Athletes can gain muscle while losing fat on deficit diet
Replies
-
bump0
-
LBM =\= muscle mass0
-
bumpity bump because it would be good for people to see this0
-
I concur....
I myself gain muscle and reduced my body fat %'s at same time..0 -
LBM =\= muscle mass
True, good thing the use "body composition (DEXA)" as the means of measuring.
So bone probably didn't change much, since these weren't kids still growing.
Already athletic so it's not like there was a huge change to need to store more glucose/water, especially since lifting was only thing added to their routine.
I doubt their organs grew much, or connective tissue grew much.
What exactly of the LBM that is NOT muscle would exactly increase in weight?
Water could have increased.
They could have had big Chinese dinner night before.
They could have been out of shape and doing cardio and increased glucose/water stores - but that is not these participants.
ect.
So not all LBM is muscle mass. So that implies that NONE of the gain in LBM was muscle?
I'm still not sure where this idea that the body is a zero sum gain inside the system. All it ends up doing is using more fat for energy needs, because more of the food nutrients needed for building muscle are used to do so.
But if you don't have enough fat, make the deficit too big, or undercut all the other basal functions the body really needs to do first, then why can this not happen.
It would actually imply from the cries you must be in surplus, that even eating at maintenance would make it impossible.
But there are even more studies showing that is easy enough. Not as easy as being in surplus, but not impossible.
Especially for the avg MFP that is not trim and fit and been lifting for a while. Sadly the rule of not undercutting metabolism happens all too frequently, hence this study showing the deficit must be minor.0 -
LBM =\= muscle mass
True, good thing the use "body composition (DEXA)" as the means of measuring.
So bone probably didn't change much, since these weren't kids still growing.
Already athletic so it's not like there was a huge change to need to store more glucose/water, especially since lifting was only thing added to their routine.
Water could have increased.
They could have had big Chinese dinner night before.
ect.
So not all LBM is muscle mass. So that implies that NONE of the gain in LBM was muscle?
It's very possible that none of it is muscle gain. It very well could be water gain or fluid retention. My point is that without doing a complete body scan with a breakdown of what components of the LBM changed as well as the total volume of LBM, there's no way to know if it's muscle gain or fluid retention, which kinda makes pointing to this study as evidence for muscle mass gain moot as they don't seem to provide this information at all.I'm still not sure where this idea that the body is a zero sum gain inside the system. All it ends up doing is using more fat for energy needs, because more of the food nutrients needed for building muscle are used to do so.
But if you don't have enough fat, make the deficit too big, or undercut all the other basal functions the body really needs to do first, then why can this not happen.
It would actually imply from the cries you must be in surplus, that even eating at maintenance would make it impossible.
But there are even more studies showing that is easy enough. Not as easy as being in surplus, but not impossible.
Especially for the avg MFP that is not trim and fit and been lifting for a while. Sadly the rule of not undercutting metabolism happens all too frequently, hence this study showing the deficit must be minor.
Sadly many of the studies you are referring to only do what this one does and cite gains in LBM, and do not actually do body scans to determine specifically what compositional elements changed. I've yet to find one that was done on someone who was not part of the exceptions group (namely new lifters, those who are morbidly obese, and such) that showed actual gains is muscle tissue, not simply LBM.
I think you need to take a look at Joe's most recent post so you can get some clarification on this. He posted several studies that are linked with other ones via PubMed. You can see who has cited this one and link into that to read more. Just be wary of studies that don't break down body composition and claim to show that you can gain muscle mass on a deficit (barring the exceptions mentioned) and only cite LBM gains.
FWIW, according to the full article that you're citing here, they only used the DEXA to estimate body fat percentage and seemed to simply subtract that from the total body weight to get the LBM. This is exactly the problem I see with the conclusion you're making here. The study showed that you can gain LBM not necessarily muscle mass on a deficit.
Also the study didn't account for any electrolyte balance issues (sodium/potassium ratio in dietary intake), which could very well account for the increased LBM from fluid retention alone. It also only seems like the participants were asked to track only 4 days of the week not every day.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/593320-setting-the-record-straight-on-muscle-building-deficits0 -
Maybe you should try it, might help you with you're struggles. You just might see amazing results like myself and Mercenary have :happy:LBM =\= muscle mass
True, good thing the use "body composition (DEXA)" as the means of measuring.
