Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Minimum BF %?
Quote | Reply
Is there a generally accepted consensus on what a minimum "healthy" body fat % is? I've heard and read everything from 10% to 5%, and have also read stories of guys like Apolo Ohno being at 2% when they were in their competitive prime. So what's everyone's experience here?

OK, here's the longer version of the question: I'm going in for another DEXA scan in a few weeks to see where I currently am vs. same point prior years. My goal is to wrap up my weight loss and get to a stable weight before I start the final inseason block of training because running a caloric deficit while trying to ramp up distance and intensity has proven to be a big no-no for me in years past. At my current height/weight (6', 160lbs) i'm expecting to be somewhere around 10% BF per the DEXA scan (which reads about 1% higher than other tests like hydrostatic testing). My bathroom scale is nearly worthless, as it's currently reporting anywhere from 13% to 15%. Anyway, this invariably begs the quetion of how much additional I should be trying to lose in the next month or two. In prior years I've gotten down to 156ish and felt fine. I understand that once in single digits it's a tightrope walk to manage recovery, ability to handle training load, immune system strength, etc, and also understand that the number will by highly individual but I'd love to hear from the "ultra-lean" folks out there on how lean is OK vs. too lean and how do you know when you're approaching that limit, i.e., what are the signals your body is giving you (preferably the signals that come before injury, exhaustion, overtraining, sickness).
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [el gato] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I feel strong at around 8% body fat.

Less than that and I start to get a little fragile.
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [el gato] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
When I was in college, I felt best around 8%. I tried going lower a few times, but always ended up feeling not great and I would get sick easily. Now that I am in my 30s and have young children, I can't go below 10% or else I start to feel crappy.
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [el gato] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I seem to remember the big 4 were said to be around 6pm tall 150 lbs 7% body fat

Maybe Monty can confirm or correct
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [jhammond] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
jhammond wrote:
When I was in college, I felt best around 8%. I tried going lower a few times, but always ended up feeling not great and I would get sick easily. Now that I am in my 30s and have young children, I can't go below 10% or else I start to feel crappy.

How do you measure your body fat?
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [el gato] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
On avg. your body will not go lower than 4% and then it starts eating muscle and things stop working As it goes lower, starvation, the end result is not good.

All these low BF% you hear about take with a grain of salt. Most people BF is higher than they think. I was part of a pretty large government study on BF and I was surprised at my BF. When racing....and the time of the study I was racing....I weighted 160 lbs and I'm 6"2'. Tall and thin.......My BF was 13% (hydrostatic testing)
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [el gato] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
My experience is that to stay below 7% (hydrostatic method) I have to be running a calorie deficit. And if I'm running a calorie deficit my training is going to suffer if I'm in an intense training block.

9% BF is where I can maintain body fat and weight, while eating a slight calorie surplus, and recover/build strength and endurance.
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [el gato] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It’s nearly impossible to get below 5-6% without including dehydration in the mix. Bodybuilders who get down to 2-3% limit water for 10 days and cut it out completely for 2-3 days on top of taking dietetics.

I would suspect Frodo/Lionel are around 5-6% but genetics play a roll how well you can function at those %s. As others have said, be skeptical of all bf% other than via the look test. If I use a calculator I often get 5-7% when I am without question not lower than 10% at that time.
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [Scottxs] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Scottxs wrote:
Most people BF is higher than they think. I was part of a pretty large government study on BF and I was surprised at my BF. When racing....and the time of the study I was racing....I weighted 160 lbs and I'm 6"2'. Tall and thin.......My BF was 13% (hydrostatic testing)

You are right. InBody machine that you see in many gyms reads BF bit higher. I did hydrostatic test by a company that does Dallas Cowboys and may professional athletes in Austin and DFW area. Mine came out 4.9%. If I go higher, I can lift better and tell I'm stronger, but running, push ups, pull ups and any body weight workout is no fun, so I keep it around 5%. 128-130lb and 5'8.
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [BGildenstern] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BGildenstern wrote:
It’s nearly impossible to get below 5-6% without including dehydration in the mix. Bodybuilders who get down to 2-3% limit water for 10 days and cut it out completely for 2-3 days on top of taking dietetics.

I would suspect Frodo/Lionel are around 5-6% but genetics play a roll how well you can function at those %s. As others have said, be skeptical of all bf% other than via the look test. If I use a calculator I often get 5-7% when I am without question not lower than 10% at that time.

