Athletes can gain muscle while losing fat on deficit diet

Hendrix7

Interesting study and thread however I would make 2 points,

- usually when people are telling others they can increase mass while dieting on this forum it's middle aged women doing couch to 5k or zumba, not elite male and female athletes as used in this study. The training regimes can't really be compared.

- I still believe most of people would get better results trying to lose body fat or increase muscle mass separately, not at the same time. Yes it's possible in certain circumstances, doesn't make it optimal.

Can I see anyones muscle gain or do we just have to believe you?


Some people are actually natural.

Yeah, that was called for. Or not. :huh:

heybales

Interesting study and thread however I would make 2 points,

- usually when people are telling others they can increase mass while dieting on this forum it's middle aged women doing couch to 5k or zumba, not elite male and female athletes as used in this study. The training regimes can't really be compared.

- I still believe most of people would get better results trying to lose body fat or increase muscle mass separately, not at the same time. Yes it's possible in certain circumstances, doesn't make it optimal.

Agreed. The claim thrown out that there was no weight loss during a few weeks because you gained muscle is a far cry from what is possible.

Strength may have gone up, ability to lift more went up, ability to store more glucose and water probably went up, but actual gains while doing nothing really intense, not eating enough protein, and not having a decent deficit like this group had all adds up to no muscle gain. LBM sure, but not muscle.

But, I also see the info there that it's much easier to gain some, if you lift right, take good deficit, and eat enough protein, at the beginning while you have fat stores to spare, rather than later.
Besides the fact it's great for retaining.

There just seemed to be an over abundance of comments that it flat-out can't be done at all. And that's not true either.
Especially for the average audience on MFP that do have more chance of it working right if they do a few things right.

suwonfish

Hmmmm, weight went up 0.7 kgs this week and my waist shrank by slightly over 1/2 inch...

Definate strengths gains even if modest...

Pleased with this high protein, 300 cal deficit. Will maintain till 10% BF.

Great results for such a short time.

I'll bet the weight gain is just more muscle and better trained to store glucose now because of the way you are using it.. 500 cal of stored glucose with required water weighs 1 lb.

So even if you say 0 gain or loss, but dropped inches, then LBM increased. I doubt it was tendons and cartiledge and bone weight, so that leaves muscle and what it stores.
Well, did brain get bigger? Maybe that was it.

Many thanks and I think you're right. I've been lifting heavy for 6ish months now and I've seen great results in how my clothes fit, energy levels etc... Other stuff too that I can't comment on here

Dropping to 1,000 cals (and below) was a disaster for muscle and strength even though I did also lose fat like crazy.

I have no doubt that a SMALL deficit combined with a good, high protein diet and a good lifting routine will allow us to build muscle while we lose fat. Why? I'm watching it happen.

Is it optimal? It is for me and may be for some other folks on this board.

I'm guessing there are relatively few elite athletes reading this. I like this thread because it runs counter to most broscience I've read here and on bodybuilding.com

Will keep on updating results...

EvgeniZyntx

This is pretty much my accidental protocol. Slow loss while wt.
However, in terms of efficiency it might still be better to lose at the faster rate for a shorter time and then bulk. I'd like to see that as a comparison.

AntWrig

People are going take this study out of context and apply it to themselves. For starters you're not elite level athletes who for the most already carry a fair amount of lean body mass. While noble, I feel posting things like this will only confuse the average person.

Stick to the tried and true. You want to gain LBM, eat in a caloric surplus. You want to lose body fat, eat in a deficit. Of course all the while doing some form of resistance training that will stimulate the muscle.

AntWrig

The full study can be found here

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CD4QFjAF&url=http://brage.bibsys.no/nih/bitstream/URN:NBN:no-bibsys_brage_17906/1/Garthe%20IntJSportNutrExercMetabol%202011.pdf&ei=CxEPT-W2CsHs0gH41r2LAw&usg=AFQjCNHSb3EHhURcxsBAz20_6k_PvtyAUg&sig2=KQAQTF9njVVaZfOT_MVaNA


In the discussion section they do note that the lbm gains for the slow reduction group came almost all from their upper body, and that most of the athletes trained their legs heavily for their sport and that may have lead to the upper body being slightly less trained and therefore more apt to respond to to the training

It still doesn't not change the fact that these athletes GAIN MUSCLE on a CALORIE DEFICIT, which has been said million times here that is not possible. Moreover upper body is the place where many people want to focus on gaining muscle. That is certainly true for most pear shaped women, who wants to lose the fat in their butt and wants to build a bit muscle on their upper body at the same time.

This is not true. No one has never said it wasn't possible. Conditions have to almost perfect, ESPECIALLY when you're not going through the "newbie gains".

LOL @ most people. Yeah, those who don't understand how the body works. If you want to build a physique, you start at the legs.

sijomial

This is not true. No one has never said it wasn't possible. Conditions have to almost perfect, ESPECIALLY when you're not going through the "newbie gains".

Actually misguided people do say this on the forums "you can't gain muscle in a deficit" does get stated as an absolute fact.

Gaining muscle and losing fat also occurs for less than perfect and far from elite athlete subjects - like 53 year olds whose primary goal is cardio performance and whose weight training is hampered by back and knee injuries. That would be me for example.
The thing that should be stressed is that it's very slow, over seven months I lost slightly over a pound of fat a month and gained half a pound of lean mass a month. Down 4% body fat in that time.
So if your primary goal is muscle building and physique then clearly it's not the quickest way to get results.

By the way "newbie" gains don't apply as I started weight training in 1973!

Kimsoontobe

Bump

shanaber

Bumping for later

tigerblue

Interesting. I have long thought that this was true because of watching my oldest son. At 16, he swims upwards of two hours a day six days a week, plus does strength/weight training for 45-60 minutes three days a week. I know he is eating at a deficit many days (unless he is sneaking food, which I am sure does happen from time to time) because he eats the same healthy diet as me, and sometimes not a lot more ( I am a 129 lb middle aged woman. He is 6+ feet tall and weighs 160 lbs and is still growing). His appetite has never been huge. But I can look at pictures and easily see the muscle mass growing. There is NO fat covering him anywhere, and his biceps and chest are getting huge.

I know there are growth hormones and such involved here, but if he is truly in deficit, you would think he would just turn into skin and bones.

On the other hand, my younger 13 year old son eats huge amounts without stopping and doesn't seem to ever build muscle. He also swims or runs 6 days a week and does bodyweight training, since he is too young to lift much. He has no fat either, but his body does not seem to easily produce muscle. He is more the skin and bones type, even though he eats plenty.

Some of it has to be genetic predisposition.