Body fat won't go down.

Watch
blue n white army
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#1
My body fat is and has for a very long time been 20-22% and i can't seem to shift it.

In terms of exercise I run quite a lot covering a mixture of long distance (10miles) and shorter faster distances (2miles) and a few inbetween so im getting about 25-30miles per week in. Plus i usually have a gym session every week to do some HIIT training and a weights session.

In terms of diet i don't think it's that unhealthy, typically I will have a bowl of fruit and fibre and a cup of tea for breakfast then at lunch i'll have 2 sandwhiches (usually ham or tuna) a banana and a chocolate biscuit (the size of a penguin). For tea it's usually some homemade veggie stuff my mums made. Lots of beans, veg, potato etc, sometimes a pasta dish, couple of times a week I have meat for tea such as meatballs or fish. I've really cut down on snacking as well i'll have a packet of crisps every other day but i don't snack like i used to. I'm certainly not eating kebabs and pizzas like i was at uni when my body fat was 20%. Also ive cut down on my drinking to the point that i barely drink anymore.

So in my view im exercising a lot and i don't think im eating an unhealthy diet yet my body fat % just won't go down. I'd quite like it to be aroudn the 10% mark cos then i'll have shifted 1.2 stone of useless weight which would help my running.
0
reply
LolaLowe
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#2
Report 7 years ago
#2
how are you measuring it?
0
reply
Gary23
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#3
Report 7 years ago
#3
As above,
Also, the snacks is something you definitely want to cut out altogether if possible, you want your main meals as usual, you want to plan the meals so you just about get hungry, not as hungry so you're starving and definitely not so your feeling full.

It is worth to note I am not an expert however,
To lose fat mass, you need to be using fat stores as your energy as such,
So for instance, if you're daily calorie intake is higher or equal to the amount of calories you burn off, then its going to be hard if not impossible to lose weight, there should be information and calculators online where you should be able to calculate how many calories you burn off daily, including calories burnt during work, sleep, exercise etc.

Depending on the exercise as well, even though your weight may not be changing, this doesn't necessarily mean your body fat is not going down, it could be turning to muscle.

I found swimming is a very good way of exercise, you can very easily control the intensity of a work out, and it works out your entire body rather than just your legs for instance and really gets your heart rate up, you're being naturally cooled down by the water, there is no shock on your body like running for instance (as your joints take a shock every step you take) and its very refreshing exercise.
The downside is with some people, they may not feel confident, it can cost to go and it can be inconvenient (you have to go when the pool is open, travel to the center etc.)

Hope this may be of help
0
reply
Spaghetti
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#4
Report 7 years ago
#4
Eat less or move more

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
Caedus
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#5
Report 7 years ago
#5
Your diet is quite carb filled, eat less carbs.
0
reply
blue n white army
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#6
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#6
(Original post by LolaLowe)
how are you measuring it?
We've got a set of scales which do body fat % muscle mass% and visceral fat.

I tend to measure when i've got back from a run which is the same time of the day every time i measure.
0
reply
cowsforsale
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#7
Report 7 years ago
#7
Weigh your food and count calories.
0
reply
MattBerry96
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#8
Report 7 years ago
#8
Low fat, high carb and cardio. I don't count calories at all and eat healthily and I'm very lean.


Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
cowsforsale
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#9
Report 7 years ago
#9
(Original post by MattBerry96)
Low fat, high carb and cardio. I don't count calories at all and eat healthily and I'm very lean.
Good for you.

However, for someone who's been fat for years, isn't as active and has no awareness on portion sizes, counting calories is the best way to fat loss.
0
reply
Malevolent
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#10
Report 7 years ago
#10
Count the calories and make sure your eating less than you burn.
0
reply
blue n white army
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#11
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#11
The annoying thing is im not even fat im really quite thin. People say I look athletic so I dont know where this body fat is but as long as it's there it's useless weight which will slow me down in races.

I see people saying I should cut carbs. What could I eat for lunch at work which doesn't have high carbs, which rules out pasta and bread.
0
reply
Kerch
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#12
Report 7 years ago
#12
(Original post by blue n white army)
The annoying thing is im not even fat im really quite thin. People say I look athletic so I dont know where this body fat is but as long as it's there it's useless weight which will slow me down in races.

I see people saying I should cut carbs. What could I eat for lunch at work which doesn't have high carbs, which rules out pasta and bread.
Those body fat scales aren't accurate at all.
0
reply
LolaLowe
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#13
Report 7 years ago
#13
(Original post by blue n white army)
We've got a set of scales which do body fat % muscle mass% and visceral fat.

I tend to measure when i've got back from a run which is the same time of the day every time i measure.
Okay. Well these scales are fine for tracking a trend, ie fat % going up or down, but they are not all that accurate for getting the overall picture. Here's why. Firstly they are very sensitive to hydration levels, so if you run on a hot day and then a cold day the results can vary quite significantly because of this factor. They work by BIA (Bioelectrical Impedence Analysis) by way of a current. The current travels up one leg, down the other (the shortest route it can find) and measures the resistance to the current. It then guesses the fat % for the top half of your body based on the lower half. So you can have someone who has very lean legs but fat stored around their middle (apple shaped) whose body fat % can come out low using these scales, and someone pear shaped whose real % is okay coming out as massively high. There is a system (available in good gyms) called Bodystat. It was developed for the medical industry to monitor the hydration levels of burns victims. It uses the same BIA technology but the sensors are attached to the hand and foot on your right side, and therefore the overall calculation is done by assuming the left and right sides of your body are similarly distributed with muscle and fat (which apart from your heart is almost always the case) (I did a research project with Bodystat in case you are wondering how I know all this!)

So you could have a body fat % that is actually quite different to what you are seeing on your scale.

Reducing carbs will definitely make you lose fat, have a look online for lunch ideas, its not an easy way to eat I dont think but very effective in losing fat.

I think the calories in/calories out thinking is flawed. Its too simplistic and if it was true it has been calculated that nobody in prisoner of war or work camps would have survived beyond a few weeks. I'm sure everyone has their opinion on this, I'm just saying that this is mine!
0
reply
blue n white army
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#14
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#14
(Original post by LolaLowe)
Okay. Well these scales are fine for tracking a trend, ie fat % going up or down, but they are not all that accurate for getting the overall picture. Here's why. Firstly they are very sensitive to hydration levels, so if you run on a hot day and then a cold day the results can vary quite significantly because of this factor. They work by BIA (Bioelectrical Impedence Analysis) by way of a current. The current travels up one leg, down the other (the shortest route it can find) and measures the resistance to the current. It then guesses the fat % for the top half of your body based on the lower half. So you can have someone who has very lean legs but fat stored around their middle (apple shaped) whose body fat % can come out low using these scales, and someone pear shaped whose real % is okay coming out as massively high. There is a system (available in good gyms) called Bodystat. It was developed for the medical industry to monitor the hydration levels of burns victims. It uses the same BIA technology but the sensors are attached to the hand and foot on your right side, and therefore the overall calculation is done by assuming the left and right sides of your body are similarly distributed with muscle and fat (which apart from your heart is almost always the case) (I did a research project with Bodystat in case you are wondering how I know all this!)

So you could have a body fat % that is actually quite different to what you are seeing on your scale.

Reducing carbs will definitely make you lose fat, have a look online for lunch ideas, its not an easy way to eat I dont think but very effective in losing fat.

I think the calories in/calories out thinking is flawed. Its too simplistic and if it was true it has been calculated that nobody in prisoner of war or work camps would have survived beyond a few weeks. I'm sure everyone has their opinion on this, I'm just saying that this is mine!
The scales I use have a handle that you lift off the base and and hold in both hands will this measure body fat more accurately as I assume the current goes through my legs and out each arm..
0
reply
AreebWithaHat
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#15
Report 7 years ago
#15
(Original post by LolaLowe)
Okay. Well these scales are fine for tracking a trend, ie fat % going up or down, but they are not all that accurate for getting the overall picture. Here's why. Firstly they are very sensitive to hydration levels, so if you run on a hot day and then a cold day the results can vary quite significantly because of this factor. They work by BIA (Bioelectrical Impedence Analysis) by way of a current. The current travels up one leg, down the other (the shortest route it can find) and measures the resistance to the current. It then guesses the fat % for the top half of your body based on the lower half. So you can have someone who has very lean legs but fat stored around their middle (apple shaped) whose body fat % can come out low using these scales, and someone pear shaped whose real % is okay coming out as massively high. There is a system (available in good gyms) called Bodystat. It was developed for the medical industry to monitor the hydration levels of burns victims. It uses the same BIA technology but the sensors are attached to the hand and foot on your right side, and therefore the overall calculation is done by assuming the left and right sides of your body are similarly distributed with muscle and fat (which apart from your heart is almost always the case) (I did a research project with Bodystat in case you are wondering how I know all this!)

So you could have a body fat % that is actually quite different to what you are seeing on your scale.

Reducing carbs will definitely make you lose fat, have a look online for lunch ideas, its not an easy way to eat I dont think but very effective in losing fat.

I think the calories in/calories out thinking is flawed. Its too simplistic and if it was true it has been calculated that nobody in prisoner of war or work camps would have survived beyond a few weeks. I'm sure everyone has their opinion on this, I'm just saying that this is mine!
lol the calorie in/out thing is not flawed, it's basic science.
0
reply
LolaLowe
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#16
Report 7 years ago
#16
(Original post by blue n white army)
The scales I use have a handle that you lift off the base and and hold in both hands will this measure body fat more accurately as I assume the current goes through my legs and out each arm..
I would have thought it was a risk to be passing a current through the left side of your body? Your scale sounds better than the one I was thinking of, Tanita used to make them and they sold them at Boots and the like, they were not good but its a few years ago.
0
reply
Kerch
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#17
Report 7 years ago
#17
(Original post by AreebWithaHat)
lol the calorie in/out thing is not flawed, it's basic science.
Is it really scientific though? It's not like the body is a closed system where the only energy input is food and all this energy is used with 100% efficiency. For example, there is energy lost to metabolic processes or used in respiration, which vary depending on the type of food.
0
reply
rhlpj98
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#18
Report 7 years ago
#18
do yoga to turn the fat into muscle, eat less carbs my friend lost 3st in 3 weeks on a low carb diet and dont snack eat and eaat meals at a set time.
0
reply
Scoobiedoobiedo
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#19
Report 7 years ago
#19
(Original post by Kerch)
Is it really scientific though? It's not like the body is a closed system where the only energy input is food and all this energy is used with 100% efficiency. For example, there is energy lost to metabolic processes or used in respiration, which vary depending on the type of food.
I'm pretty sure if you dive into the minutia of the variables, the end result is a few calories here and a few calories here. In the real world it makes no real difference.

With perhaps the exception of medical conditions, and/or extreme hormone deficiencies/additions, calories in VS calories out is pretty bang on, I reckon.

Consume less than you expend, you lose weight. Consume more than you expend, you gain weight.

Having said all of that, I do hate how overly simplistic 'calories in VS calories out' can be. It's one of those statements that is just batted around as advice, but isn't very useful on its own.
0
reply
AreebWithaHat
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#20
Report 7 years ago
#20
(Original post by Scoobiedoobiedo)
I'm pretty sure if you dive into the minutia of the variables, the end result is a few calories here and a few calories here. In the real world it makes no real difference.

With perhaps the exception of medical conditions, and/or extreme hormone deficiencies/additions, calories in VS calories out is pretty bang on, I reckon.

Consume less than you expend, you lose weight. Consume more than you expend, you gain weight.

Having said all of that, I do hate how overly simplistic 'calories in VS calories out' can be. It's one of those statements that is just batted around as advice, but isn't very useful on its own.
I just use calories in vs out because it's too much effort to write anything else. It is over-simplified but it will work for the typical joe just wanting to lose weight. Now if you're a serious lifter it would be a good idea to have a rough idea on macros too.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Do you think receiving Teacher Assessed Grades will impact your future?

I'm worried it will negatively impact me getting into university/college (151)
43.77%
I'm worried that I’m not academically prepared for the next stage in my educational journey (40)
11.59%
I'm worried it will impact my future career (28)
8.12%
I'm worried that my grades will be seen as ‘lesser’ because I didn’t take exams (72)
20.87%
I don’t think that receiving these grades will impact my future (34)
9.86%
I think that receiving these grades will affect me in another way (let us know in the discussion!) (20)
5.8%

Watched Threads

View All