Water weight has nothing to do with BF%. In theory cutting water would actually raise your body fat ratio relative to the lean tissue and water that remains I think.

Professional Athlete: http://jordancheyne.wordpress.com/ http://www.strava.com/athletes/145340

Coaching Services:http://www.peakformcoaching.com/

Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [BGildenstern] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BGildenstern wrote:
It’s nearly impossible to get below 5-6% without including dehydration in the mix. Bodybuilders who get down to 2-3% limit water for 10 days and cut it out completely for 2-3 days on top of taking dietetics.

I would suspect Frodo/Lionel are around 5-6% but genetics play a roll how well you can function at those %s. As others have said, be skeptical of all bf% other than via the look test. If I use a calculator I often get 5-7% when I am without question not lower than 10% at that time.

Dehydration raises BF%.

IMO no way Lionel is 5%
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [el gato] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think what you need varies by sport and discipline within that sport In college all I did was run, mostly longer-distance events. We could get tested frequently and we did (mostly out of some bizarre pointless sense of competitiveness) back then, even out of shape my body fat was typically lower than what it's been at my best in the years since, especially since I started doing triathlon.
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [MrTri123] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
MrTri123 wrote:
BGildenstern wrote:
It’s nearly impossible to get below 5-6% without including dehydration in the mix. Bodybuilders who get down to 2-3% limit water for 10 days and cut it out completely for 2-3 days on top of taking dietetics.

I would suspect Frodo/Lionel are around 5-6% but genetics play a roll how well you can function at those %s. As others have said, be skeptical of all bf% other than via the look test. If I use a calculator I often get 5-7% when I am without question not lower than 10% at that time.

Dehydration raises BF%.

IMO no way Lionel is 5%


No? Then are you telling me that when 200lbs guy goes on Keto, drops 20 pounds of water weight over the first 3 weeks that his body fat hasn’t gone down at all? Comon man, when water weight plays a huge roll in BF%
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [BGildenstern] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BGildenstern wrote:
MrTri123 wrote:
BGildenstern wrote:
It’s nearly impossible to get below 5-6% without including dehydration in the mix. Bodybuilders who get down to 2-3% limit water for 10 days and cut it out completely for 2-3 days on top of taking dietetics.

I would suspect Frodo/Lionel are around 5-6% but genetics play a roll how well you can function at those %s. As others have said, be skeptical of all bf% other than via the look test. If I use a calculator I often get 5-7% when I am without question not lower than 10% at that time.


Dehydration raises BF%.

IMO no way Lionel is 5%



No? Then are you telling me that when 200lbs guy goes on Keto, drops 20 pounds of water weight over the first 3 weeks that his body fat hasn’t gone down at all? Comon man, when water weight plays a huge roll in BF%

Yes this is what is being said and it is in essence correct.
If you are purely dehydrating and not dropping body fat then your total weight will go down but your body fat mass will remain the same, therefore you actual body fat % will rise as your overall weight is lower (as BF% is derived from your fat mass divided by body weight).
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [Amnesia] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
LOL @ your straight faced response. This is the internet....Even if you convince people that muscle is the main container of water, not fat; even if you are mathematically correct, g'luck convincing people of the illogical.

Just pointing out, that it seems "logical" that if you drop weight, your body fat % must drop, right? Also body builders look so much more ripped when they are dehydrated, so dehydration mean lower body fat, right? Ripped looking surely = lower body fat! Although body fat is a mathematical metric, it's associated with looking lean, and that's how any sentence involving "body fat %" will be understood by most. This now makes sense "water weight plays a huge roll in (BF%) -> looking lean".

Also, phrasing, the statement dehydration raises body fat % sounds like dehydration causes body fat mass to go up. Yes, yes, that's not what you are saying, but most people don't really understand % based metrics that well.especially when you change the numerator and denominator at the same time.
Last edited by: bloodyshogun: Jan 22, 20 1:06
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [bloodyshogun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
bloodyshogun wrote:
LOL @ your straight faced response. This is the internet....Even if you convince people that muscle is the main container of water, not fat; even if you are mathematically correct, g'luck convincing people of the illogical.

Just pointing out, that it seems "logical" that if you drop weight, your body fat % must drop, right? Also body builders look so much more ripped when they are dehydrated, so dehydration mean lower body fat, right? Ripped looking surely = lower body fat! Although body fat is a mathematical metric, it's associated with looking lean, and that's how any sentence involving "body fat %" will be understood by most. This now makes sense "water weight plays a huge roll in (BF%) -> looking lean".

