Getting muscular without adding calories

jmangini

One thought (and I'll be amazing if I frame this in a way that makes any science sense)...

(Picking numbers out of thin air)...
Someone starts out their journey... eating 3000 calories a day, and 100 pounds overweight...

They decide to eat at a mild deficit... say 2700 calories a day.
As they lose fat (because they are at a deficit), they continue to eat 2700 calories.
They may get to the point where 2700 calories is actually now closer to maintenance, as opposed to a deficit.

If they continue to lose fat, and stay at 2700 calories... they may approach the point where they actually have surplus to manage the building of muscle.

The 2700 is a deficit of what they originally used to eat... so they think they are dieting... but their body actually has more to play with, and therefore can use some of that toward body recomp.

My process has been slow, but noticeable. I don't do defined bulk and cut cycles... but sometimes I have a phase where my body WANTS ALL THE FOOD, and I find myself eating more than I "should"...

Then I notice my scale climbing, and I reign in my eating again.

Mini bulks and cuts.

Is it the most efficient way to do it? No.

Has it worked for me? I'd say so.

That actually makes perfect sense to me. Now that I think about it, I guess I do mini bulks and cuts too. Thanks.

jmangini

If you have plenty of fat for fuel, why couldn't some of that be used to support muscle growth?

Maybe I'm thinking a little to simplistic. Your body can still "make" things when in deficit. (a cut still heals, hair still grows, etc) So why couldn't you burn of fat and gain muscle? You won't get heavier. But couldn't you for example lose 10lb of fat and gain 1lb of muscle?

That is totally what I believed. That's why I posted this.

jmangini

Maybe someone wants to give me their thoughts on my work out routine I posted as another topic?

SunofaBeach14

You can gain muscle in a calorie deficit IF you are previously untrained, are retraining, or are taking steroids. These rules of thumb keep getting misunderstood as absolutes on here and this thread is a perfect example.

jmangini

I do take a lot of supplements. Mostly amino acids. My fav and the one I notice great results with is HMB. I started taking it when I read research on it that it preserves muscle when dieting, since I don't eat much.

ninerbuff

So if I'm understanding everyone right, unless I take in more calories, really no matter how hard I work out, No matter what stress I put on my muscles, I can never expect to gain any more muscle than I already have? Wow, that is truly disheartening. I am eating the same as always and feel like i've put on a lot of muscle. Even friends who haven't seen me in a while ask if I'm on steroids. Funny thing is, I eat very few calories compared to most people with my body size and workout regime. By the way, I've posted my work out routine on another post. Since you are all so helpful on these 2, maybe you want to give your opinion on my routine too? I'd appreciate any comments.

Just think about it logically a second. If one intends to gain muscle, then there is NO DOUBT mass will be added to the frame. Adding lean mass to the frame WILL RESULT in weight gain. Weight gain happens in calorie surplus, not calorie deficit.

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

so it's not possible to gain weight from muscle growth alone? I always hear about people stripping down on a diet then adding muscle and gaining substantial weight while still being lean and ripped. I want to point to Stallone back in the day, but everyone will say roids.

Gaining lean muscle is an energy surplus. Doesn't have to be a big surplus. One can add muscle and still stay lean, but it doesn't negate the fact that a surplus is still happening. As for Stallone, it's roids.

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

Edmond_Dantes

So if I'm understanding everyone right, unless I take in more calories, really no matter how hard I work out, No matter what stress I put on my muscles, I can never expect to gain any more muscle than I already have? Wow, that is truly disheartening. I am eating the same as always and feel like i've put on a lot of muscle. Even friends who haven't seen me in a while ask if I'm on steroids. Funny thing is, I eat very few calories compared to most people with my body size and workout regime. By the way, I've posted my work out routine on another post. Since you are all so helpful on these 2, maybe you want to give your opinion on my routine too? I'd appreciate any comments.

Yes, you can gain muscle while losing fat. When will this silly myth die?

For one, you have fat for fuel. You are using it. Your body has not stopped functioning because you reduced your calorie intake. Fat is potential energy. I think many broscience MFPers don't understand this.

