Building Muscle vs. Losing Weight
Options
Replies
-
It does when you never had them before prior to getting fat well into your adult years and skinny as a rail.Visible muscle size...particularly in a male...does NOT necessarily have any direct relation to muscle mass.
This made my inner 12 year old giggle. Yes, there definitely can be an increase in certain male body parts. :blushing:0 -
Visible abs have absolutely nothing to do with muscle building. Visible abs are purely a result of low body fat. Anybody can drop to single digit body fat and expose their abs, without building any muscle. In fact, all muscle definition, and looking "ripped," is all about low body fat, and has zero at all to do with muscle building. Why do you think programs like Insanity result in people having ripped bodies? Insanity is essentially a cardio program, people reduce significant body fat, and expose muscles that are already there. Muscles are always the same shape, regardless of size. The key is protein. Even consuming 15% of your diet in protein (which just about every American meets or exceeds) leads to lean mass gains along with fat gain, without exercise..
**********I had very low BF. well into my adult years and never had visable abs. It doesnt matter how low your BF is if you do not have developed abs. ********
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22215165
Low protein was 5%, normal protein was 15%, and high protein was 25%. The participants were fed at a 40% calorie surplus and randomized as to which protein protocol. So people eating roughly 1000 calories a day over maintenance, and 15% protein, gained on average 13.5 pounds in 8 weeks, of that 6.4 pounds were lean mass gains. Keep in mind, actual lean mass has nothing to do with strength. Most sedentary individuals only use roughly 10-20% of their actual muscle tissue for work, it's extremely inefficient. So when they store more fat, they add more muscle tissue to support the weight of the fat. Bones and connective tissue get heavier and more dense as well.RESULTS: Overeating produced significantly less weight gain in the low protein diet group (3.16 kg; 95% CI, 1.88-4.44 kg) compared with the normal protein diet group (6.05 kg; 95% CI, 4.84-7.26 kg) or the high protein diet group (6.51 kg; 95% CI, 5.23-7.79 kg) (P = .002). Body fat increased similarly in all 3 protein diet groups and represented 50% to more than 90% of the excess stored calories. Resting energy expenditure, total energy expenditure, and body protein did not increase during overfeeding with the low protein diet. In contrast, resting energy expenditure (normal protein diet: 160 kcal/d [95% CI, 102-218 kcal/d]; high protein diet: 227 kcal/d [95% CI, 165-289 kcal/d]) and body protein (lean body mass) (normal protein diet: 2.87 kg [95% CI, 2.11-3.62 kg]; high protein diet: 3.18 kg [95% CI, 2.37-3.98 kg]) increased significantly with the normal and high protein diets.
**************I am just finishing up my first bulk and gained 13 lbs, So what you are saying is I wasted my time busting my butt in in the gym and eating a strict diet when I could of just laid on the couch, been lazy and gained 6 lbs of lean muscle in only 8 weeks. Why does anyone lift at all? ****************So yes, theoretically, you can be lazy, eat all day while lounging in front of the TV, and put on a significant amount of lean mass, without working out. Then working out causes you to train and maintain that lean mass while losing fat. You don't actually put the muscle tissue on while in a deficit, it was already there. You're just training it, and most likely gaining nerves and blood vessels, as well as water and glycogen storage (this is why muscle appears larger, and why people see lean mass gains, blood vessels, water, glycogen, nerves, bones, all part of lean mass.)
So, if you can add lean mass just by eating protein, why strength train during a bulking cycle? Easy, you will add proportionately more lean mass while strength training. Plus, again, that study applies to untrained individuals. An athlete, or even a recreational weight trainer, will not have those results, as their body is already efficient at using muscle tissue and will not have need to add copius amounts of muscle tissue. This is also why lean mass gains get harder and harder to come by the longer you train. As your body gets more and more efficient at using the muscle it already has, it doesn't need to add more tissue to keep up up with the physical demand.