So bone probably didn't change much, since these weren't kids still growing.
Already athletic so it's not like there was a huge change to need to store more glucose/water, especially since lifting was only thing added to their routine.
Water could have increased.
They could have had big Chinese dinner night before.
ect.
So not all LBM is muscle mass. So that implies that NONE of the gain in LBM was muscle?
It's very possible that none of it is muscle gain. It very well could be water gain or fluid retention. My point is that without doing a complete body scan with a breakdown of what components of the LBM changed as well as the total volume of LBM, there's no way to know if it's muscle gain or fluid retention, which kinda makes pointing to this study as evidence for muscle mass gain moot as they don't seem to provide this information at all.I'm still not sure where this idea that the body is a zero sum gain inside the system. All it ends up doing is using more fat for energy needs, because more of the food nutrients needed for building muscle are used to do so.
But if you don't have enough fat, make the deficit too big, or undercut all the other basal functions the body really needs to do first, then why can this not happen.
It would actually imply from the cries you must be in surplus, that even eating at maintenance would make it impossible.
But there are even more studies showing that is easy enough. Not as easy as being in surplus, but not impossible.
Especially for the avg MFP that is not trim and fit and been lifting for a while. Sadly the rule of not undercutting metabolism happens all too frequently, hence this study showing the deficit must be minor.
Sadly many of the studies you are referring to only do what this one does and cite gains in LBM, and do not actually do body scans to determine specifically what compositional elements changed. I've yet to find one that was done on someone who was not part of the exceptions group (namely new lifters, those who are morbidly obese, and such) that showed actual gains is muscle tissue, not simply LBM.
I think you need to take a look at Joe's most recent post so you can get some clarification on this. He posted several studies that are linked with other ones via PubMed. You can see who has cited this one and link into that to read more. Just be wary of studies that don't break down body composition and claim to show that you can gain muscle mass on a deficit (barring the exceptions mentioned) and only cite LBM gains.
FWIW, according to the full article that you're citing here, they only used the DEXA to estimate body fat percentage and seemed to simply subtract that from the total body weight to get the LBM. This is exactly the problem I see with the conclusion you're making here. The study showed that you can gain LBM not necessarily muscle mass on a deficit.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/593320-setting-the-record-straight-on-muscle-building-deficits0 -
I think she'd rather not have her brains settle in her glutes, to be honest.0
-
Maybe you should try it, might help you with you're struggles. You just might see amazing results like myself and Mercenary have :happy:LBM =\= muscle mass
True, good thing the use "body composition (DEXA)" as the means of measuring.
So bone probably didn't change much, since these weren't kids still growing.
Already athletic so it's not like there was a huge change to need to store more glucose/water, especially since lifting was only thing added to their routine.
Water could have increased.
They could have had big Chinese dinner night before.
ect.
So not all LBM is muscle mass. So that implies that NONE of the gain in LBM was muscle?
It's very possible that none of it is muscle gain. It very well could be water gain or fluid retention. My point is that without doing a complete body scan with a breakdown of what components of the LBM changed as well as the total volume of LBM, there's no way to know if it's muscle gain or fluid retention, which kinda makes pointing to this study as evidence for muscle mass gain moot as they don't seem to provide this information at all.I'm still not sure where this idea that the body is a zero sum gain inside the system. All it ends up doing is using more fat for energy needs, because more of the food nutrients needed for building muscle are used to do so.
But if you don't have enough fat, make the deficit too big, or undercut all the other basal functions the body really needs to do first, then why can this not happen.
It would actually imply from the cries you must be in surplus, that even eating at maintenance would make it impossible.
But there are even more studies showing that is easy enough. Not as easy as being in surplus, but not impossible.
Especially for the avg MFP that is not trim and fit and been lifting for a while. Sadly the rule of not undercutting metabolism happens all too frequently, hence this study showing the deficit must be minor.
Sadly many of the studies you are referring to only do what this one does and cite gains in LBM, and do not actually do body scans to determine specifically what compositional elements changed. I've yet to find one that was done on someone who was not part of the exceptions group (namely new lifters, those who are morbidly obese, and such) that showed actual gains is muscle tissue, not simply LBM.
