You Can Gain Muscle On A Calorie Deficit!!

Jeff92se

I couldn't maintain my same weight over the few years I powerlifted. Have you gained 150lbs in your bench while maintaining yoru same weight?

Also people could be fat at XX weight and continue to gain lean muscle mass while cutting their bodyfat. That would allow them to stay at their class

You're missing the point. Can pike bench 300 (sorry don't remember the exact number) with his current physique? Yes, of course he can. Obviously, he's doing it.

Now I contend that the vast majority of muscle mass Pike has now was already there when he was at his heaviest, and he only gained a small amount of muscle while cutting. Said pre-existing muscle was 'weak' and unused to lifting, so at that point his starting weight of 135 was challenging to him. After a year of heavy training, and a very small amount of muscle gain on a cut, he's where he's at now. The argument is not if it's possible to lift X lbs with Y lbs of muscle mass, that's not under debate here. The argument is over when the muscle mass he has now was put on. It was clearly conditioned during his cut, but I think a lot of it was already there.

Also if you couldn't maintain your total weight while power lifting that means you were eating too much. It has nothing to do with the fact that you were lifting.

Um your body is always going to have the "vast majority" of it's mucle regardless. It's not like you can double or triple your body's muscle mass (at least not naturally).

You're saying the same thing. I claimed he gained muscle mass. So do you. How much is the debate here.

but I'm glad you know exactly how I trained while you don't know me or how I trained at all. I couldn't maintain my weight because getting down it would be at a bodyfat % that's unrealistic to achieve while trying to maintain my lift numbers. The lift numbers being the important stat here. Why struggle to get down to a sub 10% bodyfat to get to a XX weight if your lift numbers plummet?

Jeff92se

I just said a 150lb increase is too much to be accounted for just via technique. I'd also have to say, it would take more than a "little bit" of muscle mass gain to achieve this. Obviously a combo of both as he's not "massively" bigger than before.

This is really a poor way to state your point.

Firstly, 150 lb increases can be accomplished with improvements in technique. Furthermore, we have no idea HOW he measured those lifting gains.

Secondly, strength gain improvements do not mean muscle tissue gains. Again, I lost 6 lbs of muscle and my leg press has gone from 90 lb max (full range of motion) to 225 lb max (full range of motion). My max curl went from 15 lbs to 20 lbs. My dumbell bench max went from 15 lb (each arm) to 25 lb (each arm). All of this while LOSING muscle tissue.

Really? Have you increased your bench 150lbs via technique? I haven't. You think he could lift 150lbs more and lose muscle tissue? From the pictures, do you think he lost muscle tissue? I don't think he did from the pictures

Depends on how bad the technique was to begin with, but it's not something I would say is unreasonable. Secondly, without having a body scan done before and after, he has NO idea if he actually gained mass period. That was a point brought up multiple times in the past that is still being ignored by you, the OP, and the others who agree with him.

Yes, fault the OP for not geting a $100_ DEXA scan. :brokenheart: We are judging by the pics and his testimony. Multiple people said he hasn't gained. Thefore hasn't lost. Or has gained some. Now one can't lose fat only. You lose weight, you lose fat and muscle. In order to not lose muscle, you need to lift. Because people have admitted he actually has gained (how much is debatable), then the question of him gaining is no longer in question here.

We also have to assume his technique is more or less the same before/after. As he said he has lifted before. Perhaps he fogot to use the other arm previously?

1Timothy4v8

Yea I know this from witnessing it my self, I have in many times in the pass gained muscles and lost weight on calorie deficit, the results are incredible when you gain muscles as you lose fat, every thing get put were it's supposed to be

Elizabeth_C34

the question of him gaining is no longer in question here.

Really? I think it is. That's the point of this ENTIRE thread. Again, without having an accurate measure of body comp before and after, you can sit here and speculate until the cows come home and you're blue in the face. Doesn't make a bit of difference. You do not know, and neither does the OP.

There've been hundreds of really informative science-based posts here that indicate that the OP most likely did not gain muscle tissue, but like everyone else who loses tons of weight, lost some. The best he could do is maintain which is extremely unlikely given the amount of weight lost.

Your comment about most of the body being muscle is incorrect also. Lean mass (non-fat weight) also consists of water, bone, organs, and other fluid.

AeolianHarp

it would take more than a "little bit" of muscle mass gain to achieve this.

No, it really wouldn't. Neuromuscular efficiency is primarily what improves for most strength gains. Think of a peaking program like Smolov. You can put on 50-100lbs on your squat in a short time but that does not equate to huge muscle gains since there is a physiological limit to how much you can gain per week or month or year and this is also effected by a plethora of other things such as hormones, genetics, diet, etc.

It's very, very possible that one can gain 150lbs on the bench with some or little mass gain if they're in a deficit or on maintenance.

I recommend you watch the video I posted as it goes into the physiological side of muscle gain on a deficit.

odusgolp

I just wanted to state my sheer delight that this thread is still alive

Jeff92se

the question of him gaining is no longer in question here.

Really? I think it is. That's the point of this ENTIRE thread.

No it's not. Even the biggest disbelievers (except you) have said he has "gained". But only are giving him very little credit to how much. And giving most of the 150lb bench gain to technque. Which is decidedly one factor NOT discussed here(he hasn't mentioned some breakthough in technique or anything similar). Coming back from a layoff will of course get you gains. So would technique. I'm saying 150lbs is too much to gain just via those only

Elizabeth_C34

the question of him gaining is no longer in question here.

Really? I think it is. That's the point of this ENTIRE thread.

No it's not. Even the biggest disbelievers (except you) have said he has "gained". But only are giving him very little credit to how much. And giving most of the 150lb bench gain to technque. Which is decidedly one factor NOT discussed here(he hasn't mentioned some breakthough in technique or anything similar). Coming back from a layoff will of course get you gains. So would technique. I'm saying 150lbs is too much to gain just via those only

I'm not the only one who doesn't buy it. Read the rest of the thread.

Jeff92se

it would take more than a "little bit" of muscle mass gain to achieve this.

No, it really wouldn't. Neuromuscular efficiency is primarily what improves for most strength gains. Think of a peaking program like Smolov. You can put on 50-100lbs on your squat in a short time but that does not equate to huge muscle gains since there is a physiological limit to how much you can gain per week or month or year and this is also effected by a plethora of other things such as hormones, genetics, diet, etc.

It's very, very possible that one can gain 150lbs on the bench with some or little mass gain if they're in a deficit or on maintenance.

I recommend you watch the video I posted as it goes into the physiological side of muscle gain on a deficit.

We are talking about a bench press. Comparing an improvement in squat and bench on a 1:1 ratio isn't logical. Leg muscles and the amount of mucles recuited for a squat is much > than what's used for the bench press
Has he indicated any specialist technique that would allow him to specifically gain that much on the bench w/o adding anything of muscle? I dont' see him mentioning this. Nor do I seem him stating that was his specific goal. One would think you would have to specifically tailor your workouts for this to achieve what you are describitng. Given the improvement stated.

ArroganceInStep

Um your body is always going to have the "vast majority" of it's mucle regardless. It's not like you can double or triple your body's muscle mass (at least not naturally).

You're saying the same thing. I claimed he gained muscle mass. So do you. How much is the debate here.

but I'm glad you know exactly how I trained while you don't know me or how I trained at all. I couldn't maintain my weight because getting down it would be at a bodyfat % that's unrealistic to achieve while trying to maintain my lift numbers. The lift numbers being the important stat here. Why struggle to get down to a sub 10% bodyfat to get to a XX weight if your lift numbers plummet?

First, I re-read what I had wrote, and recognize that it came off pretty snobby, apologies for that.

I wasn't trying to speak to your workout routine actually, and rather referencing the fact that a total weight increase is the result of diet, period. If you chose that route in order to increase your lift numbers that's perfectly reasonable; you were bulking. I would also argue that you started doing that when you were much further along than Pike was when he started. If he were to try to bump his bench by 150 in a year right now, I don't believe he could do that, and certainly not on a calorie deficit.

I should also clarify 'vast majority' since you brought it up. I meant that his current muscle mass is constant, it is what it is and that's a fact. You feel he gained 'massive' muscle mass to get to the number he's at now while he was cutting weight. I think he was already pretty darn close to that number before he started cutting weight. That's where the debate is (at least that's what I'm debating).