******** First I didnt say you could add lean mass just by eating protein. Second, """why do a bulking cycle? """" thats my point exactly!! I should just do be lazy and eat bad and cutting cycles and screw eating healthy and lifting weights, and so should every other person. For example, My goal is to gain 16lbs of lean muscle and be under 10% BF. this will take 1.5- 2 years by busting my *kitten* in the gym and eating very clean over that time ( I'm 42) But if what you are saying is true I should just quit working out, eat bad, gain 32lbs anf then cut and I will reach my goal alot faster and eat whatever my heart desires and have alot more free time to go fishing*********0 -
Chris, Yes we talked about this before but you used an arm that was surgically repaired and immobilized for how long? If your example was viable why didnt your other arm grow at the same rate in size and strength at the same time?Chris, here is a pic of me after I had lost 60 + lbs, I kept forgetting to bring new clothes to FL. because I am so use to just bringing a backpack since I already have clothes there. If you look at them, everything is just hanging off of me except for my chest, shoulders, lats, neck and traps. Now how can my shirt get so tight in those area's even though it wasnt when I was 60 + lbs heavier? And by the time I was finished could no longer put that shirt on because it got too small.
We've talked about this man, lol...and I answered you then. I asked you the same question about my arm...and you can't see the relationship between the two. Visible muscle size...particularly in a male...does NOT necessarily have any direct relation to muscle mass.
I'm thinking again that we are just going to have to agree to disagree. But just in case I'm missing something, lets go through this one more time because we've both jumped around a lot. You are saying that you put on how many pounds of muscle, over how long? And how much weight did you lose overall? And again, just to be clear...you're saying you were in a controlled, average daily deficit the entire time?
I dont know how many lb's of muscle i added, I lost 83lbs over 13 months, My diet was controlled and very strict over the entire 13 months and my calories were set to try to only lose 1lb. per week, though some weeks I lost 2 lbs.0 -
To the person who wanted to know why the body won't build muscle (typically, or much... I believe newbie gains can occur, maybe 2-3 pounds of lean mass over 6 months, in a calorie deficit based on what I believe I've done, even though my measure of body fat was crude, it should be consistent, and based on every source I've read saying newbie gains but not really giving numbers):
It costs upwards of 3000 calories to build a pound of muscle, and that pound of muscle is about twice as metabolically active as a pound of fat. So basically, the body doesn't want to make any more muscle than is completely necessary, and when energy is low, the body will use muscle for energy, even though it gives less energy than fat because that muscle costs the body more to maintain and is this seen as an evolutionary disadvantage. The body wants to have as little muscle as it can. This is where esistance training comes in. It is how you tell your body it needs to keep its muscle. However, since your body just sees a low energy state, it is not going to build more metabolically active muscle. My untestable hypothesis for why newbie gains occur is that the body sees beginning to weightlift as enough of a stimulus to make a little more muscle seem necessary. It makes sense to me that as long as the deficit is somewhat small, your body can prioritize muscle because the resistance training is presenting a new threat and the calorie deficit isn't all THAT intimidating. But at some point, you stop being able to convince your body that muscle is more important than fat. It ignores your pleas and tries to make you fat. But you triumph.
Party on.
That devolved pretty quick.
My LBM went up from 209 I believe, to 214 in one month. I took a break for a few days, ate above maintenance. Like 4,000-5,000 calories. After these 3-4 rest days. My total weight went down 2lbs. I think it's just water retention. I know Going from 209 to 214lbm, isn't all water retention. Been getting a lot of compliments. I also look thinner even if my body weight is up.
