Don't know if I should gain muscle or lose weight?

Sarahwantshealth

Wow!!! My head is spinning from information over load !! I am so confused . Great discussion though !!

Haha, me too!

Sarauk2sf

LN: Well I think certain people can build muscle and burn fat at the same time and they general fall into 3 groups: 1) beginners 2) very obese people and 3) those using steroids or illicit lipolytics or a combination of any 3 of those. But if a person has been training hard for a few years and is very good with their nutrition and aren’t 35% bodyfat, they aren’t going to burn fat and build muscle at the same time most likely. It would be EXTREMELY unlikely to happen.

I'm not sure if you were trying to counter what I, and others, have said about it being possible to do both at the same time, but I wholeheartedly agree with what you said.

Here's the thing. Most people who ask questions like this are 1: beginners and 2: obese.

Telling a fat newbie that they can't do both at the same time is not helpful, because it makes them feel like they need either to go on a calorie restricted diet to lose fat OR eat a surplus and lift heavy to gain muscle. If you lift heavy AND eat at a slight deficit, an obese starter will be happier with the results than one who does either/or.

When you have been lifting for long enough to no longer be a beginner, 6-8 months or more, to pull a number out of my bottom, then maybe you have to look into what you want to do to get to the next level. In 6-8 months of eating at a slight deficit, that fat beginner has probably also dropped enough fat to see muscles they never knew were there all along and they'll have a solid foundation of lifting and proper form to enable them to catapult themselves into the next level, if thats where they want to be.

To OP: You can do both. If you want to be stronger and you have a lot of body fat you don't want anymore, You should do both.

Nobody said you can't incorporate heavy lifting while cutting. Just because you can't grow muscle, doesn't mean you can't retain muscle. Also, "noob gains" are very small, mostly unnoticeable. It's maybe a few pounds of muscle over a 6 month period for a man, significantly less for a woman (not enough testosterone.)

Most people think they are building muscle because they are retaining water and increasing glycogen stores (which shows increased lbm) and because they get stronger. 99% of the reason beginner lifters get stronger has absolutely nothing to do with muscle building. It's all about neuromuscular adaptation, where the central nervous system reprograms itself and the muscles to fire more efficiently, leading to seemingly massive strength gains. Once those adaptations finish, that's generally when the beginner lifter stalls out, and from there, either stagnates if cutting, or will continue to very slowly gain strength as muscle builds if bulking.

For everything you seem to be posting about physiology, I find it surprising that you would find it "impossible" to build muscle and lose weight at the same time.

If you eat at a slight deficit and have an increase load on your muscles, your body still has to adapt to the load placed on it. If you consume an adequate amountof protein your serum amino acid level remains high, therefore preventing muscle breakdown and even giving the ability of adding more amino acids to bound muscle proteins.

As others have stated, it is no the most efficient way of doing so, you will not become a huge body builder from it, and you will not lose a whole lot of fat quicklty, but it is possible to gain muscle and lose weight at a minor deficit.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21558571

Couple of issues with that study. Just because they were athletes does not mean that they did not get newb gains (The following sports were represented in the study: football, volleyball, cross-country skiing, judo, jujitsu, tae kwon do, waterskiing, motocross, cycling, track and field, kickboxing, gymnastics, alpine skiing, ski jumping, rifle shooting, freestyle sports dancing, skating, biathlon, and ice hockey.). The sample size was small. While they were athletes their BF was not that low on average and even went up to 36% for women and 22% for men. Also, water/glycogen is included in LBM.

Side note: what on earth is freestyle sports dancing?

"BM decreased by ~6% in both groups during the intervention but was not different from baseline values after 12 mo. FM decreased in SR and FR during the intervention by 31% ± 3% vs. 23% ± 4%, respectively, but was not different from baseline after 12 mo. LBM and upper body strength increased more in SR than in FR (2.0% ± 1.3% vs. 0.8% ± 1.1% and 12% ± 2% vs. 6% ± 2%) during the intervention, but after 12 mo there were no significant differences between groups in BC or performance."

It's saying that over the 12 months, there BF DECRESED by about 31% not that they were at 31% and gained or lost 3%. Also, their LBM increased over the course of a year by about 2%. I'm just trying to explain that it is possible to do both at the same time.

Also, I have no idea what "freestyle sports dancing" some form of hoodoo?

You are looking at the 'after effect's which is what the study was intended to look at. You need to look at the period under restriction.

Sarauk2sf

However, I would wonder how "elite atheletes" had over 20% BF to lose. That would be my first question.

There were rifle shooters and martial arts practitioners. It did not say they were elite.

It would be interesting to see which ones gained and which ones did not - that way it would be more relevant to the discussion in this topic.

HappyStack

OP: you still have weight to lose. Keep eating at a reasonable deficit, strength train, hit your macros and be patient.

When you are at a lower BF% you will be able to assess better whether you want to bulk/cut, recomp or stay where you are.

Yes x a million.

Why do people argue this point to death?

If you have a higher percentage of body fat, cut weight and keep going until you're at an acceptable level of leanness (~10% for men, ~20% for women, YMMV, it's personal preference) and then start working on building up your muscle mass IF you find that your level of muscularity is not what you'd like when you get to your desired body fat level.

a) it's easier to track progress this way,
b) it's quicker to get to your "ideal body" if you have a high percentage of body fat and follow this method.

If you want to recompose your LBM:body fat ratio it's going to take a relatively long period of time, anyway, regardless of your current weight & height.

Boohoo. You didn't get fat overnight, you won't get lean overnight.

paprad

Side note: what on earth is freestyle sports dancing?

something like this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-50GjySwew

Hexahedra

Don't listen to this. Uninformed. You can do both unless, you are trying to become a body builder.. I have several MFP examples that have succeeded in doing them both at the same time. One of my MFP mates lost over 200 lbs and now is a buff body builder. He became lean and cut at the same time.

it is the opposite that is happening to me! I am coming from a sporting background (swimming and rowing) and always had the upside-down-triangle body shape most swimmers..I had some medical issues (because of my rowing history) that prevented me from exercising for about a decade....left it all behind me a year ago..happily back to my usual activity level - I need to have at least 5 exercise session a week to feel fine..Some weeks I do 7 (just because Iove outdoors and if the weather is fine I am out cycling, rowing, swimming whatever) ....I do 70% cardio 30% strenght each workout I have...but instead of losing kgs I am finding that my muscles are becoming very appearant.I am starting to get cyclist's legs...and my shoulders look like a boxer's or a weightlifter..I went to the pool over the weekend and I got the stares - my arms looked like guns...I dont like it! I am not losing the belly fat..I am stuck at my weight loss progress as well, even thought I barely manage to eat 1200calories a day (have never had a big appetiate) and burn at least 500 per day during exercise...anyone knows how can I turn this around?

If you were an athlete, it doesn't take too much to get your muscles back to their previous state. If you've never been too active before, it takes longer to build muscle. I know because I used to be active and has gained muscle in certain spots in the back. The moment I started working out again after a couple of decades, those muscles are the very first ones to pop right back up. The rest of my underworked muscles are still trying to catch up.

My advice is to keep doing what you're doing. You look more muscular because you're losing body fat, exposing old muscles that are popping back up due to new exercises. The belly fat will be gone when your body fat percentage gets low enough. When you eventually lose the belly fat you will look quite lean and even more muscular than you are today, but don't worry, just eat a slight surplus and a little extra salt and you will 'soften' again.

tigersword

LN: Well I think certain people can build muscle and burn fat at the same time and they general fall into 3 groups: 1) beginners 2) very obese people and 3) those using steroids or illicit lipolytics or a combination of any 3 of those. But if a person has been training hard for a few years and is very good with their nutrition and aren’t 35% bodyfat, they aren’t going to burn fat and build muscle at the same time most likely. It would be EXTREMELY unlikely to happen.

I'm not sure if you were trying to counter what I, and others, have said about it being possible to do both at the same time, but I wholeheartedly agree with what you said.

Here's the thing. Most people who ask questions like this are 1: beginners and 2: obese.

Telling a fat newbie that they can't do both at the same time is not helpful, because it makes them feel like they need either to go on a calorie restricted diet to lose fat OR eat a surplus and lift heavy to gain muscle. If you lift heavy AND eat at a slight deficit, an obese starter will be happier with the results than one who does either/or.

When you have been lifting for long enough to no longer be a beginner, 6-8 months or more, to pull a number out of my bottom, then maybe you have to look into what you want to do to get to the next level. In 6-8 months of eating at a slight deficit, that fat beginner has probably also dropped enough fat to see muscles they never knew were there all along and they'll have a solid foundation of lifting and proper form to enable them to catapult themselves into the next level, if thats where they want to be.

To OP: You can do both. If you want to be stronger and you have a lot of body fat you don't want anymore, You should do both.

Nobody said you can't incorporate heavy lifting while cutting. Just because you can't grow muscle, doesn't mean you can't retain muscle. Also, "noob gains" are very small, mostly unnoticeable. It's maybe a few pounds of muscle over a 6 month period for a man, significantly less for a woman (not enough testosterone.)

Most people think they are building muscle because they are retaining water and increasing glycogen stores (which shows increased lbm) and because they get stronger. 99% of the reason beginner lifters get stronger has absolutely nothing to do with muscle building. It's all about neuromuscular adaptation, where the central nervous system reprograms itself and the muscles to fire more efficiently, leading to seemingly massive strength gains. Once those adaptations finish, that's generally when the beginner lifter stalls out, and from there, either stagnates if cutting, or will continue to very slowly gain strength as muscle builds if bulking.

For everything you seem to be posting about physiology, I find it surprising that you would find it "impossible" to build muscle and lose weight at the same time.

If you eat at a slight deficit and have an increase load on your muscles, your body still has to adapt to the load placed on it. If you consume an adequate amountof protein your serum amino acid level remains high, therefore preventing muscle breakdown and even giving the ability of adding more amino acids to bound muscle proteins.

As others have stated, it is no the most efficient way of doing so, you will not become a huge body builder from it, and you will not lose a whole lot of fat quicklty, but it is possible to gain muscle and lose weight at a minor deficit.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21558571

Can you link the actual study, or just the abstract that really doesn't tell me anything? Also, the body has many ways of adapting to a load, mostly dealing with central nervous system adaptations. And, also, lifts do not go up forever, once the CNS has adapted, lifts stall out. Finally, I noticed that study only referred to lbm, not muscle. LBM is everything in your body that isn't fat. Could have been gains in water or glycogen that were seen. Again, without the actual study, to look at the actual data tables, no way of knowing what was actually measured.

I'll stick with basic physics and biology. 1. Can't build tissue without the raw materials (even with an adequate amount of protein, anything more than required to maintain current muscle mass will be used for energy purposes due to not receiving enough calories to fuel the body.) 2. The body will not create new, extra tissue that requires caloric support to maintain when it is not receiving enough calories to support all current tissue (in other words, a calorie deficit.) The human body is a study in efficiency. If it needs 2000 calories to support current tissue, but is only receiving 1500 calories, it will not add on MORE tissue that requires more calories to maintain, as that's not efficient. It will start catabolizing all nonessential tissue in order to restabilize levels, in order to preserve a stable amount of body fat for as long as possible (a human being can survive a famine period much longer with little muscle and lots of fat, rather than lots of muscle and little fat.) This is why heavy strength training and smaller calorie deficits are so important. The strength training says the muscle is essential, so the body will hang onto it, and burn more fat, while a large enough calorie deficit will force the body into catabolizing muscle just to keep up with caloric demand.

JorisSt

Try both and look what gives best result? I always learned that everybody is different and what works for person A could not work for person B.

Joris S.
musclemaximum.org