Jeff92se

the question of him gaining is no longer in question here.

Really? I think it is. That's the point of this ENTIRE thread.

No it's not. Even the biggest disbelievers (except you) have said he has "gained". But only are giving him very little credit to how much. And giving most of the 150lb bench gain to technque. Which is decidedly one factor NOT discussed here(he hasn't mentioned some breakthough in technique or anything similar). Coming back from a layoff will of course get you gains. So would technique. I'm saying 150lbs is too much to gain just via those only

I'm not the only one who doesn't buy it. Read the rest of the thread.

I suggest you do the same.

huntindawg1962

Jeff92 - where is that video thread you spoke of? Looked back and did not see the link post.

Jeff92se

Um your body is always going to have the "vast majority" of it's mucle regardless. It's not like you can double or triple your body's muscle mass (at least not naturally).

You're saying the same thing. I claimed he gained muscle mass. So do you. How much is the debate here.

but I'm glad you know exactly how I trained while you don't know me or how I trained at all. I couldn't maintain my weight because getting down it would be at a bodyfat % that's unrealistic to achieve while trying to maintain my lift numbers. The lift numbers being the important stat here. Why struggle to get down to a sub 10% bodyfat to get to a XX weight if your lift numbers plummet?

First, I re-read what I had wrote, and recognize that it came off pretty snobby, apologies for that.

I wasn't trying to speak to your workout routine actually, and rather referencing the fact that a total weight increase is the result of diet, period. If you chose that route in order to increase your lift numbers that's perfectly reasonable; you were bulking. I would also argue that you started doing that when you were much further along than Pike was when he started. If he were to try to bump his bench by 150 in a year right now, I don't believe he could do that, and certainly not on a calorie deficit.

I should also clarify 'vast majority' since you brought it up. I meant that his current muscle mass is constant, it is what it is and that's a fact. You feel he gained 'massive' muscle mass to get to the number he's at now while he was cutting weight. I think he was already pretty darn close to that number before he started cutting weight. That's where the debate is (at least that's what I'm debating).

I was not builking or trying to bulk. I was trying to lfit as much as I can at the same weight. As I was powerlifting at a specific weight class.

Of course one can't continue on the same gain path as before. Or else he'd be benching 600lbs in another year. I stated this previously.

In order to even maintain the exact same size while losing all that wieght, he'd have to replace the muscle he has lost. and he's states that he has even bigger than before. Not "massively" but notably bigger. I would assume he knows his body best and I don't see that much reason for him to lie about it.

AeolianHarp

We are talking about a bench press. Comparing an improvement in squat and bench on a 1:1 ratio isn't logical. Leg muscles and the amount of mucles recuited for a squat is much > than what's used for the bench press
Has he indicated any specialist technique that would allow him to specifically gain that much on the bench w/o adding anything of muscle? I dont' see him mentioning this. Nor do I seem him stating that was his specific goal. One would think you would have to specifically tailor your workouts for this to achieve what you are describitng. Given the improvement stated.

It was an example but I'll explain more down below.

No it's not. Even the biggest disbelievers (except you) have said he has "gained". But only are giving him very little credit to how much. And giving most of the 150lb bench gain to technque. Which is decidedly one factor NOT discussed here(he hasn't mentioned some breakthough in technique or anything similar). Coming back from a layoff will of course get you gains. So would technique. I'm saying 150lbs is too much to gain just via those only

Why are you so set on either muscle gain or technique? As I have mentioned endlessly, there is neuromuscular efficiency. Neuromuscular efficiency functions in three ways: (1) improved coordination (essentially improved stabilization from other muscles that are not the prime movers), (2) more muscle involvement (more tissue activation), (3) and faster muscle activation (increase power output of a muscle). All these things can improve outside of muscle gain.

According to Eric Cressey, "there is evidence that, beyond the beginner level, further improvements in neuromuscular efficiency are largely responsible for further strength gains (Maximum Strength 15).

I don't get what's so hard to understand about this. The fact that it is accepted strength can increase independently of muscle gains weakens your position since strength increase does not always mean muscle increase. Your entire argument rides on the fact that he increased his bench 150lbs. This is a weak position. If you can't see it (and I've had to go and regurgitate what I've said multiple times) then this is a hopeless discussion and I'm just wasting my time. I've laid it out for you.

I'm not saying that he did or did not gain muscle. What I'm saying is that your position is weak since you're solely riding on the fact that his bench increased 150lbs.

Jeff92se

Jeff92 - where is that video thread you spoke of? Looked back and did not see the link post.

I didn't post it. But I mean to take a look later.

huntindawg1962

OK - thanks.

jenluvsushi

I wanted to start this thread because of the "" Muscle Does Not Weigh More Than Fat" thread. Reading thru it I read numerous posts that claimed that you cannot gain muscle while on a calorie deficit. Yes you can!! Please do not let these misguided comments stop you from implementing some type of lifting program while you are on your journey for a new body!! Weight training while dieting is very important because if you dont about 22% of your total weight loss will be Lean Muscle! Most people who do not lift while dieting are not happy with their body even after they reached or even surpassed their goals.

You are totally correct....I have lost 44 pounds and have been able to drop body fat and maintain a large amount of muscle mass by eating lots of protein and lifting heavy with a little cardio here and there....I was shocked to learn that even though I am considered "overweight" by weight chart standards, I actually have a ton of muscle and lower body fat than I thought (148 pounds lean body mass).....I went and had my body fat measured and my RMR tested at a sports lab through the local college....worth every penny. I eat about 1-1.5 grams of protein for each pound of lean body mass and lift heavy 3-4 times per week. I was feeling discouraged because my scale wasn't moving as fast as I thought it should so I went and got professionally tested. I felt like what my scale was saying wasn’t matching up with what I saw in the mirror or how my clothes were hanging on me. I am so glad I did get tested because it confirmed what I was thinking.....I have gained muscle mass! I am going to get tested every few months from now on....Weight training is where it's at in my opinion.....I want to change the shape of my body, not just the number on the scale. And the best part? I get to eat way more calories with the extra muscle mass!

hesn92

I'm still going to switch to maintenence when I start doing p90x

ETA: ah shoot. I didn't mean to start a whole new thread. I feel like I should have said something more substantial.

Jeff92se

The 150lb improvement is used as it's the only reasonably known measurement we are given. And seems to indicate an improvement that's BEYOND just improvements in technique. As he has lifted before and should reaonably know how to lift. And there wasn't any mention of any breakthoughs in technique in thread.

Saying it's "possible" isn't a strong position either. As much in this world is "possible" given extreme cases and the perfect storm of conditions. Which IMHO, is not the case here.

ArroganceInStep

The 150lb improvement is used as it's the only reasonably known measurement we are given. And seems to indicate an improvement that's BEYOND just improvements in technique. As he has lifted before and should reaonably know how to lift. And there wasn't any mention of any breakthoughs in technique in thread.

Saying it's "possible" isn't a strong position either. As much in this world is "possible" given extreme cases and the perfect storm of conditions. Which IMHO, is not the case here.

I think the point is that it's not just conscious technique, it's not like he repositioned his grip and can suddenly bench a car. It also about conditioning of the body to perform the movement better, ie the things that were listed. You may still disagree given the magnitude of the weight increase, but I felt it should be clarified (also needed to bump).

Jeff92se

The 150lb improvement is used as it's the only reasonably known measurement we are given. And seems to indicate an improvement that's BEYOND just improvements in technique. As he has lifted before and should reaonably know how to lift. And there wasn't any mention of any breakthoughs in technique in thread.

Saying it's "possible" isn't a strong position either. As much in this world is "possible" given extreme cases and the perfect storm of conditions. Which IMHO, is not the case here.

I think the point is that it's not just conscious technique, it's not like he repositioned his grip and can suddenly bench a car. It also about conditioning of the body to perform the movement better, ie the things that were listed. You may still disagree given the magnitude of the weight increase, but I felt it should be clarified (also needed to bump).

Right and it be the fact that he's actually gained muscle mass. I don't think it's one thing that achieved it. More like a combination of all. It's too big IMHO to have been just technque like someone was alluding to. It would be like me adding 135lbs to my bench a year ago. I'd have to be benching 315lbs right now. Improbable.