It's interesting what you also said. about how we grow on calorie surplus days, and lose on calorie deficit days. I think it's the opposite, you grow most on your recovery days and of course exercise is catabolic (you break down on your workout days)
I don't know why you keep talking about building muscle when your weight increased... That is not at all in a calorie deficit. Whatever method of calculating calories you used was flawed and you are eating above maintenance. Per body recomposition guide to lean mass gains, a male newbie can expect something like 2 lb of muscle per month if they are doing everything right, including a calorie surplus. So I doubt more than 3 lb is muscle, but that's still great! Here's that guide http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/general-philosophies-of-muscle-mass-gain.html
I don't believe I said you grow on training days, more that you eat more on training days to provide the hormones that tell your body it is okay to make muscle because you aren't starving anymore.0 -
bump0
-
I strength train 5 days a week (usually separated - tricepts Mon, bicepts Tue, legs Wed, Chest/shoulders Thur and back on Fridays. I sneak in abs where ever I have time. I lift prior to doing cardio (as it will help you burn more calories) I lift a moderate weight, 3 sets of 10-12 reps. I have toned nicely while still loosing weight (almost 50lbs so far). Once you have lost the weight you want, you can start upping the amount of weight you are lifting to bulk up (if that's what you desire) I also have a protein shake in the AM after my workout and drink lots of water through out the day to help rid lactic acid build up. Good luck!0
-
I didn't read all of the arguing go on, but I just want to try to make sure I understand-
I'm not building muscle, my body is just utilizing the muscle that was already there and because I have reduced the fat around it, I can now see the muscle like I should?0 -
Visible abs have absolutely nothing to do with muscle building. Visible abs are purely a result of low body fat. Anybody can drop to single digit body fat and expose their abs, without building any muscle. In fact, all muscle definition, and looking "ripped," is all about low body fat, and has zero at all to do with muscle building. Why do you think programs like Insanity result in people having ripped bodies? Insanity is essentially a cardio program, people reduce significant body fat, and expose muscles that are already there. Muscles are always the same shape, regardless of size. The key is protein. Even consuming 15% of your diet in protein (which just about every American meets or exceeds) leads to lean mass gains along with fat gain, without exercise.
**********I had very low BF. well into my adult years and never had visable abs. It doesnt matter how low your BF is if you do not have developed abs. ********
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22215165
Low protein was 5%, normal protein was 15%, and high protein was 25%. The participants were fed at a 40% calorie surplus and randomized as to which protein protocol. So people eating roughly 1000 calories a day over maintenance, and 15% protein, gained on average 13.5 pounds in 8 weeks, of that 6.4 pounds were lean mass gains. Keep in mind, actual lean mass has nothing to do with strength. Most sedentary individuals only use roughly 10-20% of their actual muscle tissue for work, it's extremely inefficient. So when they store more fat, they add more muscle tissue to support the weight of the fat. Bones and connective tissue get heavier and more dense as well.RESULTS: Overeating produced significantly less weight gain in the low protein diet group (3.16 kg; 95% CI, 1.88-4.44 kg) compared with the normal protein diet group (6.05 kg; 95% CI, 4.84-7.26 kg) or the high protein diet group (6.51 kg; 95% CI, 5.23-7.79 kg) (P = .002). Body fat increased similarly in all 3 protein diet groups and represented 50% to more than 90% of the excess stored calories. Resting energy expenditure, total energy expenditure, and body protein did not increase during overfeeding with the low protein diet. In contrast, resting energy expenditure (normal protein diet: 160 kcal/d [95% CI, 102-218 kcal/d]; high protein diet: 227 kcal/d [95% CI, 165-289 kcal/d]) and body protein (lean body mass) (normal protein diet: 2.87 kg [95% CI, 2.11-3.62 kg]; high protein diet: 3.18 kg [95% CI, 2.37-3.98 kg]) increased significantly with the normal and high protein diets.
**************I am just finishing up my first bulk and gained 13 lbs, So what you are saying is I wasted my time busting my butt in in the gym and eating a strict diet when I could of just laid on the couch, been lazy and gained 6 lbs of lean muscle in only 8 weeks. Why does anyone lift at all? ****************So yes, theoretically, you can be lazy, eat all day while lounging in front of the TV, and put on a significant amount of lean mass, without working out. Then working out causes you to train and maintain that lean mass while losing fat. You don't actually put the muscle tissue on while in a deficit, it was already there. You're just training it, and most likely gaining nerves and blood vessels, as well as water and glycogen storage (this is why muscle appears larger, and why people see lean mass gains, blood vessels, water, glycogen, nerves, bones, all part of lean mass.)
So, if you can add lean mass just by eating protein, why strength train during a bulking cycle? Easy, you will add proportionately more lean mass while strength training. Plus, again, that study applies to untrained individuals. An athlete, or even a recreational weight trainer, will not have those results, as their body is already efficient at using muscle tissue and will not have need to add copius amounts of muscle tissue. This is also why lean mass gains get harder and harder to come by the longer you train. As your body gets more and more efficient at using the muscle it already has, it doesn't need to add more tissue to keep up up with the physical demand.
******** First I didnt say you could add lean mass just by eating protein. Second, """why do a bulking cycle? """" thats my point exactly!! I should just do be lazy and eat bad and cutting cycles and screw eating healthy and lifting weights, and so should every other person. For example, My goal is to gain 16lbs of lean muscle and be under 10% BF. this will take 1.5- 2 years by busting my *kitten* in the gym and eating very clean over that time ( I'm 42) But if what you are saying is true I should just quit working out, eat bad, gain 32lbs anf then cut and I will reach my goal alot faster and eat whatever my heart desires and have alot more free time to go fishing*********
This is where reading comprehension and critical thinking is actually required.
1. I already talked about why to lift in a bulk. Try reading the actual post again.
2. Lifting during a cut is a requirement to maintain as much muscle tissue as possible. Just like the human body adds muscle to support extra fat while gaining weight, it gets rid of extra muscle when you reduce body fat by losing weight. The longer you train, the less muscle gain you get during bulks, and the less you lose during cuts, due to neuromuscular efficiency and training. Nowhere in my post did I ever say anything about retaining muscle while cutting without strength training.
It's just a simple biological fact. Fat people have more muscle than thin people. Just like fat people have heavier bones than thin people. The trick to body composition while losing weight is strength training to retain and maintain lean mass.0 -
First off no need to try to be a smart *kitten*. I know you need to lift during a cut, infact about 22% ( depending on the person)of your weight loss will be from lean muscle if you dont. But according to you a newbie that wants to gain LM. should just be lazy and eat bad instead of lift to gain weight, since according to you, they can gain 6.4 lbs of lean muscle in only 8 weeks by doing so. then cut, lift and eat healthy right? No need to lift or eat a strict diet to bulk, right? You're way is alot faster and more enjoyable.
Visible abs have absolutely nothing to do with muscle building. Visible abs are purely a result of low body fat. Anybody can drop to single digit body fat and expose their abs, without building any muscle. In fact, all muscle definition, and looking "ripped," is all about low body fat, and has zero at all to do with muscle building. Why do you think programs like Insanity result in people having ripped bodies? Insanity is essentially a cardio program, people reduce significant body fat, and expose muscles that are already there. Muscles are always the same shape, regardless of size. The key is protein. Even consuming 15% of your diet in protein (which just about every American meets or exceeds) leads to lean mass gains along with fat gain, without exercise.
**********I had very low BF. well into my adult years and never had visable abs. It doesnt matter how low your BF is if you do not have developed abs. ********
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22215165
Low protein was 5%, normal protein was 15%, and high protein was 25%. The participants were fed at a 40% calorie surplus and randomized as to which protein protocol. So people eating roughly 1000 calories a day over maintenance, and 15% protein, gained on average 13.5 pounds in 8 weeks, of that 6.4 pounds were lean mass gains. Keep in mind, actual lean mass has nothing to do with strength. Most sedentary individuals only use roughly 10-20% of their actual muscle tissue for work, it's extremely inefficient. So when they store more fat, they add more muscle tissue to support the weight of the fat. Bones and connective tissue get heavier and more dense as well.RESULTS: Overeating produced significantly less weight gain in the low protein diet group (3.16 kg; 95% CI, 1.88-4.44 kg) compared with the normal protein diet group (6.05 kg; 95% CI, 4.84-7.26 kg) or the high protein diet group (6.51 kg; 95% CI, 5.23-7.79 kg) (P = .002). Body fat increased similarly in all 3 protein diet groups and represented 50% to more than 90% of the excess stored calories. Resting energy expenditure, total energy expenditure, and body protein did not increase during overfeeding with the low protein diet. In contrast, resting energy expenditure (normal protein diet: 160 kcal/d [95% CI, 102-218 kcal/d]; high protein diet: 227 kcal/d [95% CI, 165-289 kcal/d]) and body protein (lean body mass) (normal protein diet: 2.87 kg [95% CI, 2.11-3.62 kg]; high protein diet: 3.18 kg [95% CI, 2.37-3.98 kg]) increased significantly with the normal and high protein diets.
