Deliberately losing muscle

This is a question that has puzzled me for awhile--please help if you know what I am talking about:

I am female, 5'4 and have 16% body fat (based on caliper measurement and formula and well as scale which has me at 15.7% body fat most recently).  I currently weigh 139.  I have gone from 148-139 since Feb. w/ the corresponding decrease in body fat from about 16.3 when I started to today's 16%-15.7% (which means I had ~124 pounds muscle when I started and now have ~117 pounds muscle; (%body fat * weight)).  I want to get down to 128 and maybe lower.

Now, my problem is given how low my body fat % is already can I continue to lose weight without deliberately losing a lot of muscle (i.e. excessive cardio)?  I know that I have already lost muscle (124-117 of muscle since losing weight).

I achieved this by very long cardio workout (running ~40miles/week) and was thinking of switching to HIIT.  BUT since I know the point of HIIT is to preserve muscle while burning maximum fat and I already have very little fat to lose as far what woud be considered healthy range for women, does this make any sense for me?  Should I stick with the long duration cardio, which deliberatley burns muscle and some fat since I am basically trying to bulk down?

Sorry for the long post---any advice would be GREATLY appreciated!

Why in the world are you trying to loose muscle?

It sounds like your priorities are out of whack.

Why push yourself into an unstable (and what sounds like and unhealthy) balance of exertion and injestion just to get the scale to drop.

That is not a very good way to feel good. What's the point?

Why not just cut off one off your arms, the left one if your right handed.  Start at the elbow and work toward the shoulder until you get the right number on the scale.

Of course I'm being sarcastic but what your saying sounds just as crazy to me as what I wrote.  Why lose muscle just to see a different number on the scale?  It's counter productive.  Go by body fat % and not weight.  You need those muscles.

Seriously. With a body fat % like that, the number on the scale is totally meaningless. You must look absolutely terrific. Running will burn off some muscle mass, but it looks like you may be genetically gifted with great musculature (unless you were once a body builder of some kind), so it will take a great deal of running to change much more.

Perhaps you should learn to embrace what you are?

I mean, if you love to run and want to train to race competitively then 40 miles a week or more (more like 100, really) is a great idea. But if you don't love running, why do it? Maybe you are a gifted runner as well? Perhaps a switch in your perspective is in order. Are you are fast runner or have excellent endurance? Maybe you should focus on competition rather than your weight. I mean if I was running 40 miles per week and effortlessly had a low body fat % I'd start training to get into the Boston Marathon.

Cheers.

Thank you all so much for your responses.  Maybe it is wrong, but I really want to be under 130 to have a more svelte physique.  If I keep losing weight the way I have, I know I will also be at the lower body fat percentage once I get below 130--if all goes well, anywhere between 12-14% body fat where I think I will look good.  If the price I have to pay is losing SOME of the massive amount of muscle I have, then I am at the point of so be it.  As long as I am not losing muscle too quickly or disproportionate to fat loss, I think it can be safely done.

The best shape I have ever been in was when I was just slightly under 130, ~128 pounds, and I had a very well defined abs.  I ballooned to 148 during my first year of grad school, and now at 139, I really want to achieve that look again.

Marneedear, I actually am running because I really enjoy it and will be doing my first half marathon this summer so inevitably I will have to put in some very long runs to train.

Thanks, hopefully, I can get to 128 safely with a good ratio of muscle to fat lost.  If anyone has any ideas on how best to go about this I would greatly appreciate the advice.

 

Also in my defense, I guess what makes my situation unique is that I have very little fat to lose whereas the average dieter has a ton of fat to lose.  Even though I have very little fat to lose, I STILL want to be a smaller size--I guess a similar version of myself at 128 pounds instead of 139 pounds.  Some might say who cares, why not just be 139 at the same proportionate body fat % but I think the smaller version of me will be better than the larger version.  Hence, cutting calories and long cardio to eat the muscle. 

Well you have your mind made up so why don't you go ahead and severely cut your calories and run 2 hours a day and be happy.

I would talk to your doctor.  The last place I read, at least 20% body fat is recommended for females, and 12 - 15% is essential.  In other words, there may be significant health risks.  Do you get annual pelvic exams?  Your obgyn would be a great person to ask about this.

 

Am I missing something here?  If you have 139lbs, being 22lbs fat, the rest (117lbs) is not muscle. You also have bones.

Nessa79, you are right.  I could have large bones which could be accounted for and reduced from the lean body mass (117lbs).  I don't know how I could find that out but that could certainly be limiting factor.  Although, when I do the finger test, my thub and middle finger overlap plenty which would technically mean I have a small frame and hence small bones?

 

This is ridiculous.

Ega, I guess what I am saying is don't do anything drastic and don't count on running to erode ~8 lbs of muscle!  I suspect you are far more svelte than you imagine.  Your stats tell me as much.

I just finished my first half marathon and actually got more muscular.  So each person is different. 

 

 Lose 40% of your lean mass and you're dead. 8lbs represents about 7% of your lean mass.

 In a word, don't.

Thanks again everyone,

I totally understand what everyone is getting at and that is why I was here in the first place since I am concerned about safety.  I have been lower than 130 before though at something like 14% body fat so I know I can achieve this.  I maintained it until grad school when long hours studying and not working out for the past 2 years, slowly drove up my body fat and I put on 20 pounds--I was 148 in February.  So I guess I know what is possible for me.  Everyone on this website has different goals and I respect that.  For some 14% body fat at 128 pounds might not be ideal but I have been there before--the best shape of my life and I am just trying to get back to tip top shape.  I run 40 miles a week and do intense full body strength training 3 days a week.  I eat between 1500-1700 calories depending on if I am running or not and I allow myself to have at least 1 cheat day/ week.  I do not think this is unhealty and doing this I have lost 10 pounds in 2 months--- some of it fat since my BF% has decreased but again since I am so, lean, inevitably some muscle had been spared in the process.

Sorry if I have offended anyone or their ideals.  Thanks again for all the advice/help. 

Without seeing a photo it's hard to tell, but if your numbers are accurate it sounds like you have the perfect body already... why on EARTH do you want to spoil it just so you can have a smaller number on your clothing tags? If it upsets you that much to look at yourself, I'd seriously suggest you go and talk to a professional about body image dysmorphia. NOBODY stays the same size and shape forever and it's just not realistic to expect it.

wow.. you do intense cardio to burn muscle.. i run about 70 miles a week and i try my very best to keep all the muscle i have. if you lose muscle, its almost certain your gonna gain weight. since your metabolism is gonna be lower.. why are you trying to be soo skinny? it seems like your at a healthy weight and i guess sometimes you just have to be happy with what you've got. otherwise your just gonna push your body where it cant go.

Hi! A lot of the responses here are telling you notdo it, but I totally understand where you are coming from.

I realize that in general, women will not become overly muscular, no matter what they do. However, this does depend on body type. If you are a pure mezomorph (as I am) you will gain muscle at a ridiculous rate, and if you lifted weights would look like a body builder in no time.

I get it - you don't want to look like that, and losing muscle is the only way to avoid it. The problem is, if you are like me, losing muscle is actually hard to do. I have certainly not solved the problem, but I find doing short intense cardio (like really fast running or skating or something) coupled with longer, less intense cardio is the best way to go. As far as strength training goes, I do things that use only my weight as resistance. as soon as i pick up weights, I bulk up.

The bad news is, you will never have that skinny, willowy look that is so fashionable (at least not if you are remotely heathy).  The good news is, your body type stays the healthiest and sturdiest as you age, and you will stilll look great at 50. Its not all bad:P 

i do lots of cardio and maintain lots of muscle.  but putting that aside...

i really don't think you have to "run off" your muscle.  if you don't want as much muscle, just don't strength train.  or strength train less.  if your muscles aren't in demand, they'll atrophy.  that's just the way it goes.  think of old ladies in old age homes:  no matter what kind of mesomorphs they are, none of them have muscular bodies, and that's bec they sit around all day and don't lift weights.  basically, my advice is to leave the gym altogether.

I've met a lot of people over my lifetime that ask questions when they already have their mind made up to do something.  They are not looking for answers they are looking for confirmation and affirmation that you agree with what they want to do. 

"A person convinced against their will is of the same opinion still".  Ega has to see it for herself or their will be no change.  Good luck.

Peace  SRQ

This thread makes me sad :'( , I like girls with some muscle on 'em