Hoeveel vetmassa verliezen zonder spierverlies

[Pieter318]

Goedemorgen allemaal,

Sommige van jullie hier kennen me vast wel. Ik ben twee jaar geleden begonnen met krachttraining omdat ik ongezond weinig woog (55kg). Ben toen bijna 45kg aangekomen in ruim twee jaar en ben toen eind februari gaan cutten. M’n onderhoud lag rond de 4000 dus ben begonnen met cutten op 3600kcal.

Elke ochtend doe ik even wegen en het gemiddelde van elke week schrijf ik op. Nu ging alles best lekker, ik verloor zo’n 0,4kg per week en kracht nam zelfs toe. Langzaam deed ik m’n calorieen afbouwen door bijvoorbeeld elke week n grammetje pindakaas minder op t brood te doen, geen olijfolie meer over de kip etc. Deze week schrok ik echter toen ik erachter kwam dat ik in 8 dagen 1,2kg ben verloren.

Ik zit echt even te tobben nu want jullie kennen t vast wel (“al mn massa weg!!”), daarom had ik de volgende vraag. Hoeveel vetmassa kun je verliezen zonder spiermassa kwijt te raken? En kun je in een week echt spieren verliezen of is dit vocht?

Heb enkele foto’s erbij gedaan zodat jullie m’n bouw kunnen inschatten, misschien dat dat ook een rol speelt (ben vgs mij ecto).

Heel erg bedankt alvast,

Pieter

 

[wovano]

Flinke gains gemaakt man, netjes.
Op de vraag hoeveel vet je kunt verkiezen zonder spiermassa te verliezen is geen goed antwoord te geven. Dat hangt af van veel factoren. Doorgaans wanneer je ongeveer 500 kcals onder je onderhoud eet, zul je niets tot weinig aan spiermassa inleveren. In de eerste week raak je meestal wel veel kwijt, maar dat is inderdaad vocht.

 

[chrash]

Pieter318
Aan de reactie van wovano heb ik niet veel meer toe te voegen, ik kom hier gewoon een complimentje droppen omdat je echt een super progressie hebt gemaakt, je ziet er echt al aardig buff uit, na een lichte cut ga je er al helemaal super uitzien, succes

 

[ACE]

Shit zeg wat zullen mensen gedacht hebben die jou ik de tussentijd niet hebben gezien

Netjes man

 

[Feem]

Geweldige gains. Ga zo door.

Wat betreft het gewichtverlies is de kans groot dat het om vocht gaat. Als je meer wilt weten over vetverlies kan je deze artikel eens lezen. https://peterbond.nl/a-primer-on-weight-loss/

One kilo of body weight is not the other
I wrote in an earlier article that you’d need to burn roughly 9000 kcal to lose 1 kilogram of fat mass. That is hard work. However, if you work out on a hot day, you’ll quickly drop a kilo of body weight too. That won’t be fat of course, but mostly a lot of fluid you lost by sweating. In such a situation it is very obvious that it is not fat mass. Nevertheless, it perfectly illustrates the point that I would like to make, namely that one kilo of body weight is not the other. There happen to be a lot of other situations in which the scale ‘deceives’.

Your body weight is the sum of a lot of things. One of those things is the storage of substances from which your body can extract energy: carbohydrates (stored as glycogen), fats (mainly triglyercides stored in adipose tissue), but also protein. Of the latter, most of the energy is extracted from muscle proteins during weight loss. In addition to these three energy-containing substances, a large part of your body weight is also due to it containing a whole lot of water and some minerals, in particular the calcium and phosphate of the skeleton.

During weight loss, you really only want to lose fat mass and a minimal amount of the other stuff (the fat free mass). The fat free mass is in essense the sum of the aforementioned; the weight of the skeleton, fluid, protein and glycogen. The skeletal mass is quite stable and can even slightly increase in weight when weight loss is combined with physical exercise, in particular resistance exercise and exercises which increase bone mineral density. However, the skeletal mass can decrease up to 2% per 10% weight loss of the body mass, especially in postmenopausal women [1]. Nevertheless, due to the small impact on weight, we can ignore weight changes of the skeletal mass when we step on the scale.

Something which cannot be ignored however, besides fat, is the impact of changes in protein, glycogen and fluid mass on the scale. The body stores roughly half a kilogram of carbohydrates in the muscles and liver as glycogen. The storage of glycogen goes hand in hand with that of water. For each gram of glycogen stored, approximately 2.7 gram water is stored in concert [2]. The storage of half a kilogram of glycogen therefore goes hand in hand with the storage of about 1.35 kilogram of water. That makes a total of 0.5 + 1.35 = 1.85 kilogram. The amount of energy stored in 1 gram of glycogen is 4.19 kcal [3]. If you take into account the storage of water that is associated with the storage of glycogen, you’ll end up with an energy density of 1132 kcal per kilogram hydrated glycogen. This is in stark contrast to fat, which has an energy density of 9440 kcal per kilogram [3].

Just as an illustration, an extreme example. Suppose you expend 1132 kcal and that energy is completely derived from hydrated glycogen, then you drop 1 kilogram on the scale. However, if exactly the same amount of energy is solely derived from fat, you will only lose 120 grams on the scale. The scale can therefore be extremely misleading for diets that deplete the glycogen. These are diets that have a very low amount of carbohydrates. They exhaust the glycogen, resulting in a rapid loss of weight. You also lose some extra fluid due to the low insulin concentration that comes with it; Insulin is responsible for the retention of sodium (and therefore also of fluid) [4].

And of course, not to forget, the impact of the expenditure of protein. The body does not really has a storage of protein in the same way it does for fat (triglycerides stored in adipose tissue) and carbohydrates (glycogen stored in liver and muscles). All the protein in the body has a certain function. When body protein is used to meet the body with its energy needs, functional protein is broken down. During an energy-restricted diet, these are mainly muscle proteins. Protein is also present hydrated in the body, just like glycogen. The estimate of hydration varies reasonably, but 1.6 grams of water per gram of protein seems to be a good estimate [5]. You could do the same calculation for protein as we did before for glycogen. The amount of energy per gram of protein is very similar to that of glycogen with 4.7 kcal per gram [3]. Hydrated protein has an energy density of 1808 kcal per kilogram, based on the 1.6 grams of water per gram of protein. The same amount of energy stored in 1 kilogram of hydrated protein is again stored in just 192 grams of fat.

So summarized the following:

• 1 kilogram hydrated glycogen = 1132 kcal
• 1 kilogram hydrated protein = 1808 kcal
• 1 kilogram fat = 9440 kcal

If your body expends energy, it is important in what proportion glycogen, protein and fat have contributed to this. The scale does not distinguish between weight loss from fat or glycogen, protein and fluid.

When choosing an energy-restricted diet with a decent amount of carbohydrates, the net contribution of glycogen to weight loss is fairly modest. What then remains is the question how much of the energy is extracted from lean body mass (in particular muscle mass) and how much from fat mass. The ratio between the two is also called the energy partition ratio, or in short the P ratio. The P ratio can take a value from 0 to 1, where 0 means that all energy is derived from fat and 1 means that all energy is derived from lean body mass (protein). Without resorting to a lot of formulas, it is sufficient to know that the P ratio is dependent on the fat mass. The more fat you have, the lower the ratio will be. When an obese person starts to lose weight, the energy will then mainly be derived from his fat mass. However, the more fat mass this person loses, the greater the contribution of protein to the energy expenditure will be. This is illustrated in the image below.

The P ratio illustrated based on the Forbes hypothesis. The P ratio follows a non-linear function of the fat mass. Image taken and adapted from [6].
Note: there are considerable interindividual differences in this that have a genetic basis. John has crappy genetics and loses, for example, with a given fat mass a lot more lean body mass than Arnold who has good genes, while both maintaining the same energy deficit. Talent (your genes) is important. The P ratio also depends on modifiable factors, including the amount of protein in the diet and the physical exercise a person performs. Someone who regularly hits the gym to play with weights and follows a high protein diet will, given equal circumstances, have a lower P ratio than someone who does not. A high protein diet and reistance exercise spare muscle mass.

 

[Feem]

Lees ook het volgend artikel eens. Wordt uitgelegd hoeveel vet je maximaal per dag kan verliezen. In theorie zou je dus kunnen berekenen hoeveel vet en hoeveel vocht/andere stoffen je verloren bent.

https://www.evertberkelaar.nl/afvallen/hoe-snel-kan-je-je-vet-kwijt-raken/

 

[arno1560]

https://www.evertberkelaar.nl/afvallen/hoe-snel-kan-je-je-vet-kwijt-raken/

Goede site, bedankt voor de informatie!