**************I am just finishing up my first bulk and gained 13 lbs, So what you are saying is I wasted my time busting my butt in in the gym and eating a strict diet when I could of just laid on the couch, been lazy and gained 6 lbs of lean muscle in only 8 weeks. Why does anyone lift at all? ****************So yes, theoretically, you can be lazy, eat all day while lounging in front of the TV, and put on a significant amount of lean mass, without working out. Then working out causes you to train and maintain that lean mass while losing fat. You don't actually put the muscle tissue on while in a deficit, it was already there. You're just training it, and most likely gaining nerves and blood vessels, as well as water and glycogen storage (this is why muscle appears larger, and why people see lean mass gains, blood vessels, water, glycogen, nerves, bones, all part of lean mass.)
So, if you can add lean mass just by eating protein, why strength train during a bulking cycle? Easy, you will add proportionately more lean mass while strength training. Plus, again, that study applies to untrained individuals. An athlete, or even a recreational weight trainer, will not have those results, as their body is already efficient at using muscle tissue and will not have need to add copius amounts of muscle tissue. This is also why lean mass gains get harder and harder to come by the longer you train. As your body gets more and more efficient at using the muscle it already has, it doesn't need to add more tissue to keep up up with the physical demand.
******** First I didnt say you could add lean mass just by eating protein. Second, """why do a bulking cycle? """" thats my point exactly!! I should just do be lazy and eat bad and cutting cycles and screw eating healthy and lifting weights, and so should every other person. For example, My goal is to gain 16lbs of lean muscle and be under 10% BF. this will take 1.5- 2 years by busting my *kitten* in the gym and eating very clean over that time ( I'm 42) But if what you are saying is true I should just quit working out, eat bad, gain 32lbs anf then cut and I will reach my goal alot faster and eat whatever my heart desires and have alot more free time to go fishing*********
This is where reading comprehension and critical thinking is actually required.
1. I already talked about why to lift in a bulk. Try reading the actual post again.
2. Lifting during a cut is a requirement to maintain as much muscle tissue as possible. Just like the human body adds muscle to support extra fat while gaining weight, it gets rid of extra muscle when you reduce body fat by losing weight. The longer you train, the less muscle gain you get during bulks, and the less you lose during cuts, due to neuromuscular efficiency and training. Nowhere in my post did I ever say anything about retaining muscle while cutting without strength training.
It's just a simple biological fact. Fat people have more muscle than thin people. Just like fat people have heavier bones than thin people. The trick to body composition while losing weight is strength training to retain and maintain lean mass.0 -
You should be upping the amount of weight when ever possible regardless, If you can do 9 or more reps increase the weight, 7 or less reps decrease the weight. For example my bench press increased over 150 lbs while I was on a deficit.I strength train 5 days a week (usually separated - tricepts Mon, bicepts Tue, legs Wed, Chest/shoulders Thur and back on Fridays. I sneak in abs where ever I have time. I lift prior to doing cardio (as it will help you burn more calories) I lift a moderate weight, 3 sets of 10-12 reps. I have toned nicely while still loosing weight (almost 50lbs so far). Once you have lost the weight you want, you can start upping the amount of weight you are lifting to bulk up (if that's what you desire) I also have a protein shake in the AM after my workout and drink lots of water through out the day to help rid lactic acid build up. Good luck!0 -
I didn't read all of the arguing go on, but I just want to try to make sure I understand-
I'm not building muscle, my body is just utilizing the muscle that was already there and because I have reduced the fat around it, I can now see the muscle like I should?
