I'm confused weight lifting/cardio/muscle question...

Options
1234568

Replies

  • zipnguyen
    zipnguyen Posts: 990 Member
    Options
    I'm currently eating at 1000 calorie deficit in order to lose 2lb per week and have been doing so since May. I do 4 days strength training per week but for the past few months have noticed next to no no muscular gains. I have been coming down in body fat/scale weight but my strength doesn't seem to have increased one bit for the last 3 months or so as I am still lifting same weight for each exercise and struggling to go any higher. Like most are saying in this thread, I am putting this down to the large calorie deficit and resulting reduction in body fat/muscle mass.

    So if one can't build muscle whilst eating at a calorie deficit, how about when in maintenance? is it possible to build muscle whilst maintaining or can it only be done when eating a calorie surplus?


    Really? 1,000 cals/day
  • zipnguyen
    zipnguyen Posts: 990 Member
    Options
    He also gained muscle going from 175lbs to about 177lbs. While already pretty lean.

    Not to mention he was training at a calorie deficit the entire time(according to him)

    Well he didn't gain 2 pounds eating at a calorie deficit. Unless it was water weight from majorly increasing carbs. That is physically impossible.


    In my defense I did get leaner though and heavier weights...it wasnt a refeed day or anything. Or after a cheat meal. I don't even know what a cheat meal feels like anymore.
  • zipnguyen
    zipnguyen Posts: 990 Member
    Options
    Here is a great article http://www.simplyshredded.com/layne-norton-the-most-effective-cutting-diet.html - that's my coach... Basically, eat enough protein and fats for your level of lean mass and fill in the rest of your caloric needs with carbs. Find out what maintainence is for you and deduct the carb numbers that will help you lose weight. I can go on and on about the process of testing "what" does "what" to your body and the optimal macronutrient composition for you, but again, testing to see what does what to your body takes some time.

    I'm still learning to test to see what's optimal. I will say one thing, when you get your metabolism functioning optimally, you can increase your carb allowance to 500 grams so the next time you diet on say 200-250 grams it's high enough where you can still eat and have fun and not starve yourself too badly. I remember the days of eating 30-90 grams of carbs a day - that was not fun at all. No one knows hell, until they've been on an extremely low-carb diet

    Now that my metabolism is on fire (thanks to my coach) I'm at about 375 grams per day and I'm not putting on any weight. He figures I'll top out at 400-500 grams somewhere, I think closer to 500 grams, which is about 2000 calories from carbs only. This is fun!!!

    In short, I didn't gain the weight back and I went from as low as 30grams to 375 grams, but it took time and Layne meticulously and methodically increased it and other macronutrient variables that "tries" to optimize my metabolism. Simply put, he just tells me how much of carbs/fat/protein to eat and it's up to me to figure it out and eat the foods that will hit those macros.

    Now I sit at 177-180 and I'm leaner NOW than I was at 175. Doesn't sound like a lot but, the 2-3 lbs I've gain has totally changed the way I look.

    Layne and I compared how I looked at 178lbs at two different points in time spaced roughly 3 months a part and visually I look so different. The last time I was 178lbs when I was dieting down and through that number I was flat, and relatively flabby. And the more recent photo of me at 178lbs I'm bigger and much leaner (much leaner). So what ever it is he's doing, it's working.

    Check out my post on blood test and my triglyceride numbers, it's low for someone eating the amount of carbs I'm eating, and my cholesterol - damn. It's like I'm 18 again!!! 110 cholesterol with HDL/LDL ratio that's almost double what is considered "good" I have the metabolism of a marathon runner my physician saids, but the ironic thing is I only do cardio 2x per week :bigsmile:

    So I think it's finding the optimal amount of diet and exercise. Now what "is" optimal is different for different people I guess. There are some guys like Alberto Nunez (google him) that can diet on 400grams of carbs per day and refeeds on 1000 grams of carbs. I don't think I will ever get there. He's 5'9" and competes at 160lbs as a natural bodybuilder. And then there's my coach, Layne Norton, who when dieting has to get as low as 100-150 grams dieting for a show. Layne, I believe, competes at 196 lbs at 5'10". They might not sound "huge" but if you google them, they are massive because they are at those weights literally with no fat on their persons....

    I hope this helps,
    N
    He gained weight(assuming muscle for how cut he is) and leaned out at the same time. But to qualify, he's paying 10x more attention to his nutriution than most of us.
    I admire Layne Norton, but I'm going to bet that although he claims being natural, there's some enhancement going on. It's so rare to find naturals that have always been naturals their whole life and compete at such a high level.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    You just found one. And hence I lack calves, traps and forearms.
  • zipnguyen
    zipnguyen Posts: 990 Member
    Options
    Because I really don't care enough about one man's claims. It's not that important to me what he believes. Why are you so obsessed with his one story, that you blatantly ignore all actual science and fact?

