Concerned about metabolic adaptation

Fithealthyforlife

I have seen some thoughts about metabolic adaptation when trying to build muscle. The most common scenario seems to be that the person eats the same amount of carbs everyday, and eventually, their insulin sensitivity decreases due to the steady-state condition. The result is less muscle gain and more fat gain. The solution is said to be carb cycling.

But I'm concerned about another type of metabolic adaptation. I recently had to increase my surplus by 100 calories. The surplus level (400 over maintenance) that allowed me to gain weight for several months apparently started to result in weight loss recently, which makes no sense. There may be statistical noise though, as I went through a period where I was sick and didn't count calories/macros or weigh in for many weeks. I was definitely not eating much for a couple of weeks during that period.

I'm still concerned though. I've heard that some people ramp up NEAT in a surplus to counteract the extra calories. They say thinner people do it more readily. I don't want to become a bottom-less calorie pit and need to keep increasing over time. My fear is needing to eat like 5000-6000 maintenance calories someday just to maintain weight about 30 lbs from now. I'm 140 lbs right now, and with the recently added 100 calories, I'm eating 3060 minimum each day now. On exercise days when I have to eat back the spent calories, I eat anywhere from 3200 to 3700 depending on estimated burns. 90% of my food gets weighed. What can't be weighed gets measured. I'm definitely eating close to what I say I am, so measurement error is not the issue.

Has anyone actually had metabolic adaptation occur? I've heard that some people recommend a low calorie day once a week to supposedly prevent it. I'm skeptical though. It just doesn't sound right to me. I think it would just pull my net calories down and make muscle gain harder. I have a basic biochemistry background. I know resting muscle tissue doesn't burn 100-150 cal per pound like they used to think. And I know that NEAT can only account for up to 900 calories a day. But still. The FUD is driving me crazy. I've even taken steps to meditate and try to move less, just in case this is happening to me.

I'm on a 500-calorie surplus now, and I feel it's sufficient for the time being. But I really hope I don't have to keep on increasing it over time to get my weight to start to increase again. The argument some people have made is that food tolerance is like tolerance to a medication over time, and we will keep needing more and more food unless we actively prevent adaptations from happening. This just doesn't sound right to me though! Then again, in high school (10 years ago) I weighed 10+ lbs more than I do now (same bodyfat level roughly) and ate probably 500 calories less than I do now. It makes no sense.

QueenBishOTUniverse

Wish I knew enough about this topic to actually be of assistance. If I were to pull an answer out of my rear end I would say that while a certain amount of adaptation might be expected, I wouldn't expect it to be indefinite. Could your maintenance level go up, possibly, but I don't think it will be to such an extreme amount that you can't also psychologically and physically adapt to being able to eat at that level.

Fithealthyforlife

Another thing is...

I am going to need to bulk for a long time to get to where I want. We're talking years. I feel like breaks are a no-brainer for a lot of reasons.

So far, I've had quite a few breaks from bulking without even trying...

-I started around late July.
-A break from late September until around Christmas time because I couldn't lift during that time due a lot of manual work.
-A break when I got food poisoning around New Year's. I couldn't eat much for about 2 weeks. I bet that's when I lost the weight (at least 2 lbs, maybe more), because I weighed in on December 27th and was the same as I was at the end of the bulk in late Sept.early Oct. And then it took a week or two to ramp up the amount of food again. I didn't weigh in until this past week, and I found myself 3 lbs lighter despite having been eating at a 400-cal surplus again for 3-4 weeks.

Somehow I don't think metabolic adaptations could be to blame here. The breaks would have prevented them.

liftsforchocolate

Wait, you're complaining about this?!? I'd be ecstatic if I could eat even 2-300 cals more and get the same results.

Bulking does take a long time, and I think it would definitely help to cycle carbs. Though I don't know too much about bulking, I have heard about similar situations with friends, and they end up doing high fat/low carb days 1-2x week when they don't need as many carbs.

Kind of related, but I'm cutting and changing my carbs. I do a keto style high protein mod fat diet 5 days, and then high protein, mod fat and mod carbs another 4-5 days then repeat. It's barely been a week, but I think it'll work!

Fithealthyforlife

Wait, you're complaining about this?!? I'd be ecstatic if I could eat even 2-300 cals more and get the same results.

Bulking does take a long time, and I think it would definitely help to cycle carbs. Though I don't know too much about bulking, I have heard about similar situations with friends, and they end up doing high fat/low carb days 1-2x week when they don't need as many carbs.

Kind of related, but I'm cutting and changing my carbs. I do a keto style high protein mod fat diet 5 days, and then high protein, mod fat and mod carbs another 4-5 days then repeat. It's barely been a week, but I think it'll work!

Yeah, I'm complaining because if being in a "perma-bulk" eventually causes me to need an extra thousand calories more than I'm supposed to need just to hit maintenance, it could be very inconvenient and life-disrupting. Imagine needing to eat constantly or else you lose hard-earned muscle. I don't want that to happen.

I really hope I'm just being irrational the same as those people cutting on 1200 calories and claiming metabolic damage. Problem is, it feels real when you're going through it. The second-to-last thing I want is for this to become a real fear...which leads to an eating disorder. That's why I'm trying to address it now and exchange ideas with others.

Waldo56...where are you when I need you? Lol.

trojan_bb

I wish I knew. I feel like it's happened to me though. I used to gain weight on 3500 Calories. I only weight15 lbs more (LBM) since those days but I cannot gain at under 4500-4700 now. 15 pounds of muscle should not cause a 1200 Calorie daily "burn". Is that because of the increased LBM? Or metabolic adaptation? I dont know. What I DO know is that it's not just because I'm nearing my genetic "peaks" or that muscle gains slows...because that would mean fat gain would continue, just without LBM gains. But weight gain altogether stalls.

Maybe it's hormonal.

IVMarkIV

There comes a point where a natural (anabolic free) person peaks weight wise. For myself, I've been lifting over a decade and can only muster 190lbs at the most...eating around 5000kcals a day mostly just adding fat as to not have to eat such ridiculous volumes of food.

I will say that my baseline has kcal needs have risen just as you are predicting for yourself. I'm averaging just under 3000kcal a day in the 165-170lb range. I do not bulk anymore nor do I see any purpose. I would have to also consider malabsorption of kcals could play a part as well because the physics of kcals and weight don't add up entirely even with ridiculously consistent weighing in order to account for fluid changes. Another overlooked factor is that carbon dioxide to oxygen expenditure ratio (actual tool used to calculate caloric needs mostly in burn patients and pediatrics) could fluctuate based on your macro ratio and possibly from endurance/cardiovascular exercise improvements after years of training.

I don't know what to tell you other than to embrace adding some more fat should your BMR go up.

Fithealthyforlife

Did either of you "perma-bulk"?

Did either of you cycle calories along the way? Macros?

I'm tempted to start just going by my hunger and eating at or below maintenance a day or two a week...if this is really what happened to you guys.

trojan_bb

permabulked. macro's changed, but almost always a surplus (supposedly, must not have truly been a surplus if weight was stagnant) for 3 years. occasional days of eating at maintenance, but totally unplanned.

Fithealthyforlife

permabulked. macro's changed, but almost always a surplus (supposedly, must not have truly been a surplus if weight was stagnant) for 3 years. occasional days of eating at maintenance, but totally unplanned.

Have you considered trying to maintain at maintenance for an extended period to clear any adaptation (assuming it's a real phenomenon and is what actually happened)?

Edit: Then again, aren't you like 200 lbs these days? You've gained like 50+ lbs of muscle, right? Your maintenance/bulk calorie numbers don't sound unreasonable either.

Fithealthyforlife

I will say that my baseline has kcal needs have risen just as you are predicting for yourself. I'm averaging just under 3000kcal a day in the 165-170lb range.

That doesn't sound unreasonable for maintenance at that weight/LBM...at least to me. It's only 400 or so higher than mine right now, and I'm 30 lbs lower. Doing the math, 30x12=360...right in line with my own predicted maintenance level in the future at that weight, assuming 12 kcal for each additional pound of muscle. Does not sound like adaptation to me.

Why do you longer bulk? Are most of your gains fat now? Or are you just at the point you're happy with? Or is it the food being an issue?

pusheen12

Perhaps a nutritionist could answer your questions.

Fithealthyforlife

Being research-minded, I did some poking around for scientific paper abstracts...
These should be good starting points for us to discuss this better.


http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0031938405002192

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/56/3/483.short

---

> http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1743-7075-3-25.pdf

http://journals.lww.com/co-clinicalnutrition/Abstract/2004/11000/Metabolic_consequences_of_overfeeding_in_humans.6.aspx

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1038/oby.2006.78/full

http://ajpendo.physiology.org/content/286/5/E675

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/j.1550-8528.1995.tb00183.x/abstract

Fithealthyforlife

After reading some of these articles and abstracts, it seems like ridiculous increases in maintenance calories with bulking are most likely due to increased NEAT (in short: movement) and not due to increases in BMR above and beyond predicted values from LBM gains.

Some of the studies suggest that NEAT might be genetically determined, or at least a highly ingrained habit. If that's true, it would mean that someone expending a lot of calories through NEAT who wants to lower their maintenace intake would only have one option, imho: meditation. After all, that's basically the definition of meditation.

It's not clear to me if macro or calorie cycling is important or not.

Springfield1970

Very interesting thread. 'Food' for thought. I think having a higher NEAT is an incredible thing. It's like turning the clock back and being young again. Lots of spontaneous movement and enthusiasm.

I must take NEAT more into account when I bulk again next winter, as maybe that surpluss isn't as big or efficient as it could be for muscle gain. I have a very active life which could easily soak up a higher NEAT count. Some days/weeks border on manic!

Are you quite hyper active OP, and did you get more so the more you eat? Rather than try and slow yourself down with meditation, do you try and direct into an unsports related activity, hobby or startup?

Thank you for providing the homework, I will read when I get time and rejoin this useful discussion!

BenjaminMFP88

I have nothing to add at this time. I just want to read through your articles.

jimmmer

Tagging to read links later...

Interesting topic OP, thanks!

OverDoIt

I cannot read your profile. Changing the content of our diet is also key. If you trained exactly the same way day in and day out what would happen ? Think of your diet in these terms my fitness pal. Science and data and evidence are fantastic, however they are speculative when it comes to idividuals. Double blind studies and test tube rhetoric do not explain individual human metabolic behavior. A study would have to be done on every single human currently living on the earth to get factual data. Ask yourself this, are you really eating to grow ? Are you training with growth in mind. I am not a doctor, nor do I play one on T.V. You may need to see a specialist, or drink a gallon of whole milk and eat a cow everyday. I wish you the very best.