Muscle gain from cardio?
Replies
-
This is one I find confusing. I mean, I didn't measure my legs before I started running, so I can't say for sure. But it sure does look to me like my calves got a lot bigger. I'm sure there was some fat in my legs - I guess - but they were never the "fatty" part of me. But I've read this so many times I'm just not sure. Maybe everything just toned up. I know my legs look a lot stronger, and I can do things I couldn't do with them before I ran. It just seems like there has to be more muscle there.
But when I read what the lifters say, they have to eat a surplus to gain weight. Makes sense, since losing weight works exactly the other way. That muscle has to get built out of something. So I can see how it wouldn't be possible to build muscle without eating more. But this is confusing.
I started working out with a personal trainer at the beginning of the year. My wife and I both think my arms look bigger from all the work. And I know I can do more push ups now. But I've lost 15 lbs. So on the one hand, I see what I think is more muscle and can feel the result. But my brain also kinda says that can't be right. The theory is easy to understand, but in practice, it is kind of confusing. It just seems like if I did push ups every day and did more and more of them my arms and chest would have to build muscle even if I was eating at a deficit. That can never happen? Your body never burns fat to build muscles that are being used more?
Not while in a calorie deficit. What you might be experiencing is a 'pump' of the muscles. If you do push ups every day they are going to 'look' bigger because of the increased vascularity and fluid that results in a temporary pump. If you stopped doing them for a few days, chances are they would go way down.0 -
I've been goin to the gym since the start of the year and my diary has been solid almost always under my goal yet I've put on the last 2 weeks? I know I'm gaining muscle but how much muscle can you gain from just doing cardio and nothing but cardio? Enough to put 2.5 lb in a week?
You might have some minimal " new-to-gym-and -working-out-hard " gain, but they would be much , much less than 2.5 pounds a week and by now would also have levelled out. It is impossible to gain muscle while eating on a deficit the natural way. Maybe you are retaining water because you are new to heavy exercise, or you actually eat more than you are aware of......or a mic of both. Water retention will disappear with time and if it is more calories in than you think, you need to check yourself and adjust how much you eat.
Good Luck !0 -
You don't gain muscle from cardio. It's a catabolic process and building muscle is done on an anabolic process.I've been goin to the gym since the start of the year and my diary has been solid almost always under my goal yet I've put on the last 2 weeks? I know I'm gaining muscle but how much muscle can you gain from just doing cardio and nothing but cardio? Enough to put 2.5 lb in a week?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
bump0 -
You don't gain muscle from cardio. It's a catabolic process and building muscle is done on an anabolic process.I've been goin to the gym since the start of the year and my diary has been solid almost always under my goal yet I've put on the last 2 weeks? I know I'm gaining muscle but how much muscle can you gain from just doing cardio and nothing but cardio? Enough to put 2.5 lb in a week?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
bump
Cardio is only going to be catabolic if you don't have sufficient energy to sustain it. Eat carbs and protein before your cardio, and there's no reason whatsoever for it to be a catabolic process.0 -
You don't gain muscle from cardio. It's a catabolic process and building muscle is done on an anabolic process.I've been goin to the gym since the start of the year and my diary has been solid almost always under my goal yet I've put on the last 2 weeks? I know I'm gaining muscle but how much muscle can you gain from just doing cardio and nothing but cardio? Enough to put 2.5 lb in a week?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
bump
Cardio is only going to be catabolic if you don't have sufficient energy to sustain it. Eat carbs and protein before your cardio, and there's no reason whatsoever for it to be a catabolic process.
That may reduce the catabolic process but certainly won't make it anabolic.0 -
Why on earth not? Catabolic (in terms of muscles) means your body is breaking down the muscle to digest it. You see long term effects of this in people on extremely low calorie diets (severe anorexia and bulemia), or in extreme cases of muscle atrophy (coma patient).
If you can show me the science as to why cardio should be catabolic, if you are timing your workout to your food intake, even in "a caloric deficit", I'd love to see it, as I have not been able to find it.
There's simply no good reason for your body to digest muscle, if you have adequate dietary intake of protein and available fuel at the time of the workout.0 -
Well, here's a link to an article on 70s Big: http://www.liftbigeatbig.com/2011/11/how-extended-cardio-will-inhibit-your.html
You don't gain muscle from cardio. It's a catabolic process and building muscle is done on an anabolic process.I've been goin to the gym since the start of the year and my diary has been solid almost always under my goal yet I've put on the last 2 weeks? I know I'm gaining muscle but how much muscle can you gain from just doing cardio and nothing but cardio? Enough to put 2.5 lb in a week?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
bump
Cardio is only going to be catabolic if you don't have sufficient energy to sustain it. Eat carbs and protein before your cardio, and there's no reason whatsoever for it to be a catabolic process.
It's not exactly what you're talking about, but it does explain why long, steady-state cardio is catabolic. HIIT, such as Tabata protocol, will not be catabolic. There are references in that article that may lead to what you're looking for.0 -
I'd be careful about making such sweeping categorical statements. Cortisol production is a very good reason.Why on earth not? Catabolic (in terms of muscles) means your body is breaking down the muscle to digest it. You see long term effects of this in people on extremely low calorie diets (severe anorexia and bulemia), or in extreme cases of muscle atrophy (coma patient).
If you can show me the science as to why cardio should be catabolic, if you are timing your workout to your food intake, even in "a caloric deficit", I'd love to see it, as I have not been able to find it.
There's simply no good reason for your body to digest muscle, if you have adequate dietary intake of protein and available fuel at the time of the workout.0 -
Why on earth not? Catabolic (in terms of muscles) means your body is breaking down the muscle to digest it. You see long term effects of this in people on extremely low calorie diets (severe anorexia and bulemia), or in extreme cases of muscle atrophy (coma patient).
If you can show me the science as to why cardio should be catabolic, if you are timing your workout to your food intake, even in "a caloric deficit", I'd love to see it, as I have not been able to find it.
There's simply no good reason for your body to digest muscle, if you have adequate dietary intake of protein and available fuel at the time of the workout.
No, it's still a catabolic state. You mitigate muscle catabolism by giving the body preferential energy sources to catabolize but you can't change the metabolic pathways to something else. It's still catabolic.0 -
With cardio only?And no progressive overload? You've been watching too much "wrestling" if you believe that.
You may be getting better muscle endurance and seeing more definition, but that doesn't equate to building muscle. To build muscle you have to invariably gain mass and that means adding weight. And if walking built muscle, then really there shouldn't be many "unmuscular" people because many people walk everyday.THANK YOU! All I am doing right now is walking (4.5 MPH for 30 min 4 times a day) and no one can tell me I'm not gaining muscle. I see my legs and they are difinitely gaining muscle and losing fat. My scale may not be moving much but I am burning 500-1000kcal/day according to my Flex. There is no way to cheat on that thing.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Again, if you have plenty of extra mass to begin with, there's ZERO reason you cannot gain muscle mass while losing fat. None.
While being extremely overweight/obese is an exception to gaining muscle while in deficit, one has to do PROGRESSIVE OVERLOAD to achieve it. Walking isn't gonna do it. And even then, the gain is minimal. Sorry, but there's your reason.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Just curious...
Can you achieve progressive overload through cardio at least for a while by increasing the intensity of cardio. Let's say...if during your walks you start climbing stairs...or climbing hills.
Also...what happens to the progressive overload when one has reached his limit on increasing his lifting weight. Will his muscles acclimate to that weight and just stay there...
Hopefully I asked this question clearly...not sure that I know exactly how to ask it.0 -
Well, here's a link to an article on 70s Big: http://www.liftbigeatbig.com/2011/11/how-extended-cardio-will-inhibit-your.html
You don't gain muscle from cardio. It's a catabolic process and building muscle is done on an anabolic process.I've been goin to the gym since the start of the year and my diary has been solid almost always under my goal yet I've put on the last 2 weeks? I know I'm gaining muscle but how much muscle can you gain from just doing cardio and nothing but cardio? Enough to put 2.5 lb in a week?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
bump
Cardio is only going to be catabolic if you don't have sufficient energy to sustain it. Eat carbs and protein before your cardio, and there's no reason whatsoever for it to be a catabolic process.
It's not exactly what you're talking about, but it does explain why long, steady-state cardio is catabolic. HIIT, such as Tabata protocol, will not be catabolic. There are references in that article that may lead to what you're looking for.
Okay.. just read the first cited study (and it would be nice if they'd footnote, so I knew what they were claiming the study said that they are repeating in the article, plus "cracked" style articles are amateur and annoying), and it only says that SIT can be just as effective as ET, but can be accomplished in less time.
I'll keep reading, but so far, nothing that supports the suggestion that ET is any more catabolic than SIT.
edit: Read all three abstracts, and one report in full.
None of them address muscle gain or catabolysis.. all merely address that HIIT (or SIT), can produce gains similar to ET, or long steady state, in much less time.
This is the problem with non-footnoted opinion pieces. Yes, the overall statement, "hiit can do you just as well as long duration steady state" is clearly shown in the studies.. but things tossed in like "and long duration cardio is catabolic" are completely unsourced. They also compare a marathon runner to a sprinter (who is also a known drug cheat), and say "which would you rather look like"? Seriously? That's not science.0 -
Why on earth not? Catabolic (in terms of muscles) means your body is breaking down the muscle to digest it. You see long term effects of this in people on extremely low calorie diets (severe anorexia and bulemia), or in extreme cases of muscle atrophy (coma patient).
If you can show me the science as to why cardio should be catabolic, if you are timing your workout to your food intake, even in "a caloric deficit", I'd love to see it, as I have not been able to find it.
There's simply no good reason for your body to digest muscle, if you have adequate dietary intake of protein and available fuel at the time of the workout.
No, it's still a catabolic state. You mitigate muscle catabolism by giving the body preferential energy sources to catabolize but you can't change the metabolic pathways to something else. It's still catabolic.
Right. Digestion is catabolic. Put a salad in your stomach, and your body uses a catabolic process to break it down into food.
Your body also uses an anabolic process to store it as fat.
And it uses an anabolic process to build muscle.
The question I have, is WHY would your body, when presented with adequate fuel in the form of carbs and protein in your system, at the time of the workout and shortly after, catabolize MUSCLE when it has no reason to do so?0 -
With cardio only?And no progressive overload? You've been watching too much "wrestling" if you believe that.
You may be getting better muscle endurance and seeing more definition, but that doesn't equate to building muscle. To build muscle you have to invariably gain mass and that means adding weight. And if walking built muscle, then really there shouldn't be many "unmuscular" people because many people walk everyday.THANK YOU! All I am doing right now is walking (4.5 MPH for 30 min 4 times a day) and no one can tell me I'm not gaining muscle. I see my legs and they are difinitely gaining muscle and losing fat. My scale may not be moving much but I am burning 500-1000kcal/day according to my Flex. There is no way to cheat on that thing.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Again, if you have plenty of extra mass to begin with, there's ZERO reason you cannot gain muscle mass while losing fat. None.
While being extremely overweight/obese is an exception to gaining muscle while in deficit, one has to do PROGRESSIVE OVERLOAD to achieve it. Walking isn't gonna do it. And even then, the gain is minimal. Sorry, but there's your reason.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Just curious...
Can you achieve progressive overload through cardio at least for a while by increasing the intensity of cardio. Let's say...if during your walks you start climbing stairs...or climbing hills.
Also...what happens to the progressive overload when one has reached his limit on increasing his lifting weight. Will his muscles acclimate to that weight and just stay there...
