Debunking the Myth

somerisagirlsname

This thread is still happening?

usmcmp

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.

Creatine doesn't build muscle, but it can aid in the metabolic processes responsible for building muscle.

jollyjoe321

There's a few people who have put on muscle and either lost weight or maintained. Granted, not very quickly, but it can be done...

So what's the argument about if somebody has done it, next you'll be telling us the world's not round because you haven't seen it.

ab_1203

If you're a newbie to lifting, this is common to lose fat while gaining and looking more muscular, but when you become more advanced, you'll have no choice but to eat in a surplus to gain more muscle.

Cheeky_and_Geeky

Before & after pics plz?

pcastagner

There's a few people who have put on muscle and either lost weight or maintained. Granted, not very quickly, but it can be done...

So what's the argument about if somebody has done it, next you'll be telling us the world's not round because you haven't seen it.

You can determine that the earth is round using simple observation and some math, with the observer at any point on the surface of the earth.

Believing in muscle gain in a negative energy balance requires a bit more, shall we say, trust. As in, you have to trust the special snowflake you are talking to isn't mistaken or making it up.

W0rthless_Her0

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)?

At the very least we might accept before and after pics. At this point I think we would even accept photoshopped ones.

AverageUkDude

lol thread still going....

Runner5AbelTownship

"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. "

You just described my marriage.

Huffdogg

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.

pyrowill

Holy **** how is this still going?

chopper_pilot

1 person's results = living proof that everyone else is wrong?

JoRocka

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.

WTF are you talking about.

men and women train just the same. The results for men happen faster- that's the only difference. But the scientific process of how we build muscle and lose weight are the same.

it's exactly apples to apples.

keithnphx

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.

Thanks for the "beer gut" laugh. You are 100% on target. I am losing weight AND gaining muscle. The point is that gaining muscle increases metabolism. In just a month of lifting, I can already feel the difference in my strength. I can only imagine what six months will do for me.

JoRocka

Thanks for the "beer gut" laugh. You are 100% on target. I am losing weight AND gaining muscle. The point is that gaining muscle increases metabolism. In just a month of lifting, I can already feel the difference in my strength. I can only imagine what six months will do for me.

11 pages later- the answer is still no. you aren't.

you are getting stronger- and you may have more definition... but you are not gaining muscle. you are gaining strength.
They are two different things.

pcastagner

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.

Thanks for the "beer gut" laugh. You are 100% on target. I am losing weight AND gaining muscle. The point is that gaining muscle increases metabolism. In just a month of lifting, I can already feel the difference in my strength. I can only imagine what six months will do for me.

You are not gaining muscle, sorry. And the increased metabolism from muscle mass claim is so exaggerated by trainers and bros at the gym that it may as well be completely false. We are talking a few pounds over the course of a year. Enjoy your extra half ounce of chicken breast.

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.

Thanks for the "beer gut" laugh. You are 100% on target. I am losing weight AND gaining muscle. The point is that gaining muscle increases metabolism. In just a month of lifting, I can already feel the difference in my strength. I can only imagine what six months will do for me.

increased strength does not equal increased muscle mass….

you may get some "newbie gains" at first, but that will level off after first month or so….and then you will just reveal the muscle you have as you lose body fat...

tomcornhole

I hate the fact that increased strength does not mean increased muscle mass. I'll add my N=1 data. Started lifting in May @ 185 lbs and 15% BF (BodPod). So, around 157 lbs LBM. I have gone from a complete newb to 4 PR's:

Squat: 280 lbs
Deadlift: 400 lbs
Bench: 205 lbs
Overhead Press: 125 lbs

The press work has not gone up as fast as the leg work due to shoulder issues, but those are done and the press work is accelerating quickly. I made all of that progress with no caloric surplus. And as it turns out, no additional LBM. My last BodPod indicated I still had 157 lbs LBM. At the same weight. Very, very frustrating. That's a lot of neuro adaptation, I guess.

So, I have found that I can get very strong and not add any LBM. Boo.

N=1.

Tom

ndj1979

I hate the fact that increased strength does not mean increased muscle mass. I'll add my N=1 data. Started lifting in May @ 185 lbs and 15% BF (BodPod). So, around 157 lbs LBM. I have gone from a complete newb to 4 PR's:

Squat: 280 lbs
Deadlift: 400 lbs
Bench: 205 lbs
Overhead Press: 125 lbs

The press work has not gone up as fast as the leg work due to shoulder issues, but those are done and the press work is accelerating quickly. I made all of that progress with no caloric surplus. And as it turns out, no additional LBM. My last BodPod indicated I still had 157 lbs LBM. At the same weight. Very, very frustrating. That's a lot of neuro adaptation, I guess.

So, I have found that I can get very strong and not add any LBM. Boo.

N=1.

Tom

nice freaking PR's!!!