Micro cycle for muscle gain
Replies
-
How much muscle do you expect to build in 12 hours? How much fat do you expect to burn in 12 hours?
What your basically doing is cutting for 12 hours and bulking for 12 hours. You're bulking right after your workout so your body has no choice but to use this extra energy to repair the muscles you have destroyed. Your body doesn't have a memory of what it was doing a few hours ago. It's not going to use all that protein to store fat because it's pissed it burned some this morning. Then the next moring it would rather use any fat you have laying around (or carbs of course) for energy than reap your muscles. While over the course of the 24 hour period, you're not really eating at a surplus, for that 12 hour period you are, and you hold onto it during the next 12 hour period by sustaining a level of energy intake just enough to prevent more losses than you gained. I think the key is finding the "sweet spot" for calories to prevent muscle loss earlier in the day. I do 200 for breakfast and 400ish for lunch.I have been playing with these numbers recently to see how many I can actually eat without gaining fat. The more the merrier obviously.
small amounts of each obviously, but over the course of weeks and months......0 -
aren't you the same guy that said you increased muscle while eating in a deficit…but then later admitted that you were eating in a surplus….
No, you must be thinking of somebody else.
Aren't you the guy who doesn't actually add any insightful opinions to a thread, but instead just puts people down if you disagree with their opinions. And for the record "I know you are, but what am I?" is not an insightful opinion.
i'm the guy you want to be, but never will be…..thats all you need to know...
Doesn't the fact that you are capable of actually typing something like that automatically preclude you from being the envy of anyone? Except for O'Doyle and that blonde kid from Karate Kid0 -
.......they will cancel each other out.
How much muscle do you expect to build in 12 hours? How much fat do you expect to burn in 12 hours?
What your basically doing is cutting for 12 hours and bulking for 12 hours. You're bulking right after your workout so your body has no choice but to use this extra energy to repair the muscles you have destroyed. Your body doesn't have a memory of what it was doing a few hours ago. It's not going to use all that protein to store fat because it's pissed it burned some this morning. Then the next moring it would rather use any fat you have laying around (or carbs of course) for energy than reap your muscles. While over the course of the 24 hour period, you're not really eating at a surplus, for that 12 hour period you are, and you hold onto it during the next 12 hour period by sustaining a level of energy intake just enough to prevent more losses than you gained. I think the key is finding the "sweet spot" for calories to prevent muscle loss earlier in the day. I do 200 for breakfast and 400ish for lunch.I have been playing with these numbers recently to see how many I can actually eat without gaining fat. The more the merrier obviously.
small amounts of each obviously, but over the course of weeks and months......0 -
Yes, 12 hour microcycles... Because everybody knows it takes less than 12 hours for your body to digest and utilize the food you eat.... This is just one of many reasons why the whole "meal timing" theory has been debunked. It takes at least 16-18 hours to get into a "fasting" state, instead of the "fed" state. Your body isn't "cutting for 12 hours and bulking for 12 hours." It's utilizing ALL the food you eat in that 24 hour period for what it needs to use it for.0
-
I am still looking for a real response to the original question. I promise I'm not trying to stir the pot, I am just very interested in the process.
If it is possible to eat a surplus for 6 weeks, then eat at a deficit for 6 weeks and end up with a gain of muscle mass while reducing BF%, why is it not possible to mimic the exact thing on a much smaller scale? Essentially the same factors are at play. You build muscle at a surplus, and then cut to a point where you have retained some but not all of the muscle you have built to a point where you are happy with the aesthetic results. The net result is more lean body mass.
I agree that it seems to be a much slower process than a conventional bulk / cut, but what I have observed is that the majority of guys (at least at my gym) are in a "perpetual bulk". There are very few people who ever actually get to the "cutting" part of the bulk / cut process. Out the, say, 300 people who I see on a regular basis at my gym, I can count on two hands the number of people I would consider "ripped". So I guess my point is, it's easy to say "I'm bulking" while keeping a constant pudge covering your muscles. The hard part is eating at a deficit and running on the treadmill. That's not nearly as fun or "manly". If there is a way to live 365 days a year with well defined muscles and consistant increase in mass, why wouldn't one try it?0 -
Yes, 12 hour microcycles... Because everybody knows it takes less than 12 hours for your body to digest and utilize the food you eat.... This is just one of many reasons why the whole "meal timing" theory has been debunked. It takes at least 16-18 hours to get into a "fasting" state, instead of the "fed" state. Your body isn't "cutting for 12 hours and bulking for 12 hours." It's utilizing ALL the food you eat in that 24 hour period for what it needs to use it for.
Yes, but those systems are in a constant overlapping flow.0 -
Because the human body doesn't work that way. Food you eat at 8am is still being processed and utilized at 8pm. Food you eat at 8pm is still being processed and utilized at 8am. What matters is long term totals. If you consistently eat above TDEE on a weekly basis, you gain weight. If you consistently eat below TDEE on a weekly basis, you lose weight. The individual days and hours in those days don't matter, because the body doesn't react that quickly to changes. It takes 96 hours of complete fasting before the body registers it isn't getting food and begins taking steps to preserve itself. Trying to adjust intake in a 12 hour cycle will have absolutely effect.0
-
aren't you the same guy that said you increased muscle while eating in a deficit…but then later admitted that you were eating in a surplus….
No, you must be thinking of somebody else.
Aren't you the guy who doesn't actually add any insightful opinions to a thread, but instead just puts people down if you disagree with their opinions. And for the record "I know you are, but what am I?" is not an insightful opinion.
i'm the guy you want to be, but never will be…..thats all you need to know...
Doesn't the fact that you are capable of actually typing something like that automatically preclude you from being the envy of anyone? Except for O'Doyle and that blonde kid from Karate Kid
doesn't the fact that you previously posted that you "gained muscle in a calorie deficit" and then were shot down, so you came back with this thread…preclude you from ever posting again? I get it, you are trolling for attention and not doing a very good job of it. The only reason I keep coming back is because I find this amusing…kind of like the freak show at the circus…I don't want to go in, but some weird reason I do….0 -
Because the human body doesn't work that way. Food you eat at 8am is still being processed and utilized at 8pm. Food you eat at 8pm is still being processed and utilized at 8am. What matters is long term totals. If you consistently eat above TDEE on a weekly basis, you gain weight. If you consistently eat below TDEE on a weekly basis, you lose weight. The individual days and hours in those days don't matter, because the body doesn't react that quickly to changes. It takes 96 hours of complete fasting before the body registers it isn't getting food and begins taking steps to preserve itself. Trying to adjust intake in a 12 hour cycle will have absolutely effect.
listen to this guy, he knows what he is talking about ...0 -
And you've just blown your own theory out of the water. Congratulations. You figured out why your idea is wrong.Yes, 12 hour microcycles... Because everybody knows it takes less than 12 hours for your body to digest and utilize the food you eat.... This is just one of many reasons why the whole "meal timing" theory has been debunked. It takes at least 16-18 hours to get into a "fasting" state, instead of the "fed" state. Your body isn't "cutting for 12 hours and bulking for 12 hours." It's utilizing ALL the food you eat in that 24 hour period for what it needs to use it for.
Yes, but those systems are in a constant overlapping flow.
Your body is burning fat and storing fat 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Your body is building muscle and breaking down muscle 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Whether you are in an overall deficit or surplus calorie wise determines whether you have a net gain or loss in fat and muscle. It isn't something that can be broken down into mini cycles a few hours at a time, because it's something that happens gradually.0 -
What I meant by overlapping flow is that although your body does not completely enter a fasting state until a certain point or exit a fed state until a certain point, these are not absolute. Immediately following a workout, your body begins the reparation process and has nutritional needs, and continues to do so for many hours in a diminishing fashion. Conversely, after you eat, your blood sugar spikes and diminishes over the course of time. Even though there is an overly stability of our metabolism, there are still many functions which occur on a small scale which determine our weight, shape, etc. Everything you are telling me is the same stuff I've read for years. I'm aware of the conventional thought, you're not telling me anything I don't know. I'm not completely discounting it. I'm simply bringing up a discussion about what has clearly worked for me. This discussion should not be about the prevailing (yet again, still truly hypothetical) wisdom about hypertrophy, we all know that. It should be about what I'm doing specifically that works.0
-
What you're doing specifically is eating around maintenance and doing a slow recomp. That's all it is. You aren't doing anything novel, new or exciting. It's actually fairly old, common, and fell out of favor with athletes and competitors because it's very slow and inefficient.0
-
Possibly. I never claimed to be inventing the wheel. But it can't really be considered a recomp if I strarted with very low bf% to begin with.0
-
Nevermind (considering OP's last thread on subject).
IKR? In for 'micro cycles'.0 -
Nevermind (considering OP's last thread on subject).
IKR? In for 'micro cycles'.
this is micro cycles thread…F me, I thought it was the micro machines thread….backs out...0 -
Like me, OP has no visible body fat. Not sure why people are asking for evidence of this, when his avatar is right there.
:laugh: :drinker:0 -
I am still looking for a real response to the original question. I promise I'm not trying to stir the pot, I am just very interested in the process.
If it is possible to eat a surplus for 6 weeks, then eat at a deficit for 6 weeks and end up with a gain of muscle mass while reducing BF%, why is it not possible to mimic the exact thing on a much smaller scale? Essentially the same factors are at play. You build muscle at a surplus, and then cut to a point where you have retained some but not all of the muscle you have built to a point where you are happy with the aesthetic results. The net result is more lean body mass.
I agree that it seems to be a much slower process than a conventional bulk / cut, but what I have observed is that the majority of guys (at least at my gym) are in a "perpetual bulk". There are very few people who ever actually get to the "cutting" part of the bulk / cut process. Out the, say, 300 people who I see on a regular basis at my gym, I can count on two hands the number of people I would consider "ripped". So I guess my point is, it's easy to say "I'm bulking" while keeping a constant pudge covering your muscles. The hard part is eating at a deficit and running on the treadmill. That's not nearly as fun or "manly". If there is a way to live 365 days a year with well defined muscles and consistant increase in mass, why wouldn't one try it?
You already answered yourself. It is much slower process and has to be so controlled that it is basically pointless for any significant gain.
Building muscle is very slow. VERY slow. What you are asking your body to do is jump from building mass (and you want only muscle gain) to cutting mass (only fat loss) within hours of each other like an on off switch. It does not work like that. There will be transition times between both states and you lose and gain both fat and muscle in each state. The conditions where muscle is being created is going to be a small part of the day and will not even be optimal then. You are never giving your body enough muscle building ingredients for a long enough time. More than likely only enough to just repair or replace what you used during the workout and not enough for anything new.
If an average guy in a large surplus for a long duration can only gain around a pound per month what do you think the guy that only spend a fraction of his day in a surplus is going to gain? Probably wont even get back what he loses the rest of the day and will be lucky to break even.
The second highlighted part....people have tried it. Lots of people. People that need or want to stay lean year round use it all the time. Actors, models, veteran lifters that have already reached their muscle gaining potential. Also some people just dont want to get "big". Totally legitimate reasons but they all understand (or will soon realize) they will not see any significant gain.0 -
Nevermind (considering OP's last thread on subject).
IKR? In for 'micro cycles'.
this is micro cycles thread…F me, I thought it was the micro machines thread….backs out...
Do you ever have anything meaningful to say, or are you all snark al the time? Maybe that's part of being the man everyone wants to be.0 -
The Rock and Hugh Jackman both put on massive muscle mass and got ripped to shred doing the 16 hour a day starvation and then cram a gazillion calories in 8 hours. Their results are amazing and fast. Nothing slow about their results.
Bulk and cut is also very manageable.
Not sure I understand the fascination with the topic when there are some pretty proven ways to get to the end state more quickly and more reliably.
That said, best to all for whatever works best for them.0 -
The Rock and Hugh Jackman both put on massive muscle mass and got ripped to shred doing the 16 hour a day starvation and then cram a gazillion calories in 8 hours. Their results are amazing and fast. Nothing slow about their results.
Fast and amazing results must mean they did it natty0 -
The Rock and Hugh Jackman both put on massive muscle mass and got ripped to shred doing the 16 hour a day starvation and then cram a gazillion calories in 8 hours. Their results are amazing and fast. Nothing slow about their results.
Fast and amazing results must mean they did it natty
Fasting means stress, which means amino acids are being NATURALLY mobilized and Growth Hormone and Cortisol are NATURALLY at high levels. Then eat after the tough workout for the Insulin burst and you have created a virtual muscle-making factory, as these guys have apparently found out.
That is part of the reason why breakfast is bunk.
Check out Dr. Hagan's "Breakfast: The least important meal of the day"
And is that supported by anything other than anecdote? Natural manipulation of hormones does little to nothing for body comp0 -
The Rock and Hugh Jackman both put on massive muscle mass and got ripped to shred doing the 16 hour a day starvation and then cram a gazillion calories in 8 hours. Their results are amazing and fast. Nothing slow about their results.
Fast and amazing results must mean they did it natty
Fasting means stress, which means amino acids are being NATURALLY mobilized and Growth Hormone and Cortisol are NATURALLY at high levels. Then eat after the tough workout for the Insulin burst and you have created a virtual muscle-making factory, as these guys have apparently found out.
That is part of the reason why breakfast is bunk.
Check out Dr. Hagan's "Breakfast: The least important meal of the day"
Given a choice between assuming these two professionals gained their size so quickly by the use of 1) anabolics, or 2) by skipping breakfast...
...I'm voting for #1.0 -
I really don't have a dog in this fight, I know what works for me and millions of others, and is founded in science, so I won't comment on the OP's question.
I do have one observation though...
OP, after reading your various posts, wouldn't it help you make your case, maybe even just a little, by showing some pics of your progress? If my BF% was in the single digits, and this was mainly due to something that no one else is doing, I think I would be proud to show my before and after shots to substantiate what I was going on about in all my posts. Maybe that's just me.
Carry on... :drinker:0 -
OP, after reading your various posts, wouldn't it help you make your case, maybe even just a little, by showing some pics of your progress? If my BF% was in the single digits, and this was mainly due to something that no one else is doing, I think I would be proud to show my before and after shots to substantiate what I was going on about in all my posts. Maybe that's just me.
Lots of people have done what the OP did. It is nothing special at all.
Kudos to him for sticking with it that long, most people tend to move on to something else when they get sick of the crappy progress.0 -
The Rock and Hugh Jackman both put on massive muscle mass and got ripped to shred doing the 16 hour a day starvation and then cram a gazillion calories in 8 hours. Their results are amazing and fast. Nothing slow about their results.
Fast and amazing results must mean they did it natty
Fasting means stress, which means amino acids are being NATURALLY mobilized and Growth Hormone and Cortisol are NATURALLY at high levels. Then eat after the tough workout for the Insulin burst and you have created a virtual muscle-making factory, as these guys have apparently found out.
That is part of the reason why breakfast is bunk.
Check out Dr. Hagan's "Breakfast: The least important meal of the day"
And is that supported by anything other than anecdote? Natural manipulation of hormones does little to nothing for body comp
Still waiting.0 -
Bump0
-
OP, after reading your various posts, wouldn't it help you make your case, maybe even just a little, by showing some pics of your progress? If my BF% was in the single digits, and this was mainly due to something that no one else is doing, I think I would be proud to show my before and after shots to substantiate what I was going on about in all my posts. Maybe that's just me.
Lots of people have done what the OP did. It is nothing special at all.
Kudos to him for sticking with it that long, most people tend to move on to something else when they get sick of the crappy progress.
I agree that what the OP is describing is nothing more or less than a body recomp, I was just thinking that if someone was this bent on getting their point across they would be happy to post some pics of their progress. Or at least a profile pic.0 -
OP, after reading your various posts, wouldn't it help you make your case, maybe even just a little, by showing some pics of your progress? If my BF% was in the single digits, and this was mainly due to something that no one else is doing, I think I would be proud to show my before and after shots to substantiate what I was going on about in all my posts. Maybe that's just me.
Lots of people have done what the OP did. It is nothing special at all.
Kudos to him for sticking with it that long, most people tend to move on to something else when they get sick of the crappy progress.
I agree that what the OP is describing is nothing more or less than a body recomp, I was just thinking that if someone was this bent on getting their point across they would be happy to post some pics of their progress. Or at least a profile pic.
don't hold your breath…OP had another thread where he claimed to build muscle in a calorie deficit and pics were never posted there either….0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions