hydrostatic testing, losing weight, and getting faster!

Hi Emily:

Forgive me for being out of school here (being a guy and
all...), but I'm working on a similar problem.

I'm about 12 lbs heaver (5 8", currently 152) than when I
ran my best times. I look quite fit, very low body fat,
veins visible on arms and legs.

I tend to put on muscle, which is heavy, and in my opinion,
slows you down. My two nieces are also quite muscular (one
is a national class gymnast). You may be one of those, like
us, who add more muscle than fat when you gain weight.

This would explain your low body fat%, and probably you look
thinner than your weight because muscle takes up less space
pound for pound.

Nevertheless, I'm losing 10 lbs for the summer to see if I
can get down to my historical weight. If you look at the
really fast guys, they are usually pretty skinny.

I think you can be too thin, but if you were healthy at a
lower weight in the past, I think it's a good idea to try
and get down there if you want to run your fastest.

-- Dan

"Emily" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Here's the stats, I'm a 42 year old woman, who is just
shy of 5'5" and I weigh 139 lbs. After a lifetime of
jogging, last year I started running with a running group
and racing. My times have been steadily improving and
last month I ran a PR 5K of 22:49 at 6000' (where I live
and train).

While I'm happy with my weight on a personal level, I'm
realizing that I'm _significantly_ heavier for my height
than most other women I race with. I've become passionate
enough about my running that I want to do what I can to
improve my race times, including adjusting my eating
habits, which on the whole are good but there's always
room for improvement.

We have a hydrostatic testing facility nearby and hearing
that it's the gold standard I went to get my body fat
tested. They concluded that I had 14.7% body fat and told
me that for a women in my 40's I should not be any lower
than that. Now I believe this result is wrong, I think I
look trim and fit but not 14% trim and fit! We have a very
accomplished coach who consults with our group and when I
told him the results of my test, he said he thought the
results were "unlikely" but since I wasn't obviously
overweight, putting on more muscle to power my current
weight would be more productive than trying to lose
weight. Could it be that perhaps I just have particularly
dense bones and so that threw off the hydrostatic results?
Made it appear that I had a lower percentage of body fat
than I do?

While it's comforting to think about just living with the
weight I'm at, when I think about what it could mean to my
race times to be running at 129 lbs vs. 139 it's tempting
to see if I could get there. But I don't want to set
myself up for failure by trying to get to a weight that's
too low for me. On the other hand according to all the
charts 129 is _not_ on the low end for a woman my height.
I know I weighed less than that when I was in college but
I think I had less muscle then too. I also don't want to
negatively impact my race times by not giving my body
enough fuel or losing muscle. So I'm not sure what to do.

I know no one can really answer this question based on
this message, but thought I'd see if anyone had any
thoughts.

Thanks!

"Dan Stumpus" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Hi Emily:

Forgive me for being out of school here (being a guy and
all...),

but I'm

Quoted message said:

working on a similar problem.

I'm about 12 lbs heaver (5 8", currently 152) than when
I ran my

best times.

Quoted message said:

I look quite fit, very low body fat, veins visible on
arms and

legs.

Quoted message said:

I tend to put on muscle, which is heavy, and in my
opinion, slows

you down.

Quoted message said:

My two nieces are also quite muscular (one is a
national class

gymnast).

Quoted message said:

You may be one of those, like us, who add more muscle
than fat

when you gain

Quoted message said:

weight.

This would explain your low body fat%, and probably
you look

thinner than

Quoted message said:

your weight because muscle takes up less space pound
for pound.

Nevertheless, I'm losing 10 lbs for the summer to see if
I can get

down to

Quoted message said:

my historical weight. If you look at the really fast
guys, they

are usually

Quoted message said:

pretty skinny.

Dan, I would recommend you have yourself hydrostatically
checked before you attempt to lose 10 pounds. If your in the
5-8% then the 10 pounds will come mostly from muscle and I
don't think that is what you want to do. In the past you may
have been faster and leaner but solid training(more muscle)
and a little of the aging process has you at a comfortable
weight. Of course if you're eating a pint of Ice cream each
night with a dozen chocolate chip cookies for breakfast then
some dietary changes might help.

Emily, you may just be at your ideal weight. I have a female
friend that is the same weight and similar build and
muscular. That is her natural build and to try to alter that
would mean loss of muscle and I don't think that is
beneficial.

--
Doug Freese
[email hidden]
(Remove the NOBS)

"Dan Stumpus" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Hi Emily:

Forgive me for being out of school here (being a guy and
all...),

but I'm

Quoted message said:

working on a similar problem.

I'm about 12 lbs heaver (5 8", currently 152) than when
I ran my

best times.

Quoted message said:

I look quite fit, very low body fat, veins visible on
arms and

legs.

Quoted message said:

I tend to put on muscle, which is heavy, and in my
opinion, slows

you down.

Quoted message said:

My two nieces are also quite muscular (one is a
national class

gymnast).

Quoted message said:

You may be one of those, like us, who add more muscle
than fat

when you gain

Quoted message said:

weight.

This would explain your low body fat%, and probably
you look

thinner than

Quoted message said:

your weight because muscle takes up less space pound
for pound.

Nevertheless, I'm losing 10 lbs for the summer to see if
I can get

down to

Quoted message said:

my historical weight. If you look at the really fast
guys, they

are usually

Quoted message said:

pretty skinny.

Dan, I would recommend you have yourself hydrostatically
checked before you attempt to lose 10 pounds. If your in the
5-8% then the 10 pounds will come mostly from muscle and I
don't think that is what you want to do. In the past you may
have been faster and leaner but solid training(more muscle)
and a little of the aging process has you at a comfortable
weight. Of course if you're eating a pint of Ice cream each
night with a dozen chocolate chip cookies for breakfast then
some dietary changes might help.

Emily, you may just be at your ideal weight. I have a female
friend that is the same weight and similar build and
muscular. That is her natural build and to try to alter that
would mean loss of muscle and I don't think that is
beneficial.

--
Doug Freese
[email hidden]
(Remove the NOBS)

"Doug Freese" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Dan, I would recommend you have yourself hydrostatically
checked before you attempt to lose 10 pounds. If your in
the 5-8% then the 10 pounds will come mostly from muscle
and I don't think that is what you want to do.

Yes it is! Most people add fat when gaining weight, I add
muscle. I never had anything remotely resembling a gut, even
when sedentary for a few years in my late 30's and I
ballooned to 174. It's like I take steriods -- maybe I
shoulda been a body builder. When I started running I was
155 with very big legs from lots of tennis. When I got fast,
I was 140-142 with skinny legs. Experiment of 1.

I know it sounds crazy, since most people get thin when they
lower their body fat %. If this is the case, they will end
up weakening themselves if they go further. But everyone is
different. Your advice is probably right on for most people.

You know, Lance Armstrong, after losing 1/2 of his
testosterone supply (will this get censored??) ended up
weighing 20 lbs less than before, and that is when he went
from mere world class to a monster. He was certainly very
fit before, but losing that 20lbs of solid muscle pushed him
in to the stratosphere.

Quoted message said:

In the past you may have been faster and leaner but solid
training(more muscle) and a little of the aging process
has you at a comfortable weight. Of course if you're
eating a pint of Ice cream each night with a dozen
chocolate chip cookies for breakfast then some dietary
changes might help.

Actually, I do sometimes get close to that...it's
always a battle.

Quoted message said:

Emily, you may just be at your ideal weight. I have a
female friend that is the same weight and similar build
and muscular. That is her natural build and to try to
alter that would mean loss of muscle and I don't think
that is beneficial.

Since losing wgt is so gradual (when done right). She
can lose a few lbs, stabilize (because weight loss
itself removes the zip from the legs imo), and see if
she feels better.

I know that as I got thinner each stride felt like a leap as
opposed to a shuffle. It's not subtle.

--Dan

"Doug Freese" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Dan, I would recommend you have yourself hydrostatically
checked before you attempt to lose 10 pounds. If your in
the 5-8% then the 10 pounds will come mostly from muscle
and I don't think that is what you want to do.

Yes it is! Most people add fat when gaining weight, I add
muscle. I never had anything remotely resembling a gut, even
when sedentary for a few years in my late 30's and I
ballooned to 174. It's like I take steriods -- maybe I
shoulda been a body builder. When I started running I was
155 with very big legs from lots of tennis. When I got fast,
I was 140-142 with skinny legs. Experiment of 1.

I know it sounds crazy, since most people get thin when they
lower their body fat %. If this is the case, they will end
up weakening themselves if they go further. But everyone is
different. Your advice is probably right on for most people.

You know, Lance Armstrong, after losing 1/2 of his
testosterone supply (will this get censored??) ended up
weighing 20 lbs less than before, and that is when he went
from mere world class to a monster. He was certainly very
fit before, but losing that 20lbs of solid muscle pushed him
in to the stratosphere.

Quoted message said:

In the past you may have been faster and leaner but solid
training(more muscle) and a little of the aging process
has you at a comfortable weight. Of course if you're
eating a pint of Ice cream each night with a dozen
chocolate chip cookies for breakfast then some dietary
changes might help.

Actually, I do sometimes get close to that...it's
always a battle.

Quoted message said:

Emily, you may just be at your ideal weight. I have a
female friend that is the same weight and similar build
and muscular. That is her natural build and to try to
alter that would mean loss of muscle and I don't think
that is beneficial.

Since losing wgt is so gradual (when done right). She
can lose a few lbs, stabilize (because weight loss
itself removes the zip from the legs imo), and see if
she feels better.

I know that as I got thinner each stride felt like a leap as
opposed to a shuffle. It's not subtle.

--Dan

"Emily" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Here's the stats, I'm a 42 year old woman, who is just
shy of 5'5" and I weigh 139 lbs. After a lifetime of
jogging, last year I started running with a running group
and racing. My times have been steadily improving and
last month I ran a PR 5K of 22:49 at 6000' (where I live
and train).

While I'm happy with my weight on a personal level, I'm
realizing that I'm _significantly_ heavier for my height
than most other women I race with. I've become passionate
enough about my running that I want to do what I can to
improve my race times, including adjusting my eating
habits, which on the whole are good but there's always
room for improvement.

We have a hydrostatic testing facility nearby and hearing
that it's the gold standard I went to get my body fat
tested. They concluded that I had 14.7% body fat and told
me that for a women in my 40's I should not be any lower
than that. Now I believe this result is wrong, I think I
look trim and fit but not 14% trim and fit! We have a very
accomplished coach who consults with our group and when I
told him the results of my test, he said he thought the
results were "unlikely" but since I wasn't obviously
overweight, putting on more muscle to power my current
weight would be more productive than trying to lose
weight. Could it be that perhaps I just have particularly
dense bones and so that threw off the hydrostatic results?
Made it appear that I had a lower percentage of body fat
than I do?

While it's comforting to think about just living with the
weight I'm at, when I think about what it could mean to my
race times to be running at 129 lbs vs. 139 it's tempting
to see if I could get there. But I don't want to set
myself up for failure by trying to get to a weight that's
too low for me. On the other hand according to all the
charts 129 is _not_ on the low end for a woman my height.
I know I weighed less than that when I was in college but
I think I had less muscle then too. I also don't want to
negatively impact my race times by not giving my body
enough fuel or losing muscle. So I'm not sure what to do.

I know no one can really answer this question based on
this message, but thought I'd see if anyone had any
thoughts.

Thanks!

At your current weight and height, you have a Body Mass
Index of 23.1 (a very good number - this level is right near
the bottom of the curve for weight-related health problems).
For your height, age and gender, this puts you in the 22nd
weight percentile (i.e., 88% of 5 ft 5" tall 42 year old
American women weigh more than 139 lbs).

As the other posters have suggested, I think you could
carefully experiment with weight loss and see what impact it
has on your performance and health. If you got down to 129
lbs, your BMI would be 21.5, and you would be in the 11th
weight percentile.

If you're interested in some software to assist you in your
weight loss efforts, I've recently published a program
called WeightWare that you might find useful. It uses
statistical techniques borrowed from stock market analysis
to filter out the normal day-to-day fluctuations in your
weight, so that you can see the true underlying trends. For
instance, based on your weight alone it will tell you what
your daily caloric deficit or surplus has been, and predict
what you will weigh in the future. It also tracks many other
factors relating to your health, including resting heart
rate, blood pressure, body fat (with a built-in estimator),
body circumference measurements, etc. You can try it for
free for 45-days by downloading it from the website.

GG weightware.comweightware.comOpen ↗ - WeightWare - Your Weight and
Health Journal strideware.comstrideware.comOpen ↗ - StrideWare -
Software for Runners and Walkers

Dan Stumpus said:

He was certainly very fit before, but losing that 20lbs
of solid muscle pushed him in to the stratosphere.

Oooh, I don't think it was just the 20 lbs weight loss...

Emily. Who *knows* that cyclists are a pharmacists dream.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Emily said:

I think I look trim and fit but not 14% trim and fit! We
have a very accomplished coach who consults with our group
and when I told him the results of my test, he said he
thought the results were "unlikely" but since I wasn't
obviously overweight, putting on more muscle to power my
current weight would be more productive than trying to
lose weight.

This sounds odd advice. For 5+km road races, adding more
muscle is likely to slow you down. Benita Johnson is about
your height and weighs 50kg (110lb). The way she powered
away from the Ethiopeans to win the recent world cross
country long course suggests her muscle mass is adequate.

I'd suggest maintaining a healthy diet and slowly increasing
training volume is probably the safest course currently.

Andrew

Em:

Could you ask your uncle Roger the following:

1) What kinds of performance doping can escape detection
these days? I think they test for Hematocrit and various
anabolic steriods, no?

2) Is it a matter of doping off season, getting strong,
then laying off the stuff for a couple months 'till the
bloodwork is clean?

I think I read read ages ago that even after the HCT goes
down to normal in autologous transfusion that one is
stronger than before.

Please hurry, I have a race in July...

Dan's personal assistant, Dan

"Caroline's adorable cousin" <[email hidden]>
wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Dan Stumpus said:

He was certainly very fit before, but losing that 20lbs
of solid muscle pushed him in to the stratosphere.

Oooh, I don't think it was just the 20 lbs weight loss...

Emily. Who *knows* that cyclists are a pharmacists dream.

Em:

Could you ask your uncle Roger the following:

1) What kinds of performance doping can escape detection
these days? I think they test for Hematocrit and various
anabolic steriods, no?

2) Is it a matter of doping off season, getting strong,
then laying off the stuff for a couple months 'till the
bloodwork is clean?

I think I read read ages ago that even after the HCT goes
down to normal in autologous transfusion that one is
stronger than before.

Please hurry, I have a race in July...

Dan's personal assistant, Dan

"Caroline's adorable cousin" <[email hidden]>
wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Dan Stumpus said:

He was certainly very fit before, but losing that 20lbs
of solid muscle pushed him in to the stratosphere.

Oooh, I don't think it was just the 20 lbs weight loss...

Emily. Who *knows* that cyclists are a pharmacists dream.

"Dan Stumpus" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Doug Freese" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Dan, I would recommend you have yourself hydrostatically
checked before you attempt to lose 10 pounds. If your in
the 5-8% then the 10 pounds will come mostly from muscle
and I don't think that is what you want to do.

Yes it is! Most people add fat when gaining weight, I add
muscle. I

never

Quoted message said:

had anything remotely resembling a gut, even when
sedentary for a few

years

Quoted message said:

in my late 30's and I ballooned to 174. It's like I take
steriods --

maybe

Quoted message said:

I shoulda been a body builder. When I started running I
was 155 with very big legs from lots of tennis. When I got
fast, I was 140-142 with skinny legs. Experiment of 1.

I know it sounds crazy, since most people get thin when
they lower their body fat %. If this is the case, they
will end up weakening themselves if they go further. But
everyone is different. Your advice is probably

right

Quoted message said:

on for most people.

You know, Lance Armstrong, after losing 1/2 of his
testosterone supply

(will

Quoted message said:

this get censored??) ended up weighing 20 lbs less than
before, and that

is

Quoted message said:

when he went from mere world class to a monster. He was
certainly very

fit

Quoted message said:

before, but losing that 20lbs of solid muscle pushed him
in to the stratosphere.

I would not recommend his methods for weight loss.
The chemotherapy also had a lot to do with the loss
of muscle mass since he was on testosterone
replacement therapy. The muscle mass loss simply made
him a better climber.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

In the past you may have been faster and leaner but
solid training(more muscle) and a little of the aging
process has you at a comfortable weight. Of course if
you're eating a pint of Ice cream each night with a
dozen chocolate chip cookies for breakfast then some
dietary changes might help.

Actually, I do sometimes get close to that...it's always
a battle.

Quoted message said:

Emily, you may just be at your ideal weight. I have a
female friend that is the same weight and similar build
and muscular. That is her natural build and to try to
alter that would mean loss of muscle and I don't think
that is beneficial.

Since losing wgt is so gradual (when done right). She
can lose a few lbs, stabilize (because weight loss
itself removes the zip from the legs imo), and see if
she feels better.

I know that as I got thinner each stride felt like a leap
as opposed to a shuffle. It's not subtle.

--Dan

"Dan Stumpus" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Em:

Could you ask your uncle Roger the following:

1) What kinds of performance doping can escape detection
these days? I think they test for Hematocrit and
various anabolic steriods, no?

THG, Hgh to name two (although there is a test for the
former now) There are other drugs that are out there
that the machines are not programmed to look for. The
hematocrit check is a sham; always was. The test now
actually looks for evidence of rhEPO use.

Quoted message said:

2) Is it a matter of doping off season, getting strong,
then laying off

the

Quoted message said:

stuff for a couple months 'till the bloodwork is clean?

Since the blood is not tested initially, you want to
get the urine clean. Using stuff during the off
season (remember however, there is out of
competition testing that is done year round), is one
method, but for many things, you need a booster shot
along the way

Quoted message said:

I think I read read ages ago that even after the HCT goes
down to normal

in

Quoted message said:

autologous transfusion that one is stronger than before.

Once you replace the red cells, you take a plasma
volume expander to avoid "sludge blood".

Quoted message said:

Please hurry, I have a race in July...

Dan's personal assistant, Dan

"Caroline's adorable cousin" <[email hidden]>
wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Dan Stumpus said:

He was certainly very fit before, but losing that
20lbs of solid muscle pushed him in to the
stratosphere.

Oooh, I don't think it was just the 20 lbs weight
loss...

Emily. Who *knows* that cyclists are a pharmacists
dream.

[email hidden] (Andrew Taylor) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

In article
<[email hidden]>, Emily

Quoted message said:

I think I look trim and fit but not 14% trim and fit! We
have a very accomplished coach who consults with our
group and when I told him the results of my test, he said
he thought the results were "unlikely" but since I wasn't
obviously overweight, putting on more muscle to power my
current weight would be more productive than trying to
lose weight.

This sounds odd advice. For 5+km road races, adding more
muscle is likely to slow you down. Benita Johnson is about
your height and weighs 50kg (110lb). The way she powered
away from the Ethiopeans to win the recent world cross
country long course suggests her muscle mass is adequate.

He is a very experienced coach with lots of great runners
that he has helped both in the past and currently. And the
professional women he coaches are all stick thin. I might be
reading something that wasn't there, but I had the feeling
when he was talking to me that he was being very careful.
Like maybe he's had some experience with women runner's
going off the deep end about their weight. I know I'm in no
danger of developing an eating disorder, but maybe that's
just his standard response to recreational racers. <shrug

[email hidden] (Andrew Taylor) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

In article
<[email hidden]>, Emily

Quoted message said:

I think I look trim and fit but not 14% trim and fit! We
have a very accomplished coach who consults with our
group and when I told him the results of my test, he said
he thought the results were "unlikely" but since I wasn't
obviously overweight, putting on more muscle to power my
current weight would be more productive than trying to
lose weight.

This sounds odd advice. For 5+km road races, adding more
muscle is likely to slow you down. Benita Johnson is about
your height and weighs 50kg (110lb). The way she powered
away from the Ethiopeans to win the recent world cross
country long course suggests her muscle mass is adequate.

He is a very experienced coach with lots of great runners
that he has helped both in the past and currently. And the
professional women he coaches are all stick thin. I might be
reading something that wasn't there, but I had the feeling
when he was talking to me that he was being very careful.
Like maybe he's had some experience with women runner's
going off the deep end about their weight. I know I'm in no
danger of developing an eating disorder, but maybe that's
just his standard response to recreational racers. <shrug

Thanks for all your thoughts. I do tend to put on muscle
easily and I know I don't have the body type to be one of
those 110 lb runners. But I think there's still some fat
there that could go without dipping too much into the
muscle. Here's the plan. I have a key race this Sunday, but
then it's all training races until two more important races,
one at the beginning of August and another at the end of
September. So I think after this weekend, it would be a good
time to try to see if I can lose a few pounds. I'm going to
take it very slowly, and see how I feel as I go along. If it
starts to seem like my training (or quality of life :-) is
suffering, then I'll back off. But I think it's worth a try.

I appreciate you taking the time to answer my question. I'll
check back in to let you know how it's going in my
experiment where N=1.

- (the other) Emily