I think you need to take a look at Joe's most recent post so you can get some clarification on this. He posted several studies that are linked with other ones via PubMed. You can see who has cited this one and link into that to read more. Just be wary of studies that don't break down body composition and claim to show that you can gain muscle mass on a deficit (barring the exceptions mentioned) and only cite LBM gains.
FWIW, according to the full article that you're citing here, they only used the DEXA to estimate body fat percentage and seemed to simply subtract that from the total body weight to get the LBM. This is exactly the problem I see with the conclusion you're making here. The study showed that you can gain LBM not necessarily muscle mass on a deficit.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/593320-setting-the-record-straight-on-muscle-building-deficits
I think we can all learn a little something from an old Friends episode:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLhCzSas07c&feature=related 0 -
.....
I can see I stumbled into the wrong thread....
0 -
.....
I can see I stumbled into the wrong thread....
Awesome
0 -
LBM =\= muscle mass
True, good thing the use "body composition (DEXA)" as the means of measuring.
So bone probably didn't change much, since these weren't kids still growing.
Already athletic so it's not like there was a huge change to need to store more glucose/water, especially since lifting was only thing added to their routine.
I doubt their organs grew much, or connective tissue grew much.
What exactly of the LBM that is NOT muscle would exactly increase in weight?
Water could have increased.
They could have had big Chinese dinner night before.
They could have been out of shape and doing cardio and increased glucose/water stores - but that is not these participants.
ect.
So not all LBM is muscle mass. So that implies that NONE of the gain in LBM was muscle?
I'm still not sure where this idea that the body is a zero sum gain inside the system. All it ends up doing is using more fat for energy needs, because more of the food nutrients needed for building muscle are used to do so.
But if you don't have enough fat, make the deficit too big, or undercut all the other basal functions the body really needs to do first, then why can this not happen.
It would actually imply from the cries you must be in surplus, that even eating at maintenance would make it impossible.
But there are even more studies showing that is easy enough. Not as easy as being in surplus, but not impossible.
Especially for the avg MFP that is not trim and fit and been lifting for a while. Sadly the rule of not undercutting metabolism happens all too frequently, hence this study showing the deficit must be minor.
What is the MOE of DEXA and what about variances on the individual level? If variances on the individual level are potentially wide ranging, what impact would a small sample size such as the one in this study have?0 -
Well I guess you're definition of amazing and mine are two different things. Starting at 41 years of age (11 years older than you) at 6" 1 + and 287 lbs and ending up at 204 lbs and under 10% BF., and at the same time gaining over an inch in my chest, arms, calves and traps from when I was 83 lbs heavier to be amazing results. Please explain what you're definition of amazing is?
Maybe you should try it, might help you with you're struggles. You just might see amazing results like myself and Mercenary have :happy:LBM =\= muscle mass
True, good thing the use "body composition (DEXA)" as the means of measuring.
So bone probably didn't change much, since these weren't kids still growing.
Already athletic so it's not like there was a huge change to need to store more glucose/water, especially since lifting was only thing added to their routine.
Water could have increased.
They could have had big Chinese dinner night before.
ect.
So not all LBM is muscle mass. So that implies that NONE of the gain in LBM was muscle?
It's very possible that none of it is muscle gain. It very well could be water gain or fluid retention. My point is that without doing a complete body scan with a breakdown of what components of the LBM changed as well as the total volume of LBM, there's no way to know if it's muscle gain or fluid retention, which kinda makes pointing to this study as evidence for muscle mass gain moot as they don't seem to provide this information at all.I'm still not sure where this idea that the body is a zero sum gain inside the system. All it ends up doing is using more fat for energy needs, because more of the food nutrients needed for building muscle are used to do so.
But if you don't have enough fat, make the deficit too big, or undercut all the other basal functions the body really needs to do first, then why can this not happen.
It would actually imply from the cries you must be in surplus, that even eating at maintenance would make it impossible.
But there are even more studies showing that is easy enough. Not as easy as being in surplus, but not impossible.
Especially for the avg MFP that is not trim and fit and been lifting for a while. Sadly the rule of not undercutting metabolism happens all too frequently, hence this study showing the deficit must be minor.
Sadly many of the studies you are referring to only do what this one does and cite gains in LBM, and do not actually do body scans to determine specifically what compositional elements changed. I've yet to find one that was done on someone who was not part of the exceptions group (namely new lifters, those who are morbidly obese, and such) that showed actual gains is muscle tissue, not simply LBM.
I think you need to take a look at Joe's most recent post so you can get some clarification on this. He posted several studies that are linked with other ones via PubMed. You can see who has cited this one and link into that to read more. Just be wary of studies that don't break down body composition and claim to show that you can gain muscle mass on a deficit (barring the exceptions mentioned) and only cite LBM gains.
FWIW, according to the full article that you're citing here, they only used the DEXA to estimate body fat percentage and seemed to simply subtract that from the total body weight to get the LBM. This is exactly the problem I see with the conclusion you're making here. The study showed that you can gain LBM not necessarily muscle mass on a deficit.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/593320-setting-the-record-straight-on-muscle-building-deficits
I don't see amazing results, what's your LBM 120 or 130??0 -
I wasn't talking crap, just encouraging her and anyone else to just try liftng even if you do not believe that you can gain LM. while on a deficit. It's still the most beneficial form of exercise we can do as we get older, it really is like finding the fountain of youth. What gave me the results was newbie gains, eating a diet high in protein and carbs, lifting heavy and trying to lose the weight as slow as possible. In my opinion losing weight should be a marathon and not a sprint and attempting to lose weight without implementing a lifting program is a big mistake because about 22% ( depending on the person) of you're weight loss will be made up of lean muscle if you dont.
Well I guess you're definition of amazing and mine are two different things. Starting at 41 years of age (11 years older than you) at 6" 1 + and 287 lbs and ending up at 204 lbs and under 10% BF., and at the same time gaining over an inch in my chest, arms, calves and traps from when I was 83 lbs heavier to be amazing results. Please explain what you're definition of amazing is?
Maybe you should try it, might help you with you're struggles. You just might see amazing results like myself and Mercenary have :happy:LBM =\= muscle mass
True, good thing the use "body composition (DEXA)" as the means of measuring.
So bone probably didn't change much, since these weren't kids still growing.
Already athletic so it's not like there was a huge change to need to store more glucose/water, especially since lifting was only thing added to their routine.
Water could have increased.
They could have had big Chinese dinner night before.
ect.
So not all LBM is muscle mass. So that implies that NONE of the gain in LBM was muscle?
It's very possible that none of it is muscle gain. It very well could be water gain or fluid retention. My point is that without doing a complete body scan with a breakdown of what components of the LBM changed as well as the total volume of LBM, there's no way to know if it's muscle gain or fluid retention, which kinda makes pointing to this study as evidence for muscle mass gain moot as they don't seem to provide this information at all.I'm still not sure where this idea that the body is a zero sum gain inside the system. All it ends up doing is using more fat for energy needs, because more of the food nutrients needed for building muscle are used to do so.
But if you don't have enough fat, make the deficit too big, or undercut all the other basal functions the body really needs to do first, then why can this not happen.
It would actually imply from the cries you must be in surplus, that even eating at maintenance would make it impossible.
But there are even more studies showing that is easy enough. Not as easy as being in surplus, but not impossible.
Especially for the avg MFP that is not trim and fit and been lifting for a while. Sadly the rule of not undercutting metabolism happens all too frequently, hence this study showing the deficit must be minor.
Sadly many of the studies you are referring to only do what this one does and cite gains in LBM, and do not actually do body scans to determine specifically what compositional elements changed. I've yet to find one that was done on someone who was not part of the exceptions group (namely new lifters, those who are morbidly obese, and such) that showed actual gains is muscle tissue, not simply LBM.
I think you need to take a look at Joe's most recent post so you can get some clarification on this. He posted several studies that are linked with other ones via PubMed. You can see who has cited this one and link into that to read more. Just be wary of studies that don't break down body composition and claim to show that you can gain muscle mass on a deficit (barring the exceptions mentioned) and only cite LBM gains.
FWIW, according to the full article that you're citing here, they only used the DEXA to estimate body fat percentage and seemed to simply subtract that from the total body weight to get the LBM. This is exactly the problem I see with the conclusion you're making here. The study showed that you can gain LBM not necessarily muscle mass on a deficit.
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/593320-setting-the-record-straight-on-muscle-building-deficits
I don't see amazing results, what's your LBM 120 or 130??
I am just giving you a hard time, just saying no need to be talking crap to people on here.
Just wondering what you're claiming gave you these results?0 -
I agree with you 100%! I could have lost my weight in less than half the amount of time that it took me but it takes time to build strong habits like you put it. Unfortunately this isnt some thing that we lose the weight and then we never have to worry about it again, its a life long journey.
I wasn't talking crap, just encouraging her and anyone else to just try liftng even you do not believe that you can gain LM. while on a deficit. It's still the most beneficial form of exercise we can do as we get older, it really is like finding the fountain of youth. What gave me the results was newbie gains, eating a diet high in protein and carbs, lifting heavy and trying to lose the weight as slow as possible. In my opinion losing weight should be a marathon and not a sprint and attempting to lose weight without implementing a lifting program is a big mistake because about 22% ( depending on the person) of you're weight loss will be made up of lean muscle if you dont.I am just giving you a hard time, just saying no need to be talking crap to people on here.
Just wondering what you're claiming gave you these results?
Yes that's very good advice. That's what I am doing now. I usually have a calorie deficit of about 500-700. I am currently doing an intense program. There are a lot of benefits to lifting. The way i see the entire sprint/marathon weight loss metaphor.
Weight loss is about habits, exercise and diet habits. If you get those habits down, you'll be healthy for a life time.
If someone loses 30lbs in 2 months, and someone elses loses it in 60 months. Who will more than likely keep it off? The person who has been doing it longer, due to the fact they have built stronger habits, and have more practice doing it.
You did get good results, don't get me wrong, was just giving you a hard time. I guess it was just a misinterpretation.0 -
I agree with you 100%! I could have lost my weight in less than half the amount of time that it took me but it takes time to build strong habits like you put it. Unfortunately this isnt some thing that we lose the weight and then we never have to worry about it again, its a life long journey.
I wasn't talking crap, just encouraging her and anyone else to just try liftng even you do not believe that you can gain LM. while on a deficit. It's still the most beneficial form of exercise we can do as we get older, it really is like finding the fountain of youth. What gave me the results was newbie gains, eating a diet high in protein and carbs, lifting heavy and trying to lose the weight as slow as possible. In my opinion losing weight should be a marathon and not a sprint and attempting to lose weight without implementing a lifting program is a big mistake because about 22% ( depending on the person) of you're weight loss will be made up of lean muscle if you dont.I am just giving you a hard time, just saying no need to be talking crap to people on here.
Just wondering what you're claiming gave you these results?
Yes that's very good advice. That's what I am doing now. I usually have a calorie deficit of about 500-700. I am currently doing an intense program. There are a lot of benefits to lifting. The way i see the entire sprint/marathon weight loss metaphor.
Weight loss is about habits, exercise and diet habits. If you get those habits down, you'll be healthy for a life time.
If someone loses 30lbs in 2 months, and someone elses loses it in 60 months. Who will more than likely keep it off? The person who has been doing it longer, due to the fact they have built stronger habits, and have more practice doing it.
You did get good results, don't get me wrong, was just giving you a hard time. I guess it was just a misinterpretation.
You obviously didn't bother reading my profile on here so let me repost for you:
Current max lifts (1 rep max):
Barbell squat (ATG): 135 lbs
Sumo deadlift: 185 lbs
Bench: 85 lbs
I've been lifting for the last 8 months 3x per week. Body fat has gone from 42% (February of 2011) to 29% (April 2012) and 40 total lbs of weight loss. Of that 40 lbs lost, 7 has been muscle loss. I know this because I had a full body scan done every 6 months to track it.
Thanks for the lecture though and for assuming I had no experience with lifting because I pointed out the flaws in this posted article.0 -
I agree with you 100%! I could have lost my weight in less than half the amount of time that it took me but it takes time to build strong habits like you put it. Unfortunately this isnt some thing that we lose the weight and then we never have to worry about it again, its a life long journey.
I wasn't talking crap, just encouraging her and anyone else to just try liftng even you do not believe that you can gain LM. while on a deficit. It's still the most beneficial form of exercise we can do as we get older, it really is like finding the fountain of youth. What gave me the results was newbie gains, eating a diet high in protein and carbs, lifting heavy and trying to lose the weight as slow as possible. In my opinion losing weight should be a marathon and not a sprint and attempting to lose weight without implementing a lifting program is a big mistake because about 22% ( depending on the person) of you're weight loss will be made up of lean muscle if you dont.I am just giving you a hard time, just saying no need to be talking crap to people on here.
Just wondering what you're claiming gave you these results?
Yes that's very good advice. That's what I am doing now. I usually have a calorie deficit of about 500-700. I am currently doing an intense program. There are a lot of benefits to lifting. The way i see the entire sprint/marathon weight loss metaphor.
Weight loss is about habits, exercise and diet habits. If you get those habits down, you'll be healthy for a life time.
If someone loses 30lbs in 2 months, and someone elses loses it in 60 months. Who will more than likely keep it off? The person who has been doing it longer, due to the fact they have built stronger habits, and have more practice doing it.
You did get good results, don't get me wrong, was just giving you a hard time. I guess it was just a misinterpretation.
Just curious but are you STILL thinking you get continued and long term muscle gains on a calorie deficit?0 -
No, once I reached my goal weight a little over a month ago, I started a bulk and am no longer eating at a deficit. And no, once you drop below a certain BF % (depending on the person) and stop benefitting from newbie gains it is impossible.
I agree with you 100%! I could have lost my weight in less than half the amount of time that it took me but it takes time to build strong habits like you put it. Unfortunately this isnt some thing that we lose the weight and then we never have to worry about it again, its a life long journey.
I wasn't talking crap, just encouraging her and anyone else to just try liftng even you do not believe that you can gain LM. while on a deficit. It's still the most beneficial form of exercise we can do as we get older, it really is like finding the fountain of youth. What gave me the results was newbie gains, eating a diet high in protein and carbs, lifting heavy and trying to lose the weight as slow as possible. In my opinion losing weight should be a marathon and not a sprint and attempting to lose weight without implementing a lifting program is a big mistake because about 22% ( depending on the person) of you're weight loss will be made up of lean muscle if you dont.I am just giving you a hard time, just saying no need to be talking crap to people on here.
Just wondering what you're claiming gave you these results?
Yes that's very good advice. That's what I am doing now. I usually have a calorie deficit of about 500-700. I am currently doing an intense program. There are a lot of benefits to lifting. The way i see the entire sprint/marathon weight loss metaphor.
Weight loss is about habits, exercise and diet habits. If you get those habits down, you'll be healthy for a life time.
If someone loses 30lbs in 2 months, and someone elses loses it in 60 months. Who will more than likely keep it off? The person who has been doing it longer, due to the fact they have built stronger habits, and have more practice doing it.
You did get good results, don't get me wrong, was just giving you a hard time. I guess it was just a misinterpretation.
Just curious but are you STILL thinking you get continued and long term muscle gains on a calorie deficit?0 -
How can I view you're profile when it is private? And It wasn't a lecture. How long have you been lifting? Have you had you're T levels checked? How many calories below maint. are you eating everyday? How many grams of protein are you eating everyday ? Also what is you're program/split and how much cardio are you doing per week?
I agree with you 100%! I could have lost my weight in less than half the amount of time that it took me but it takes time to build strong habits like you put it. Unfortunately this isnt some thing that we lose the weight and then we never have to worry about it again, its a life long journey.
I wasn't talking crap, just encouraging her and anyone else to just try liftng even you do not believe that you can gain LM. while on a deficit. It's still the most beneficial form of exercise we can do as we get older, it really is like finding the fountain of youth. What gave me the results was newbie gains, eating a diet high in protein and carbs, lifting heavy and trying to lose the weight as slow as possible. In my opinion losing weight should be a marathon and not a sprint and attempting to lose weight without implementing a lifting program is a big mistake because about 22% ( depending on the person) of you're weight loss will be made up of lean muscle if you dont.I am just giving you a hard time, just saying no need to be talking crap to people on here.
Just wondering what you're claiming gave you these results?
Yes that's very good advice. That's what I am doing now. I usually have a calorie deficit of about 500-700. I am currently doing an intense program. There are a lot of benefits to lifting. The way i see the entire sprint/marathon weight loss metaphor.
