So even though you can't gain muscle on a calorie

Sidesteal

Why do you think so? And do you think that only applies to fasted weight training -- or fasted exercise of any kind?

(Not meant as a snotty answer, I am truly trying to understand BCAA supplementation better.)

Because in the presence of adequate protein intake you should already have sufficient supply of amino acids. Martin Berkhan's protocol calls for BCAA supplementation after fasting periods but the last I recall on this topic is that it was a "grey area" as to whether or not it's even necessary.

aweightymatter

Why do you think so? And do you think that only applies to fasted weight training -- or fasted exercise of any kind?

(Not meant as a snotty answer, I am truly trying to understand BCAA supplementation better.)

Because in the presence of adequate protein intake you should already have sufficient supply of amino acids. Martin Berkhan's protocol calls for BCAA supplementation after fasting periods but the last I recall on this topic is that it was a "grey area" as to whether or not it's even necessary.

That makes sense. Thank you for the response!

Jeff92se

I don't always had enough to eat protein wise when I hit the gym so the BCAAs help. I also don't know if my particular protein shake has "enough" BCAAs or not. I just know that I have a tendency to get and stay pretty sore. So I'm trying different things to combat that. BCAAs seem to help (along with other things)

RonSwanson66

Why do you think so? And do you think that only applies to fasted weight training -- or fasted exercise of any kind?

(Not meant as a snotty answer, I am truly trying to understand BCAA supplementation better.)

Because in the presence of adequate protein intake you should already have sufficient supply of amino acids. Martin Berkhan's protocol calls for BCAA supplementation after fasting periods but the last I recall on this topic is that it was a "grey area" as to whether or not it's even necessary.

^^This^^

"Despite the lack of strong evidence for the efficacy of BCAA supplements, athletes continue to use them. However, normal food alternatives are available and are almost certainly cheaper. For example, a typical BCAA supplement sold in tablet form contains 100 mg valine, 50 mg isoleucine, and 100 mg leucine. A chicken breast (100 g) contains ∼470 mg valine, 375 g isoleucine, and 656 mg leucine, the equivalent of about 7 BCAA tablets. One quarter of a cup of peanuts (60 g) contains even more BCAA and is equivalent to 11 tablets."

http://jn.nutrition.org/content/135/6/1591S.long

Jeff92se

This is what I take:

Each serving of ON Instantized BCAA 5000 Powder provides a 5,000 mg (5 g) blend of the three Branched Chain Amino Acids (L-Valine, L-Leucine, and L-Isoleucine) in every serving



Optimum Nutrition BCAA 5000 Powder, Instantized, Unflavored, 345 Grams


Serving Size 2 Scoops
Servings Per Container 40

Amount Per Serving % DV


Calories 10.00

Total Carbohydrate 3.00 g 1%


Micronized L-Leucine 2.50 g **


Micronized L-Isoleucine 1.25 g **

Micronized L-Valine 1.25 g **



Chicken breast at 100g has about 110 calories vs 10 for the On product.

nowornever78

bump

tigersword

This is what I take:

Each serving of ON Instantized BCAA 5000 Powder provides a 5,000 mg (5 g) blend of the three Branched Chain Amino Acids (L-Valine, L-Leucine, and L-Isoleucine) in every serving



Optimum Nutrition BCAA 5000 Powder, Instantized, Unflavored, 345 Grams


Serving Size 2 Scoops
Servings Per Container 40

Amount Per Serving % DV


Calories 10.00

Total Carbohydrate 3.00 g 1%


Micronized L-Leucine 2.50 g **


Micronized L-Isoleucine 1.25 g **

Micronized L-Valine 1.25 g **



Chicken breast at 100g has about 110 calories vs 10 for the On product.

I honestly wouldn't believe the accuracy of those numbers. Carbs are 4 calories per gram, as is protein, so just based on that the 3 grams of carbs it has should be 12 calories. And then 5 grams of protein should be another 20 calories.

And while yes, chicken breast is still more calories, you're getting a lot more useable protein out of it.

Jeff92se

This is what I take:

Each serving of ON Instantized BCAA 5000 Powder provides a 5,000 mg (5 g) blend of the three Branched Chain Amino Acids (L-Valine, L-Leucine, and L-Isoleucine) in every serving



Optimum Nutrition BCAA 5000 Powder, Instantized, Unflavored, 345 Grams


Serving Size 2 Scoops
Servings Per Container 40

Amount Per Serving % DV


Calories 10.00

Total Carbohydrate 3.00 g 1%


Micronized L-Leucine 2.50 g **


Micronized L-Isoleucine 1.25 g **

Micronized L-Valine 1.25 g **



Chicken breast at 100g has about 110 calories vs 10 for the On product.

I honestly wouldn't believe the accuracy of those numbers. Carbs are 4 calories per gram, as is protein, so just based on that the 3 grams of carbs it has should be 12 calories. And then 5 grams of protein should be another 20 calories.

And while yes, chicken breast is still more calories, you're getting a lot more useable protein out of it.

I get my protein out of my whey shakes. the value of real food isn't lost on me. I understand that. But to keep under my calorie limits, this is how I have to do it. Or until I can tailer my diet better.

Jeff92se

If you have a normal level of body fat, you won't gain muscle on a calorie deficit, as your body will be hanging onto the body fat for use, as body fat serves a lot of metabolic and hormonal functions in the body. If your obese, and have lots of excess fat, than your body will burn fat a little more generously and it's possible to build muscle on a deficit. It's not common, and won't be much, and certainly won't happen for most people.

Remember, adipose tissue is a major endocrine organ, so unless you have a very significant excess of fat, your body will try too hang on to it, in any way possible.