    Do you dispute that you cannot create something out of nothing? Do you believe that the human body can magically create more mass out of thin air? Just use some logical, critical thinking.


    No I think Jeff is curious about how I did it and how I am currently doing it and how it could potentially apply to him. The academic minutia can get somewhat cumbersome and application is even more so; so if I seemed to pull off what looks to be pretty damn cool, I think others would like to know my approach as opposed to mTOR this and gluco-something-or-other pathway that...
  • zipnguyen
    zipnguyen Posts: 990 Member
    Options
    OMG STFU, this thread is still going? What are you, a bunch of 12 year olds? Disagreements, they happen. No one is changing anyone else's mind here, so just move on! Your penises are all the same size as they were before this thread started, I promise.

    Run along now, the grown-ups are talking.


    ^^^now that was funny...... :laugh:
  • zipnguyen
    zipnguyen Posts: 990 Member
    Options
    OMG STFU, this thread is still going? What are you, a bunch of 12 year olds? Disagreements, they happen. No one is changing anyone else's mind here, so just move on! Your penises are all the same size as they were before this thread started, I promise.

    Run along now, the grown-ups are talking.

    In circles.




    also, BWAHAHAHAHAHHAAA

    Again high fiving, but again don't know if it connected.
  • zipnguyen
    zipnguyen Posts: 990 Member
    Options
    I'm with the other guy on this!
    MAGIC!

    Seem like it huh.... I like to think hard work to get back to my former shape. But will take magic as it is funny when used at that precise moment. :laugh:
  • zipnguyen
    zipnguyen Posts: 990 Member
    Options
    @JaxDiablo - nearly 150 posts and did you get the answer you were looking for buddy?
  • tigersword
    tigersword Posts: 8,059 Member
    Options
    How do you build muscle while losing fat on a caloric deficit diet?

    The excess energy comes from using the stored fat for your energy needs, and the protein intake for muscle building.
    So you might picture it this way. You are deficit by 500 cal/day, but because of your fat burning to supply most energy needs, while your muscles get the best of everything, you are like 750 cal/day from the point of view of your fat systems. Made up figures BTW, but that's the point, it's not zero-sum gain within the system of your body. You can get your muscles what they want to grow, you just make sure your fat loses out more.
    It's not like all your energy needs are taken care of by what you eat.

    An already lean muscular body type would be difficult/impossible, not probably the majority using this site - who are here to lose weight, dare I say fat weight.

    This ignores a fundamental principle in human metabolism. Homeostasis. Muscle is extremely metabolically active, meaning it takes large amounts of calories to support. If you aren't taking in enough calories, and your body has to use fat stores in order to get through the day, the last thing it is going to do is add extremely high maintenance tissue that would require MORE calories to sustain, increasing metabolism. When you're in a calorie deficit the body will actively work to slow your metabolism, hence it stalls adding new muscle mass, and also changes hormone levels to slow down metabolism and calorie burn, to conserve fuel. Remember, the body is designed to store fat, burning fat is considered highly stressful, so the body is not going to respond by building new systems to support, it's going to restrict activity to keep the bare minimum calorie burn required.
    Studies you want, sure, here are a few. If a weight lifter, might enjoy a site that might be called home.


    http://www.musclehack.com/how-to-build-muscle-and-lose-fat-at-the-same-time/
    This article talks about a study you linked to, which the study in question had nothing to do with calorie deficit, as the subjects were told to eat at maintenance, since they were not overweight. Irrelevant to the discussion on building muscle on a calorie deficit.
    Lean mass gain does not automatically equal muscle gain, and there isn't enough information here to draw a useful conclusion, particularly since the lean mass gains are very small, most likely water or an increase in bone density. Without having access to the complete body composition, it's impossible to tell.
    This doesn't say anything about caloric consumption.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez/12077732?dopt=Abstract&holding=f1000,f1000m,isrctn
    Thus, we conclude that a carbohydrate-restricted diet resulted in a significant reduction in fat mass and a concomitant increase in lean body mass in normal-weight men, which may be partially mediated by the reduction in circulating insulin concentrations.
    This is the study that the first article mentioned, and it has nothing to do with eating at a calorie defect, it states right in the abstract that they were normal weight men, consuming enough calories to maintain total weight. How is that relevant to building muscle on a calorie deficit?
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez/9417152?dopt=Abstract&holding=f1000,f1000m,isrctn

    Are these overweight folks, new to weight lifting? Of course!

    But if you lost 10 lbs weight, and 13 lbs was fat, and you gained 3lbs lean body weight, that ain't water and it ain't bone.

    But I'm sorry about bringing this up again - who exactly thinks this site is inhabited by weight lifters? Might be a few after they lost weight and moved on to other goals, but lets be real about when that question is asked on this site.

    good grief.
    That last survey was 6 CHILDREN as the sample size, hardly an indicative study on how calorie deficit works in the majority of the adult population.
  • tigersword
    tigersword Posts: 8,059 Member
    Options
    I'm with the other guy on this!
    MAGIC!

    Seem like it huh.... I like to think hard work to get back to my former shape. But will take magic as it is funny when used at that precise moment. :laugh:

    Former shape? So you used to be a builder? Because that actually would explain everything, and it's a part that the guy that brought you up in this thread left out.

    3 exceptions to not building muscle on a calorie deficit, the morbidly obese, beginners, and former athletes returning after a layoff. The length of the layoff doesn't matter, the fact that you were in that kind of shape before makes it possible for you to get back there. It doesn't make it easy, it just makes it possible. Mystery solved.
  • zipnguyen
    zipnguyen Posts: 990 Member
    Options
    I'm with the other guy on this!
    MAGIC!

    Seem like it huh.... I like to think hard work to get back to my former shape. But will take magic as it is funny when used at that precise moment. :laugh:

    Former shape? So you used to be a builder? Because that actually would explain everything, and it's a part that the guy that brought you up in this thread left out.

    3 exceptions to not building muscle on a calorie deficit, the morbidly obese, beginners, and former athletes returning after a layoff. The length of the layoff doesn't matter, the fact that you were in that kind of shape before makes it possible for you to get back there. It doesn't make it easy, it just makes it possible. Mystery solved.
    .

    Sorry, in my thread I mentioned I lifted for 19-20 years, but there was a 6-8 year break. I don't really know when the "stopping" of the official "intense" lifting happened. It just kinda crept up on me, missing 1 workout here and then 2-3 workouts there and then missing a week, month...months, etc. and then starting off and on again during that period of time with marriage, kids, businesses, it was tough and brutal. I packed on 1-2 lbs per month of fat weight over that span of time and BAM 96 lbs heavier.

    Not a great feeling when one used to be fit and in shape...
  • zipnguyen
    zipnguyen Posts: 990 Member
    Options
    @tigersword. Just peaked at your bio, you got 70lbs to lose/lost right? You are pretty much in the same boat though I was no? I am 34 and the 96lbs kinda crept up on me over a 6-8 year period. How are you approaching it?
  • Jeff92se
    Jeff92se Posts: 3,369 Member
    Options
    "Their" argument is that you cannot gain at all. After viewing the pics, "they" claimed you gained nothing. Well after losing a signifcant amount of weight, you'd actually have to gain in order to even stay the same. Or you appear sigificantly smaller.

    And much of your progress was made AFTER. you at a pretty high bodyfat level.

    I guess the question is, are you bigger now than you were before you gained all that weight? tiger's implication is that if you lifted before, you could get back to where you were, but that's it for muscle mass. You can't add to your previous muscle mass without a calorie surplus diet. (which it looks like you didn't necessarily do because you were losing fat thoughout the process)
  • tigersword
    tigersword Posts: 8,059 Member
    Options
    @tigersword. Just peaked at your bio, you got 70lbs to lose/lost right? You are pretty much in the same boat though I was no? I am 34 and the 96lbs kinda crept up on me over a 6-8 year period. How are you approaching it?
    Well, I certainly don't have the advantage of being a former lifter. :laugh: In fact I was pretty much exercise and gym illiterate until about 6 months ago. I started at 260 pounds and 35% body fat. I got a food scale and taught myself what a normal portion size actually is, and basically watched my food intake, while doing a light to moderate exercise plan, basically alternate days of treadmill jogging and full body machine circuits at the gym, no real direction, though, due to a lack of fundamental knowledge. I also started researching, how the body functions, how metabolism works, and basically the how to safely lose weight, and improve fitness levels. This was back in April, and I tracked everything I ate by hand. In June, a search in my iPhone app store led me to the MyFitnessPal app, which led me to this board, which certainly made tracking and research a lot easier.

    In November I hit 50 pounds lost, and a 14% reduction in body fat. In real numbers, that's a loss of 46 pounds of fat, and about 4 pounds of lean body mass. Since I use calipers and calculators, I have no way of knowing what of that 4 pounds were muscle, water, or anything else, although I assume it was mostly muscle, due to my haphazard training. Once I hit 50 pounds I shifted to maintenance, to allow my hormone levels to reset and shift back, and also because I wanted to enjoy the holidays without any added stress from actively trying to lose weight. As of yesterday's weigh in, I've successfully maintained 210 pounds. After crunching all my numbers, I've decided to stay in maintenance over the next 6 months. I still have 21% body fat, which is on the higher end, but clothing wise, I'm actually wearing a smaller size than I wore in high school, when I weighed 40 pounds less. So my current plan is to eat at maintenance for the next 6 months, and concentrate on heavy barbell training, and then reevaluate over the summer.
  • zipnguyen
    zipnguyen Posts: 990 Member
    Options
    @tigersword. Just peaked at your bio, you got 70lbs to lose/lost right? You are pretty much in the same boat though I was no? I am 34 and the 96lbs kinda crept up on me over a 6-8 year period. How are you approaching it?
    Well, I certainly don't have the advantage of being a former lifter. :laugh: In fact I was pretty much exercise and gym illiterate until about 6 months ago. I started at 260 pounds and 35% body fat. I got a food scale and taught myself what a normal portion size actually is, and basically watched my food intake, while doing a light to moderate exercise plan, basically alternate days of treadmill jogging and full body machine circuits at the gym, no real direction, though, due to a lack of fundamental knowledge. I also started researching, how the body functions, how metabolism works, and basically the how to safely lose weight, and improve fitness levels. This was back in April, and I tracked everything I ate by hand. In June, a search in my iPhone app store led me to the MyFitnessPal app, which led me to this board, which certainly made tracking and research a lot easier.

    In November I hit 50 pounds lost, and a 14% reduction in body fat. In real numbers, that's a loss of 46 pounds of fat, and about 4 pounds of lean body mass. Since I use calipers and calculators, I have no way of knowing what of that 4 pounds were muscle, water, or anything else, although I assume it was mostly muscle, due to my haphazard training. Once I hit 50 pounds I shifted to maintenance, to allow my hormone levels to reset and shift back, and also because I wanted to enjoy the holidays without any added stress from actively trying to lose weight. As of yesterday's weigh in, I've successfully maintained 210 pounds. After crunching all my numbers, I've decided to stay in maintenance over the next 6 months. I still have 21% body fat, which is on the higher end, but clothing wise, I'm actually wearing a smaller size than I wore in high school, when I weighed 40 pounds less. So my current plan is to eat at maintenance for the next 6 months, and concentrate on heavy barbell training, and then reevaluate over the summer.

    Sounds like a plan. Good luck to you. No scratch that, you don't need the luck. Outwork is more like it. :wink:
  • zipnguyen
    zipnguyen Posts: 990 Member
    Options
    "Their" argument is that you cannot gain at all. After viewing the pics, "they" claimed you gained nothing. Well after losing a signifcant amount of weight, you'd actually have to gain in order to even stay the same. Or you appear sigificantly smaller.

    And much of your progress was made AFTER. you at a pretty high bodyfat level.

    I guess the question is, are you bigger now than you were before you gained all that weight? tiger's implication is that if you lifted before, you could get back to where you were, but that's it for muscle mass. You can't add to your previous muscle mass without a calorie surplus diet. (which it looks like you didn't necessarily do because you were losing fat thoughout the process)

    Jeff - I agree though the gains you see in the photo below is just due to good lighting, a tan, and "water weight" yeah...that's it... water weight... :laugh:

    backdev2.jpg
  • zipnguyen
    zipnguyen Posts: 990 Member
    Options
    Oh and Jeff, it's the posing as well. I pose better in the 2nd photo. And it must be the lighting. I told my wife that we need to get this type of lighting all over the house as to not make me look too fugly. :laugh:
  • Jeff92se
    Jeff92se Posts: 3,369 Member
    Options
    The peaks in your shoulders look higher to me? I don't know what the weight was in those two pictures but you have to add some in order to even stay the same size. (if you were losing weight/fat)
  • zipnguyen
    zipnguyen Posts: 990 Member
    Options
    The peaks in your shoulders look higher to me? I don't know what the weight was in those two pictures but you have to add some in order to even stay the same size. (if you were losing weight/fat)

    I was joking. Yes back is much thicker and denser, but I have to do more work to get where I want to be. Again, picking stuff up and putting them back down is the easy part. Nutrition for me was the hardest part.
  • Jeff92se
    Jeff92se Posts: 3,369 Member
    Options
    The peaks in your shoulders look higher to me? I don't know what the weight was in those two pictures but you have to add some in order to even stay the same size. (if you were losing weight/fat)

    I was joking. Yes back is much thicker and denser, but I have to do more work to get where I want to be. Again, picking stuff up and putting them back down is the easy part. Nutrition for me was the hardest part.

    Well as you can see if you have reviewed this thread, you have to be very specific and clear to some.