How far to "cut"

[DominicJ]

I started my on again off again weight loss journey a good few years ago at over 16st, quite possibly well over, like, 18st over, I stopped weighing

This morning, I clocked in at 12st 7lb

I genuinely never thought I would get here, (Thanks FitBit) and so never really planned for how far to go.

According to a random BMI calculator I found online, I'm still over weight and need to hit 150 to be healthy

Do I just keep going as far as I can, then work to gain that back in muscle, or is it better to "yo-yo", cut a stone of mostly fat, gain a stone of mostly muscle, repeat.

[SunsetRunner]

---

@DominicJ wrote:

I started my on again off again weight loss journey a good few years ago at over 16st, quite possibly well over, like, 18st over, I stopped weighing

This morning, I clocked in at 12st 7lb

I genuinely never thought I would get here, (Thanks FitBit) and so never really planned for how far to go.

According to a random BMI calculator I found online, I'm still over weight and need to hit 150 to be healthy

Do I just keep going as far as I can, then work to gain that back in muscle, or is it better to "yo-yo", cut a stone of mostly fat, gain a stone of mostly muscle, repeat.

---

It is better to restrict calories and exercise.

That way, the "fats" get pulled into the muscle tissue and get used as energy.

[jszatala]

I've never been a huge fan of BMI calculators and alot of health professionals discourage BMI as well. BMI should be a loose guide more than an exact number to hit. Some of the healthiest people I know are "overweight" according to BMI. I think you should focus more on diet and exersize than the number on your scale. Awesome job on your weight loss so far!

[SunsetRunner]

---

@jszatala wrote:

I've never been a huge fan of BMI calculators and alot of health professionals discourage BMI as well. BMI should be a loose guide more than an exact number to hit. Some of the healthiest people I know are "overweight" according to BMI. I think you should focus more on diet and exersize than the number on your scale. Awesome job on your weight loss so far!

---

BMI is not a good indicator for bodybuilders (and the like). A simple caliper test seems to work well.

Also, if you diet and don't exercise, deposited fat can be left around the internal organs, and that may

result in a higher incidence of health problems (like type 2 diabetes, and prostrate cancer, etc.).

[jszatala]

Thats why I said diet AND exercise! I agree with calipers too. Or simply a height to waist ratio of 2:1 as a GUIDELINE. Nothing should really be set in stone as far as numbers go. Too many people head down a slippery slope that way.

[SunsetRunner]

---

@jszatala wrote:

Thats why I said diet AND exercise! I agree with calipers too. Or simply a height to waist ratio of 2:1 as a GUIDELINE. Nothing should really be set in stone as far as numbers go. Too many people head down a slippery slope that way.

---

You are absolutely right, and you did say diet and exercise (but that was intended for the original

poster). Everyone is unique, and we can only get general guidelines and some motivation from the

consumer quality equipment that is available. People that are really interested in their biometrics

would be getting blood tests (fats and genetics), VO2 max., MRI scans for fat and location, etc.

[WendyB]

@DominicJYou have done great! Congrats!

[SunsetRunner]

Wendy has accumulated most of her 5,000 plus posts, by congratulating people.

[Heybales]

Congrats too. Always a nice difficult situation to find yourself in.

Since BMI was never intended for individual analysis but population stats, it can be great for a range to aim for, but at top of healthy range visual should start being your cue I think.

Is fat still where you don't want it. Obviously can't spot reduce, so may need to just keep losing more fat.

Of course now that insurance has latched on to BMI as individual thing, it may indeed matter for rates, ect, so good to think about being in healthy range unless you are a weight lifter, and sadly get a note from your Dr for the insurance then. So sad.....

Anyway,

If you have been progressive overload lifting for a while now, like close to a year, your newbie gains are likely tapped out, so any slow muscle growth while still losing fat in a diet is over.

But because of insulin sensitivity while carrying extra fat is not that great, you don't get the benefit from bulking by eating in surplus and trying to gain muscle.

In which case, losing the fat down to say 10%, would usually be best before eating in surplus and bulking the muscle (and fat) back up again. Not super accurate 10%, but an average bodyfat % from several methods saying about there.

So you can get to that 10% via small deficit and lifting and make it faster.

Or eating at maintenance and lifting and make it slower.

For the latter, one study for athletic men showed a trade of 3.5 lbs of fat loss to 3.5 lbs of LBM gain in 16 weeks. Now, that was partial newbie gain in areas not previously worked real well, and they didn't break out from the LBM how much muscle was actually gained, so .....

http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/778012

YMMV

Then eating 250-500 in surplus daily while lifting to get that 1/2 - 1 lb gain weekly, until BF% back at 15.

Then even easier to cut back down to 10% again.

[DominicJ]

Spinning, circuits and running mostly

Weights have been mostly recent
40kg chest & shoulder press
50kg seated row
60kg lat pull down
All 3x8 twice a week, but that's getting harder not easier.

[Heybales]

So you'll be able to still get some newbie gains then lifting while in a deficit, that's good.

I'd suggest 3 x weekly if you have the time, and recovery is happening enough. The 3 sets x 8 reps is good, but still not enough weekly time to get max benefit for most.

True, you won't be able to eat as much an a day you trade cardio for lifting, but the results will be better if you can adhere to the lower eating level anyway.

[DominicJ]

Adding a third cycle wont be a problem.

But, just to make sure we are completely on the same page...

That would be 8x3x3

So 72 repitions of each lift per week?

It doesnt seem like a lot?

[josephz2va]

You could try Bodybuilding.com for a calendar of exercises.

I don't follow the BMI chart at all. Everyone says I'm the ideal weight. It's the fat to lose. 

Description Women Men

Essential fat	10–13%	2–5%
Athletes	14–20%	6–13%
Fitness	21–24%	14–17%
Average	25–31%	18–24%
Obese	32%+	25%+

[Heybales]

---

@DominicJ wrote:

Adding a third cycle wont be a problem.

But, just to make sure we are completely on the same page...

That would be 8x3x3

So 72 repitions of each lift per week?

It doesnt seem like a lot?

---

That's not out of line at all. If going for muscle increase that is, that provides the Time Under Tension (TUT) needed to get it.

http://www.exrx.net/WeightTraining/Research.html

Untrained participants (less than 1 year of consistent training) experience maximal strength gains with an average training intensity of 60% of their 1 RM or approximately a 12 RM, training each muscle group 3 days per week. Novices weight training 2 times per week may make approximately 80% of the strength gains as compared to training 3 times per week.