Optimal BF % for longevity?

[tzanghi]

I went to the doctor today, and he told me I need to lose my belly fat. Now I was sitting hunched over, and I do have a small patch of fat on my lower abdominal area, so I can see where he's coming from, but I'm guessing I'm around 15% after the holidays, so this was a bit unexpected. Perhaps my estimate is too optimistic, and I'm more towards 18-20%?

Anyways, this got me to wonder if there is particular BF% at which one should strive to stay around in order to maintain optimal health/longevity?

I subscribe to the theory that in general, the more attractive a feature is, the more healthy it is(e.g., white teeth, low BF %), so this would lead me to think ~10% for males would be ideal.

Thanks, again, Jordan.

[Jordan Feigenbaum]

Your doctor is an idiot and he's just regurgitating the "Belly fat (visceral) is the most dangerous fat there is!" (which he couldn't tell from looking at you). It seems that mortality is affected by both fat free mass and body fat percentage, although I can't find any reliable source that puts an upper limit on either (BMI being notoriously flawed along with BIA BF testers).

Best I can tell, if you can keep your metabolic machinery happy, don't smoke, and don't die in a traumatic accident you'll be fine. If I had to postulate, a body fat between 10-17% is probably the healthiest for a guy (+/- 2%). Anything lower than that for most guys is going to require consistent caloric restriction (or gear) or a very low fat free mass level. Anything higher than that represents a somewhat less than optimal hormonal and metabolic situation, in my opinion.

[tzanghi]

Thanks, Jordan. On another topic, I asked him what he thought of ketogenic diets, and he said he thought they were good to start off weight loss, but that they tax your kidneys too much. Ever heard of this? My thoughts were that he was referring to eating too much protein which would tax the kidneys, which is BS, I know, unless you have pre-existing kidney disease/damage.

Also, I need to educate myself some more on ketogenic diets and the safety thereof; I'm reading GCBC, but what other sources are good on the safety/benefits of ketogenic diets?

Needless to say, I likely won't be returning to that doctor.

[JDelage]

It's very easy to get one's BF off. At 15% BF, you should be fitter than 90% of his patients. I doubt you'd have much of a paunch either.

[Jordan Feigenbaum]

Thanks, Jordan. On another topic, I asked him what he thought of ketogenic diets, and he said he thought they were good to start off weight loss, but that they tax your kidneys too much. Ever heard of this? My thoughts were that he was referring to eating too much protein which would tax the kidneys, which is BS, I know, unless you have pre-existing kidney disease/damage.

Also, I need to educate myself some more on ketogenic diets and the safety thereof; I'm reading GCBC, but what other sources are good on the safety/benefits of ketogenic diets?

Needless to say, I likely won't be returning to that doctor.

I'd just pull the papers cited in GCBC and go from there. You could also google-fu your way full of knowledge on the topics. I don't have any other books that focus on keto diets but that advanced nutrition and metabolism is a good read.

I've never heard of kidney issues from Keto stuff either. Keto should really be more moderate protein than anything, but yes he's probably thinking about protein damaging the kidneys when in reality it's pretty benign. If you saw the nutrition and metabolism education given in current medical programs you'd laugh your ass off. I can't even imagine what it was like back in the day.

[Eric Larousse]

ok so let me get this straight....your supposed to novice progression your way up to around 20% body fat and then you drop try and drop to 10-17% for health and longevity?

[Jordan Feigenbaum]

During novice progression you should probably be pretty stagnant between 15-20, depending on your genetic predisposition. More than this represents less than optimal dietary choices more often than not. Less than this generally either means you're leaving LP on the table or you're a hardass (literally). People can run leaner during intermediate and advanced cycles with the longer recovery period not necessitating the caloric surplus so immediately. 3% BF could be dropped in 3 weeks, not really too concerned about if someone goes over this made up upper limit I came up with of 17%.

On LP fuel appropriately to make the gains. Don't get fat though, and if that means you have to be more cognizant of your food choices then so be it. On the other hand, LP is stymied so many times by people who won't eat consistently that I'm hesitant to add any more complicated recommendations or stipulations to the program outside of eat a lot of clean food + GOMAD or similar. Any person who has the cajones and work ethic to make it through LP will have no problem getting leaner afterwards (if they happened to let themselves get fatter than they wanted), but unfortunately, most people have fat people brains.

[swingshiftworker]

I went to the doctor today, and he told me I need to lose my belly fat. <snip> I'm guessing I'm around 15% after the holidays, so this was a bit unexpected.

How do you know you're "around 15"%" BF? Guessing won't work.

The only way to "know" is to measure it. Calipers are inherently unreliable. Bioelectrical meters are not much better.

The best way to measure it is to get a hydrostatic (underwater) body fat test or a DXA body scan (which is arguably more accurate than hydrostatic testing).

I've had my BF tested hydrostatically every 3 months for the past year and am better able to manage my diet and strength development as a result.

I suggest you get your BF tested so that you'll know for sure whether your doctor's advice is something you should listen to or not.

[Jordan Feigenbaum]

How do you know you're "around 15"%" BF? Guessing won't work.

The only way to "know" is to measure it. Calipers are inherently unreliable. Bioelectrical meters are not much better.

The best way to measure it is to get a hydrostatic (underwater) body fat test or a DXA body scan (which is arguably more accurate than hydrostatic testing).

I've had my BF tested hydrostatically every 3 months for the past year and am better able to manage my diet and strength development as a result.

I suggest you get your BF tested so that you'll know for sure whether your doctor's advice is something you should listen to or not.

How do you know the spirometer measurement of your lung volume is accurate? Calipers, in trained hands are brutally effective and repeatable (and cheaper). But seriously, who really cares about the actual number vs lean or fat looking? You are also assuming his October can tell his ass from a hole in the ground. I disagree.