Also, phrasing, the statement dehydration raises body fat % sounds like dehydration causes body fat mass to go up. Yes, yes, that's not what you are saying, but most people don't really understand % based metrics that well.especially when you change the numerator and denominator at the same time.

Completely agree with what you are saying!!
A lot of people also don't understand that the way body builders dehydrate themselves to look lean and vascular is like the icing on the cake after getting their BF% down to absurdly low values. At that point they are not losing more body fat but it is the way the dehydration alters, amongst other things, skin tone etc that means they look that much more ripped (even though they feel like absolute shite).
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [el gato] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
During my base building periods when I'm maxing out my hours (16-20+) I like to keep a little extra body fat, 12% maybe. I race at 6-8% but that's something I've learned I can only hold for a week or maybe even just a few days.

I also tried to do hard work at a caloric deficit for a period last year. I was in the single digit BF range for 2-3 months and it went well for about 1.5 months then things started going really south for me. I was sluggish in key races, no 5th gear, and my first milage related injuries of my life. It was a tough lesson to learn.

Too old to go pro but doing it anyway
http://instagram.com/tgarvey4
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [Amnesia] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Amnesia wrote:
bloodyshogun wrote:
LOL @ your straight faced response. This is the internet....Even if you convince people that muscle is the main container of water, not fat; even if you are mathematically correct, g'luck convincing people of the illogical.

Just pointing out, that it seems "logical" that if you drop weight, your body fat % must drop, right? Also body builders look so much more ripped when they are dehydrated, so dehydration mean lower body fat, right? Ripped looking surely = lower body fat! Although body fat is a mathematical metric, it's associated with looking lean, and that's how any sentence involving "body fat %" will be understood by most. This now makes sense "water weight plays a huge roll in (BF%) -> looking lean".

Also, phrasing, the statement dehydration raises body fat % sounds like dehydration causes body fat mass to go up. Yes, yes, that's not what you are saying, but most people don't really understand % based metrics that well.especially when you change the numerator and denominator at the same time.

Completely agree with what you are saying!!
A lot of people also don't understand that the way body builders dehydrate themselves to look lean and vascular is like the icing on the cake after getting their BF% down to absurdly low values. At that point they are not losing more body fat but it is the way the dehydration alters, amongst other things, skin tone etc that means they look that much more ripped (even though they feel like absolute shite).


I see how there has been a miscommunication. I only subtly said it but I only think consistent measure of body fat is the visual test%. There are so many variables in different body fat techniques and the visual test is easiest and the most accurate outside water test.
I was a bodybuilder for 7 years prior to triathlon so I am well aware you don’t “actually” lose bf%, just the visual look with a “trick”.
The point I was simply trying to make was that if someone tells you they are under 5% they are either using a “trick” ie.bodybuilder dehydration or they are lying because no one can maintain or even achieve sub 5% without causing damage to the body.
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [MrRabbit] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
MrRabbit wrote:
I race at 6-8% but that's something I've learned I can only hold for a week or maybe even just a few days..

To increase body fat to 10%, you would likely need to gain over 2kg of fat.

How do you achieve this in just a few days?
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [fruit thief] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
fruit thief wrote:
MrRabbit wrote:
I race at 6-8% but that's something I've learned I can only hold for a week or maybe even just a few days..

To increase body fat to 10%, you would likely need to gain over 2kg of fat.

How do you achieve this in just a few days?

Strong comprehension skills... Where does it say he gets back to 10% in just a few days...?
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [dunno] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Says "just a few days" right there ^^^
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [fruit thief] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
fruit thief wrote:
Says "just a few days" right there ^^^


I can stay that low a few days, then the slow build back up begins. Didn't say I gorge immediately.

Too old to go pro but doing it anyway
http://instagram.com/tgarvey4
Last edited by: MrRabbit: Jan 22, 20 15:14
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [fruit thief] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Drink 2kg of oil.
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [fruit thief] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
fruit thief wrote:
Says "just a few days" right there ^^^

As I said...strong comprehension skills. It doesn't say anything about how long it takes him to return to 10%, only that he can maintain 8% for just a few days..
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [dunno] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
My genuine question is because I find it surprising that such significant changes in body fat happen in a short time.

My personal experience is that changes in body fat% have been very slow. For example even with 1000kcal deficit per day, even a lean adult would take about a week for a 1% reduction in body fat.

So I'm curious how 6-8% body fat is something you could hold but only for a few days. I have no personal experience of single digit % body fat, and wondered if maybe there is a sort of rebound hunger/ calorie excess mechanism and maybe mrRabbit would explain. He certainly looks very lean on the race photo attached to his profile
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [el gato] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Hello el gato and All,

"The trick is to keep losing weight until your friends and family ask you if you've been sick. then you know you're within 10 pounds. if they start whispering to each other, wondering if you've got cancer or aids, you're within 5. when they actually do an intervention, you're at race weight."

Slowman

Cheers, Neal

+1 mph Faster
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [fruit thief] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
fruit thief wrote:
My genuine question is because I find it surprising that such significant changes in body fat happen in a short time.

My personal experience is that changes in body fat% have been very slow. For example even with 1000kcal deficit per day, even a lean adult would take about a week for a 1% reduction in body fat.

So I'm curious how 6-8% body fat is something you could hold but only for a few days. I have no personal experience of single digit % body fat, and wondered if maybe there is a sort of rebound hunger/ calorie excess mechanism and maybe mrRabbit would explain. He certainly looks very lean on the race photo attached to his profile


I can gain 5-7 lbs inside of a week after a race without much thought about it. A little fat helps me recover, and a good chunk of that is just post race water weight too.

And I train at 9-10% leading up to the race, then cut 2-3% in a 4 week taper. I don't back off the milage much and even when tapering I'm putting in 12+ hours. Your personal experience didn't have much bearing on me it seems.

This really isn't that complicated and I feel like you're playing some unsuccessful gotcha game. You aren't getting anything however.

Too old to go pro but doing it anyway
http://instagram.com/tgarvey4
Last edited by: MrRabbit: Jan 22, 20 15:22
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [MrRabbit] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Back in my bodybuilding I had a few epic binges. Spent the day on a movie set and ate 10k+ cals. Absolutely repulsive, I know. But in one day I gained 18 pounds and visually I went from looking around 9%bf to 15%. Obviously 16-17pounds of it was water weight and lost 4lbs/day and by day 7 I was already below my previous number due to a 1000cal/day deficit.
Water weight can do some crazy things!
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [MrRabbit] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thanks for taking the time to explain, that is interesting to know.
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [el gato] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
el gato wrote:
Is there a generally accepted consensus on what a minimum "healthy" body fat % is?

El gato, there is a book called Racing Weight by Matt Fitzgerald. It unpacks some data about the body composition of elite and non-elite athletes in triathlon and in other sports. Maybe you have already read it, but if not it might be of interest because it deals with a lot of the questions in your post.

FWIW as you have asked for n=1 experiences I believe I have 10% body fat but this is based on bioimpedence and caliper skin fold, not DXA. Im 6 feet tall, weigh 148 pounds. Train year round almost every day, mainly running, and see very little change in body comp month to month or year to year. Clearly pretty different to mrR's situation. Sorry if my Q caused any offence, not intended. Was just interested how it works for someone with that elite race-day body composition, and thanks for that explanation.
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [fruit thief] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
No offense here. Just a misunderstanding. Seemed like you were accusing me of lying, but I don't think that's the case any longer. Glad I could help shed some light.

Too old to go pro but doing it anyway
http://instagram.com/tgarvey4
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [fruit thief] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thank you very much. I was not aware of that book. I'll have to check it out.
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [fruit thief] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
fruit thief wrote:
el gato wrote:
Is there a generally accepted consensus on what a minimum "healthy" body fat % is?
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [HardlyTrying] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
HardlyTrying wrote:
fruit thief wrote:
el gato wrote:
Is there a generally accepted consensus on what a minimum "healthy" body fat % is?


It's funny, but ever since I went too low and hurt myself after obsessing about BF too much this is basically what I do.

I stopped counting calories. I stopped measuring BF%. And I barely ever look at a scale anymore.

I know when I feel strong, and it's actually a little heavier than most my height that are competing for OA spots at races. At 5'9 I'm faster at 155 than I am at 148, even on the track. I just get too weak eventually and lose that "bounce."

So racing at 152ish is my sweet spot. I try to keep more muscle in my upper body too because 1) I'm vain, and 2) I'm trying to swim faster this year. I may just race at 155, just going by feel now.

And not feeling guilty about dessert now and then anymore.

