Muscle building in a deficit.

Options
PAV8888
PAV8888 Posts: 13,739 Member
edited March 2019 in Health and Weight Loss
Since I started on MFP a few years back there has been a general sentiment on the MFP forums that it is incredibly unlikely to build muscle while in a deficit.

Maybe if we do everything right we will protect and reveal existing muscle mass; but, building new muscle, especially for women... no way!

Sometimes the exception "but for a beginner lifter with a smaller deficit it may be possible to see some newbie gains" gets added to the admonition.

I always thought this approach to be a bit odd mainly because, to me, the likelihood that the person posting such a question on an MFP forum was an over-fat beginner was actually quite high and one of the more likely scenarios!

But, it seems that the truth is a little bit more complicated. And while UNLIKELY; it is far from impossible to achieve the holy grail.

Of course, being a beginner, eating sufficient protein, exercising correctly, and getting enough sleep and rest... all help.

https://sci-fit.net/bulking-deficit-gaining/

https://mennohenselmans.com/gain-muscle-and-lose-fat-at-the-same-time/

https://mennohenselmans.com/energy-balance-myths/

http://scoobysworkshop.com/gain-muscle-lose-fat/

Replies

  • JohnnytotheB
    JohnnytotheB Posts: 361 Member
    Options
    sijomial wrote: »
    When I joined MFP I was taken aback by the 'group think' that frequently manifested itself as the absolute statement "you can't build muscle in a deficit". Having done exactly that on several occasions I knew it's clearly false.

    Where is this mode switch located that switches off muscle protein synthesis? How does your body "know" you are in a deficit from TDEE in the first place?

    Note the lack of any qualification around the you part and the deficit part so that's including every single person and every size of deficit from massive to tiny. Over the years there's been a grudging acceptance from most, but not all, that it's not universal.

    I'd add Eric Helms article https://muscleandstrengthpyramids.com/calorie-deficit-gain-weight/ as well as it has quite a few study links around muscle gain and quantifies the calorie balance in addition to the main points around recomposition. It's includes the fun fact that people successfully recomping are actually in a tiny long term deficit.

    I agree with what sijomial said. It's BS to think that you can't do both. I started weight lifting again right when I started cutting calories and I have made some gains. I'm only around 3 months in. This is not scientifically backed or proven, but I believe that when one cuts calories they should start a weight lifting program to combat loose of muscle from cutting calories to deep - which is a totally different problem! So, my opinion is get going on weight lifting now (with good technique) and get gaining muscle.
  • PAV8888
    PAV8888 Posts: 13,739 Member
    Options
    ceiswyn wrote: »
    Of course, what you still can't do is build enough muscle to prevent you losing weight. Because how would that even work - where would the mass come from?

    I suspect that the 'you can't build muscle in a deficit' on these forums usually comes in the context of someone saying 'you're probably not seeing weight loss because you're building muscle'. At which point the nuanced reality is discarded in favour of being really, really clear that that is not the case.

    It is true that it is really really UNLIKELY for it to be the case.

    In terms of it being flat out impossible, have a look at the link from @sijomial above: https://muscleandstrengthpyramids.com/calorie-deficit-gain-weight/

    and at one of the links in my first post in this thread: https://mennohenselmans.com/energy-balance-myths/



  • ceiswyn
    ceiswyn Posts: 2,256 Member
    Options
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    ceiswyn wrote: »
    Of course, what you still can't do is build enough muscle to prevent you losing weight. Because how would that even work - where would the mass come from?

    I suspect that the 'you can't build muscle in a deficit' on these forums usually comes in the context of someone saying 'you're probably not seeing weight loss because you're building muscle'. At which point the nuanced reality is discarded in favour of being really, really clear that that is not the case.

    It is true that it is really really UNLIKELY for it to be the case.

    In terms of it being flat out impossible, have a look at the link from @sijomial above: https://muscleandstrengthpyramids.com/calorie-deficit-gain-weight/

    and at one of the links in my first post in this thread: https://mennohenselmans.com/energy-balance-myths/

    I'll read those articles later, but I'm well skeptical :)
  • mmapags
    mmapags Posts: 8,934 Member
    Options
    For me, I guess the real question for me is how much compared to at maintenance or in surplus? A small deficit and resistance training will certainly be the ticket but what would the expectations be? I've read one of the linked articles but I'll read the others later today.
  • PAV8888
    PAV8888 Posts: 13,739 Member
    edited March 2019
    Options
    mmapags wrote: »
    For me, I guess the real question for me is how much compared to at maintenance or in surplus? A small deficit and resistance training will certainly be the ticket but what would the expectations be? I've read one of the linked articles but I'll read the others later today.

    Less so, for sure.

    This doesn't mean that recomp / not running bulk cut cycles is wrong for everyone. Especially for those who do not have their "programming" firing on all cylinders. Or who have other reasons to not want to bulk and cut.

    The reference is mainly against the blanket, and often motivation detracting, mantra about muscle gains being impossible in a deficit. And about the flat out denial (of the unlikely event) that a person could be in a deficit and not lose weight because of the counteracting effects of increased lean mass.
  • mmapags
    mmapags Posts: 8,934 Member
    Options
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    mmapags wrote: »
    For me, I guess the real question for me is how much compared to at maintenance or in surplus? A small deficit and resistance training will certainly be the ticket but what would the expectations be? I've read one of the linked articles but I'll read the others later today.

    Less so, for sure.

    This doesn't mean that recomp / not running bulk cut cycles is wrong for everyone. Especially for those who do not have their "programming" firing on all cylinders. Or who have other reasons to not want to bulk and cut.

    The reference is mainly against the blanket, and often motivation detracting, mantra about muscle gains being impossible in a deficit. And about the flat out denial (of the unlikely event) that a person could be in a deficit and not lose weight because of the counteracting effects of increased lean mass.

    Yes. I totally agree. I am also a big proponent of recomps as opposed to bulk and cuts for most people. But the effective rate of muscle gains either in deficit or recomp really depends on where the person is when they start. For an already trained person of, say, middle age, it's going to be slow and minimal I would think.
    That being said, it beats the alternative of losing muscle mass. And the "you must be replacing fat with muscle" thing isn't at all accurate.
  • ceiswyn
    ceiswyn Posts: 2,256 Member
    Options
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    mmapags wrote: »
    For me, I guess the real question for me is how much compared to at maintenance or in surplus? A small deficit and resistance training will certainly be the ticket but what would the expectations be? I've read one of the linked articles but I'll read the others later today.

    Less so, for sure.

    This doesn't mean that recomp / not running bulk cut cycles is wrong for everyone. Especially for those who do not have their "programming" firing on all cylinders. Or who have other reasons to not want to bulk and cut.

    The reference is mainly against the blanket, and often motivation detracting, mantra about muscle gains being impossible in a deficit. And about the flat out denial (of the unlikely event) that a person could be in a deficit and not lose weight because of the counteracting effects of increased lean mass.

    I really must read those articles... do they cover how the physics of it works? Where the mass comes from? Does human muscle contain more water than human fat, for example - I can sort of see how that would work...
  • leonadixon
    leonadixon Posts: 479 Member
    Options
    sijomial wrote: »
    ceiswyn wrote: »
    Of course, what you still can't do is build enough muscle to prevent you losing weight. Because how would that even work - where would the mass come from?

    I suspect that the 'you can't build muscle in a deficit' on these forums usually comes in the context of someone saying 'you're probably not seeing weight loss because you're building muscle'. At which point the nuanced reality is discarded in favour of being really, really clear that that is not the case.

    I agree there are some comments along those lines mostly from people who have no idea of the timescales involved in adding muscle mass but "you can't gain muscle in a deficit" does come up and I would say far more frequently. Also the assumption that "muscle loss in a deficit is inevitable and if you do all the right things you might minimise it" whereas the actual outcomes are very varied and personal.

    The opposite is also stated in these forums "you must be in a surplus to gain muscle" or telling people without advanced physique goals they must do cut/bulk cycles. That's also wrong and going to be quite demotivating to hear for many.

    The danger of this misinformation is that people (wrongly) see no benefit in lifting while dieting so think they might as well wait until they get to goal weight and then is there any point in trying to add muscle if they have to get big again.....

    This has been my mentality for the past year, having been a quiet reader of the forums. Thank you for the post, I am going to read up on these links and start lifting! Thanks all!

  • mmapags
    mmapags Posts: 8,934 Member
    Options
    ceiswyn wrote: »
    PAV8888 wrote: »
    mmapags wrote: »
    For me, I guess the real question for me is how much compared to at maintenance or in surplus? A small deficit and resistance training will certainly be the ticket but what would the expectations be? I've read one of the linked articles but I'll read the others later today.

    Less so, for sure.

    This doesn't mean that recomp / not running bulk cut cycles is wrong for everyone. Especially for those who do not have their "programming" firing on all cylinders. Or who have other reasons to not want to bulk and cut.

    The reference is mainly against the blanket, and often motivation detracting, mantra about muscle gains being impossible in a deficit. And about the flat out denial (of the unlikely event) that a person could be in a deficit and not lose weight because of the counteracting effects of increased lean mass.

    I really must read those articles... do they cover how the physics of it works? Where the mass comes from? Does human muscle contain more water than human fat, for example - I can sort of see how that would work...

    Do take a look at them. It will help you to "get it". One of the things that stood out to me in one of the links was the thought that fat and fat burning and muscle building and protein synthesis are 2 different systems in the body. Fat burning doesn't prevent muscle protein synthesis. To little total energy intake can though.

    Reasonable, moderate deficits, resistance training and decent protein was shown to work by the preponderance of the studies. Interestingly, to me, in the one link (I forget which) where there was a chart with the results from lots of the studies, lower than ideal protein intake still produced some muscle growth. And higher protein intake did not necessarily produce better results beyond the 1.8 to 2.2 grams per kg. Also, that there was hypertrophy in both trained and untrained subjects.
  • kimny72
    kimny72 Posts: 16,013 Member
    Options
    @sijomial That makes sense :smile:
  • Chieflrg
    Chieflrg Posts: 9,097 Member
    Options
    sijomial wrote: »
    kimny72 wrote: »
    ceiswyn wrote: »
    Of course, what you still can't do is build enough muscle to prevent you losing weight. Because how would that even work - where would the mass come from?

    I suspect that the 'you can't build muscle in a deficit' on these forums usually comes in the context of someone saying 'you're probably not seeing weight loss because you're building muscle'. At which point the nuanced reality is discarded in favour of being really, really clear that that is not the case.

    I'd bet this is where it started. Lots of newbies were telling other newbies (usually women) that they weren't losing weight because they were building muscle on the treadmill and the corrective responses were over-simplified to "you can't build muscle in a deficit" without all the qualifiers. Then other posters kept seeing that posted and learned the over-simplified statement and not the qualifiers! So this post is a good correction :smile:

    Really, I'm just bookmarking this for myself by posting so I can read the links later...
    @kimny72
    It's also come from the opposite direction.
    From very advanced trainees (such as bodybuilders for example) who actually need all conditions to be optimal to make any discernible progress. When you have a lot of serious training years under your belt, have built close to your genetic muscular potential and are lean then not being able to build any measurable muscle in a significant deficit is far more likely.
    As they look good with their shirts off and know how to lift heavy weights then their views have gravitas. :)
    There's also an element of the wannabees copying the methods without understanding the context. Every gym seems to have beginners doing body part splits, super-setting everything, chugging BCAA shakes and doing cut/bulk cycles....
    Of course it works - but not for the reasons they think.

    But advanced trainees represent a tiny proportion of the general population who are mostly under-trained, often over-fat and miles away from their potential. A reasonable training routine plus a reasonably adequate diet (including calorie balance) is normally sufficient to make progress.

    Well said.
  • PAV8888
    PAV8888 Posts: 13,739 Member
    Options
    JBanx256 wrote: »
    70wwbv0v4mny.jpg
    FWIW - the difference here is right at 2 months (left is January 13, right is March 15). About 5 lbs lighter on the scale, but waist is significantly smaller & quads have grown. Also lifting more weight etc on some movements. So, yes, it's possible to add muscle on a deficit.

    Now THAT is INSPIRING to me.

    And it's NOT as if you were starting from what *I* would call under-trained and over-fat.

    Mind you... you sort of "spoil" things by actually being 5lbs lighter and not complaining about not having lost enough weight :lol:

Categories