If you are eating in a deficit that is correct.0 -
First off no need to try to be a smart *kitten*. I know you need to lift during a cut, infact about 22% ( depending on the person)of your weight loss will be from lean muscle if you dont. But according to you a newbie that wants to gain LM. should just be lazy and eat bad instead of lift to gain weight, since according to you, they can gain 6.4 lbs of lean muscle in only 8 weeks by doing so. then cut, lift and eat healthy right? No need to lift or eat a strict diet to bulk, right? You're way is alot faster and more enjoyable.
Man...you're not getting it.
It's not according to him...it's a peer reviewed study. You can refute it all you want, but it flat happened. I'm sorry that it doesn't fit in your explanation for what you believe happened with you...but it's still a fact. He showed you proof of exactly what I've been telling you...but you won't even choose to understand it, much less see how it applies to your own situation. My brother, and even myself (not to mention YOU!!) are both perfect examples of this kind of thing.
He also wasn't being rude...but we've gone I don't know how many pages arguing the same points in circles, despite proof handed out like candy. It gets a bit frustrating.
So, to clarify once again. THIS is what I have been saying happened to you, and all of my examples, including my right biceps (more on that below)...apply. You were skinny fat, with little muscle. You got fat, and your body put on proportional muscle along WITH that fat. The muscle however, was weak, and ineffecient. You began lifting and losing weight (cutting in effect). Since you were relatively new to physical activity, over the course of your weight loss you made many gains in both size, and strength. These gains were the result of neuromuscular adaptation (increasing the visible size and actual strength/efficiency of your muscles), and glycogen storage (a large contributor to 'bulk').
I don't know why this is so hard to get your head around. The science is there, read it for yourself?
Oh, my biceps...the reason my left arm made no gains, and my right arm has made substantial gains, is because my left arm was still being used efficiently throughout my injury (even moreso, because it took on the burdens of BOTH arms for a time). My right arm (and yes, even my forearm lost some mass), virtually completely forgotten by my brain...stopped storing glycogen basically at all. On top of that, due in part to being immobilized for a period of time, my physical control of that muscle, and the strength that comes with it...reverted back to that of an infant. It then very quickly developed to the control of a typical child, then a sedentary adult, and eventually back to nearly the same level as my left arm. Glycogen storage was resumed, and between the two, size and strength was restored in VERY short order.
Now...if you can't see how these things apply, I'm going to have to end my part in this discussion with you. Not because I don't like you or because I think you're stupid, but because ALL the proof necessary to explain what happened with you has been given. If you don't want to see it or believe it, that's fine. But I wish that you'd stop telling people that you gained actual muscle on a caloric deficit. It's misleading and does more harm than good to be honest.0 -
Chris, Im not claiming that I didnt gain muslce from getting fat, or that water and glycogen levels didn't increase from lifting. But I gained over 110 lbs of weight, according to tigersword, 55 lbs of that would have been lean muscle ( not including addtional weight from water and Glycogen) If that was true, I would have only had to cut less than 50lbs instead of 87 lbs.First off no need to try to be a smart *kitten*. I know you need to lift during a cut, infact about 22% ( depending on the person)of your weight loss will be from lean muscle if you dont. But according to you a newbie that wants to gain LM. should just be lazy and eat bad instead of lift to gain weight, since according to you, they can gain 6.4 lbs of lean muscle in only 8 weeks by doing so. then cut, lift and eat healthy right? No need to lift or eat a strict diet to bulk, right? You're way is alot faster and more enjoyable.
Man...you're not getting it.
It's not according to him...it's a peer reviewed study. You can refute it all you want, but it flat happened. I'm sorry that it doesn't fit in your explanation for what you believe happened with you...but it's still a fact. He showed you proof of exactly what I've been telling you...but you won't even choose to understand it, much less see how it applies to your own situation. My brother, and even myself (not to mention YOU!!) are both perfect examples of this kind of thing.