Take a look at this guy's story.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/403233-lost-96lbs-and-made-top-10-in-physique-contest?page=5#posts-5785056

No one wants to take a crack at this one?

Obviously not obese or even 20+% BF. Gained plenty of muscle.....

crux

No one wants to take a crack at this one?

Obviously not obese or even 20+% BF. Gained plenty of muscle.....

The answer is in his profile, he lifted and got big in school, then let it go, now he's regaining his muscle. That's one of the categories that is accepted as possible to gain while on a deficit.

Jeff92se

he also gained mass while already cut down. He alludes to being bigger than before.

The product of my reverse diet... Gaining mass while staying lean and/or getting leaner and eating more... I LOVE IT!!!!!!!! :bigsmile:

RonSwanson66

he also gained mass while already cut down. He alludes to being bigger than before.

The product of my reverse diet... Gaining mass while staying lean and/or getting leaner and eating more... I LOVE IT!!!!!!!! :bigsmile:

He doesn't look like he gained mass.
He's leaner, more tan, the lighting is different, and the "after" picture is zoomed in closer.

These all give the illusion of size.

BobbyClerici

As a guy who values size, it was hard to lose mass for the sake of overall health and lower weight and body fat.

My huge ego protested.

But what's important to me now is being more healthy than just some large armed, fat slug.
That ship no longer sails.

Jeff92se

he also gained mass while already cut down. He alludes to being bigger than before.

The product of my reverse diet... Gaining mass while staying lean and/or getting leaner and eating more... I LOVE IT!!!!!!!! :bigsmile:

He doesn't look like he gained mass.
He's leaner, more tan, the lighting is different, and the "after" picture is zoomed in closer.

These all give the illusion of size.

it's not me claiming he gained muscle, it's him. His peaks on the shoulders are higher. And he's posted pics of his biceps. Not to mention his weight increase while becoming more shredded.

Jeff92se

I even asked him specifically:

Jeff92se
Amazing. Have you been eating at a calorie deficit all this time? You seem to have gain alot of muscle mass

His reply
yes. I'm still at a slight caloric deficit because when you compare my photos at a constant weight of 177-178 over the past 3 months of my reverse diet (which I have not uploaded yet) I look totally different from when I was dieting down and through 177-175 vs. now when I've hovering between 175 to 178. It's like my body morphed while staying at this weight.

Once I start my mass phase, however, my coach sees 1-2 lbs per month easy in this slow and controlled manner. So hopefully back up near 200 lbs in about a year from now. For height reference, I'm 5'8"...

AdAstra47

Many people believe this (you can't gain muscle while simultaneously losing weight), but it's not true. It's a highly persistent myth based on consideration of the thermodynamics but ignorance of the biochemistry. Our bodies are very, very complex.

Facts to consider:

1. You can get calories (which is just a fancy word for energy) from carbohydrates, fat, or protein.

2. Protein is also used to build & repair muscles. It is also the main ingredient in your hair & fingernails. Therefore, ALL of the protein you eat is NOT used for energy (as calories), even though when you log it, it will show up as calories, as if it was all used that way. Protein is like wood: yes, you can burn it to heat your house. But you can also use it to build the furniture that goes inside your house. Just counting all protein as "calories" as if all calories are spent equally is a bit misleading. How much of your protein is used strictly for energy and how much is used for other purposes? Well, that depends on your own particular metabolism.

3. Here's a very important fact: the chemical reaction that burns fatty acids also requires amino acids (protein). And vice versa, of course. Just like you can't have a fire without fuel, oxygen and a catalyst/heat source. Take away any of those ingredients, and you have no fire. Take away the fat OR the protein OR the hormones that trigger the reaction, and you won't get the correct energy-burning reaction. That's why some people can eat a calorie deficit and still gain weight: something is interfering with the reaction, preventing the calories from being burned & used. Something (usually some hormone imbalance) is causing calories to be stored even though you may be starving yourself. People with PCOS, insulin resistance, women who always gain weight during TOM, you know what I'm talking about, right?

4. The chemical reaction that burns fat & protein requires (very roughly) three parts fat to one part protein. So if you ate exactly three times as much fat as protein, your body would just burn exactly what you ate, without burning any stored fat and without losing any muscle, either.
So if you don't eat enough protein, your body will harvest that protein from your muscles, and you will lose muscle along with your fat. This is what happens to a lot of people when they diet.
But the opposite also applies: if you DO eat plenty of protein, your body can burn the fat without needing to shrink your muscles. If you eat lots of protein & need to burn it for energy, your body will need fat in order to complete the chemical reaction, and it will harvest that fat from your stores. So no matter how much protein you eat, the protein that you actually burn as energy will also burn three times as much fat (assuming you have the fat to burn, and assuming that the hormones properly trigger the reaction). And your body will get the energy it needs, while still having protein left over for muscle repair & muscle-building.

So my point is: you CANNOT make generalizations about :"This is the way that weight loss definitely, always, works!"

Everyone's body is different. Your hormone levels and how they regulate your energy-burning mechanisms are partly dependent on genetics, partly on lifestyle, partly on random things like the altitude where you live or the childhood diseases you've had. So, yes, for some people, it's strictly "calories-in, calories-out." For others, *what* you eat and *when* you eat it makes a big difference. Some people will be able to gain muscle while losing weight; others may find this impossible.

I've oversimplified this a bit 'cause people's eyes generally glaze over when you talk about biochemistry... :laugh:
Just want to throw this out there to encourage all of you to give each other the benefit of the doubt. There are many paths to weight loss, and a path that works great for one metabolism may not work for another. Someone whose weight loss strategy differs from yours is not delusional or lying; they just did it differently, and it worked for them because EVERYONE'S BODY IS DIFFERENT.

(Climbing down off my soapbox now...) :laugh: