How to lower body fat percentage

C

christine159

New member
Hi everyone,

I've been reading this forum for awhile now but this is the first time I've posted anything. Up until now, I've found most of my questions have been answered through other people's posts but now I have some questions that are more specific to my individual circumstances.

In a nutshell, I'd like some advice on how to lower my body fat percentage. Here's some background information: In February, I weighed just over 130 lbs, which while in a healthy range for my age and height (23, 5'4"), did not look good on my frame. I had a lot of excess fat around my midsection and wanted to get rid of it. I went on a diet and started exercising, setting an arbitrary goal weight of 115 lbs.

I've now more or less reached my goal weight - I fluctuate between 116 and 118 depending on the day and time I weigh myself. I managed to lose the weight by eating between 1300-1600 calories most days and exercising for about an hour six days a week (3 days of strength training and 3 days of cardio, most of which incorporates interval training).

At this point, I don't want to lose any more weight, as I don't want to look too skinny. Instead, I want to shift my focus to building a bit of muscle and attaining a more toned and athletic look. Last time I measured (a couple of weeks ago), my body fat percentage was 20%. I would like to lower it to 15%. What changes, if any, should I make to my diet and exercise plan (as outlined above) to achieve this?

Should I continue creating a calorie deficit or should I start eating at maintenance levels? Again, I don't want to get thinner, I just want to build a bit of muscle and was told this isn't possible while in a calorie deficit.

If I should eat at maintenance, how many calories should I consume per day? Using the Harold-Benedict formula, I came up with about 2000 calories a day for maintenance. This is based on my age (23), height (5'4"), current weight (118) and activity level (I multiplied by 1.55 although I'm wondering if I should have multiplied by 1.75 - I exercise 6 days a week, but I also work a desk job and don't get a lot of physical activity outside of my regular workout). Does this figure sound accurate?

Thanks in advance to anyone who takes the time to respond!
 
15% is not healthy for a woman, if you lower your body fat percentage too much it will interfere with your estrogen production, could disrupt your menstrual cycle and worst of all could cause you to lose bone mass the way post menopausal women do.

Look up the female athlete triad. Female athlete triad - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Frankly, weighing 116-118 pounds at 5'4" and 20% body fat sounds like the minimum those numbers can be for you. These numbers would be considered great even among actresses and other people paid to look thin.

You have to realize that your goal sounds very unhealthy. Why aren't you happy at your size?
 
Last edited:
Biggestloser,
You may be a bit misinformed about the proper bodyfat percentage for a woman, much less anyone actually. Everyone is different, and women lose their period at different levels at body fat. Also there is no real problem with amenorrhea as long as it is not caused by an unknown underlying problem, you take calcium supplements, and you are not real interest in pregnancy anytime soon!

Now that being said

Christine,
15% is easily attainable! Any particular reason for wanting to be 15%? Also are you being professionally measured? That is the most important question because getting measured without good old fashioned calipers and by the same person each time that knows what they are doing is the most accurate.

Is the 15% a look thing? I mean do you think you will look better at 15% and that is why you want that number? Or are you looking to maybe one day compete? Most of the time what we are looking for in our own bodies can be obtained by symmetry and we often mistake it for getting leaner. Not sure if that makes sense or not.

For an example you could want to have a thinner waist. You think a smaller waist is obtained through losing weight or lowering body fat when the look you are actually looking for (the one you see on fitness models and the like) is actually a shoulder to waist ratio. You build the back wider and shoulders bigger then you create the look of a smaller waist without ever really focusing on your waist. Hopefully I have explained that okay. SO the question lies on why do you want 15% instead of say 8% or 10%?

Speaking of, my partner is a professional figure competitor and she competes at 5% body fat!
 
I'd agree, percentages like 10% are male percentages, womens body fat needs to be higher as we carry weight on our bodies for child birth (antibodies, hormones, etc) men don't so they are able to get a lower body fat.

Just as the poster above me has said, it will adversly (not could, but will) affect your body to have too low a body fat. Being able to have children is just one factor, if your body isn't working properly, your likely to get problems like osteoperosis, odema, depression, get early wrinkles, even be at risk of metabolic problems and thyroid problems.

Please make sure your ambitions are wise and well thought out, if your at all unsure, seek medical and professional advice. You only get one life, you only get one body and life's too short to be stuck in one you have messed up to the point where its irreversable.
 
5KFreak said:
Biggestloser,
You may be a bit misinformed about the proper bodyfat percentage for a woman, much less anyone actually. Everyone is different, and women lose their period at different levels at body fat. Also there is no real problem with amenorrhea as long as it is not caused by an unknown underlying problem, you take calcium supplements, and you are not real interest in pregnancy anytime soon!
Click to expand...

I mean maybe, but I've read a bit about body fat % and pretty much everything I read recommends things like 20-25%, 21-24%.

I've also read that learn female athletes like figure skaters, like gymnasts, like runners can get so lean that they lose their periods.

It's possible that she specifically can be healthy at a lower than recommended body fat %, but I personally don't see the point of risking it when the recommendations are above 20%, and there are documented issues that female athletes have due to their leanness.

Why risk it? I mean, her weight and body fat % is already very lean and she is thin. What is the point of getting leaner, unless she actually is a gymnast or something like that and needs the weight to succeed at her sport?

If she feels like her body is too fat at this weight and body fat, then it sounds like a psychological rather than a physical issue that needs to be dealt with in a manner other than losing fat.

It just seems crazy to me to risk things like early osteoporosis to look even more lean when she's already very lean.

Speaking of, my partner is a professional figure competitor and she competes at 5% body fat!
Click to expand...

Which is substantially lower than essential body fat needed for female body function, which IIRC is 10-12%.
 
Last edited:
Biggestloser,

You do make a great point in regards to the mental issue vs the physical issue and that is mainly why I asked about the reason for 15%. Competitors want and have to have a completely different look so if her goal was to get to 15% as a short term accomplishment on her way to competition levels then that is one thing, but if you have an idea of what 15% looks like then you are most likely wrong and your where you are getting that idea from is most likely a symmetry issue which you can accomplish more by learning what to work.

However, the only real issue that a woman (practicing a healthy lifestyle - I add this in because people practicing unhealthy habits create and do have issues) from having a low body fat percentage is the loss of a period, and that really is not an issue if you are not wanting to get pregnant anytime soon (once you get the fact back on you will menstrate again and then after a couple of cycles your ovulation gets back on track) and you take a calcium supplement. Where the lack of a period does not directly cause osteoperosis, it surely does not help the strength of the bones so calcium is important.

I personally do not pay attention to what doctors or the government tell me what my healthy body fat percentage should be. I go on where I feel great and look great, but going back to my caveat, I practice healthy habits and live a healthy lifestyle i.e. I don't have mental issues with how I look where someone like a person suffering from anorexia nervosa (there is a difference between nervosa and plain ole anorexia) might have that problem.

So that being said, where someone might look excellent at 15% to you but that person could actually safely go lower and acheive the look they are acually wanting. Does that make sense?

The lowest my partner competed at ever was at 4.7% and as she sits on the couch next to me right now 6 weeks out from a competition, she is eating 6oz boiled chicken, 1 cup broccoli, 1 cup of steamed multigrains, and a small salad which is her 5th meal like it today, and she is 6.2% body fat. She has been getting up all week pretty early and she comes home so I assume she is functioning just fine =)

She is very healthy, and nothing is wrong with her. However she does not live every day on 5%! There is not way. Her off season every day living bf is 10%
 
5KFreak said:
However, the only real issue that a woman (practicing a healthy lifestyle - I add this in because people practicing unhealthy habits create and do have issues) from having a low body fat percentage is the loss of a period, and that really is not an issue if you are not wanting to get pregnant anytime soon (once you get the fact back on you will menstrate again and then after a couple of cycles your ovulation gets back on track) and you take a calcium supplement. Where the lack of a period does not directly cause osteoperosis, it surely does not help the strength of the bones so calcium is important.
Click to expand...

That's just not true, the woman who is too lean loses her period because of a loss of estrogen production (which is made in fat tissue). Estrogen has many functions in the female body apart from fertility (including mental function, mood and so on).

Period loss is a symptom of a systemic issue where an essential part of a woman's function is diminished.

It's kind of like bringing on early menopause, every part of the body is going to be affected.


Your partner may be strong and healthy now, but I just don't see how repeatedly bringing a female body to 5% body fat is not going to have negative effects in the long run.

In my opinion people need to take reasonable risks. If you're going to risk losing your health, the payoff has to be really really good. That may be the case for your partner, and the benefit from being a body builder may outweigh the health consequences for her. But don't fool yourself that this carries no health risk.
 
Last edited:
Hmmmm! well in all of my research, I have never found any real data on the negative issues surrounding lower body fat in women or any real negative effects of the loss of menstration. Can you post any links to your research so that I may take a gander?


Also your point on lower estrogen levels have direct effects on mental function makes me wonder, do men have mental issues?
 
5KFreak said:
Hmmmm! well in all of my research, I have never found any real data on the negative issues surrounding lower body fat in women or any real negative effects of the loss of menstration. Can you post any links to your research so that I may take a gander?
Click to expand...

