10 stone to 9 but no difference ???!!?
Moderators: Boss Man, cassiegose
10 stone to 9 but no difference ???!!?
ok i was 10 stone and now im 9 stone 5 but i see no difference at all i mean i went down the scales say it but i really see no difference i still have alot of chest fat (man boobs) and a ... thighs r quite hard...and biceps have grown quite a bit.. But all i want is to have pecs to get rid of chest and a flatter . Can anyone explain why i aint been seeing much difference....i may not have the best diet since i eat alot of junk..but i lost weight....so im confused..i also stopped going boxing and i got tests so i need to do some exercises at home eg push ups...
Some of your weight could have been water weight. You also may have shed a bit of Fat from certain areas but less than others.
It is quite easy to see Fat reductions in small muscles like Biceps, Triceps, Deltoids, but not so easy with things like Lats, Quads, Hamstrings etc etc, bearing in mind a bigger muscle group, will potentially take longer to reduce it's fat percentage by say 1%, than a Bicep for example, because you have a greater surface area.
You might also sometimes see, that some people who could be 30-40lbs overweight, have partially visable cuts in their Forearms, yet you can see a little rotundeness in the midriff area.
That's mainly due to the Forearms, not having as much Fat storage capability.
That's why when some people state a bf%, it's not all over, it can't be, because some areas due to their size, and possibly other factors, facilitate greater Fat storage than others.
So a bf% is probably a mean average, based on what the numbers are for each tested section, and how many sections tested.
Example. You get a bf test done, and get some basic measurements I.E. Neck, Chest, Arms, Back, Stomach, Waist, Legs.
Arms might be say 20%, but the other areas might be +3-4% either way, and the Stomach being the joker in the pack, possibly as much as 10% more than Arms.
The average in that instance is therefore going to be roughly 20%, and allowing for the Stomach measurement, that might bump it up to about 21 / 21.5% bf
So weight will have gone down, if you lost some Fat, but it is going to be difficult with certain areas of the body, to notice it.
It is quite easy to see Fat reductions in small muscles like Biceps, Triceps, Deltoids, but not so easy with things like Lats, Quads, Hamstrings etc etc, bearing in mind a bigger muscle group, will potentially take longer to reduce it's fat percentage by say 1%, than a Bicep for example, because you have a greater surface area.
You might also sometimes see, that some people who could be 30-40lbs overweight, have partially visable cuts in their Forearms, yet you can see a little rotundeness in the midriff area.
That's mainly due to the Forearms, not having as much Fat storage capability.
That's why when some people state a bf%, it's not all over, it can't be, because some areas due to their size, and possibly other factors, facilitate greater Fat storage than others.
So a bf% is probably a mean average, based on what the numbers are for each tested section, and how many sections tested.
Example. You get a bf test done, and get some basic measurements I.E. Neck, Chest, Arms, Back, Stomach, Waist, Legs.
Arms might be say 20%, but the other areas might be +3-4% either way, and the Stomach being the joker in the pack, possibly as much as 10% more than Arms.
The average in that instance is therefore going to be roughly 20%, and allowing for the Stomach measurement, that might bump it up to about 21 / 21.5% bf
So weight will have gone down, if you lost some Fat, but it is going to be difficult with certain areas of the body, to notice it.