You Can Gain Muscle On A Calorie Deficit!!

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.

trybefan

Just jumping in to say incredible work! Looking at those pics, "Anything is possible" comes to mind....amazing man!

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.

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.

Ok so if he's obese and his body is using his fat stores as calories to put on some muscle tissue, by him just doing normal lifting, the muscle will go to bodyparts worked (including bi's and tri's). This along with the fact that he still had a good amount of LBM even in his arms can produce what he has shown in those pics.

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.

Ok so if he's obese and his body is using his fat stores as calories to put on some muscle tissue, by him just doing normal lifting, the muscle will go to bodyparts worked (including bi's and tri's). This along with the fact that he still had a good amount of LBM even in his arms can produce what he has shown in those pics.

Now I have no idea what your point is. BTW, how do you know how much muscle mass he had before/after in an area such as his biceps? There's no really good before pic to compare it to. Not sure what "good amount" really means. Does that mean more or less? Same? You'd think after losing approx 250lbs, his arms would look signficatly smaller if he was on a deficit program.

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.

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.

Ok so if he's obese and his body is using his fat stores as calories to put on some muscle tissue, by him just doing normal lifting, the muscle will go to bodyparts worked (including bi's and tri's). This along with the fact that he still had a good amount of LBM even in his arms can produce what he has shown in those pics.

Now I have no idea what your point is. BTW, how do you know how much muscle mass he had before/after in an area such as his biceps? There's no really good before pic to compare it to. Not sure what "good amount" really means. Does that mean more or less? Same?

Jeff this is really pointless. And no I don't know how much muscle mass he had before/after, but that isn't the point. The point is whether or not a person can build muscle on a calorie deficit. (Which has been the point for god knows how long now)

And the answer is under certain circumstances someone can....(like i've said repeatedly). But if someone was lets say under 20% bodyfat and they continued to try to build muscle on a calorie deficit they won't be able to do it. In order to grow you need energy intake. You have to have something to build on.

Right now I'm doing Lyle Mcdonald's RFL program and currently I'm eating 900 calories a day for 14 days. Mostly protein intake by eating 1g of protein per lb of my LBM. I can guarantee you and I'd put money on it that I won't be building muscle on my calorie deficit. I'd be lucky to preserve the LBM I currently do have. I'll retain most of it but the only reason is I'm eating enough protein per day and I'm lifting.

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.

Ok so if he's obese and his body is using his fat stores as calories to put on some muscle tissue, by him just doing normal lifting, the muscle will go to bodyparts worked (including bi's and tri's). This along with the fact that he still had a good amount of LBM even in his arms can produce what he has shown in those pics.

Now I have no idea what your point is. BTW, how do you know how much muscle mass he had before/after in an area such as his biceps? There's no really good before pic to compare it to. Not sure what "good amount" really means. Does that mean more or less? Same?

Jeff this is really pointless. And no I don't know how much muscle mass he had before/after, but that isn't the point. The point is whether or not a person can build muscle on a calorie deficit. (Which has been the point for god knows how long now)

And the answer is under certain circumstances someone can....(like i've said repeatedly). But if someone was lets say under 20% bodyfat and they continued to try to build muscle on a calorie deficit they won't be able to do it. In order to grow you need energy intake. You have to have something to build on.

Right now I'm doing Lyle Mcdonald's RFL program and currently I'm eating 900 calories a day for 14 days. Mostly protein intake by eating 1g of protein per lb of my LBM. I can guarantee you and I'd put money on it that I won't be building muscle on my calorie deficit. I'd be lucky to preserve the LBM I currently do have. I'll retain most of it but the only reason is I'm eating enough protein per day and I'm lifting.

I don't think anyone here (the most recent guy or pike) has claimed they gained muscle mass while being under let's say 20% bodyfat. I don't know of anyone that's participated on any of these discussions recently has claimed they gained muscle mass while being under "20% bodyfat". I even stated this more than once.

But onto your specifics. You will be smaller after your cut cycle. But from the pics, he (they actually) seem to be the same size if not larger. After losing 250lbs from all over your body, you'd have to be noticably smaller in thar arm area(area chosen because it's in the pictures) Does his arms look noticably smaller to you? Then again, he's on a big fat surplus which jives with current thinking.

The thing is your statement is concentrated around an arbitrary bodyfat number of 20%. Which is fine for this discussion. But you can be over 20%(well over) and not really be overfat or obese. Let's say 30% for discussion. Thefore you can (according to your numbers) gain muscle on a deficit until you get around 20%. Not the most efficent way but it can happen(according to you). Being over 20% ecompassing a great many people here (including myself until recently).

I was measured at 19% at 180lbs. I was as high as 190lbs. Now I'm at 175lbs. I think I've at least retained my muscle size from 190lbs to 175lbs. Maybe a slight gain. Hard to really judge. Do I think I could gain muscle from 175lbs and at a deficit? Nope.

JNick77

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.

Somebody eluded to this on the original thread with some comments from Eric Cressey who undeniably knows his ****. When you're talking maximal strength effort lifting you're not just talking muscle mass strength. You're also incorporating neural strength in a manner that is not accomplished anywhere else on the Force Curve. I believe Charles Poliquin actually referred to this as, Neural Maximal Strength. There are a few factors (CNS, Form, Programming, diet quality) at play here and aside from some newbie muscle gain, muscle mass ain't coming out of nowhere (calorie deficit). But strength gains can be made from learning how to lift properly and by strengthening supporting muscle groups (i.e. triceps, traps, rear deltoids, lats, etc).

I have accurate records of my strength gains. I hurt my back last year and I couldn't do legs at all for months, I lost a lot of strength. I could tell by the level of effort it took to go up stairs. When I started deadlifting again my 1RM, albeit conservative, was 205lbs at a bodyweight of 220lbs. Two weeks ago I pulled 325 for a triple @ 207lbs. I've lost 13lbs and increased my Deadlift by over 125lbs. My 1RM prior to hurting my back was 290lbs. My legs are no bigger, still fitting in the same pants although my waist is smaller. Although I am more defined from head-to-toe I haven't gained any noticeable size and I have a couple shirts that are actually a little loose in certain spots.

Jeff92se

You're the 2nd person to use leg lifts and a number around 150lbs. This guy increased his BENCH 150lbs. And I think he was out of lifting for well over a year. Probably 5 years? 10?

Again, have you read anything in this thread that indicates he paid particular attention do his diet and training to maximize his lifts w/o trying to gain mucsle mass? I didn't. I also didn't try to assign all of that gain to muscle mass gains. But I didn't EXCLUDE any one reason either.

ArroganceInStep

Again, have you read anything in this thread that indicates he paid particular attention do his diet and training to maximize his lifts w/o trying to gain mucsle mass? I didn't. I also didn't try to assign all of that gain to muscle mass gains. But I didn't EXCLUDE any one reason either.

Eating at a caloric deficit while getting adequate protein (which he did do) == maximizing lifts w/o trying to gain muscle mass.

JNick77

jg627

If lifting weight helps you get in shape or makes you feel good, do it. That's how I look at it. Who cares if the muscle heads approve or not. It's not a contest. Let them roid rage all they want.