I haven't saved links to what I read, so to find them again I'd have to search which I don't have time for.

I mean, here is a quick link to what estrogen does in the body: Estrogen - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You could probably google scholar gymnasts who are at the leanest end of female athletes to see their health. I mean that's not even saying that professional athletes generally have all sorts of health issues later in life. And if your goal is health and longevity, the regimen of a professional athlete is not the way to go.

Also your point on lower estrogen levels have direct effects on mental function makes me wonder, do men have mental issues?
Click to expand...

Men obviously have a different biology than women and need different levels of hormones.

Women are supposed to have estrogen, after menopause when that's lost women experience all sorts of negative health effects.

Losing your fat to the point where your body no longer makes enough estrogen to even menstruate just sounds like a very risky behavior to me. It's messing with basic biological function of your body and forcing it into extremes that it's not optimized for.

So in my opinion the pay off for doing that to your body has to be really high to justify the risk.
 
Last edited:
Is it possible that body fat percentage and BMI are being mixed up here? It seems like there may be a misunderstanding between those who think 15% is too little, and those who think it is adequate.

From what I understand, 15% would be unhealthy according to the BMI scale (where 18 and under is considered underweight), but not as a body fat percentage. I know male athletes with a body fat percentage of 6%, for example, or females with a body fat percentage of 12%, but on the BMI scale they are considered "obese" because of the weight of their muscles. A professional athlete can have a BMI of 35%, or a pregnant woman can have one of 45% - the BMI chart isn't really very useful, because it doesn't take what you are composed of into consideration.

I just thought maybe some people were thinking about BMI rather than body fat percentage, and that might explain the difference of opinion?
 
Siam said:
Is it possible that body fat percentage and BMI are being mixed up here? It seems like there may be a misunderstanding between those who think 15% is too little, and those who think it is adequate.

From what I understand, 15% would be unhealthy according to the BMI scale (where 18 and under is considered underweight), but not as a body fat percentage. I know male athletes with a body fat percentage of 6%, for example, or females with a body fat percentage of 12%, but on the BMI scale they are considered "obese" because of the weight of their muscles. A professional athlete can have a BMI of 35%, or a pregnant woman can have one of 45% - the BMI chart isn't really very useful, because it doesn't take what you are composed of into consideration.

I just thought maybe some people were thinking about BMI rather than body fat percentage, and that might explain the difference of opinion?
Click to expand...

Men can have a much lower percentage than women and be healthy. For women 10-12% is simply essential fat, but female athletes with body fat of 12% (like elite gymnasts) don't produce enough estrogen to the extent that some even stop menstruating. From what I read, fitness level healthy body fat % for women is 20-25%.

Obviously these are averages and different women may like outside the range and be healthy, but I wouldn't just scoff at these averages without good reason.
If a woman's dream is to be an elite gymnast it would be understandable why she would take drastic measures to lower her body fat, but if it's simply a matter of slightly altering appearance from very lean to even more lean it just seems like a pointless risk to take.

Not having enough estrogen can have negative health consequences in terms of bone loss, emotions much like menopause does. Post menopausal women have a higher risk of heart attack for example.
 
Last edited:
Is the 15% a look thing? I mean do you think you will look better at 15% and that is why you want that number? Or are you looking to maybe one day compete? Most of the time what we are looking for in our own bodies can be obtained by symmetry and we often mistake it for getting leaner. Not sure if that makes sense or not.
Click to expand...

15% is just a ballpark based on what I'd been told was an ideal body fat percentage for women my age although, as usual, there's a ton of conflicting information out there. Some websites say under 21% is unhealthy, while others say 20% is average and 12-15% is ideal. However, I usually base my progress on how I look/feel so I'm not too concerned with the actual number.

Ultimately, I want to acheive a more toned look by building muscle, which would probably increase my weight in the long run but lower my BF%. Maybe I should have emphasized that more in my original post.

If she feels like her body is too fat at this weight and body fat, then it sounds like a psychological rather than a physical issue that needs to be dealt with in a manner other than losing fat.
Click to expand...

Where did I say I was "too fat?" On the contrary, I said I didn't want to lose any more weight because I thought I'd look too thin if I lost any more... again, I want to lower my BF% by building muscle, not losing fat.
 
christine159 said:
Where did I say I was "too fat?" On the contrary, I said I didn't want to lose any more weight because I thought I'd look too thin if I lost any more... again, I want to lower my BF% by building muscle, not losing fat.
Click to expand...

Wanting to look more lean kind of implies you think you aren't lean enough. I don't mean to put you on the defensive, I'm just curious why you don't think you're lean enough when it sounds like you're very lean.