CyberEd312

I understand the concept behind eating at a surplus to build lean muscle mass, but I also can't dismiss the fact that it is possible to gain muscle and lose fat on a calorie deficit either. I have to ask... I have been eating at a deficit for 34 months and have lost 304 lbs. I have read that some think the OP had this muscle already and just uncovered it when he lost the weight. If that was true than your telling me that I had all this muscle already and that my 560 lbs, was just covering it up??? I find that very hard to believe.....

2009 @ 560 lbs.



2010 @ 420 lbs.





Saturday @ 256 lbs.

Jeff92se

Geez dude. That's incredible.

CyberEd312

Geez dude. That's incredible.

lol thanks... I read throw everything and had to post... Unless I am just a freak of nature then there has to be some leeway in this equation cause I can almost guarantee I did not have this much muscle underlying all that fat.....

joejccva71

I understand the concept behind eating at a surplus to build lean muscle mass, but I also can't dismiss the fact that it is possible to gain muscle and lose fat on a calorie deficit either. I have to ask... I have been eating at a deficit for 34 months and have lost 304 lbs. I have read that some think the OP had this muscle already and just uncovered it when he lost the weight. If that was true than your telling me that I had all this muscle already and that my 560 lbs, was just covering it up??? I find that very hard to believe.....

2009 @ 560 lbs.



2010 @ 420 lbs.





Saturday @ 256 lbs.

Those people that know what they are talking about will tell you that if you are morbidly obese (which you were at one point) that by your body using your fat stores as calories to build some new muscle tissue. Even while you were eating at a deficit. You did have some muscle underneath all that fat because your LBM has to be somewhat substantial to be able to support your bones and structure to hold all that weight.

There are 3 ways to build muscle tissue:

1. Eating a surplus.
2. You can build some new tissue if you are new to lifting or have returned from a long break. (Small muscle gains)
3. You are obese and use fat stores as calories to put on some muscle. (Again some small gains)

By the way, great transformation! Good job.

Jeff92se

And we go again...........

I suppose it depends. Some muscle groups aren't as affected by his weight than others.

joejccva71

And we go again...........

I suppose it depends. Some muscle groups aren't as affected by his weight than others.

Jeff how often do we have to go around and around the circle? Until one of us runs out of gas or until you realize the facts?

Which is it?

Jeff92se

And we go again...........

I suppose it depends. Some muscle groups aren't as affected by his weight than others.

Jeff how often do we have to go around and around the circle? Until one of us runs out of gas or until you realize the facts?

Which is it?

Oh yeah, "until I realize the facts". Great logic there. I recommened you post into a threat of the other guys' success and you declined. I'm not going to debat this guy's gains as he obviously had alot of fat stores. But muscle groups like the bicept / tricep aren't going to be worked like the back/legs on a heavy person

joejccva71

And we go again...........

I suppose it depends. Some muscle groups aren't as affected by his weight than others.

Jeff how often do we have to go around and around the circle? Until one of us runs out of gas or until you realize the facts?

Which is it?

Oh yeah, "until I realize the facts". Great logic there. I recommened you post into a threat of the other guys' success and you declined. I'm not going to debat this guy's gains as he obviously had alot of fat stores. But muscle groups like the bicept / tricep aren't going to be worked like the back/legs on a heavy person

I truely fail to see your point here.

Biceps and Triceps get worked by doing almost every other lifting exercise you do. Maybe I misunderstood what you're saying.

Jeff92se

And we go again...........

I suppose it depends. Some muscle groups aren't as affected by his weight than others.

Jeff how often do we have to go around and around the circle? Until one of us runs out of gas or until you realize the facts?

Which is it?

Oh yeah, "until I realize the facts". Great logic there. I recommened you post into a threat of the other guys' success and you declined. I'm not going to debat this guy's gains as he obviously had alot of fat stores. But muscle groups like the bicept / tricep aren't going to be worked like the back/legs on a heavy person

I truely fail to see your point here.

Biceps and Triceps get worked by doing almost every other lifting exercise you do. Maybe I misunderstood what you're saying.

Lifting of weights? yes. But as it pertains to supporting a heavy person? Not so much. And I use these muscle groups as they are demonstrated in the after pics of that guy that just posted.