How much weight can a man in his 40s lose in 6 months?

How much weight can a 40-year-old man lose in 6 months?

For the example, 9.5 kg (20.9 lb) of body weight, and all of it fat: the scale reads 67.5 kg (148.9 lb) at Month 6, down from 77 kg (170 lb), and body fat has gone from 20% to 8.8%. On a man of 177 cm (5′ 10″) that is a different silhouette rather than a slightly smaller one: a belt two or three notches tighter, a visible jawline, shirts that sit flat.

The first half of the curve is quicker than the second. By the end of the third month the example is down 6.0 kg (13.2 lb) and reads 13.2%; the following three months add a little more than half as much again. That slowing is the floor approaching, which the section on pace explains.

Read the body-weight row against the fat row: they move together, kilogram for kilogram, because the engine does not let a cut at this depth take anything from lean mass. The page says what that rule rests on further down. Notice too how little happens between Month 6 and the end of the first year, 10.0 kg (22.0 lb) in total, barely more than at six months. At 8.8% the example has arrived. A cut that long is not what the engine recommends, only what it can draw.

Is it harder to lose fat after 40?

In the engine, no, and the page would rather say that plainly than borrow a complaint. Three of the four parts of a cut do not read age at all. The deficit is −17.5% from maintenance at every age. The weekly pace is −0.625% of body weight a week at every age. The body-fat floor is 8% for every man. Run the example body at twenty-five and at 45 on a cut and the fat row comes out identical.

Where age does enter is the maintenance figure the deficit is taken from. The resting-expenditure equation the calorie target starts from subtracts a few calories for every year of age, so the same body is given a slightly smaller daily budget at 45 than it would have had at twenty-five: on the order of a hundred calories a day, a yoghurt rather than a meal. The deficit is then a share of that smaller number. The pace in kilograms is unchanged; the plate is a little emptier to reach it.

What men in their 40s usually mean by harder is real but lives outside the equation: shorter sleep, a job that sits, two decades of habits a twenty-five-year-old has not formed yet. None of that changes the curve; all of it changes whether the curve is followed, and the engine assumes it is followed at least eighty percent of the time. Losing fat after 40 is the same arithmetic with less slack around it.

How many calories should a man in his 40s eat to lose fat?

For the example, 2,000 kcal a day, with 169 g of protein, 62 g of fat and 192 g of carbohydrate. Those are the daily targets the app would set him on Day 1, and they come from arithmetic you can check: resting expenditure from height, weight, age and sex, an activity factor for 3 sessions a week, and then the cut's −17.5%.

• The deficit is bounded. −17.5% is the cut's setting, and the app never sets a target more than 25% under expenditure, whatever a weigh-in or a check-in asks for, because past that line the shortfall starts coming from muscle instead of fat. The reasoning and the citation are on the fat-loss guide.
• Protein goes up, not down. A cut carries the highest protein factor of the three goals, 2.2 g per kg, because in a deficit protein is what holds the lean mass the fat row depends on. The figure for your own weight is on the protein guide.
• Fat has a floor and a ceiling. The fat target is set per kilogram of body weight and capped at a share of the day's calories, so a cut never squeezes fat to nothing and never lets it crowd out the carbohydrate the sessions run on.
• Carbohydrate is what is left. It is the part of the budget that moves when the weekly check-in nudges calories; the protein figure stays put.

If your weight, height or training days differ from the example, the calorie calculator runs the same arithmetic on yours and prints the figure the app would start you on. It is a starting point rather than a verdict: the weekly check-in reads your weigh-in trend against the curve and moves the target in bounded steps, down if you are behind and up if you are losing faster than the plan wants.

How fast should a man over 40 lose weight?

−0.625% of body weight a week, which for the example is a little under half a kilogram at the start and slightly less each week as he gets lighter, because the pace is a share of body weight rather than a fixed amount. Over 6 months that compounds to the 9.5 kg (20.9 lb) in the table, with the last stretch slower still.

The flattening at the end is the engine's taper. Fat loss runs at the full pace while body fat is comfortably above the floor, eases off over the last few points above 8%, and stops at it. The example enters that zone early in the fourth month, which is why his second quarter is slower than his first and his second half-year barely moves. The taper exists so that a long cut levels out instead of running the arithmetic into a body that does not exist.

Can a man in his 40s lose fat without losing muscle?

In the engine he keeps all of it, and the page owes you the reason. On a cut the lean-mass row is held flat: the model's rule is that a deficit no deeper than −17.5%, protein at 2.2 g per kg and 3 lifting sessions a week are together enough to keep what is there. So the muscle row in every table reads none, and that none is the engine's honest zero rather than a blank: no muscle added, and none lost.

That is the optimistic edge of the published evidence, and the page will not dress it up as more. Men who cut without lifting, or who cut on the protein of a man who does not lift, do lose lean mass, and the engine's figure assumes neither. The fat figure on this page belongs to a man who lifts 3 times a week and eats 169 g of protein a day, not to a diet on its own.

The table looks odd until you see what it is saying. Training history changes nothing about a cut's fat row, because the engine adds no muscle on a cut for any tier; a man of 45 with three years behind him loses the same 9.5 kg (20.9 lb) as the beginner. The lifts themselves are the same at every tier: a squat pattern, a hinge, a press and a pull, programmed at 10–20 hard sets a week per big muscle group, in a rotation that rolls forward when a session is missed instead of counting the day lost.

How does the figure change with a lighter start?

The example is one man at 77 kg (170 lb) and 20%. The engine was also run on two lighter neighbours so you can read the row nearest your own start; all three are 45, new to lifting, and on the same cut.

The figures spread wider here than on the muscle pages, because a cut's result is almost entirely a function of where you start: how much fat sits above the floor, and how heavy you are when the weekly share is taken. The lighter man loses 7.4 kg (16.3 lb), the middle one 8.4 kg (18.5 lb), the example 9.5 kg (20.9 lb). All three end within a point of one another in body fat, because the floor is the same for all three; the heavier the start, the longer the road to it and the larger the six-month figure. The free projection will draw your own pair of figures from your own numbers.