Weight loss is about habits, exercise and diet habits. If you get those habits down, you'll be healthy for a life time.
If someone loses 30lbs in 2 months, and someone elses loses it in 60 months. Who will more than likely keep it off? The person who has been doing it longer, due to the fact they have built stronger habits, and have more practice doing it.
You did get good results, don't get me wrong, was just giving you a hard time. I guess it was just a misinterpretation.
You obviously didn't bother reading my profile on here so let me repost for you:
Current max lifts (1 rep max):
Barbell squat (ATG): 135 lbs
Sumo deadlift: 185 lbs
Bench: 85 lbs
I've been lifting for the last 8 months 3x per week. Body fat has gone from 42% (February of 2011) to 29% (April 2012) and 40 total lbs of weight loss. Of that 40 lbs lost, 7 has been muscle loss. I know this because I had a full body scan done every 6 months to track it.
Thanks for the lecture though and for assuming I had no experience with lifting because I pointed out the flaws in this posted article.0 -
bump0
-
hint: you can just quote the bit you want to reply to. you don't have to quote the entire fecking thread.0
-
hah! mfp swear filter doesn't speak Irish!!0
-
hint: you can just quote the bit you want to reply to. you don't have to quote the entire fecking thread.
LMAO!!!!!!0 -
Don't read it then!hint: you can just quote the bit you want to reply to. you don't have to quote the entire fecking thread.0 -
Just curious but are you STILL thinking you get continued and long term muscle gains on a calorie deficit?
lets hope not.
anyone is going to gain muscle when starting out. They're called n00b gains, and I made them while eating frozen pizzas and drinking beer 5 nights a week. But after the first 6 months or so, you have to start working for the muscle, and you have to eat.0 -
I gained LM for alot longer than the first 6 months but then again I had alot of weight to lose. And also I answered his question so there is no need to hope. :bigsmile:
Just curious but are you STILL thinking you get continued and long term muscle gains on a calorie deficit?
lets hope not.
anyone is going to gain muscle when starting out. They're called n00b gains, and I made them while eating frozen pizzas and drinking beer 5 nights a week. But after the first 6 months or so, you have to start working for the muscle, and you have to eat.0 -
Don't read it then!hint: you can just quote the bit you want to reply to. you don't have to quote the entire fecking thread.
Aggressive little man, aren't you?0 -
How can I view you're profile when it is private? And It wasn't a lecture. How long have you been lifting? Have you had you're T levels checked? How many calories below maint. are you eating everyday? How many grams of protein are you eating everyday ? Also what is you're program/split and how much cardio are you doing per week?You obviously didn't bother reading my profile on here so let me repost for you:
Current max lifts (1 rep max):
Barbell squat (ATG): 135 lbs
Sumo deadlift: 185 lbs
Bench: 85 lbs
I've been lifting for the last 8 months 3x per week. Body fat has gone from 42% (February of 2011) to 29% (April 2012) and 40 total lbs of weight loss. Of that 40 lbs lost, 7 has been muscle loss. I know this because I had a full body scan done every 6 months to track it.
Thanks for the lecture though and for assuming I had no experience with lifting because I pointed out the flaws in this posted article.
1. My bad. I forgot I changed my profile to private a while back, so sorry for the jab there.
2. 8 months of lifting from a completely sedentary/newb start.
3. According to my doctor, my bloodwork is perfect. I have to have labs done every month to keep an eye on my heart medication.
4. I'm ~250-500 calories below maintenance every day.
5. I eat between 120-150g protein per day. (LBM is 125 lbs approximately)
6. I'm not on a specific program but I hit legs on Fridays (normally), Wednesday is back, abs, and chest, and Monday is arms and shoulders. No cardio other than light walking which I do every day for work. Legs have taken a beating lately because my knees have been bad.
Lastly, I'm really doing just fine with my program the way it is. I have been progressively getting much stronger and leaner than I was when I started.
My point is that you shouldn't assume that because someone doesn't look like a fitness model (yet) or a powerlifter, that they don't know what they're talking about. That's really the whole point of my last comment to you.0 -
BUMP.....and keep it saved!!!
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions