Debunking the Myth

ndj1979

I have had very little input during this exchange from others who also maintain a very low BF% and good muscle development. I know you're out there. What do you eat? All I'm getting is people who are obviously satisfied with a little gel coating....not that there's anything wrong with that. But I was looking for some similar stories to compare with mine. Somehow I got into this dicussiion with female powerlifters. Not exactly comparing apples to apples here.

That there weren't any credible accounts rushing to your defense is consistent with the generally held position that you didn't actually do what you thought you did.

This is not a debate whether I did what I thought I did. That is invontravertable. The debate is over why I did what I thought I did. Keep up.

actually, everything you have claimed has been debated and found to be highly suspect, if not blatantly false….

you also contradicted yourself about five times….

My weight is not debatable

My relative strength is not debatable

My relative BF% is not debatable

My caloric intake is not debatable

These things are only debatable if ones opinion is that I am blatently lying. If that's the case, there's no point in having a discussion when you don't believe what one side is saying. And to that point, what would I possibly gain from making up stories about my lifestyle, body comp, eating habits, and gym progress. That would be a little sad and uncharacteristic. I am pretty serious about my health and fitness, and don't take this stuff lightly. I am not a troll, or "delusional" as someone stated. I am just a guy who stays in pretty good shape and noticed some pretty remarkable changes in my body while eating at a perceived deficit.

The only things then that become a topic for debate are: what is my actual TDEE, and what are the processes going on in my body to account for the changes?

And also, please quote a single contradiction. I think I have stayed pretty steadfast to my initial stance.

actually this has been debated through this whole thread..and I have yet to see the conclusive evidence that your claims are valid.

FatHuMan1

What "data" are you looking for besides my own measurements and observations? Please be more specific. Since when does someone have to have a scienctific study behind their words to make them true? I look down, see a number on the scale. I look up, see my reflection in the mirror, I drive to the gym, move X amount of weight around, I drive home, I eat X amount of food. There's your data. What else do you need?

As soon as they claim to have "debunked" a scientifically accepted concept" as you did in your thread title. That's when. Now would be the time to pony up to that claim, or stop defending it.

shmoony

What "data" are you looking for besides my own measurements and observations? Please be more specific. Since when does someone have to have a scienctific study behind their words to make them true? I look down, see a number on the scale. I look up, see my reflection in the mirror, I drive to the gym, move X amount of weight around, I drive home, I eat X amount of food. There's your data. What else do you need?

As soon as they claim to have "debunked" a scientifically accepted concept" as you did in your thread title. That's when. Now would be the time to pony up to that claim, or stop defending it.

I already apologized in an earlier post for titling my OP that. Maybe I should have entitled it "Interesting observations of the way my body has reacted to my routine". That, however, would not change the content herein.

shmoony

I have had very little input during this exchange from others who also maintain a very low BF% and good muscle development. I know you're out there. What do you eat? All I'm getting is people who are obviously satisfied with a little gel coating....not that there's anything wrong with that. But I was looking for some similar stories to compare with mine. Somehow I got into this dicussiion with female powerlifters. Not exactly comparing apples to apples here.

That there weren't any credible accounts rushing to your defense is consistent with the generally held position that you didn't actually do what you thought you did.

This is not a debate whether I did what I thought I did. That is invontravertable. The debate is over why I did what I thought I did. Keep up.

actually, everything you have claimed has been debated and found to be highly suspect, if not blatantly false….

you also contradicted yourself about five times….

My weight is not debatable

My relative strength is not debatable

My relative BF% is not debatable

My caloric intake is not debatable

These things are only debatable if ones opinion is that I am blatently lying. If that's the case, there's no point in having a discussion when you don't believe what one side is saying. And to that point, what would I possibly gain from making up stories about my lifestyle, body comp, eating habits, and gym progress. That would be a little sad and uncharacteristic. I am pretty serious about my health and fitness, and don't take this stuff lightly. I am not a troll, or "delusional" as someone stated. I am just a guy who stays in pretty good shape and noticed some pretty remarkable changes in my body while eating at a perceived deficit.

The only things then that become a topic for debate are: what is my actual TDEE, and what are the processes going on in my body to account for the changes?

And also, please quote a single contradiction. I think I have stayed pretty steadfast to my initial stance.

actually this has been debated through this whole thread..and I have yet to see the conclusive evidence that your claims are valid.

What conclusive evidence could I possibly provide in a text thread of these numbers other than my word. This is rediculous.

Barbonica

Fine. You guys are forcing me to get more specific. So here I go:

1) I am about as accurate a logger as there is. I track everything down to the gram. Unless its the occasional cheat meal, if it's not weighed and portioned, it doesn't go in my mouth.

2) My BF% has not decreased in over a year. I have been lean to the point of definition, vascularity and striations for over a year, my change in appearance is only due to muscle gain, not increased defintion due to fat loss.

3) I never said that I haven't gained weight. I have gained 6-7 lbs. of lean muscle in the last 8 months while maintaining BF%

4) I'm not making newbie gains. I am 40 years old and have lifted weights off and on for 25 years.

5) My TDEE is only as accurate as what MFP and FItbit tell me. So I can't argue with the fact that my TDEE is less than what I'm being told. But if that's the case, how did I successfully lose weight based on the same calculator.

What I believe is happening is that by maintaining a slight deficit and lifting with super high intensity, I am forcing my body to use whatever it can to rebuild muscle. I fully understand the science behind hypertrophy and being in an anabolic state, so I can't tell you scientifically why this has been working for me, but the proof is in the pudding. I don't like putting pictures of myself online, so youre; just going to have to take my word for it.

If your BF% has not changed, and if you have gained 6-7 pounds of lean muscle, then you have to have gained weight, and therefore are not eating at a deficit. Simple math: if you weigh 200 pounds and have 15% BF, then you are 30# fat and 170# lean. If you gained 6 pounds lean, but did not gain overall weight, then your BF% would decrease (200# total, 24# fat and 176# lean = 12% BF%). Would you please provide additional detail - I might be misunderstanding your post.

Sorry if this is a repeat post, I haven't read the entire thread.

shmoony

Fine. You guys are forcing me to get more specific. So here I go:

1) I am about as accurate a logger as there is. I track everything down to the gram. Unless its the occasional cheat meal, if it's not weighed and portioned, it doesn't go in my mouth.

2) My BF% has not decreased in over a year. I have been lean to the point of definition, vascularity and striations for over a year, my change in appearance is only due to muscle gain, not increased defintion due to fat loss.

3) I never said that I haven't gained weight. I have gained 6-7 lbs. of lean muscle in the last 8 months while maintaining BF%

4) I'm not making newbie gains. I am 40 years old and have lifted weights off and on for 25 years.

5) My TDEE is only as accurate as what MFP and FItbit tell me. So I can't argue with the fact that my TDEE is less than what I'm being told. But if that's the case, how did I successfully lose weight based on the same calculator.

What I believe is happening is that by maintaining a slight deficit and lifting with super high intensity, I am forcing my body to use whatever it can to rebuild muscle. I fully understand the science behind hypertrophy and being in an anabolic state, so I can't tell you scientifically why this has been working for me, but the proof is in the pudding. I don't like putting pictures of myself online, so youre; just going to have to take my word for it.

If your BF% has not changed, and if you have gained 6-7 pounds of lean muscle, then you have to have gained weight, and therefore are not eating at a deficit. Simple math: if you weigh 200 pounds and have 15% BF, then you are 30# fat and 170# lean. If you gained 6 pounds lean, but did not gain overall weight, then your BF% would decrease (200# total, 24# fat and 176# lean = 12% BF%). Would you please provide additional detail - I might be misunderstanding your post.

Sorry if this is a repeat post, I haven't read the entire thread.

My BF% has actually decreased. On my scale, it has gone from 5.6% to 5%. What I meant is that my relative BF has stayed the same, meaning as I've gained muscle, I have not gained fat. Of course, dealing with such small numbers, you never know exactly how accurate it is so my best gauge is looking in the mirror. When you're as lean as I am, you can see even the smallest fluctuations in bodyfat with varying levels of vascularity, striation, and separation.

Barbonica

Fine. You guys are forcing me to get more specific. So here I go:

1) I am about as accurate a logger as there is. I track everything down to the gram. Unless its the occasional cheat meal, if it's not weighed and portioned, it doesn't go in my mouth.

2) My BF% has not decreased in over a year. I have been lean to the point of definition, vascularity and striations for over a year, my change in appearance is only due to muscle gain, not increased defintion due to fat loss.

3) I never said that I haven't gained weight. I have gained 6-7 lbs. of lean muscle in the last 8 months while maintaining BF%

4) I'm not making newbie gains. I am 40 years old and have lifted weights off and on for 25 years.

5) My TDEE is only as accurate as what MFP and FItbit tell me. So I can't argue with the fact that my TDEE is less than what I'm being told. But if that's the case, how did I successfully lose weight based on the same calculator.

What I believe is happening is that by maintaining a slight deficit and lifting with super high intensity, I am forcing my body to use whatever it can to rebuild muscle. I fully understand the science behind hypertrophy and being in an anabolic state, so I can't tell you scientifically why this has been working for me, but the proof is in the pudding. I don't like putting pictures of myself online, so youre; just going to have to take my word for it.

If your BF% has not changed, and if you have gained 6-7 pounds of lean muscle, then you have to have gained weight, and therefore are not eating at a deficit. Simple math: if you weigh 200 pounds and have 15% BF, then you are 30# fat and 170# lean. If you gained 6 pounds lean, but did not gain overall weight, then your BF% would decrease (200# total, 24# fat and 176# lean = 12% BF%). Would you please provide additional detail - I might be misunderstanding your post.

Sorry if this is a repeat post, I haven't read the entire thread.

My BF% has actually decreased. On my scale, it has gone from 5.6% to 5%. What I meant is that my relative BF has stayed the same, meaning as I've gained muscle, I have not gained fat. Of course, dealing with such small numbers, you never know exactly how accurate it is so my best gauge is looking in the mirror. When you're as lean as I am, you can see even the smallest fluctuations in bodyfat with varying levels of vascularity, striation, and separation.

I thought earlier in the thread you said your BF% was between 7%-9%?

Still not getting the math here, but never mind - it seems imprecise to be using a scale to measure BF%, and then validating it in the mirror. Sorry, not worth my time trying to figure this one out; I have to assume your math or measurements are off somewhere, or I am just not understanding something.

ndj1979

Fine. You guys are forcing me to get more specific. So here I go:

1) I am about as accurate a logger as there is. I track everything down to the gram. Unless its the occasional cheat meal, if it's not weighed and portioned, it doesn't go in my mouth.

2) My BF% has not decreased in over a year. I have been lean to the point of definition, vascularity and striations for over a year, my change in appearance is only due to muscle gain, not increased defintion due to fat loss.

3) I never said that I haven't gained weight. I have gained 6-7 lbs. of lean muscle in the last 8 months while maintaining BF%

4) I'm not making newbie gains. I am 40 years old and have lifted weights off and on for 25 years.

5) My TDEE is only as accurate as what MFP and FItbit tell me. So I can't argue with the fact that my TDEE is less than what I'm being told. But if that's the case, how did I successfully lose weight based on the same calculator.

What I believe is happening is that by maintaining a slight deficit and lifting with super high intensity, I am forcing my body to use whatever it can to rebuild muscle. I fully understand the science behind hypertrophy and being in an anabolic state, so I can't tell you scientifically why this has been working for me, but the proof is in the pudding. I don't like putting pictures of myself online, so youre; just going to have to take my word for it.

If your BF% has not changed, and if you have gained 6-7 pounds of lean muscle, then you have to have gained weight, and therefore are not eating at a deficit. Simple math: if you weigh 200 pounds and have 15% BF, then you are 30# fat and 170# lean. If you gained 6 pounds lean, but did not gain overall weight, then your BF% would decrease (200# total, 24# fat and 176# lean = 12% BF%). Would you please provide additional detail - I might be misunderstanding your post.

Sorry if this is a repeat post, I haven't read the entire thread.

LOL this was already covered but OP chose to ignore it..

he claims to have ate in a deficit, gained weight, and increased muscle….

as a side note, I also fart rainbows that will lead to a pot of gold ….

shmoony

Fine. You guys are forcing me to get more specific. So here I go:

1) I am about as accurate a logger as there is. I track everything down to the gram. Unless its the occasional cheat meal, if it's not weighed and portioned, it doesn't go in my mouth.

2) My BF% has not decreased in over a year. I have been lean to the point of definition, vascularity and striations for over a year, my change in appearance is only due to muscle gain, not increased defintion due to fat loss.

3) I never said that I haven't gained weight. I have gained 6-7 lbs. of lean muscle in the last 8 months while maintaining BF%

4) I'm not making newbie gains. I am 40 years old and have lifted weights off and on for 25 years.

5) My TDEE is only as accurate as what MFP and FItbit tell me. So I can't argue with the fact that my TDEE is less than what I'm being told. But if that's the case, how did I successfully lose weight based on the same calculator.

What I believe is happening is that by maintaining a slight deficit and lifting with super high intensity, I am forcing my body to use whatever it can to rebuild muscle. I fully understand the science behind hypertrophy and being in an anabolic state, so I can't tell you scientifically why this has been working for me, but the proof is in the pudding. I don't like putting pictures of myself online, so youre; just going to have to take my word for it.

If your BF% has not changed, and if you have gained 6-7 pounds of lean muscle, then you have to have gained weight, and therefore are not eating at a deficit. Simple math: if you weigh 200 pounds and have 15% BF, then you are 30# fat and 170# lean. If you gained 6 pounds lean, but did not gain overall weight, then your BF% would decrease (200# total, 24# fat and 176# lean = 12% BF%). Would you please provide additional detail - I might be misunderstanding your post.

Sorry if this is a repeat post, I haven't read the entire thread.

My BF% has actually decreased. On my scale, it has gone from 5.6% to 5%. What I meant is that my relative BF has stayed the same, meaning as I've gained muscle, I have not gained fat. Of course, dealing with such small numbers, you never know exactly how accurate it is so my best gauge is looking in the mirror. When you're as lean as I am, you can see even the smallest fluctuations in bodyfat with varying levels of vascularity, striation, and separation.

I thought earlier in the thread you said your BF% was between 7%-9%?

Still not getting the math here, but never mind - it seems imprecise to be using a scale to measure BF%, and then validating it in the mirror. Sorry, not worth my time trying to figure this one out; I have to assume your math or measurements are off somewhere, or I am just not understanding something.

I know my scale is wrong. There's no way it's actually 5%. I mentioned that in an earlier post. I just use it to determine relative BF%. The 7-9% was a guestimate. I use the mirror as my primary gauge of progress

FatHuMan1

Fine. You guys are forcing me to get more specific. So here I go:

1) I am about as accurate a logger as there is. I track everything down to the gram. Unless its the occasional cheat meal, if it's not weighed and portioned, it doesn't go in my mouth.

2) My BF% has not decreased in over a year. I have been lean to the point of definition, vascularity and striations for over a year, my change in appearance is only due to muscle gain, not increased defintion due to fat loss.

3) I never said that I haven't gained weight. I have gained 6-7 lbs. of lean muscle in the last 8 months while maintaining BF%

4) I'm not making newbie gains. I am 40 years old and have lifted weights off and on for 25 years.

5) My TDEE is only as accurate as what MFP and FItbit tell me. So I can't argue with the fact that my TDEE is less than what I'm being told. But if that's the case, how did I successfully lose weight based on the same calculator.

What I believe is happening is that by maintaining a slight deficit and lifting with super high intensity, I am forcing my body to use whatever it can to rebuild muscle. I fully understand the science behind hypertrophy and being in an anabolic state, so I can't tell you scientifically why this has been working for me, but the proof is in the pudding. I don't like putting pictures of myself online, so youre; just going to have to take my word for it.

If your BF% has not changed, and if you have gained 6-7 pounds of lean muscle, then you have to have gained weight, and therefore are not eating at a deficit. Simple math: if you weigh 200 pounds and have 15% BF, then you are 30# fat and 170# lean. If you gained 6 pounds lean, but did not gain overall weight, then your BF% would decrease (200# total, 24# fat and 176# lean = 12% BF%). Would you please provide additional detail - I might be misunderstanding your post.

Sorry if this is a repeat post, I haven't read the entire thread.

My BF% has actually decreased. On my scale, it has gone from 5.6% to 5%. What I meant is that my relative BF has stayed the same, meaning as I've gained muscle, I have not gained fat. Of course, dealing with such small numbers, you never know exactly how accurate it is so my best gauge is looking in the mirror. When you're as lean as I am, you can see even the smallest fluctuations in bodyfat with varying levels of vascularity, striation, and separation.

I thought earlier in the thread you said your BF% was between 7%-9%?

Still not getting the math here, but never mind - it seems imprecise to be using a scale to measure BF%, and then validating it in the mirror. Sorry, not worth my time trying to figure this one out; I have to assume your math or measurements are off somewhere, or I am just not understanding something.

I know my scale is wrong. There's no way it's actually 5%. I mentioned that in an earlier post. I just use it to determine relative BF%. The 7-9% was a guestimate. I use the mirror as my primary gauge of progress

So by your own admission you rely on 1) your scale ( a.k.a. your only source of any scientific gauging), and it is wrong. 2) you "guestimate, which, by definition, is nothing more than at best, an educated shot in the dark. And 3) the eyeball test, which is subject to so many variables (lighting, bloating, post-workout pump, not to mention your emotional state of mind on any given day), to arrive at your conclusions.

And you wonder why people question whether you have in fact, broken the laws of physics???

It's one thing to say you hear footsteps outside your door. It's entirely another to insist that it's dinosaurs causing them.

BeachIron

Fine. You guys are forcing me to get more specific. So here I go:

1) I am about as accurate a logger as there is. I track everything down to the gram. Unless its the occasional cheat meal, if it's not weighed and portioned, it doesn't go in my mouth.

2) My BF% has not decreased in over a year. I have been lean to the point of definition, vascularity and striations for over a year, my change in appearance is only due to muscle gain, not increased defintion due to fat loss.

3) I never said that I haven't gained weight. I have gained 6-7 lbs. of lean muscle in the last 8 months while maintaining BF%

4) I'm not making newbie gains. I am 40 years old and have lifted weights off and on for 25 years.

5) My TDEE is only as accurate as what MFP and FItbit tell me. So I can't argue with the fact that my TDEE is less than what I'm being told. But if that's the case, how did I successfully lose weight based on the same calculator.

What I believe is happening is that by maintaining a slight deficit and lifting with super high intensity, I am forcing my body to use whatever it can to rebuild muscle. I fully understand the science behind hypertrophy and being in an anabolic state, so I can't tell you scientifically why this has been working for me, but the proof is in the pudding. I don't like putting pictures of myself online, so youre; just going to have to take my word for it.

If your BF% has not changed, and if you have gained 6-7 pounds of lean muscle, then you have to have gained weight, and therefore are not eating at a deficit. Simple math: if you weigh 200 pounds and have 15% BF, then you are 30# fat and 170# lean. If you gained 6 pounds lean, but did not gain overall weight, then your BF% would decrease (200# total, 24# fat and 176# lean = 12% BF%). Would you please provide additional detail - I might be misunderstanding your post.

Sorry if this is a repeat post, I haven't read the entire thread.

My BF% has actually decreased. On my scale, it has gone from 5.6% to 5%. What I meant is that my relative BF has stayed the same, meaning as I've gained muscle, I have not gained fat. Of course, dealing with such small numbers, you never know exactly how accurate it is so my best gauge is looking in the mirror. When you're as lean as I am, you can see even the smallest fluctuations in bodyfat with varying levels of vascularity, striation, and separation.

I thought earlier in the thread you said your BF% was between 7%-9%?

Still not getting the math here, but never mind - it seems imprecise to be using a scale to measure BF%, and then validating it in the mirror. Sorry, not worth my time trying to figure this one out; I have to assume your math or measurements are off somewhere, or I am just not understanding something.

I know my scale is wrong. There's no way it's actually 5%. I mentioned that in an earlier post. I just use it to determine relative BF%. The 7-9% was a guestimate. I use the mirror as my primary gauge of progress

So by your own admission you rely on 1) your scale ( a.k.a. your only source of any scientific gauging), and it is wrong. 2) you "guestimate, which, by definition, is nothing more than at best, an educated shot in the dark. And 3) the eyeball test, which is subject to so many variables (lighting, bloating, post-workout pump, not to mention your emotional state of mind on any given day), to arrive at your conclusions.

And you wonder why people question whether you have in fact, broken the laws of physics???

It's one thing to say you hear footsteps outside your door. It's entirely another to insist that it's dinosaurs causing them.

usmcmp

What conclusive evidence could I possibly provide in a text thread of these numbers other than my word. This is rediculous.

By that statement I can tell everyone I ate 4000 calories of pizza every day for 4 months and lost 30 pounds. Just because you say you did it doesn't mean it is accurate or true.

Scientific studies take constant measurements. Did you use a tape measure at least monthly? Did you take body fat measurements monthly using calipers or bodpod or hydrostatic? Did you weigh every single thing you put in your mouth (that means you couldn't eat fast food or go out to eat because those are highly inaccurate)?

Commander_Keen

I am finally ready after 2 years of experimention to firmly say that the prevailing concept that a caloric surplus is necessary to build muscle is untrue. I know this is going to get a lot of backlash since it has been the belief for so long amongst the general public, but I am now living proof that muscle and strength gains can be acheived through an intense lifting regiment and a closely monitered intake even with a slight caloric deficit. Without getting into too much detail about mself, I can just tell you that I net under my TDEE every week, and every week I get bigger, stronger, and more defined. The key is simply lifting heavy weights to the point of misery, and eating a crap load of protein. Of course if you want to get bigger faster, eat more, but I am much happier making slow gains while maintaining a six pack than benching 285 lbs. with a beer gut.

Somebody PM me, would ya.. but I think there is truth to this.. The OP is stating to eat at a deficit and to be able to do Strong lifts ( add weight weekly, do more reps). What does the body need to build muscle/strength? Protein right?

strength gain and muscle gain are not the same thing…

you can "train" your muscles to get stronger and lift more weight while in a deficit but you will not gain any muscle..

to gain muscle, you need energy, i.e surplus calories above maintenance…

protein will prevent muscle loss, while in a deficit; again, to build muscle you need surplus calories...

So your saying Strength vs Mass.. well can't you gain Muscle Mass by taking Creatine

jwdieter

Doubt it will help at this point, but I've said a few times there's nothing unreasonable about the actual observed results here: gaining mostly muscle at slightly under 1lb/month gain rate while eating 2400-2700 cals/day as a 40 yr male ~150 lbs on a strength training routine.

The only problem here is claiming a deficit, which is definitionally impossible.

ndj1979

I am finally ready after 2 years of experimention to firmly say that the prevailing concept that a caloric surplus is necessary to build muscle is untrue. I know this is going to get a lot of backlash since it has been the belief for so long amongst the general public, but I am now living proof that muscle and strength gains can be acheived through an intense lifting regiment and a closely monitered intake even with a slight caloric deficit. Without getting into too much detail about mself, I can just tell you that I net under my TDEE every week, and every week I get bigger, stronger, and more defined. The key is simply lifting heavy weights to the point of misery, and eating a crap load of protein. Of course if you want to get bigger faster, eat more, but I am much happier making slow gains while maintaining a six pack than benching 285 lbs. with a beer gut.

Somebody PM me, would ya.. but I think there is truth to this.. The OP is stating to eat at a deficit and to be able to do Strong lifts ( add weight weekly, do more reps). What does the body need to build muscle/strength? Protein right?

strength gain and muscle gain are not the same thing…

you can "train" your muscles to get stronger and lift more weight while in a deficit but you will not gain any muscle..

to gain muscle, you need energy, i.e surplus calories above maintenance…

protein will prevent muscle loss, while in a deficit; again, to build muscle you need surplus calories...

So your saying Strength vs Mass.. well can't you gain Muscle Mass by taking Creatine

not really an expert on creatine…my understandings that it just draws water into your muscles making them look bigger but you have not actually gained any mass….but I could be wrong on this, so anyone else feel free to clarify.

IMO - if you want to add muscle then just eat in a slight surplus and lift heavy without the supplements…again, that is just my opinion...

usmcmp

So your saying Strength vs Mass.. well can't you gain Muscle Mass by taking Creatine

not really an expert on creatine…my understandings that it just draws water into your muscles making them look bigger but you have not actually gained any mass….but I could be wrong on this, so anyone else feel free to clarify.

IMO - if you want to add muscle then just eat in a slight surplus and lift heavy without the supplements…again, that is just my opinion...

Creatine pulls water into the muscles. It also aids in the production of ATP. The body breaks down ATP during movement to create ADP, producing energy. Another phosphate is needed to make ATP and start the process over again. Creatine increases available phosphates to increase prodution of ATP by the body.

mustgetmuscles1

Commander_Keen

I am finally ready after 2 years of experimention to firmly say that the prevailing concept that a caloric surplus is necessary to build muscle is untrue. I know this is going to get a lot of backlash since it has been the belief for so long amongst the general public, but I am now living proof that muscle and strength gains can be acheived through an intense lifting regiment and a closely monitered intake even with a slight caloric deficit. Without getting into too much detail about mself, I can just tell you that I net under my TDEE every week, and every week I get bigger, stronger, and more defined. The key is simply lifting heavy weights to the point of misery, and eating a crap load of protein. Of course if you want to get bigger faster, eat more, but I am much happier making slow gains while maintaining a six pack than benching 285 lbs. with a beer gut.

Somebody PM me, would ya.. but I think there is truth to this.. The OP is stating to eat at a deficit and to be able to do Strong lifts ( add weight weekly, do more reps). What does the body need to build muscle/strength? Protein right?

strength gain and muscle gain are not the same thing…

you can "train" your muscles to get stronger and lift more weight while in a deficit but you will not gain any muscle..

to gain muscle, you need energy, i.e surplus calories above maintenance…

protein will prevent muscle loss, while in a deficit; again, to build muscle you need surplus calories...

So your saying Strength vs Mass.. well can't you gain Muscle Mass by taking Creatine

not really an expert on creatine…my understandings that it just draws water into your muscles making them look bigger but you have not actually gained any mass….but I could be wrong on this, so anyone else feel free to clarify.

IMO - if you want to add muscle then just eat in a slight surplus and lift heavy without the supplements…again, that is just my opinion...

So you can't add mass while trying to loose weight?

ndj1979

I am finally ready after 2 years of experimention to firmly say that the prevailing concept that a caloric surplus is necessary to build muscle is untrue. I know this is going to get a lot of backlash since it has been the belief for so long amongst the general public, but I am now living proof that muscle and strength gains can be acheived through an intense lifting regiment and a closely monitered intake even with a slight caloric deficit. Without getting into too much detail about mself, I can just tell you that I net under my TDEE every week, and every week I get bigger, stronger, and more defined. The key is simply lifting heavy weights to the point of misery, and eating a crap load of protein. Of course if you want to get bigger faster, eat more, but I am much happier making slow gains while maintaining a six pack than benching 285 lbs. with a beer gut.

Somebody PM me, would ya.. but I think there is truth to this.. The OP is stating to eat at a deficit and to be able to do Strong lifts ( add weight weekly, do more reps). What does the body need to build muscle/strength? Protein right?

strength gain and muscle gain are not the same thing…

you can "train" your muscles to get stronger and lift more weight while in a deficit but you will not gain any muscle..

to gain muscle, you need energy, i.e surplus calories above maintenance…

protein will prevent muscle loss, while in a deficit; again, to build muscle you need surplus calories...

So your saying Strength vs Mass.. well can't you gain Muscle Mass by taking Creatine

not really an expert on creatine…my understandings that it just draws water into your muscles making them look bigger but you have not actually gained any mass….but I could be wrong on this, so anyone else feel free to clarify.

IMO - if you want to add muscle then just eat in a slight surplus and lift heavy without the supplements…again, that is just my opinion...

So you can't add mass while trying to loose weight?

No, but I think I already said that….

Commander_Keen

Creatine pulls water into the muscles. It also aids in the production of ATP. The body breaks down ATP during movement to create ADP, producing energy. Another phosphate is needed to make ATP and start the process over again. Creatine increases available phosphates to increase prodution of ATP by the body.

No idea, what you just said, time to do whole lot of googling.