He also wasn't being rude...but we've gone I don't know how many pages arguing the same points in circles, despite proof handed out like candy. It gets a bit frustrating.
So, to clarify once again. THIS is what I have been saying happened to you, and all of my examples, including my right biceps (more on that below)...apply. You were skinny fat, with little muscle. You got fat, and your body put on proportional muscle along WITH that fat. The muscle however, was weak, and ineffecient. You began lifting and losing weight (cutting in effect). Since you were relatively new to physical activity, over the course of your weight loss you made many gains in both size, and strength. These gains were the result of neuromuscular adaptation (increasing the visible size and actual strength/efficiency of your muscles), and glycogen storage (a large contributor to 'bulk').
I don't know why this is so hard to get your head around. The science is there, read it for yourself?
Oh, my biceps...the reason my left arm made no gains, and my right arm has made substantial gains, is because my left arm was still being used efficiently throughout my injury (even moreso, because it took on the burdens of BOTH arms for a time). My right arm (and yes, even my forearm lost some mass), virtually completely forgotten by my brain...stopped storing glycogen basically at all. On top of that, due in part to being immobilized for a period of time, my physical control of that muscle, and the strength that comes with it...reverted back to that of an infant. It then very quickly developed to the control of a typical child, then a sedentary adult, and eventually back to nearly the same level as my left arm. Glycogen storage was resumed, and between the two, size and strength was restored in VERY short order.
Now...if you can't see how these things apply, I'm going to have to end my part in this discussion with you. Not because I don't like you or because I think you're stupid, but because ALL the proof necessary to explain what happened with you has been given. If you don't want to see it or believe it, that's fine. But I wish that you'd stop telling people that you gained actual muscle on a caloric deficit. It's misleading and does more harm than good to be honest.
If he was also correct the most efficient way for a newbie that wanted to gain lean muscle would be to be lazy eat like a horse, gain 50 lbs of weight, then lift, eat healthy and cut in order to lose 25 lbs of fat and end up looking like a greek god. Half the work, half the sacrifice and also half the amount of time to get the same results. If you think you cain 1 lbs of mucle for every 1 lbs of fat by eating bad and being lazy you are nuts. And if your arm that you keep using as an example was relevant to this discussion, why didnt it gain so much size and strength prior the your surgery or imobiliazation of your arm? It was caused by major trama.0 -
Chris, Im not claiming that I didnt gain muslce from getting fat, or that water and glycogen levels didn't increase from lifting. But I gained over 110 lbs of weight, according to tigersword, 55 lbs of that would have been lean muscle ( not including addtional weight from water and Glycogen) If that was true, I would have only had to cut less than 50lbs instead of 87 lbs.First off no need to try to be a smart *kitten*. I know you need to lift during a cut, infact about 22% ( depending on the person)of your weight loss will be from lean muscle if you dont. But according to you a newbie that wants to gain LM. should just be lazy and eat bad instead of lift to gain weight, since according to you, they can gain 6.4 lbs of lean muscle in only 8 weeks by doing so. then cut, lift and eat healthy right? No need to lift or eat a strict diet to bulk, right? You're way is alot faster and more enjoyable.
Man...you're not getting it.
It's not according to him...it's a peer reviewed study. You can refute it all you want, but it flat happened. I'm sorry that it doesn't fit in your explanation for what you believe happened with you...but it's still a fact. He showed you proof of exactly what I've been telling you...but you won't even choose to understand it, much less see how it applies to your own situation. My brother, and even myself (not to mention YOU!!) are both perfect examples of this kind of thing.
He also wasn't being rude...but we've gone I don't know how many pages arguing the same points in circles, despite proof handed out like candy. It gets a bit frustrating.
So, to clarify once again. THIS is what I have been saying happened to you, and all of my examples, including my right biceps (more on that below)...apply. You were skinny fat, with little muscle. You got fat, and your body put on proportional muscle along WITH that fat. The muscle however, was weak, and ineffecient. You began lifting and losing weight (cutting in effect). Since you were relatively new to physical activity, over the course of your weight loss you made many gains in both size, and strength. These gains were the result of neuromuscular adaptation (increasing the visible size and actual strength/efficiency of your muscles), and glycogen storage (a large contributor to 'bulk').
I don't know why this is so hard to get your head around. The science is there, read it for yourself?
Oh, my biceps...the reason my left arm made no gains, and my right arm has made substantial gains, is because my left arm was still being used efficiently throughout my injury (even moreso, because it took on the burdens of BOTH arms for a time). My right arm (and yes, even my forearm lost some mass), virtually completely forgotten by my brain...stopped storing glycogen basically at all. On top of that, due in part to being immobilized for a period of time, my physical control of that muscle, and the strength that comes with it...reverted back to that of an infant. It then very quickly developed to the control of a typical child, then a sedentary adult, and eventually back to nearly the same level as my left arm. Glycogen storage was resumed, and between the two, size and strength was restored in VERY short order.
Now...if you can't see how these things apply, I'm going to have to end my part in this discussion with you. Not because I don't like you or because I think you're stupid, but because ALL the proof necessary to explain what happened with you has been given. If you don't want to see it or believe it, that's fine. But I wish that you'd stop telling people that you gained actual muscle on a caloric deficit. It's misleading and does more harm than good to be honest.
If he was also correct the most efficient way for a newbie that wanted to gain lean muscle would be to be lazy eat like a horse, gain 50 lbs of weight, then lift, eat healthy and cut in order to lose 25 lbs of fat and end up looking like a greek god. Half the work, half the sacrifice and also half the amount of time to get the same results. If you think you cain 1 lbs of mucle for every 1 lbs of fat by eating bad and being lazy you are nuts. And if your arm that you keep using as an example was relevant to this discussion, why didnt it gain so much size and strength prior the your surgery or imobiliazation of your arm? It was caused by major trama.
Dude, my ARM WAS TOTALLY NORMAL AND HEALTHY BEFORE THE SURGERY!!!
Do you get that? It was ALREADY nearly 15.75". Then post surgery it deflated (again, my BICEPS wasn't injured, there was NO tissue damage to the muscle WHATSOEVER...why aren't you understanding that?) by over 2" due to disuse...causing zero storage of glycogen and atrophy of the neural connections (NOT MUSCLE ATROPHY). Today, just now...I measured it at 15.25", and my left biceps at 15.5". The REASON MY LEFT ARM HASN'T GROWN, IS BECAUSE IT NEVER STOPPED BEING USED AT MAXIMAL EFFICIENCY...and I'M AT A CALORIC DEFICIT. My RIGHT ARM SHRANK FROM DISUSE (again, NOT muscle atrophy!), and GREW NEARLY 2" BACK TO ALMOST NORMAL SIZE in less than two months.
The caps are major points, not yelling. And the point is that I gained well over an INCH of biceps circumference...from the time my biceps was at an inactive persons level of strength, to the point where it was almost to my previous level of strength. If you can't figure out where that applies to your own major increases in measurements, I'm sorry...I can't help you with this anymore.
And you keep saying 'according to tigersword'. It's not according to tigersword. It's according to a (actually multiple...mine was a different study) supervised, controlled medical study. You know, the kinds of studies that cure diseases? Pretty much inarguable scientific observations for all intents and purposes. Do you truly think that those initial gains wouldn't level off if you kept getting more and more fat? Don't they level off in reverse as your work out and lose weight?
Common sense man.
Anyhow, I think it's pretty obvious where this discussion is going between us. I've said 'agree to disagree' about twenty times. It's my polite way of saying that the only way you're going to figure this out is to have the bus it's written on run you over about fifteen times. I'm out. The readers can come to their own conclusions, and hopefully they'll read all the posts (not likely, but it is what it is.../sigh).
Either way you've had great results, and I respect that. Good luck to you in your future progress.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions