Am I an oddity?

SilentDrapeRunners

I'm a 29 year old female, 5'4", 102 pounds

Brief history- never really was a skinny, fast-metabolism kid, weighed around 125 in high school. When I was 24, I started taking a bunch of different anti-depressants (not at the same time, but in sequence in an effort to find one that worked). Strattera was one that worked really well for a while. I also started to lose weight at this time, which I attributed to the medications as well as stress from vet school. I was probably around 115 at this point. I went to the doctor to make sure I didn't have any medical issues, and all bloodwork came back normal. Basically she diagnosed me as having an eating disorder and seemed angry and confused as to why I was complaining about weight loss (hence the speculation from her that I was anorexic or something). I think that for me, the medications cause a combo of a faster metabolism along with appetite suppression. Anyway, I continued to lose weight, despite eating really crappy foods at this time, but I guess in smaller quantities (I was in vet school and not really focused on proper nutrition or exercise). I wasn't really doing any exercise at this time.

For a brief period of time, maybe 9 months or so, I went off all medication. You would expect that I would gain a bunch of weight, but I really didn't (maybe 5 pounds or so, but I was still around 110). Anyway, trying no meds and finding that my depression was still a problem, I went on Vyvanse & Viibryd (started 3 yrs ago), and this combo has worked the best for me. It also seems to have led to more weight loss.

A year and a half ago, I started a dedicated workout program (cardio & weightlifting) and nutrition regimen. 9 months ago, I increased the intensity of my program to where it is today (lift 5 days a week, HIIT cardio 2-4 times a week, complete rest 1 day a week). I've stuck to that program diligently for the past 9 months (I've experimented with the cardio frequency), but the progress has been minimal. But it's difficult for me to say how much progress I should expect to see in a given time frame. I can definitely visibly see some progress, but it's not like I've made a complete body transformation. During these 9 months, I've been experimenting with cutting and bulking (around 1500 calories when cutting & 1900 when bulking). When cutting, I drop down to around 99 pounds & 17% BF w/ calipers and when bulking I get up to around 103 pounds & 19% BF. It seems like this is a vicious cycle.

Ideally, my first goal was to get up to 110 pounds & 15% BF. No idea if this is possible or how long it would take. Not sure if given my history, that since my weight loss may have been synthetically induced, that it will be difficult to put on weight in the form of muscle naturally. Maybe when I increase my calories to 1900 in an effort to put on more muscle, my body just wants to use the extra energy to put on more fat (since I'm not naturally an ectomorph)? Thank you for reading this novel, and I appreciate any insight!

AliceDark

I don't really have any suggestions, but I just wanted to say that I'm kind of in the same boat. A similar one, anyway. I started trying to do a very slow, conservative bulk in December. I've been going up and down a lot, but in that time I've maybe put on two pounds. My body apparently resists putting on muscle the way it resists putting on polyester.

How long is your bulk cycle? If you're getting more than one bulk/cut in 9 months, that seems really fast. If you're going between 99lb@17%BF and 103lb@19%BF, you're gaining and losing both fat and LBM, but I'm new to this so I don't know if they're in the best proportions or not. Also, are you doing cardio during your bulk? You might just have to cut that out, or cut it way down.

SilentDrapeRunners

Yeah I'm new to this too, so I've kind of just been experimenting (but still adhering to an intensive weight training and nutrition program). But experimenting with the details. Overall, I've been focusing on bulking, so the majority of the time I've been eating between 1700-1900 calories. In the 9 months, I've only done 2 cuts (and each one lasted no longer than 4 weeks) because I didn't want to lose the muscle I had gained. I actually started out doing minimal cardio, but I've come to find out that cardio 3-4 times a week is a must. For me, it seems like I lose more muscle during calorie restriction with minimal cardio vs. during calorie surplus with more cardio.

I do think that for some women it's difficult (if not impossible) to put on significant muscle mass and lose the extra fat (like fat that concentrates on the thighs or butt). But I really don't know. My boyfriend thinks that genetics play a big role, and I'd have to agree, but I'm not sure if it's possible or not to overcome your genetics if you don't have an athletic predisposition. For example, I think it's possible for overweight or obese people to lose significant weight because for most people, getting that way was due to lifestyle choices. But once you reach a certain point, you can't go further (like a genetic plateau I guess?) So for people (women especially) that are of a 'normal' body type and who aren't athletic, is it possible to achieve an athletic build (without steroids or testosterone or similar drugs)?

cwolfman13

what kind of lifting program are you doing. if you want to bulk on muscle you really need to be working a tried and true hypertrophy/bodybuilding program. also, in addition to the calories you need lots of protein. That said, your bulk is also going to be influenced by genetics. it is also very difficult for women to bulk as they don't have the requisite testosterone.

I also question whether you're really bulking cutting and dropping and gaining that BF%...it's a mere 4 Lbs. I can fluctuate four Lbs in a day. How are you measuring your BF%? How long are your cycles? Most guys I know who bulk and cut will go really slow...like gaining about 1-2 Lbs per month for months before cutting.

AliceDark

So for people (women especially) that are of a 'normal' body type and who aren't athletic, is it possible to achieve an athletic build (without steroids or testosterone or similar drugs)?

I think it is. I actually started this bulk because I went home for Thanksgiving and saw my mom and my sister. We're all the same height and at various points in the last 10 years have had similar builds. Now, though, my mom is 5'3" and probably 95lb., I'm 5'4" and stay between 117 and 120, and my sister is my height and has another 20 pounds on me, but it's solid muscle. The biggest difference between the three of us is how we eat and how we work out. It's anecdotal evidence, but it's making me believe that it's possible for me to put on some muscle.

The_Enginerd

I also question whether you're really bulking cutting and dropping and gaining that BF%...it's a mere 4 Lbs. I can fluctuate four Lbs in a day. How are you measuring your BF%? How long are your cycles? Most guys I know who bulk and cut will go really slow...like gaining about 1-2 Lbs per month for months before cutting.

This is the key thing I'm seeing. You can go up and down 4 lbs just in water weight, and BF% measurements aren't going to be very reliable with that small of a change, and the measurement can be effected by hydration.

QuietBloom

19% fat is still very low. Your body is likely to want at least that before it starts to think about putting on muscle weight. I don't think you need to worry about doing cut and bulk cycles until you just get your weight up more in the normal range.

I will be interested in what some of the more experienced posters have to say.

SilentDrapeRunners

what kind of lifting program are you doing. if you want to bulk on muscle you really need to be working a tried and true hypertrophy/bodybuilding program. also, in addition to the calories you need lots of protein. That said, your bulk is also going to be influenced by genetics. it is also very difficult for women to bulk as they don't have the requisite testosterone.

I also question whether you're really bulking cutting and dropping and gaining that BF%...it's a mere 4 Lbs. I can fluctuate four Lbs in a day. How are you measuring your BF%? How long are your cycles? Most guys I know who bulk and cut will go really slow...like gaining about 1-2 Lbs per month for months before cutting.

I'm doing the program by Mike Matthews (muscleforlife.com). It's pretty basic/standard- emphasizes bench press, squats, deadlifts. I try to eat at least 130 g of protein a day. I question the BF% as well (I use calipers), and I question the accuracy. Agreed about the not huge change in weight. I weigh myself the same time every day (first thing in the morning), but even so, there can be water weight fluctuations. That's why all in all, there isn't much quantitative change over the past 9 months. But I'm wondering, since I only weigh 100 pounds, are quantitative changes going to be more difficult to detect (or take a longer amount of time to detect)?

SilentDrapeRunners

19% fat is still very low. Your body is likely to want at least that before it starts to think about putting on muscle weight. I don't think you need to worry about doing cut and bulk cycles until you just get your weight up more in the normal range.

I will be interested in what some of the more experienced posters have to say.

That's interesting, makes sense. That's actually a thought I had the other day- that I need to build up a certain amount of muscle mass before I can hope to lose the fat without losing the muscle. I guess is it better to put on the muscle (and some amount of fat inevitably) BEFORE trying to get lean? Versus trying to get really lean and then put on muscle?

It seems like a never-ending cycle to me where the goal can never be reached

SilentDrapeRunners

So for people (women especially) that are of a 'normal' body type and who aren't athletic, is it possible to achieve an athletic build (without steroids or testosterone or similar drugs)?

I think it is. I actually started this bulk because I went home for Thanksgiving and saw my mom and my sister. We're all the same height and at various points in the last 10 years have had similar builds. Now, though, my mom is 5'3" and probably 95lb., I'm 5'4" and stay between 117 and 120, and my sister is my height and has another 20 pounds on me, but it's solid muscle. The biggest difference between the three of us is how we eat and how we work out. It's anecdotal evidence, but it's making me believe that it's possible for me to put on some muscle.

That's interesting. How long did it take your sister to put on that amount of muscle?