# How long does it take to drop 1% of BF? Is there an average rate under certain deficit?

How long does it take to drop 1% of BF? Is there an average rate under certain deficit? Or does it vary too much per person. I am currently around 20-22%, so I was wondering how long would it take me to go from that to something like 13-14% with 300kcal deficit.

>6'2/190lbs

1. 3 months ago
Anonymous

When you lose 1 kilogram some of that weight is fat and some is lean mass. How much of each you lose is described in a concept called "nutrient partitioning". It's called that because it's usually referred to in the context of gaining mass but it works both ways.

At 2.8g/kg of protein your p-ratio tops out at 60% bodyfat, 40% lean body mass. There is significant individual variability; this is an average. It's also not a hard and fast rule - this number was obtained from experimental trials involving pretty high tier athletes. If you're not one of those, i.e. well-trained and already at a good composition, your p-ratio could definitely be different. We know fat noobies can recomp, which would require a p-ratio above 1 - gaining more lean mass than total mass.

But if you take 60:40 as a rule of thumb and start from there, then track your own results to do your own experimental study with subjects = 1, you can find your own p-ratio. Then it's relatively simple maths to calculate what your body composition will be after any given duration of time at that deficit and p-ratio. I leave that math as an exercise for the reader.

• 3 months ago
Anonymous

So I'm guessing higher the BF%, the higher the p-ratio, for my BF% I would guess its 70-30 - is there a way to minimize lean mass loss? Do I need a high protein low car low fat diet to cut?

• 3 months ago
Anonymous

>So I'm guessing higher the BF%, the higher the p-ratio
If by that you mean "higher bodyfat = more lean mass gains" then yes and no.

The no first: p-ratio has nothing to do with bf% as far as we can tell from the research. This makes sense because there's no mechanism in the body that we know of which detects your bf% and then passes that information on to your "partitioning system".

And now the yes: that same research gives an ever so slight trend in the direction you described, fatter = more muscle. This also makes sense because you'd think if you're already a fat fuck your body would be less concerned with laying in stores for winter and more willing to build muscle. And we know that there are plenty of fat, jacked guys (e.g. linebackers, who some of this research came from). And we also know that when you're super fucking lean it's almost impossible to make gains without getting fat very fast - but maybe this is just because going from 4% to 10% looks much more dramatic than 17% to 27% even though the latter is a much bigger jump in reality.

So as far as what can be supported by research, p-ratio isn't affected by body composition. As far as research + common sense + experience tells us, p-ratio might be a little bit affected at the extremes, maybe.

Like I said the only way to know for sure if you truly want to take a scientific approach is to track your cals, your protein, and your bodyfat reliably over time (DEXA scans aren't that expensive and you only need a handful of datapoints to draw a line on a graph). It's what I'm gonna do for my next bulk. I wouldn't seriously recommend it though, I'm just autistic.

But to put it in practical terms:
>eat 2.8g of protein per kg of bodyweight
>train neutrally because training in a deficit sucks balls, don't take it easy but don't go hard or expect to crush your workouts
>that's it

I'll post the maths in the next post.

• 3 months ago
Anonymous

stm = starting total mass (assuming 100 here)
p = fat portion of p ratio as a decimal (0.6)
sbf = starting bodyfat percentage as a decimal (assuming 0.21)
d = total mass lost (daily deficit * 7 * weeks on cut / 7000 (assuming 500*7*12/7000))

(stm*sbf)-(d*p)
(
(stm*sbf)-(d*p)
+
(stm*(1-sbf))-(d*(1-p))
)
=final bodyfat percentage

You could rearrange the formula to solve for weeks to cut or whatever but I haven't slept yet tonight so it's a miracle if I managed to re-derive just this part of it correctly.

So:
((100*0.2)-(6*0.6))/((100*0.2)-(6*0.6)+(100*0.8)-(6*0.4))=0.17 or approx 17% bf after a 12 week cut at 500 cal deficit per day at a final mass of 94kg.

If we make the daily deficit 1000 then it goes down to 14% at a final mass of 88kg.

As proof of how fucking aids working with formulas in notepads is I fucked up the brackets twice doing this and almost posted an incorrect answer due to BOMDAS lol. I hate maths. Pic related is what I was TRYING to write. All you're trying to do is do final fat mass divided by final total mass - using the p-ratio you can calculate out how much of each of fat and lean you should lose so you split them out and subtract the proportionate losses and then put them back together.

As for putting this into practice, in my experience it's fairly accurate (at least for me). I use it as a guide though, not a map. Sometimes I have to adjust my calories way higher or lower than I though to hit the waypoints, and sometimes I'm getting more fat than I expected at a certain rate of gain and have to back off a bit. But by and large, over time, it's worked out for me pretty accurately. On the other hand that's probably confounded by the fact that I'm working towards it. I guess the point is that you CAN work towards it, so if your results are worse than this then there's things you can probably improve.

I wouldn't rely on this as the final analysis, though.

• 3 months ago
Anonymous

kill me

• 3 months ago
Anonymous

high protein and strength training, you will lose quite a bit of strength on a cut but most of it returns as soon as you eat at maintenance

• 3 months ago
Anonymous

I am fine with losing a bit of strength as long as I'm losing fat and getting leaner but I'm worried about losing too much lean mass and basically becoming dyel

• 3 months ago
Anonymous

>
At 2.8g/kg of protein your p-ratio tops out at 60% bodyfat, 40% lean body mass.

• 3 months ago
Anonymous

If you eat 2.8 grams of protein for every kilogram of bodyweight that you are then for every 1000 grams of weight you gain or lose 600 will be fat and 400 will be muscle.

That is a very, very, very loose rule. Don't take it too seriously. But it's a starting point, and the only one I have found in a long time spent searching that actually has applicability and has borne out in my own life.

It's more likely that you only need 2.8 grams of protein for every kilogram of lean body mass that you have, not total bodyweight, but the difference won't be huge unless you're super fat anyway and you shouldn't be if you are; in any event too much protein won't kill you and it compensates for low days in my experience.

• 3 months ago
Anonymous

I appreciate the extra effort anon, thank you. I will also not ignore the contextual framework you're providing-I'll keep my goal outcomes reasonable and sober.

• 3 months ago
Anonymous

if it's the same 60:40 for gain or lose then how would anyone ever gain bulk and cut

• 3 months ago
Anonymous

Good question. I must be wrong about something then. Probably the p-ratio is higher when you cut than when you bulk? Like I said I don't stick to the estimate once I'm actually doing the thing and that combined with only having done 1 actual cut before roids means I never got a chance to catch that discrepancy in practice.

I haven't done much cutting so I haven't put that much thought into that half of things but admittedly that's still a major brainlet oversight on my part. Anyway I dunno but I'm about to fucking die from sleep deprivation here so I'll come back to this thread if it's still up.

Just goes to show that all the research in the world can't make me not a fucking idiot. Good catch anon.

• 3 months ago
Anonymous

I mean it was only ever the loosest imaginable rule anyway though. I'm sure if I still had my old spreadsheet I could go and get the deviations between estimated and actual and give you a better answer that isn't just "lmao guess I'm wrong".

• 3 months ago
Anonymous

I mean it was only ever the loosest imaginable rule anyway though. I'm sure if I still had my old spreadsheet I could go and get the deviations between estimated and actual and give you a better answer that isn't just "lmao guess I'm wrong".

too hard on yourself anon

2. 3 months ago
Anonymous

This bro lookin like a baldurs gate sewer rat

• 3 months ago
Anonymous

3. 3 months ago
Anonymous

Is Manuel natty???

• 3 months ago
Anonymous

he looks roided

4. 3 months ago
Anonymous

>40% of total bodyweight dropped is lean mass even with a high-protein diet

No you retard then nobody would cut and everybody would be a bloat lord, nobody on the bodybuilding stage would be lean because they'd have no muscle mass.