Hopefully I asked this question clearly...not sure that I know exactly how to ask it.
Yeah, you can and that's a great idea. Progressive overload should be a part of all exercise programs and adding resistance (like stairs or hills) is a great way to do it.0 -
Why on earth not? Catabolic (in terms of muscles) means your body is breaking down the muscle to digest it. You see long term effects of this in people on extremely low calorie diets (severe anorexia and bulemia), or in extreme cases of muscle atrophy (coma patient).
If you can show me the science as to why cardio should be catabolic, if you are timing your workout to your food intake, even in "a caloric deficit", I'd love to see it, as I have not been able to find it.
There's simply no good reason for your body to digest muscle, if you have adequate dietary intake of protein and available fuel at the time of the workout.
No, it's still a catabolic state. You mitigate muscle catabolism by giving the body preferential energy sources to catabolize but you can't change the metabolic pathways to something else. It's still catabolic.
Right. Digestion is catabolic. Put a salad in your stomach, and your body uses a catabolic process to break it down into food.
Your body also uses an anabolic process to store it as fat.
And it uses an anabolic process to build muscle.
The question I have, is WHY would your body, when presented with adequate fuel in the form of carbs and protein in your system, at the time of the workout and shortly after, catabolize MUSCLE when it has no reason to do so?
If you're in a caloric deficit you're always going to catabolize some muscle. There's no way to mitigate it 100%.
If you're at maintenance or a surplus and you fuel before endurance cardio and intake more glycogen before you hit glycogen depletion there's minimal muscle catabolism. I really don't understand what point you're trying to make. It's never going to be anabolic during SS cardio no matter how you fuel.0 -
Why on earth not? Catabolic (in terms of muscles) means your body is breaking down the muscle to digest it. You see long term effects of this in people on extremely low calorie diets (severe anorexia and bulemia), or in extreme cases of muscle atrophy (coma patient).
If you can show me the science as to why cardio should be catabolic, if you are timing your workout to your food intake, even in "a caloric deficit", I'd love to see it, as I have not been able to find it.
There's simply no good reason for your body to digest muscle, if you have adequate dietary intake of protein and available fuel at the time of the workout.
No, it's still a catabolic state. You mitigate muscle catabolism by giving the body preferential energy sources to catabolize but you can't change the metabolic pathways to something else. It's still catabolic.
Right. Digestion is catabolic. Put a salad in your stomach, and your body uses a catabolic process to break it down into food.
Your body also uses an anabolic process to store it as fat.
And it uses an anabolic process to build muscle.
The question I have, is WHY would your body, when presented with adequate fuel in the form of carbs and protein in your system, at the time of the workout and shortly after, catabolize MUSCLE when it has no reason to do so?
If you're in a caloric deficit you're always going to catabolize some muscle. There's no way to mitigate it 100%.
If you're at maintenance or a surplus and you fuel before endurance cardio and intake more glycogen before you hit glycogen depletion there's minimal muscle catabolism. I really don't understand what point you're trying to make. It's never going to be anabolic during SS cardio no matter how you fuel.
Bluntly, THE SCIENCE SHOW ME IT. A link to another thread on this forum saying the same thing is not science. A link to a weighlifting forum somewhere else is not science. Repeating the same thing over and over and saying "Everyone knows' is not science.
"everyone knows" you should drink 8 glasses of water a day. "everyone knows" you get sore because of lactic acid buildup. "everyone knows" that sugar will make you fat. All opinions, none based whatsoever in science.
Please, show me the study that addresses muscle catabolism during exercise on a reasonable caloric deficit, but eating proper nutrition. I'd LOVE to see it.
I've already been shown three footnotes which don't even address it, but I read em!0 -
Why on earth not? Catabolic (in terms of muscles) means your body is breaking down the muscle to digest it. You see long term effects of this in people on extremely low calorie diets (severe anorexia and bulemia), or in extreme cases of muscle atrophy (coma patient).
If you can show me the science as to why cardio should be catabolic, if you are timing your workout to your food intake, even in "a caloric deficit", I'd love to see it, as I have not been able to find it.
There's simply no good reason for your body to digest muscle, if you have adequate dietary intake of protein and available fuel at the time of the workout.
No, it's still a catabolic state. You mitigate muscle catabolism by giving the body preferential energy sources to catabolize but you can't change the metabolic pathways to something else. It's still catabolic.
Right. Digestion is catabolic. Put a salad in your stomach, and your body uses a catabolic process to break it down into food.
Your body also uses an anabolic process to store it as fat.
And it uses an anabolic process to build muscle.
The question I have, is WHY would your body, when presented with adequate fuel in the form of carbs and protein in your system, at the time of the workout and shortly after, catabolize MUSCLE when it has no reason to do so?
If you're in a caloric deficit you're always going to catabolize some muscle. There's no way to mitigate it 100%.
If you're at maintenance or a surplus and you fuel before endurance cardio and intake more glycogen before you hit glycogen depletion there's minimal muscle catabolism. I really don't understand what point you're trying to make. It's never going to be anabolic during SS cardio no matter how you fuel.
Bluntly, THE SCIENCE SHOW ME IT. A link to another thread on this forum saying the same thing is not science. A link to a weighlifting forum somewhere else is not science. Repeating the same thing over and over and saying "Everyone knows' is not science.
"everyone knows" you should drink 8 glasses of water a day. "everyone knows" you get sore because of lactic acid buildup. "everyone knows" that sugar will make you fat. All opinions, none based whatsoever in science.
Please, show me the study that addresses muscle catabolism during exercise on a reasonable caloric deficit, but eating proper nutrition. I'd LOVE to see it.
I've already been shown three footnotes which don't even address it, but I read em!
What I just explained is in every exercise physiology textbook that exists. Go look it up yourself. Since you're proposing a hypothesis that's outside the box of standard knowledge, how about you provide any research that supports your theory.0 -
I'd be careful about making such sweeping categorical statements. Cortisol production is a very good reason.Why on earth not? Catabolic (in terms of muscles) means your body is breaking down the muscle to digest it. You see long term effects of this in people on extremely low calorie diets (severe anorexia and bulemia), or in extreme cases of muscle atrophy (coma patient).
If you can show me the science as to why cardio should be catabolic, if you are timing your workout to your food intake, even in "a caloric deficit", I'd love to see it, as I have not been able to find it.
There's simply no good reason for your body to digest muscle, if you have adequate dietary intake of protein and available fuel at the time of the workout.
Cortisol is going to be released, whether you are under or over on your dietary calories. Endurance training also helps to delay cortisol thresholds.
And weight training releases more cortisol than aerobic training anyway.
http://www.unm.edu/~lkravitz/Article folder/cortisol.html0 -
With cardio only?And no progressive overload? You've been watching too much "wrestling" if you believe that.
You may be getting better muscle endurance and seeing more definition, but that doesn't equate to building muscle. To build muscle you have to invariably gain mass and that means adding weight. And if walking built muscle, then really there shouldn't be many "unmuscular" people because many people walk everyday.THANK YOU! All I am doing right now is walking (4.5 MPH for 30 min 4 times a day) and no one can tell me I'm not gaining muscle. I see my legs and they are difinitely gaining muscle and losing fat. My scale may not be moving much but I am burning 500-1000kcal/day according to my Flex. There is no way to cheat on that thing.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Again, if you have plenty of extra mass to begin with, there's ZERO reason you cannot gain muscle mass while losing fat. None.
While being extremely overweight/obese is an exception to gaining muscle while in deficit, one has to do PROGRESSIVE OVERLOAD to achieve it. Walking isn't gonna do it. And even then, the gain is minimal. Sorry, but there's your reason.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Just curious...
Can you achieve progressive overload through cardio at least for a while by increasing the intensity of cardio. Let's say...if during your walks you start climbing stairs...or climbing hills.
Also...what happens to the progressive overload when one has reached his limit on increasing his lifting weight. Will his muscles acclimate to that weight and just stay there...
Hopefully I asked this question clearly...not sure that I know exactly how to ask it.
Yeah, you can and that's a great idea. Progressive overload should be a part of all exercise programs and adding resistance (like stairs or hills) is a great way to do it.
Thanks for responding. At my age I am more concerned with keeping and strengthening the muscles that I have...as soon as I can find them underneath the fat!
I do cardio and some strength training and try to keep challenging myself as I progress. I am limited as to what I can do however due to an injury that fairly well destroyed any core muscles that I have.
If I can ask one more question...
I change my routine up fairly often(I get bored easily). As I progress and am able to do more I try to add to it even if it is just something small. Is this what I should be doing. For example...I can do squats...I started with no weight and today I added 8lb dumbbells.
I have done a lot of research but there is not much out there for people that have no core muscles left. When they say tighten up your core...I just kind of laugh...and then do the best that I can.0 -
With cardio only?And no progressive overload? You've been watching too much "wrestling" if you believe that.
You may be getting better muscle endurance and seeing more definition, but that doesn't equate to building muscle. To build muscle you have to invariably gain mass and that means adding weight. And if walking built muscle, then really there shouldn't be many "unmuscular" people because many people walk everyday.THANK YOU! All I am doing right now is walking (4.5 MPH for 30 min 4 times a day) and no one can tell me I'm not gaining muscle. I see my legs and they are difinitely gaining muscle and losing fat. My scale may not be moving much but I am burning 500-1000kcal/day according to my Flex. There is no way to cheat on that thing.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Again, if you have plenty of extra mass to begin with, there's ZERO reason you cannot gain muscle mass while losing fat. None.
While being extremely overweight/obese is an exception to gaining muscle while in deficit, one has to do PROGRESSIVE OVERLOAD to achieve it. Walking isn't gonna do it. And even then, the gain is minimal. Sorry, but there's your reason.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness industry for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Just curious...
Can you achieve progressive overload through cardio at least for a while by increasing the intensity of cardio. Let's say...if during your walks you start climbing stairs...or climbing hills.
Also...what happens to the progressive overload when one has reached his limit on increasing his lifting weight. Will his muscles acclimate to that weight and just stay there...
Hopefully I asked this question clearly...not sure that I know exactly how to ask it.
Yeah, you can and that's a great idea. Progressive overload should be a part of all exercise programs and adding resistance (like stairs or hills) is a great way to do it.
Thanks for responding. At my age I am more concerned with keeping and strengthening the muscles that I have...as soon as I can find them underneath the fat!
I do cardio and some strength training and try to keep challenging myself as I progress. I am limited as to what I can do however due to an injury that fairly well destroyed any core muscles that I have.
If I can ask one more question...
I change my routine up fairly often(I get bored easily). As I progress and am able to do more I try to add to it even if it is just something small. Is this what I should be doing. For example...I can do squats...I started with no weight and today I added 8lb dumbbells.
I have done a lot of research but there is not much out there for people that have no core muscles left. When they say tighten up your core...I just kind of laugh...and then do the best that I can.
Yes you are on exactly the right track. When something gets easy, make it harder- exactly like you're doing and that's how to make your program effective.
You must have some core muscles! If you're able to do squats, for example, your core muscles are stabilizing your body. When you're walking, as you move all 4 limbs back and forth, the core muscles stabilize and counterbalance the movement. It sounds like you're on the right track- keep trying to make it a little harder each time. If it's walking, add hills or stairs, or try to do the same course a little faster than before. Don't get discouraged if you don't succeed every time, it's about trying.0 -
Thanks for responding. At my age I am more concerned with keeping and strengthening the muscles that I have...as soon as I can find them underneath the fat!
I do cardio and some strength training and try to keep challenging myself as I progress. I am limited as to what I can do however due to an injury that fairly well destroyed any core muscles that I have.
If I can ask one more question...
I change my routine up fairly often(I get bored easily). As I progress and am able to do more I try to add to it even if it is just something small. Is this what I should be doing. For example...I can do squats...I started with no weight and today I added 8lb dumbbells.
I have done a lot of research but there is not much out there for people that have no core muscles left. When they say tighten up your core...I just kind of laugh...and then do the best that I can.
THis guy has not picked up a weight in over 8 years.
Huge? No. WEll built with good definition? IMHO, yes.
http://www.alternativecomplementarymedicine.com/wp-content/uploads/ddp-yoga31-620x350.jpg0 -
What I just explained is in every exercise physiology textbook that exists. Go look it up yourself. Since you're proposing a hypothesis that's outside the box of standard knowledge, how about you provide any research that supports your theory.
Okay: Let me see if I have this right.
Two different things are being discussed:
1) "cardio" won't build muscle mass. It may tone and strengthen, but it will not, generally, build muscle mass. This I can understand, due to fact that it's basically isometric, and not resistance training.
2) Weight training on any kind of caloric deficit is pointless, as you can only gain muscle mass on a caloric surplus. So if someone who is 50 pounds overweight wants to build muscle mass, they should eat for the "maintain" amount, at the very least, if not the "gain" level?
Do I have that right?0 -
Let's get this straight. You don't build muscle by doing cardio or lifting weights...
Your body builds muscle when you REST!
That should end this argument.0 -
Let's get this straight. You don't build muscle by doing cardio or lifting weights...
Your body builds muscle when you REST!
That should end this argument.
Chemically induced coma here I come.
How long will I need to be there to look like The Rock?0 -
Yes you are on exactly the right track. When something gets easy, make it harder- exactly like you're doing and that's how to make your program effective.
You must have some core muscles! If you're able to do squats, for example, your core muscles are stabilizing your body. When you're walking, as you move all 4 limbs back and forth, the core muscles stabilize and counterbalance the movement. It sounds like you're on the right track- keep trying to make it a little harder each time. If it's walking, add hills or stairs, or try to do the same course a little faster than before. Don't get discouraged if you don't succeed every time, it's about trying.
If I got discouraged every time that I can't do something...I would have quit a long time ago.
The muscles in my stomach are torn and so weak that they don't hold all the insides in. I have learned to compensate for some of it but I have had to face...there are just some things that I can't do. I am not sure why I have been able to accomplish squats...lunges however...no matter how hard I try...just can't seem to be able to find the balance and the strength.
Thank you again...sometimes I wonder if I am truly doing any good. Oh well...I enjoy it so I guess that is all that matters.0 -
Thanks for responding. At my age I am more concerned with keeping and strengthening the muscles that I have...as soon as I can find them underneath the fat!
I do cardio and some strength training and try to keep challenging myself as I progress. I am limited as to what I can do however due to an injury that fairly well destroyed any core muscles that I have.
If I can ask one more question...
I change my routine up fairly often(I get bored easily). As I progress and am able to do more I try to add to it even if it is just something small. Is this what I should be doing. For example...I can do squats...I started with no weight and today I added 8lb dumbbells.
I have done a lot of research but there is not much out there for people that have no core muscles left. When they say tighten up your core...I just kind of laugh...and then do the best that I can.
THis guy has not picked up a weight in over 8 years.
Huge? No. WEll built with good definition? IMHO, yes.
http://www.alternativecomplementarymedicine.com/wp-content/uploads/ddp-yoga31-620x350.jpg
So there is hope for me and my little Barbie dumbbells and my resistance bands! Yea!0 -
What I just explained is in every exercise physiology textbook that exists. Go look it up yourself. Since you're proposing a hypothesis that's outside the box of standard knowledge, how about you provide any research that supports your theory.