Secondly, when you put stress on your body, it can respond by building muscle even while losing fat. You do have to supply the building blocks in the form of protein in your diet. Their are papers and meta-analyses in PubMed that show a gain in lean body mass while losing fat mass. Not really up to dispute, but you should read some of the interesting rebuttals. (This has nothing to do with snowflakes or building a house while breaking it down.)

Now we wait for the usual gang to come in and say it is not possible.

MireyGal76

If you have plenty of fat for fuel, why couldn't some of that be used to support muscle growth?

Maybe I'm thinking a little to simplistic. Your body can still "make" things when in deficit. (a cut still heals, hair still grows, etc) So why couldn't you burn of fat and gain muscle? You won't get heavier. But couldn't you for example lose 10lb of fat and gain 1lb of muscle?

That is totally what I believed. That's why I posted this.

Again, I think it's a matter of the fact that we don't live in a vaccuum. Life is never absolute.

If you are eating close to maintenance, even at a mild deficit... the reality is that some days you may be way more active than others... those days, you may have a greater deficit and be a fat burning machine (even if you eat back most of your exercise cals)... will you be in a position to build muscle? No.

But other days you may have a lazy day where you sit on the couch all day and barely burn anything. Those days, you're likely eating at a surplus.

On average, over the week, you may be at an overall deficit - but some days you're over, some under.

I don't know how fast the body turns around the building of muscle, burning of fat. A daily fluctuation probably doesn't yield much in terms of fast results. But the principle is there, and I think it is what 'body recomp' is all about.

The thing we see here, more often though, is a large volume of people who want to lose AS MUCH WEIGHT AS POSSIBLE... and so they eat at a crazy deficit, and probably lose a good deal of lean body mass while they're at it. (The body needs money, and starts selling any assets it can for that lil bit of cash).


Anyhoo... I'm rambling. I'll stop now.

mustgetmuscles1

If you have plenty of fat for fuel, why couldn't some of that be used to support muscle growth?

Maybe I'm thinking a little to simplistic. Your body can still "make" things when in deficit. (a cut still heals, hair still grows, etc) So why couldn't you burn of fat and gain muscle? You won't get heavier. But couldn't you for example lose 10lb of fat and gain 1lb of muscle?

That is totally what I believed. That's why I posted this.

The problem with this is that when you eat protein, which is needed to build muscle, you create insulin. Insulin stops the use of fat for energy. So you cant really use your stored fat to support muscle growth while you have the protein available.

Since protein can also be used for energy it will be burned up and it can not really be stored for later use.

You will only have a surplus of energy and protein, simultaneously, around feeding times while in a deficit. This will only be for a small portion of the day and most likely only long enough to just repair and replace what got used for the work out and not enough time for any new mass (depending on the size of the deficit).

You will not have protein available while body fat is being used for energy. Fat can not be converted to protein so you can not use stored body fat to build muscle.

jmangini

If you have plenty of fat for fuel, why couldn't some of that be used to support muscle growth?

Maybe I'm thinking a little to simplistic. Your body can still "make" things when in deficit. (a cut still heals, hair still grows, etc) So why couldn't you burn of fat and gain muscle? You won't get heavier. But couldn't you for example lose 10lb of fat and gain 1lb of muscle?

That is totally what I believed. That's why I posted this.

Again, I think it's a matter of the fact that we don't live in a vaccuum. Life is never absolute.

If you are eating close to maintenance, even at a mild deficit... the reality is that some days you may be way more active than others... those days, you may have a greater deficit and be a fat burning machine (even if you eat back most of your exercise cals)... will you be in a position to build muscle? No.

But other days you may have a lazy day where you sit on the couch all day and barely burn anything. Those days, you're likely eating at a surplus.

On average, over the week, you may be at an overall deficit - but some days you're over, some under.

I don't know how fast the body turns around the building of muscle, burning of fat. A daily fluctuation probably doesn't yield much in terms of fast results. But the principle is there, and I think it is what 'body recomp' is all about.

The thing we see here, more often though, is a large volume of people who want to lose AS MUCH WEIGHT AS POSSIBLE... and so they eat at a crazy deficit, and probably lose a good deal of lean body mass while they're at it. (The body needs money, and starts selling any assets it can for that lil bit of cash).


Anyhoo... I'm rambling. I'll stop now.

actually, I find your posts very interesting. You must have been at this a long time, because I totally understand what you are saying and after reading it, it makes total sense to me and I can totally relate. It seems that you are describing my cycles lol Especially the laying around after a work out because I just beat the sh out of my body.

TriLifter

If you are eating less calories than your TDEE, where would the calories required for muscle GROWTH come from? The calories you are taking in eating AT TDEE are enough to support the activities you are doing. If you eat less than TDEE (a deficit), then you have even less calories to divert from normal activity to muscle growth.

jmangini

One other note which may or may not matter, but I eat mostly carbs and very little fat. And probably a lot less protein than most.

jmangini

If you are eating less calories than your TDEE, where would the calories required for muscle GROWTH come from? The calories you are taking it eating AT TDEE are enough to support the activities you are doing. If you eat less than TDEE (a deficit), then you have even less calories to divert from normal activity to muscle growth.

good point

TriLifter

If you are eating less calories than your TDEE, where would the calories required for muscle GROWTH come from? The calories you are taking it eating AT TDEE are enough to support the activities you are doing. If you eat less than TDEE (a deficit), then you have even less calories to divert from normal activity to muscle growth.

good point

Trust me, I spent 20 weeks eating 200-300 calories/day OVER TDEE and only gained 4 lbs of LBM. Gaining muscle is no joke hard work.

jmangini

The thing is, when you stress your muscles with heavy loads, you actually injure them by tearing them and then when rested, they heal back bigger than they were like if you break a bone and it grows more bone over to help protect. Isn't that correct? So if we are talking about the body healing itself and how it goes about doing that, one would think you could indeed build muscle at or around the same calories by constantly working that muscle - tear, heal, tear heal.

mustgetmuscles1

The thing is, when you stress your muscles with heavy loads, you actually injure them by tearing them and then when rested, they heal back bigger than they were like if you break a bone and it grows more bone over to help protect. Isn't that correct? So if we are talking about the body healing itself and how it goes about doing that, one would think you could indeed build muscle at or around the same calories by constantly working that muscle - tear, heal, tear heal.

Healing existing muscle and adding new mass are different and both require energy. If your deficit was too large you might even have a loss of muscle despite training that should stimulate muscle retention/growth. If you have ever gone from surplus to deficit you can definitely tell there is a huge difference in recovery times.

Some lifters are just happy if they dont lose any muscle while cutting fat and here we talking about adding new muscle. That is something that is difficult even in a moderate surplus.

ninerbuff

The thing is, when you stress your muscles with heavy loads, you actually injure them by tearing them and then when rested, they heal back bigger than they were like if you break a bone and it grows more bone over to help protect. Isn't that correct? So if we are talking about the body healing itself and how it goes about doing that, one would think you could indeed build muscle at or around the same calories by constantly working that muscle - tear, heal, tear heal.

Then why do competitors bulk if this is true? Why go through hard dieting to dial in for a competition, if adding muscle this way worked?

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

Edmond_Dantes

The thing is, when you stress your muscles with heavy loads, you actually injure them by tearing them and then when rested, they heal back bigger than they were like if you break a bone and it grows more bone over to help protect. Isn't that correct? So if we are talking about the body healing itself and how it goes about doing that, one would think you could indeed build muscle at or around the same calories by constantly working that muscle - tear, heal, tear heal.

You are correct in your thinking.
Do tumors stop growing when someone is eating at a deficit? That would be awesome, but sadly it is not the case. Sarcomas grow even while a patient is wasting away. This is just an example that one's body can create or enlarge certain structures (muscle) while reducing others (fat).

Hornsby

In to read later.

Edmond_Dantes

The thing is, when you stress your muscles with heavy loads, you actually injure them by tearing them and then when rested, they heal back bigger than they were like if you break a bone and it grows more bone over to help protect. Isn't that correct? So if we are talking about the body healing itself and how it goes about doing that, one would think you could indeed build muscle at or around the same calories by constantly working that muscle - tear, heal, tear heal.

Further, would anyone advise a morbidly obese kid to not eat at a deficit because they would stop growing? No one reasonable would. You can grow in height while losing fat - another illustration that the notion of a calorie deficit stunting growth is misinformed.