 

[Chast]

Lees ook het volgend artikel eens. Wordt uitgelegd hoeveel vet je maximaal per dag kan verliezen. In theorie zou je dus kunnen berekenen hoeveel vet en hoeveel vocht/andere stoffen je verloren bent.

https://www.evertberkelaar.nl/afvallen/hoe-snel-kan-je-je-vet-kwijt-raken/

Interessant artikel! Wel tegenstrijdig dat volgens hun je deficit kleiner word naarmate je vp daalt. Hierdoor komt je totale calorie intake ook nog is omhoog.

 

[Feem]

Interessant artikel! Wel tegenstrijdig dat volgens hun je deficit kleiner word naarmate je vp daalt.

Als je lichter wordt heb je minder calorieën nodig, waardoor je ook steeds je intake moet blijven verlagen om af te vallen. Zie de tegenstrijdigheid niet.

Hierdoor komt je totale calorie intake ook nog is omhoog.

Dit volg ik even niet.

Kan overigens best een niet betrouwbare bron zijn, maar ik heb het rapport niet gelezen en uit de abstract haal ik niets zinnigs op.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022519304004175?via=ihub

 

[Camelus]

Lees ook het volgend artikel eens. Wordt uitgelegd hoeveel vet je maximaal per dag kan verliezen. In theorie zou je dus kunnen berekenen hoeveel vet en hoeveel vocht/andere stoffen je verloren bent.

https://www.evertberkelaar.nl/afvallen/hoe-snel-kan-je-je-vet-kwijt-raken/

Hoi Evert je kale kop op je avatar verraad je

 

[Chast]

Als je lichter wordt heb je minder calorieën nodig, waardoor je ook steeds je intake moet blijven verlagen om af te vallen. Zie de tegenstrijdigheid niet.

De hoeveelheid vet die je kan afvallen neemt af en daarmee je deficit. Enkel daalt je deficit harder dan je basaal metabolisme(volgens deze berekening).

Voorbeeld: een man van 100kg, 180, 25 jaar, 10% vet en factor 1,55 verliest 1 kg vet.

Begin situatie 100kg 10% vet:
Onderhoud 3367 kcal
Deficit 700 kcal
Te eten kcal: 2667

2e situatie 99kg 9% vet:
Onderhoud 3345 kcal
Deficit 624 kcal
Te eten kcal: 2721

 

[arno1560]

Als je lichter wordt heb je minder calorieën nodig, waardoor je ook steeds je intake moet blijven verlagen om af te vallen. Zie de tegenstrijdigheid niet.

klopt, zo denk ik (en de wetenschap) er ook over.

 

[arno1560]

Goedemorgen allemaal,

Sommige van jullie hier kennen me vast wel. Ik ben twee jaar geleden begonnen met krachttraining omdat ik ongezond weinig woog (55kg). Ben toen bijna 45kg aangekomen in ruim twee jaar en ben toen eind februari gaan cutten. M’n onderhoud lag rond de 4000 dus ben begonnen met cutten op 3600kcal.

Elke ochtend doe ik even wegen en het gemiddelde van elke week schrijf ik op. Nu ging alles best lekker, ik verloor zo’n 0,4kg per week en kracht nam zelfs toe. Langzaam deed ik m’n calorieen afbouwen door bijvoorbeeld elke week n grammetje pindakaas minder op t brood te doen, geen olijfolie meer over de kip etc. Deze week schrok ik echter toen ik erachter kwam dat ik in 8 dagen 1,2kg ben verloren.

Ik zit echt even te tobben nu want jullie kennen t vast wel (“al mn massa weg!!”), daarom had ik de volgende vraag. Hoeveel vetmassa kun je verliezen zonder spiermassa kwijt te raken? En kun je in een week echt spieren verliezen of is dit vocht?

Heb enkele foto’s erbij gedaan zodat jullie m’n bouw kunnen inschatten, misschien dat dat ook een rol speelt (ben vgs mij ecto).

Heel erg bedankt alvast,

Pieter

Bekijk bijlage 452103

Bekijk bijlage 452104

Bekijk bijlage 452105

goeie gains gemaakt man, wees er maar fier op. Geef je een follow-up na je cut?

 

[chrash]

Hoi Evert je kale kop op je avatar verraad je

Ik heb zijn filmpjes bekeken het zou inderdaad goed kunnen zijn dat hij het is

 

[Feem]

De hoeveelheid vet die je kan afvallen neemt af en daarmee je deficit. Enkel daalt je deficit harder dan je basaal metabolisme(volgens deze berekening).

Voorbeeld: een man van 100kg, 180, 25 jaar, 10% vet en factor 1,55 verliest 1 kg vet.

Begin situatie 100kg 10% vet:
Onderhoud 3367 kcal
Deficit 700 kcal
Te eten kcal: 2667

2e situatie 99kg 9% vet:
Onderhoud 3345 kcal
Deficit 624 kcal
Te eten kcal: 2721

Helder, persoonlijk zou ik de berekeningen met een korrel zout nemen. Lichaam werkt van persoon tot persoon anders en volgens mij is 1 gram vet ook meer dan 9 calorieën.

Zelf gebruik ik het als richtlijn tijdens een (koolhydraatarm) dieet, maar absoluut niet als een regel. Wel handig om te weten dat een volwassen man circa 500g glycogeen heeft en als dat op is we circa 2kg kunnen afvallen op een dag.

 

[Feem]

Hoi Evert je kale kop op je avatar verraad je

Ik heb zijn filmpjes bekeken het zou inderdaad goed kunnen zijn dat hij het is

Haha, volgens mij ben ik ontmaskert

Maar als ik naar de bouw van Saik kijk moet jij de grootste bb’er van de ICT-academie zijn en Chrash de beste trickster?

 

[marina1975]

volgens mij is 1 gram vet ook meer dan 9 calorieën.

Ben wel benieuwd hoe je hierop komt....
Enige (wetenschappelijke) onderbouwing?

 

[Feem]

Ben wel benieuwd hoe je hierop komt....
Enige (wetenschappelijke) onderbouwing?

Zie mijn eerdere bericht. Ga er dan wel vanuit dat Peter Bond een betrouwbare bron is, maar gezien de reputatie is dat zo.

1 kilogram fat = 9440 kcal

 

[Galen]

Is inderdaad ietsje meer, gemiddeld genomen zo'n 9440 kcal per kg. Zie https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3281434

Is afhankelijk van de samenstelling van het vet.

 

[Galen]

Geweldige gains. Ga zo door.

Wat betreft het gewichtverlies is de kans groot dat het om vocht gaat. Als je meer wilt weten over vetverlies kan je deze artikel eens lezen. https://peterbond.nl/a-primer-on-weight-loss/

One kilo of body weight is not the other
I wrote in an earlier article that you’d need to burn roughly 9000 kcal to lose 1 kilogram of fat mass. That is hard work. However, if you work out on a hot day, you’ll quickly drop a kilo of body weight too. That won’t be fat of course, but mostly a lot of fluid you lost by sweating. In such a situation it is very obvious that it is not fat mass. Nevertheless, it perfectly illustrates the point that I would like to make, namely that one kilo of body weight is not the other. There happen to be a lot of other situations in which the scale ‘deceives’.

Your body weight is the sum of a lot of things. One of those things is the storage of substances from which your body can extract energy: carbohydrates (stored as glycogen), fats (mainly triglyercides stored in adipose tissue), but also protein. Of the latter, most of the energy is extracted from muscle proteins during weight loss. In addition to these three energy-containing substances, a large part of your body weight is also due to it containing a whole lot of water and some minerals, in particular the calcium and phosphate of the skeleton.

During weight loss, you really only want to lose fat mass and a minimal amount of the other stuff (the fat free mass). The fat free mass is in essense the sum of the aforementioned; the weight of the skeleton, fluid, protein and glycogen. The skeletal mass is quite stable and can even slightly increase in weight when weight loss is combined with physical exercise, in particular resistance exercise and exercises which increase bone mineral density. However, the skeletal mass can decrease up to 2% per 10% weight loss of the body mass, especially in postmenopausal women [1]. Nevertheless, due to the small impact on weight, we can ignore weight changes of the skeletal mass when we step on the scale.

Something which cannot be ignored however, besides fat, is the impact of changes in protein, glycogen and fluid mass on the scale. The body stores roughly half a kilogram of carbohydrates in the muscles and liver as glycogen. The storage of glycogen goes hand in hand with that of water. For each gram of glycogen stored, approximately 2.7 gram water is stored in concert [2]. The storage of half a kilogram of glycogen therefore goes hand in hand with the storage of about 1.35 kilogram of water. That makes a total of 0.5 + 1.35 = 1.85 kilogram. The amount of energy stored in 1 gram of glycogen is 4.19 kcal [3]. If you take into account the storage of water that is associated with the storage of glycogen, you’ll end up with an energy density of 1132 kcal per kilogram hydrated glycogen. This is in stark contrast to fat, which has an energy density of 9440 kcal per kilogram [3].

Just as an illustration, an extreme example. Suppose you expend 1132 kcal and that energy is completely derived from hydrated glycogen, then you drop 1 kilogram on the scale. However, if exactly the same amount of energy is solely derived from fat, you will only lose 120 grams on the scale. The scale can therefore be extremely misleading for diets that deplete the glycogen. These are diets that have a very low amount of carbohydrates. They exhaust the glycogen, resulting in a rapid loss of weight. You also lose some extra fluid due to the low insulin concentration that comes with it; Insulin is responsible for the retention of sodium (and therefore also of fluid) [4].

And of course, not to forget, the impact of the expenditure of protein. The body does not really has a storage of protein in the same way it does for fat (triglycerides stored in adipose tissue) and carbohydrates (glycogen stored in liver and muscles). All the protein in the body has a certain function. When body protein is used to meet the body with its energy needs, functional protein is broken down. During an energy-restricted diet, these are mainly muscle proteins. Protein is also present hydrated in the body, just like glycogen. The estimate of hydration varies reasonably, but 1.6 grams of water per gram of protein seems to be a good estimate [5]. You could do the same calculation for protein as we did before for glycogen. The amount of energy per gram of protein is very similar to that of glycogen with 4.7 kcal per gram [3]. Hydrated protein has an energy density of 1808 kcal per kilogram, based on the 1.6 grams of water per gram of protein. The same amount of energy stored in 1 kilogram of hydrated protein is again stored in just 192 grams of fat.
Bekijk bijlage 452291

So summarized the following:

• 1 kilogram hydrated glycogen = 1132 kcal
• 1 kilogram hydrated protein = 1808 kcal
• 1 kilogram fat = 9440 kcal

If your body expends energy, it is important in what proportion glycogen, protein and fat have contributed to this. The scale does not distinguish between weight loss from fat or glycogen, protein and fluid.

When choosing an energy-restricted diet with a decent amount of carbohydrates, the net contribution of glycogen to weight loss is fairly modest. What then remains is the question how much of the energy is extracted from lean body mass (in particular muscle mass) and how much from fat mass. The ratio between the two is also called the energy partition ratio, or in short the P ratio. The P ratio can take a value from 0 to 1, where 0 means that all energy is derived from fat and 1 means that all energy is derived from lean body mass (protein). Without resorting to a lot of formulas, it is sufficient to know that the P ratio is dependent on the fat mass. The more fat you have, the lower the ratio will be. When an obese person starts to lose weight, the energy will then mainly be derived from his fat mass. However, the more fat mass this person loses, the greater the contribution of protein to the energy expenditure will be. This is illustrated in the image below.



Bekijk bijlage 452292
The P ratio illustrated based on the Forbes hypothesis. The P ratio follows a non-linear function of the fat mass. Image taken and adapted from [6].
Note: there are considerable interindividual differences in this that have a genetic basis. John has crappy genetics and loses, for example, with a given fat mass a lot more lean body mass than Arnold who has good genes, while both maintaining the same energy deficit. Talent (your genes) is important. The P ratio also depends on modifiable factors, including the amount of protein in the diet and the physical exercise a person performs. Someone who regularly hits the gym to play with weights and follows a high protein diet will, given equal circumstances, have a lower P ratio than someone who does not. A high protein diet and reistance exercise spare muscle mass.

Ter info, dat artikel heb ik (eerder) ook in het Nederlands geschreven:
https://peterbond.nl/de-wetenschap-achter-gewichtsverlies/