Too old to go pro but doing it anyway
http://instagram.com/tgarvey4
Last edited by: MrRabbit: Jan 23, 20 7:37
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [fruit thief] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
OK, so I looked into this book on Amazon. The very first review I came across what this:

https://www.amazon.com/...&ASIN=1934030996

Admittedly this is just one review, and there were many other glowing reviews of the book, but if this review is accurate this is exactly what i'm hoping to avoid, i.e., claims that have been debunked or are just unproven, along with nonense like "you can lose weight without being in caloric deficit."

I'd love to hear your take on the book, and what you got out of it that helped you.
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [el gato] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I like pretty much all of Matt Fitzgerald's writing. The parts of Racing Weight which may be relevant are the charts showing data about body composition and other biometrics of elite runners, swimmers, cyclists and triathletes. Think you'd probably find some answer to the question about lower limits in there.

Also interesting were the food diaries of several pro athletes. They eat so clean, but actually seeing it mapped out over a day/week I found helpful.
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [el gato] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
el gato wrote:
OK, so I looked into this book on Amazon. The very first review I came across what this:

https://www.amazon.com/...&ASIN=1934030996

Admittedly this is just one review, and there were many other glowing reviews of the book, but if this review is accurate this is exactly what i'm hoping to avoid, i.e., claims that have been debunked or are just unproven, along with nonense like "you can lose weight without being in caloric deficit."

I'd love to hear your take on the book, and what you got out of it that helped you.

That review is looking at the book to literally. Fitzgerald is suggesting that rather than forcing a calorie deficit, you change your mindset to the quality of food and using food at fuel and that will ultimately lead to the desired result without the shackles of a limited diet. I use to calorie count and always obsess over numbers but when I got the most effective results was when I look nutrients and what I need for recovery/workouts and I continued to make smarter and smarter choices. Rather than eating some rubbish post run because calories are calories, I would ensure I would eat something more nourishing and that in turn left me less hungry allowing me to naturally go into a calorie deficit.
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [HardlyTrying] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
i love this!
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [el gato] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm pretty sure the message of that book is less "you can lose weight without being in a deficit" and more "if you focus on food quality, and eat nutritious, whole foods, you would have to go out of your way not to be in a slight deficit."
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [el gato] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
el gato wrote:
Is there a generally accepted consensus on what a minimum "healthy" body fat % is?...Apolo Ohno being at 2% when they were in their competitive prime. So what's everyone's experience here?
.

Performance does not equal health.

Apollo Ohno was also going for gold medals and was willing to put his short term health at risk. If he did carry a 2% BF I can imagine it was for very long.
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [907Tri] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Fair enough. That's the gist of my question, as I'm looking to get down to a low yet sustainable and healthy weight before the final 12 week block of training - not something I an maintain for a week or two. Sounds like something in the 7-8% range is a decent target and then see how I feel from there.
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [907Tri] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
907Tri wrote:
el gato wrote:
Is there a generally accepted consensus on what a minimum "healthy" body fat % is?...Apolo Ohno being at 2% when they were in their competitive prime. So what's everyone's experience here?
.

Performance does not equal health.

Apollo Ohno was also going for gold medals and was willing to put his short term health at risk. If he did carry a 2% BF I can imagine it was for very long.


I looked this info up. It was Apollo Ohno’s trainer who said he was 2% while boasting how he helped him get lean after putting on “excess body fat”. Something tells me he may be a bit biased. If you look at photos of him around the Olympics he is not even close to 2%. If you look at his finish line photos from the Ironman World Champs he was around 10% which should say something.
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [HardlyTrying] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
HardlyTrying wrote:
fruit thief wrote:
el gato wrote:
Is there a generally accepted consensus on what a minimum "healthy" body fat % is?


The jiggle pyramid is the answer.

But the numbers:
Men should not notice jiggle.
Women should add + 5% to male numbers.

Non-athletes won't notice jiggle unless body fat exceeds 20%.

Non-professional athletes will not notice jiggle unless body fat exceeds 10%.

It is hard to keep body fat below 8%.

It might is not always hard to keep body fat below 10% (males) and 15% (females)- if you train a lot and avoid eating like a pig.
Last edited by: Velocibuddha: Jan 25, 20 12:45
Quote Reply
Re: Minimum BF %? [Velocibuddha] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply


quite fat from 2%. add another 10 To Apolo:


Quote Reply