Debunking the Myth

pcastagner

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

Whoa! Idk though, do you look the same? I haven't made half your progress on strength but I'm definitely putting on some mass (eating for that purpose though).

I'm starting to think I got a ****ty genetic hand dealt to me. Or that I've personally pushed the limits of low strength:bodyweight for a healthy male.

Amadbro

In for debunking studies conducted by top scientists of Harvard, Brown and Michigan state. This will be good. OP gonna make history!

shmoony

I'm back. So after a couple days of thought, two things occurred to me.

1) People who have been "bulking" by eating a surplus, lifting heavy and accepting the fact that they will likely add a lttle fat in the process are very threatened by the concept of gaining muscle while decreasing your BF%; hence the barrage of insults and accusations of blatent untruths. Why? Not sure, but it probably has something to do with thinking that the donut around their midsection is acceptable because they're "bulking".

2) What I have clearly done is wrongly trusted the caloric "maintanance" calories given to me by MyFitnessPal and adjsted by Fitbit. It is obvious that I have eaten at a surplus to have gained 7 pounds. Just not according to MYFitnessPal.

That being said, I remain steadfast on my claims that I have gained ALL of my weight as LBM. My BF calculator is my mirror, and there is no denying what I see, and to suggest otherwise is silly. Everyone knows their body; a little firmer here, a little less to pinch there, a new vein exposed, a new cut that wasn't there yesterday. All the while that my $120 Fitbit Aria scale tells me that my BF$ is decreasing. As I mentioned before, when your BF% is a low as mine, slight changes are very easy to indentify.
I could really give two sh%#s whether there are people out there that question my ethics and think that it would be fun to get on the internet and make up stuff, but to all of you who get on here to actually learn from others people's experiences, all I have to say, is don't necessarily believe the prevailing broscience that you need to get fat to get jacked.

jwdieter

I'm back. So after a couple days of thought, two things occurred to me.

1) People who have been "bulking" by eating a surplus, lifting heavy and accepting the fact that they will likely add a lttle fat in the process are very threatened by the concept of gaining muscle while decreasing your BF%; hence the barrage of insults and accusations of blatent untruths. Why? Not sure, but it probably has something to do with thinking that the donut around their midsection is acceptable because they're "bulking".

I think this particular hobgoblin is something you've made up on your own. There are many people here who are not interested in being fat while building muscle. I don't recall anyone saying you have to get fat to bulk. Basic math says if you gain weight and maintain body fat percentage - your original claim - you gained both fat and muscle. I think an average person can gain weight and reduce body fat percentage simultaneously fairly easily, just by gaining a higher percentage of muscle than the existing. Anyway, it's not really much of a point of argument in this thread.

2) What I have clearly done is wrongly trusted the caloric "maintanance" calories given to me by MyFitnessPal and adjsted by Fitbit. It is obvious that I have eaten at a surplus to have gained 7 pounds. Just not according to MYFitnessPal.

Bingo.

That being said, I remain steadfast on my claims that I have gained ALL of my weight as LBM. My BF calculator is my mirror, and there is no denying what I see, and to suggest otherwise is silly. Everyone knows their body; a little firmer here, a little less to pinch there, a new vein exposed, a new cut that wasn't there yesterday. All the while that my $120 Fitbit Aria scale tells me that my BF$ is decreasing. As I mentioned before, when your BF% is a low as mine, slight changes are very easy to indentify.

Just seeking controversy? Gaining mostly LBM is easy to believe. Gaining 100% LBM, without any substantive evidence, is just an odd claim to make.

Amadbro

I'm back. So after a couple days of thought, two things occurred to me.

1) People who have been "bulking" by eating a surplus, lifting heavy and accepting the fact that they will likely add a lttle fat in the process are very threatened by the concept of gaining muscle while decreasing your BF%; hence the barrage of insults and accusations of blatent untruths. Why? Not sure, but it probably has something to do with thinking that the donut around their midsection is acceptable because they're "bulking".

2) What I have clearly done is wrongly trusted the caloric "maintanance" calories given to me by MyFitnessPal and adjsted by Fitbit. It is obvious that I have eaten at a surplus to have gained 7 pounds. Just not according to MYFitnessPal.

That being said, I remain steadfast on my claims that I have gained ALL of my weight as LBM. My BF calculator is my mirror, and there is no denying what I see, and to suggest otherwise is silly. Everyone knows their body; a little firmer here, a little less to pinch there, a new vein exposed, a new cut that wasn't there yesterday. All the while that my $120 Fitbit Aria scale tells me that my BF$ is decreasing. As I mentioned before, when your BF% is a low as mine, slight changes are very easy to indentify.
I could really give two sh%#s whether there are people out there that question my ethics and think that it would be fun to get on the internet and make up stuff, but to all of you who get on here to actually learn from others people's experiences, all I have to say, is don't necessarily believe the prevailing broscience that you need to get fat to get jacked.

You are so fully of it op. You're trying to contradict years of studies from top scientists around the world. If you'd like I can post several of these studies. The general concept of bulking and cutting has been tested, tried and true by professional bodybuilders for generations. If this wasn't the case then don't you think they'd be doing what you claim to have been doing? Your anatomy is no different from anyone else. Get a clue and stop posting the poison.

Ang108

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.

Muscle increase and increase of strength are not the same. You can increase your strength ( especially through lifting ) while losing weight, but you cannot gain muscle mass, unless you are a very overweight newcomer to lifting and even then the gain of muscle mass is miniscule.

I know that this has been said already a hundred times, but I am entertaining hopes that just by repeating this fact over and over again, someone will remember....:o).

ninerbuff

I'm back. So after a couple days of thought, two things occurred to me.

1) People who have been "bulking" by eating a surplus, lifting heavy and accepting the fact that they will likely add a lttle fat in the process are very threatened by the concept of gaining muscle while decreasing your BF%; hence the barrage of insults and accusations of blatent untruths. Why? Not sure, but it probably has something to do with thinking that the donut around their midsection is acceptable because they're "bulking".

2) What I have clearly done is wrongly trusted the caloric "maintanance" calories given to me by MyFitnessPal and adjsted by Fitbit. It is obvious that I have eaten at a surplus to have gained 7 pounds. Just not according to MYFitnessPal.

That being said, I remain steadfast on my claims that I have gained ALL of my weight as LBM. My BF calculator is my mirror, and there is no denying what I see, and to suggest otherwise is silly. Everyone knows their body; a little firmer here, a little less to pinch there, a new vein exposed, a new cut that wasn't there yesterday. All the while that my $120 Fitbit Aria scale tells me that my BF$ is decreasing. As I mentioned before, when your BF% is a low as mine, slight changes are very easy to indentify.
I could really give two sh%#s whether there are people out there that question my ethics and think that it would be fun to get on the internet and make up stuff, but to all of you who get on here to actually learn from others people's experiences, all I have to say, is don't necessarily believe the prevailing broscience that you need to get fat to get jacked.

So you weren't in calorie deficit? Because if no, then your whole debunking thread is incorrect.

A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group FitnessTrainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

Sarauk2sf

I'm back. So after a couple days of thought, two things occurred to me.

1) People who have been "bulking" by eating a surplus, lifting heavy and accepting the fact that they will likely add a lttle fat in the process are very threatened by the concept of gaining muscle while decreasing your BF%; hence the barrage of insults and accusations of blatent untruths. Why? Not sure, but it probably has something to do with thinking that the donut around their midsection is acceptable because they're "bulking".

2) What I have clearly done is wrongly trusted the caloric "maintanance" calories given to me by MyFitnessPal and adjsted by Fitbit. It is obvious that I have eaten at a surplus to have gained 7 pounds. Just not according to MYFitnessPal.

That being said, I remain steadfast on my claims that I have gained ALL of my weight as LBM. My BF calculator is my mirror, and there is no denying what I see, and to suggest otherwise is silly. Everyone knows their body; a little firmer here, a little less to pinch there, a new vein exposed, a new cut that wasn't there yesterday. All the while that my $120 Fitbit Aria scale tells me that my BF$ is decreasing. As I mentioned before, when your BF% is a low as mine, slight changes are very easy to indentify.
I could really give two sh%#s whether there are people out there that question my ethics and think that it would be fun to get on the internet and make up stuff, but to all of you who get on here to actually learn from others people's experiences, all I have to say, is don't necessarily believe the prevailing broscience that you need to get fat to get jacked.

1) Holy ridiculous assumptions batman.

2) that is what people were saying...and yet you still insult them..even though they were right and you were wrong...nice!

How about you post pics.

ndj1979

I'm back. So after a couple days of thought, two things occurred to me.

1) People who have been "bulking" by eating a surplus, lifting heavy and accepting the fact that they will likely add a lttle fat in the process are very threatened by the concept of gaining muscle while decreasing your BF%; hence the barrage of insults and accusations of blatent untruths. Why? Not sure, but it probably has something to do with thinking that the donut around their midsection is acceptable because they're "bulking".

2) What I have clearly done is wrongly trusted the caloric "maintanance" calories given to me by MyFitnessPal and adjsted by Fitbit. It is obvious that I have eaten at a surplus to have gained 7 pounds. Just not according to MYFitnessPal.

That being said, I remain steadfast on my claims that I have gained ALL of my weight as LBM. My BF calculator is my mirror, and there is no denying what I see, and to suggest otherwise is silly. Everyone knows their body; a little firmer here, a little less to pinch there, a new vein exposed, a new cut that wasn't there yesterday. All the while that my $120 Fitbit Aria scale tells me that my BF$ is decreasing. As I mentioned before, when your BF% is a low as mine, slight changes are very easy to indentify.
I could really give two sh%#s whether there are people out there that question my ethics and think that it would be fun to get on the internet and make up stuff, but to all of you who get on here to actually learn from others people's experiences, all I have to say, is don't necessarily believe the prevailing broscience that you need to get fat to get jacked.

LOL..

thats all I got…

OP - your original premise was that you ate in a deficit and gained muscle…however, you now admit that you ate over maintenance, gained about seven pounds, but still claim to be in a deficit even though you gained 7 pounds…sayyyyy whaaaattt…???

Just leave it alone bro, for real...

sm1zzle

Came in expecting bible debate..






..silly me.

PinkNinjaLaura

I have the $120 Fitbit Aria scale as well, and my body fat percentage is all over the place on it. It's also dramatically different than my caliper test results.

Barbonica

Came in expecting bible debate..






..silly me.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

isaiahcool

Your $120 scale was a waste of money. A scale can't calculate BF% accurately at all, bioelectric impedance is a sure crapshoot. You'll get different readings based off your level of hydration; the only way to get a real good reading is to essentially dehydrate yourself to a specific baseline and only measure BF% each time when your body is at that baseline. Even with calipers and a waist measurement, you're still at ballpark level. You need to a get bodpod measurement done, or hydrostatic weighing to get a real reading, and that's just a waste of money anyway.

There's a thing called a clean bulk, and then there's a dirty bulk. You need fat to gain muscle, period. You need a caloric surplus, anywhere 10-20% over your TEE, to gain muscle, period. Theoretically, if you consume your TEE each day, you will maintain your weight due to incidental exercise/lifestyle...most people without the research would be surprised what their TEE actually is - MFP even does a semi-crap job at calculating this, mostly because it's not designed for those who want to bulk. You need to do about 5 minutes of grade school math to figure this out, using the mifflen st. jeor to calculate BMR, multiplying by an activity factor to get TEE, then upping 10-20% to get a ballpark cal figure for a proper bulk. Even then, it takes 2-4 weeks of weight measurement to get it right. Keep in mind BF% was never even involved in any of this. It's a stupid, outdated way of figuring out how "fat" you are, and only is relevant to those who are severely obese and need to calculate their macros based off of lean weight.

For those guys out there dirty bulking, unless you are a serious huge person, it would be impossible to keep within your fat macros if each mean contained junk. Not to mention you'll be wacking out your cholesterol and sodium levels, as well as probably consuming trans fats. It's good for cals, cheap, and easy, but overall not too healthy. With a proper bulk, that "donut" around your midsection shouldn't be too noticable. And yes, it is acceptable. Your BF% needs to be under 10 for abs to show anyway. Pretty hard to get that on a bulk unless you're starting from a low point.

The idea is to build up your body, the cut the fat around the muscles. At that point, you'll be able to bulk/cut in 5-10 week increments to maintain yourself properly, adding muscle with one program, then decreasing fat with another. You simply can't have both. It's just science.

Read before you make assumptions, trust me your fitness will increase ten fold.