Does weight gain count if it's muscle?

I'm a little underweight - my period stopped late last year and people tell me I look too thin.  I want to get my weight up just enough to get my period back; I figure that will be a sign that I've reached a healthy weight.

Does it make any difference then, if my weight gain is primarily muscle, as opposed to fat?  I'd be really happy to weight train and watch the scales go up if I knew that I was adding muscle to my body, as opposed to just a layer of fat.  Or do I need the extra fat in order to get my period?

You cannot gain weight without fat gain too. Remember that. You do need that extra fat on your body for your period to come back, though, yes. For a woman, a healthy BF% range is 25 to 31%. 

Remember to eat at least 2500 calories to gain and keep it on and that's if you're sedentary. Eat more if you work out, even if it's just weights - your body will need the extra to supply muscle growth. Light resistance work is okay during weight gain but make sure your doctor says it's okay and you don't go overboard.

you need the fat for your period.  Fat releases estrogen.  You lost your period partially because your estrogen is too low.

Its impossible to gain muscle without gaining fat.

Although I totally disagree that you can't add muscle without fat, I think if you focus on adding muscle by eating more and working out, some fat will probably tag along.

Thank you for the replies.  Horfinator:  Do you have any tips on how I would add primarily muscle?  I'm not stressed about adding fat now, but the more muscle the better.

Original Post by horfinator:

Although I totally disagree that you can't add muscle without fat, I think if you focus on adding muscle by eating more and working out, some fat will probably tag along.

you can't.  how much fat you gain along with the muscle is a function of genetics, how much over maintenance you are, and your training. its called 'p ratio'...the ratio of fat to muscle gain.  Trust me...I study sports nutrition and exercise physiology.

it is impossible to gain solely muscle.  Muscle is a very expensive tissue compared to fat, and the body will preferentially gain fat vs muscle unless you are training.

Original Post by pemberly:

Thank you for the replies.  Horfinator:  Do you have any tips on how I would add primarily muscle?  I'm not stressed about adding fat now, but the more muscle the better.

 Sorry but there's really no way to gaurantee anything. You can help up your chances of gaining more muscle by following a "clean" diet, eating frequent meals at regular intervals, and of course - strength training. That is essential. If you do not use the muscle, it will not grow.

I personally still push a 80% healthy (or "clean") and 20% "fun" diet. It's okay to have the slightly unhealthier stuff every now and again. Even if you make it yourself. :D

Original Post by for_zev:

you can't.  how much fat you gain along with the muscle is a function of genetics, how much over maintenance you are, and your training. its called 'p ratio'...the ratio of fat to muscle gain.  Trust me...I study sports nutrition and exercise physiology.

it is impossible to gain solely muscle.  Muscle is a very expensive tissue compared to fat, and the body will preferentially gain fat vs muscle unless you are training.

 okay,we can go with that, but then the issue becomes how much muscle you can gain while minimizing, as opposed to entirely avoiding fat gain, which was essentially the issue anyways. In my experience, you can gain muscle without gaining excessive amounts of fat. Obviously, training is mandatory.

Horfinator, you are male. Your body fat thresholds can afford to be lower. The original poster, pemberly, is female. She has a higher threshold and need for body fat. She has no regular menses or cycle. While you might be able to to minimalize fat gain of what I have seen it often takes a very controlled diet - not good for a recovering disordered eater - and is not ideal for a woman already of a low body fat and without her period. It is NOT ideal for her to do this even if it's possible to minimize the gain.

Original Post by horfinator:

Original Post by for_zev:

you can't.  how much fat you gain along with the muscle is a function of genetics, how much over maintenance you are, and your training. its called 'p ratio'...the ratio of fat to muscle gain.  Trust me...I study sports nutrition and exercise physiology.

it is impossible to gain solely muscle.  Muscle is a very expensive tissue compared to fat, and the body will preferentially gain fat vs muscle unless you are training.

 okay,we can go with that, but then the issue becomes how much muscle you can gain while minimizing, as opposed to entirely avoiding fat gain, which was essentially the issue anyways. In my experience, you can gain muscle without gaining excessive amounts of fat. Obviously, training is mandatory.

Sure you can, but you said you can gain muscle without fat gain...which is impossible.

And, as pointed out, it is easier if you are male.  AND, if you are regaining due to an ED you are hormonally more primed for fat gain which makes the ratio of muscle:fat gain even lower.

A typical person just looking to gain muscle is going to have a different result than someone recovering from and ED, which is who asked the question.

Original Post by for_zev:

Sure you can, but you said you can gain muscle without fat gain...which is impossible.

And, as pointed out, it is easier if you are male.  AND, if you are regaining due to an ED you are hormonally more primed for fat gain which makes the ratio of muscle:fat gain even lower.

A typical person just looking to gain muscle is going to have a different result than someone recovering from and ED, which is who asked the question.

 I conceded that point.  I guess the fact is that the original poster does need to gain some fat regardless, and the semantics of that really aren't important.

Wow, noob poster here, and I have to say that I'm really impressed with the level of knowledge of some posters. The grace to admit and correct one's statement is something that is mostly absent from the typical forums nowadays... I guess with these kinds of exchanges it wil be a pleasure to post here and help others if I can! ; )

the only think I would point out is that, in my opinion, 25-31%bf is way to high for someone who would like to gain "muscle".. by that I supposed that the person would like to at least *see* them a bit on her frame. Aiming 25%bf will definitely "puff" the person too much, imo.

She is a WOMAN. She NEEDS some fat on her body for her period to be regular. For a WOMAN, that range is 25-31%. See that? FOR A WOMAN. What is making me angry is this is coming from MALE posters who do not seem to register that a WOMAN is going to NEED MORE BODY FAT BECAUSE SHE CARRIES BABIES. Whether she wants to build muscle or not she can still have some muscle and be in a healthy BF% range FOR HER GENDER.

God.

Original Post by lalabanana:

She is a WOMAN. She NEEDS some fat on her body for her period to be regular. For a WOMAN, that range is 25-31%. See that? FOR A WOMAN. What is making me angry is this is coming from MALE posters who do not seem to register that a WOMAN is going to NEED MORE BODY FAT BECAUSE SHE CARRIES BABIES. Whether she wants to build muscle or not she can still have some muscle and be in a healthy BF% range FOR HER GENDER.

God.

Since you yelled, I figured I'd look it up. 

http://life.familyeducation.com/weight/health /35880.html

"Normal body fat percent for women is 20 to 30 (for men it is lower). In women, below 17 is extreme low body fat; between 30 to 33, high body fat; and above 34, extremely high body fat or obese."

It sounds like she'd be safe with anywhere from 17-33% bodyfat, but wouldn't you aim for a lower bodyfat% that accomplishes what you want?  If ALL the original poster needs is to gain back is enough fat  to get her period again, then WHY would she go past that point?  The point I'm making is that, sure, you can get away with 30% and still be healthy but you can also be healthy and "carry babies" with a much lower bodyfat%.

Please calm down, I accept that genders are different, but I don't think it's as extreme as you're saying.

thanks for the input, my point was that IF she wants to weight train and see some results in the mirror, having a lower BF will be much more satisfying for her. And not having periods is not detrimental to health... a lot of women chose not to have them (contraception means, and low bf%), and then when they want to have babies they just gain the necessary fat... i'm not aware of any long term adverse side effects

http://cks.library.nhs.uk/amenorrhoea/backgro und_information/complications_and_prognosis

Original Post by dedicatedforlife:

thanks for the input, my point was that IF she wants to weight train and see some results in the mirror, having a lower BF will be much more satisfying for her. And not having periods is not detrimental to health... a lot of women chose not to have them (contraception means, and low bf%), and then when they want to have babies they just gain the necessary fat... i'm not aware of any long term adverse side effects

 there is a huge difference between taking pills to not get a period and not getting one due to health problems.  They are hormonally ccompletely different.  The pill  contains hormones that keep the body healthy...not having a period is due to a LACK of those same hormones which result in risk of osteoporosis, infertility, immunological problems, etc.

Please don't comment on something like this unless you know what you're talking about.

Hi, I was the original poster.  I've been reading all the responses (thank you everyone) and I'm a bit concerned.

Is it true that I have to get my BF% up to 25 to get my period back?  I am currently 15% and that seems like an awful lot of fat  I have to put on.  That would completely change the way my body looks, no?  I mean, I'm lean and very toned now, would I have to give up that athletic look?

Also, I'm nearly 43 and I've finished having children, so I'm mainly concerned about osteoperosis.  Would supplementing with calcium help to prevent bone loss?

Any advice is appreciated.  (but try not to kill each other)

Original Post by pemberly:

Hi, I was the original poster.  I've been reading all the responses (thank you everyone) and I'm a bit concerned.

Is it true that I have to get my BF% up to 25 to get my period back?  I am currently 15% and that seems like an awful lot of fat  I have to put on.  That would completely change the way my body looks, no?  I mean, I'm lean and very toned now, would I have to give up that athletic look?

Also, I'm nearly 43 and I've finished having children, so I'm mainly concerned about osteoperosis.  Would supplementing with calcium help to prevent bone loss?

Any advice is appreciated.  (but try not to kill each other)

 well, i wouldn't put much stock in that 15%....most methods of bodyfat% are inaccurate so unless that was a DEXA scan, its probably wrong.  If you were 15% you'd be pretty ripped...lwe're talking quadricep definition, 6 pack abs, etc.  Most people think they are lower than they really are.  If you're pretty fit, you're more likely closer to 18%.

To answer the question, no, not necessarily.  Some AN never lose their period regardless of how emaciated they get.  and I know many fitness competitors who DO get down to 14% and still get their periods.  Its very individual, and stress/emotions definitely play a role.  I know a study comparing women of equal weight/bodyfat% found that those who did NOT get their periods reported more ED thoughts/stress compared to the others, even after controlling for food intake and activity.

If I were you I would get a bone scan and see what it shows up.  You should also be tested for a vitamin D deficiency.  In studies of AN, calcium supplementation doesn't show as strong an effect as hoped for, unfortunately.  But it certainly wouldn't hurt.

In addition, I would make sure you are eating enough to gain to a healthy weight, rest, cut out any intensive cardio (which is most certainly related to loss of period due to high stress hormones), and do your best to be patient.  You may also want to consider that at 43 you are not that far off from pre-menopause, so look at your family history of when women in your family went through menopause.