Who told you that 12-15% body fat is ideal for a female?
 
biggestloser105 said:
Men can have a much lower percentage than women and be healthy. For women 10-12% is simply essential fat, but female athletes with body fat of 12% (like elite gymnasts) don't produce enough estrogen to the extent that some even stop menstruating. From what I read, fitness level healthy body fat % for women is 20-25%.
Click to expand...

Okay, so everyone is talking about the same thing. Thanks for the information, I'm going to check that out.
 
Is essential body fat an absolute, or a %, for a given individual? I'm thinking absolute - for example, why would a person need more fat on their body just because they put on some muscle mass?

A 120lb female at 15% body fat has less fat (in lbs or volume) than the same female at 160lbs and 15% body fat. 120lbs @ 15% = 18lbs of fat, 160 @ 15% = 24 lbs of fat.

A 160lb female at 15% body fat has as much fat as a 120lb female at 20% body fat.

Just saying... I don't think you can just pick out a fat % and call it the healthy limit. A body builder should be fine with a lower fat % because the % lowers due to an increase in muscle mass, not just because they have any less total fat than an average person. You should consider that when giving advice.
 
MAR1984 said:
Is essential body fat an absolute, or a %, for a given individual? I'm thinking absolute - for example, why would a person need more fat on their body just because they put on some muscle mass?

A 120lb female at 15% body fat has less fat (in lbs or volume) than the same female at 160lbs and 15% body fat. 120lbs @ 15% = 18lbs of fat, 160 @ 15% = 24 lbs of fat.

A 160lb female at 15% body fat has as much fat as a 120lb female at 20% body fat.

Just saying... I don't think you can just pick out a fat % and call it the healthy limit. A body builder should be fine with a lower fat % because the % lowers due to an increase in muscle mass, not just because they have any less total fat than an average person. You should consider that when giving advice.
Click to expand...

If fat plays a role in estrogen production, it would make sense that a bigger person would need more fat because a bigger person would need more estrogen than a smaller person.

There doesn't seem to be a whole lot of research on what's a healthy body fat %, but the issues that lean female athletes have are documented. So deliberately lowering your body fat into those ranges for the sake of improving appearance (when appearance is already great) just seems dangerous to me.


The bigger issue here is that a 5'4" woman who is 116-118 pounds and 20% body fat feels that her body is not lean enough. It really does sound like a psychological issue.
 
Last edited:
I'm going to throw up some pictures - I've heard in the past (and tend to agree based on the pictures I've seen) that women below 18% BF start to look ... odd. Here are some pictures with the associated BF% though.




It should also be noted that some of that will depend on how much muscle you've got -


Personally I'd recommend a goal that's based on how you actually look & feel rather than an arbitrary number like 15%.

(Pictures from )
 
I think what we have here is someone wanting to look like a model and not so much a real normal healthy person.

I cannot comment on all models but I know for sure that a high percentage of models are as slight as they are because they take drugs such as amphetamines, don't eat (just drink) and ....are air brushed on photos!

Take a good look at the images above- note how the ones with the lower body fat percentage have been airbrushed to perfection, you don't see their bones protuding, you don't see the condition their heart is under or how rubbish their skin and hair actually are, they are spray tanned to oompha loompa standards and are dressed in pretty buy-me clothes. The few pictures of the more normal looking people (those that you see day to day in real life for example) are taken without such airbrushing. It just goes to show societies (and more over the media's) point of view takes presidence over health and common sense.

Seriously OP, you can look georgous and be healthy at the same time, you don't need to look emaciated to be beautiful.
 
summer123 said:
I think what we have here is someone wanting to look like a model and not so much a real normal healthy person.
Click to expand...

I think at the OP's weight and body fat %, she already should look like a model. Maybe not the super-skinny 110 pounds 5'10" height model, but definitely like a lingerie or swimsuit model. Many of the actresses who are thin and considered hot by media standards, have similar stats to the OP.

That is why this whole post sounds like the OP has psychological issues, because it's not an average woman trying to look like a model. It's a woman who already looks like a model trying to be even more lean.
 
Last edited:
Jeanette401 said:
I'm going to throw up some pictures - I've heard in the past (and tend to agree based on the pictures I've seen) that women below 18% BF start to look ... odd. Here are some pictures with the associated BF% though.




It should also be noted that some of that will depend on how much muscle you've got -


Personally I'd recommend a goal that's based on how you actually look & feel rather than an arbitrary number like 15%.

(Pictures from )
Click to expand...


Ummmmmm these pictures are GROSSLY incorrect!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top