Okay: Let me see if I have this right.
Two different things are being discussed:
1) "cardio" won't build muscle mass. It may tone and strengthen, but it will not, generally, build muscle mass. This I can understand, due to fact that it's basically isometric, and not resistance training.
2) Weight training on any kind of caloric deficit is pointless, as you can only gain muscle mass on a caloric surplus. So if someone who is 50 pounds overweight wants to build muscle mass, they should eat for the "maintain" amount, at the very least, if not the "gain" level?
Do I have that right?
1)Yeah
2) No.
A person 50lbs overweight probably doesn't need to gain muscle mass. Most ambulatory people carrying around 50 extra lbs has plenty of muscle. The point of strength training for everyone who is new to lifting is primarily neuromuscular adaptations, for the first 8 months to a year, ish. This person will tune their diet and exercise program to mitigate muscle losses and get stronger. They will still lose some muscle, even with the right protein and weight lifting. When they get to a lower body fat, at that point they will decide whether they want to maintain and do slow body recomp, or do bulk/cut cycles to add muscle mass.
I think the piece you're missing is the neuromuscular adaptations. New people don't need to add any new muscle tissue to get all of the benefits of lifting. Untrained individuals only use a very small percentage of the muscle tissue they have. The goal is to learn to fire up the rest of the tissue.0 -
THANK YOU! All I am doing right now is walking (4.5 MPH for 30 min 4 times a day) and no one can tell me I'm not gaining muscle. I see my legs and they are difinitely gaining muscle and losing fat. My scale may not be moving much but I am burning 500-1000kcal/day according to my Flex. There is no way to cheat on that thing.
THAT'S what I thought also, because due to consistent walking, my calves have gotten hard as a rock; I see definition in my quads, hamstrings and glutes. What REALLY happened is that the layer of fat covering my muscle as gotten thinner, making it easier to see the normal definition of muscles.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/1189614-rate-of-muscle-gain0 -
Everyone is saying you can't build muscle from anything other than lifting. Not true!
Tell that to serious runners.
Tell that to gymnasts.
Tell that to swimmers.
Tell that to collegiate Soccer and LAX players.
Tell that to Lance Armstrong and the whole USA team...doping or not.
Tell that to people who swear by plyometric exercises and jumping.
Yes, these people may lift a bit...but they definitely gain muscle from their other activities as well.
These are HIGH IMPACT resistance activities. They can build muscle!0 -
Everyone is saying you can't build muscle from anything other than lifting. Not true!
Tell that to serious runners.
Tell that to gymnasts.
Tell that to swimmers.
Tell that to Lance Armstrong and the whole USA team...doping or not.
Yes, these people may lift a bit...but they definitely gain muscle from their other activities as well.
Hmm.. I wonder.
Are we confusing the terms we are using with each other?
Say you are joe sedentary who is carrying some extra weight, but only uses enough of their existing muscle mass to wander to the fridge and back.
(ya with me?)
Now, Joe Sedentary starts working out moderately. He's losing weight, and also increasing the measurable size of muscles.
I agree, a bit of this is going to be waved off as "water weight" etc.. but doesn't muscle, well, swell, when being used regularly, as an intermediary step before "adding mass" (as in creation of longer, or new fiber)?
I thought I read that somewhere.
Could what you and I are calling "building muscle" actually be the current muscle (nothing new built) getting to max capability before actually adding new fibers, thus "building"?0 -
<<I don't lift. I do cardio, running and cycling. I have gained muscle and mass in my quads and calfs. I run mostly half marathons. I always eat back my exercise calories. On long run days, I usually overeat back my exercise calories. I overconsume protien because I'm old and need protein to heal up the damage. I think my gains are from cycling, because I ride a **** tonne of hills, so its more likely cardio with resistance.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.5K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K 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