar
Vanity3 Vanity3 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 828
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 265/247.5/145 Female 5'4.25"
BF:50%/46%/15%
Progress: 15%
Location: West Hartford, CT
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fridayeyes
Vanity, honey... that ass in the pic you like? It's round. Round is thick muscle with a bit of fat over it.


that's right, can't loose the ass, my DBF likes it too much!

that pic is of Janet Jackson by the way, another girl from my home town in Indiana!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
[BFL] Using BF% as goal Natrushka Specific Exercise Plans 37 Mon, Sep-08-03 11:46
Full text: A Randomized Trial Comparing a Very Low tamarian LC Research/Media 0 Thu, Jul-10-03 17:21
Low-Fat is Dead: Fat makes comeback after 3 lean decades tamarian LC Research/Media 7 Mon, May-19-03 18:53
Body Fat Impact of Conjugated Linoleic Acid (CLA) tamarian LC Research/Media 5 Thu, Apr-04-02 12:08


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:43.


Copyright © 2000-2019 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.