Building Muscle vs. Losing Weight

crisanderson27

You can and will build muscle while in deficit. Even better, the more muscle you build, the higher you metabolism will be, because lean muscle burns more calories than fat.

This statement is deceptive and frustrating to someone like me. This implies that any muscle growth = faster metabolism = fat flying off of you. It does not happen like that...

This is true because a pound of muscle burns from 6 - 35 calories per day, depending on who did the study, more than a pound of fat. It is a lot of work to add even one pound of muscle...I wouldn't rely on the fat burning capabilities of a little extra muscle.

But the hormonal response of training that muscle...is another thing entirely. People, it's not all about calories in vs calories out when we're talking about burning fat instead of lean mass. HOW your body determines what is to be burned is a definite player in this game. Strength training spikes growth hormone response, and adrenalin response, both of which protect lean mass, and both of which are KEY FACTORS in fat oxidation. No other form of exercise does this at the same level, and the one most often used by 'fitness experts' doesn't do it at all.

Alright, so, question. I've always had pretty lean calves, I'm assuming due to years and years of dancing, my habit of running, and genetics. The rest of me is pretty fatty. In a one month period, I put on 1/4 inch on my calves (which do not have much fat on them), lost inches just about everywhere else I measure (upper arms, upper thighs, my natural waist, my navel, and my hips), and lost 5 pounds. Does that mean that I did actually build muscle (since my calves got bigger) and also lost fat (since everywhere else except for my bust) while eating at a mild deficit?

My answer is no. You've started using the muscle you have...it's going to store glycogen, along with the fact that your brain is gonig to begin using that muscle more efficiently (giving a small increase in size for some women).

Additionally, your history of being a dancer and running have little (or nothing, to be honest) to do with your calves being lean, while the rest of you wasn't. It's just your genetic predisposition for where your fat is stored.

jaymek92

Alright, so, question. I've always had pretty lean calves, I'm assuming due to years and years of dancing, my habit of running, and genetics. The rest of me is pretty fatty. In a one month period, I put on 1/4 inch on my calves (which do not have much fat on them), lost inches just about everywhere else I measure (upper arms, upper thighs, my natural waist, my navel, and my hips), and lost 5 pounds. Does that mean that I did actually build muscle (since my calves got bigger) and also lost fat (since everywhere else except for my bust) while eating at a mild deficit?

My answer is no. You've started using the muscle you have...it's going to store glycogen, along with the fact that your brain is gonig to begin using that muscle more efficiently (giving a small increase in size for some women).

Additionally, your history of being a dancer and running have little (or nothing, to be honest) to do with your calves being lean, while the rest of you wasn't. It's just your genetic predisposition for where your fat is stored.

Even though I had been already lifting on and off for a few years and lifting seriously for 4 or 5 months, all of a sudden my calves got bigger? That just goes over my head. I could see that being the case if the gain happened in the first month or two of lifting, but not a few months in. However, I'm not an expert and I don't claim to be; it just seems odd that my measurements would be the same for a few months and then get bigger in a one month span.
And at which point would I actually be building muscle, then, opposed to glycogen storage? Would it be when my waist measurements go down and all of my other measurements increase?

crisanderson27

Alright, so, question. I've always had pretty lean calves, I'm assuming due to years and years of dancing, my habit of running, and genetics. The rest of me is pretty fatty. In a one month period, I put on 1/4 inch on my calves (which do not have much fat on them), lost inches just about everywhere else I measure (upper arms, upper thighs, my natural waist, my navel, and my hips), and lost 5 pounds. Does that mean that I did actually build muscle (since my calves got bigger) and also lost fat (since everywhere else except for my bust) while eating at a mild deficit?

My answer is no. You've started using the muscle you have...it's going to store glycogen, along with the fact that your brain is gonig to begin using that muscle more efficiently (giving a small increase in size for some women).

Additionally, your history of being a dancer and running have little (or nothing, to be honest) to do with your calves being lean, while the rest of you wasn't. It's just your genetic predisposition for where your fat is stored.

Even though I had been already lifting on and off for a few years and lifting seriously for 4 or 5 months, all of a sudden my calves got bigger? That just goes over my head. I could see that being the case if the gain happened in the first month or two of lifting, but not a few months in. However, I'm not an expert and I don't claim to be; it just seems odd that my measurements would be the same for a few months and then get bigger in a one month span.
And at which point would I actually be building muscle, then, opposed to glycogen storage? Would it be when my waist measurements go down and all of my other measurements increase?

So you're saying you were lifting weights for four or five months seriously, and suddenly you gained 1/4" on your calves...on a calorie deficit?? I agree that it's odd...but it indicates to me that part of the puzzle is missing. A rather large part.

The point where you would actually be gaining muscle, is the point where you begin eating over your TDEE (maintenance). Looking at it from the direction you are, is like saying 'Do I tell when my bus has stopped for me by randomly stepping into the road and hoping it's there?' The answer is no...you check the bus schedule, make sure you're there on time, and only step into the bus when the door opens lol. Your caloric intake will determine when you build muscle (and understand...unless you're on a very specific eating method...you'll be adding on fat as well!). Your measurements, and waist size aren't relevant to that specific issue...particularly when it's clear something large is missing from the way you're tracking things.

jaymek92

Alright, so, question. I've always had pretty lean calves, I'm assuming due to years and years of dancing, my habit of running, and genetics. The rest of me is pretty fatty. In a one month period, I put on 1/4 inch on my calves (which do not have much fat on them), lost inches just about everywhere else I measure (upper arms, upper thighs, my natural waist, my navel, and my hips), and lost 5 pounds. Does that mean that I did actually build muscle (since my calves got bigger) and also lost fat (since everywhere else except for my bust) while eating at a mild deficit?

My answer is no. You've started using the muscle you have...it's going to store glycogen, along with the fact that your brain is gonig to begin using that muscle more efficiently (giving a small increase in size for some women).

Additionally, your history of being a dancer and running have little (or nothing, to be honest) to do with your calves being lean, while the rest of you wasn't. It's just your genetic predisposition for where your fat is stored.

Even though I had been already lifting on and off for a few years and lifting seriously for 4 or 5 months, all of a sudden my calves got bigger? That just goes over my head. I could see that being the case if the gain happened in the first month or two of lifting, but not a few months in. However, I'm not an expert and I don't claim to be; it just seems odd that my measurements would be the same for a few months and then get bigger in a one month span.
And at which point would I actually be building muscle, then, opposed to glycogen storage? Would it be when my waist measurements go down and all of my other measurements increase?

So you're saying you were lifting weights for four or five months seriously, and suddenly you gained 1/4" on your calves...on a calorie deficit?? I agree that it's odd...but it indicates to me that part of the puzzle is missing. A rather large part.

The point where you would actually be gaining muscle, is the point where you begin eating over your TDEE (maintenance). Looking at it from the direction you are, is like saying 'Do I tell when my bus has stopped for me by randomly stepping into the road and hoping it's there?' The answer is no...you check the bus schedule, make sure you're there on time, and only step into the bus when the door opens lol. Your caloric intake will determine when you build muscle (and understand...unless you're on a very specific eating method...you'll be adding on fat as well!). Your measurements, and waist size aren't relevant to that specific issue...particularly when it's clear something large is missing from the way you're tracking things.

What is missing from the way I'm tracking things?
Right now, my primary goal is to lose fat, so I'm eating at a deficit. When my body fat is low enough to the point where I'm comfortable working to put on weight and serious muscle, I'll up my calories to above my TDEE. I know that I can't put on a significant amount of muscle while eating at a deficit, but the fact that I suddenly gained 1/4 inch on my calves (and it hasn't gone away in the past month) is pretty curious.

tigersword

Just to point out, it's very easy to make an error when talking about a difference of 1/4 inch. Pulling the tape slightly tighter or looser, measuring a spot a few millimeters off from a previous measurement, etc. Especially if you are doing the measurements yourself. Heck, I changed one of my biceps measurements by almost a half inch just by touching the handle on my myotape.

mmapags

But the hormonal response of training that muscle...is another thing entirely. People, it's not all about calories in vs calories out when we're talking about burning fat instead of lean mass. HOW your body determines what is to be burned is a definite player in this game. Strength training spikes growth hormone response, and adrenalin response, both of which protect lean mass, and both of which are KEY FACTORS in fat oxidation. No other form of exercise does this at the same level, and the one most often used by 'fitness experts' doesn't do it at all.

Yes, excellent point!

crisanderson27

Alright, so, question. I've always had pretty lean calves, I'm assuming due to years and years of dancing, my habit of running, and genetics. The rest of me is pretty fatty. In a one month period, I put on 1/4 inch on my calves (which do not have much fat on them), lost inches just about everywhere else I measure (upper arms, upper thighs, my natural waist, my navel, and my hips), and lost 5 pounds. Does that mean that I did actually build muscle (since my calves got bigger) and also lost fat (since everywhere else except for my bust) while eating at a mild deficit?

My answer is no. You've started using the muscle you have...it's going to store glycogen, along with the fact that your brain is gonig to begin using that muscle more efficiently (giving a small increase in size for some women).

Additionally, your history of being a dancer and running have little (or nothing, to be honest) to do with your calves being lean, while the rest of you wasn't. It's just your genetic predisposition for where your fat is stored.

Even though I had been already lifting on and off for a few years and lifting seriously for 4 or 5 months, all of a sudden my calves got bigger? That just goes over my head. I could see that being the case if the gain happened in the first month or two of lifting, but not a few months in. However, I'm not an expert and I don't claim to be; it just seems odd that my measurements would be the same for a few months and then get bigger in a one month span.
And at which point would I actually be building muscle, then, opposed to glycogen storage? Would it be when my waist measurements go down and all of my other measurements increase?

So you're saying you were lifting weights for four or five months seriously, and suddenly you gained 1/4" on your calves...on a calorie deficit?? I agree that it's odd...but it indicates to me that part of the puzzle is missing. A rather large part.

The point where you would actually be gaining muscle, is the point where you begin eating over your TDEE (maintenance). Looking at it from the direction you are, is like saying 'Do I tell when my bus has stopped for me by randomly stepping into the road and hoping it's there?' The answer is no...you check the bus schedule, make sure you're there on time, and only step into the bus when the door opens lol. Your caloric intake will determine when you build muscle (and understand...unless you're on a very specific eating method...you'll be adding on fat as well!). Your measurements, and waist size aren't relevant to that specific issue...particularly when it's clear something large is missing from the way you're tracking things.

What is missing from the way I'm tracking things?
Right now, my primary goal is to lose fat, so I'm eating at a deficit. When my body fat is low enough to the point where I'm comfortable working to put on weight and serious muscle, I'll up my calories to above my TDEE. I know that I can't put on a significant amount of muscle while eating at a deficit, but the fact that I suddenly gained 1/4 inch on my calves (and it hasn't gone away in the past month) is pretty curious.

It is curious...because, again...you didn't gain 1/4" of muscle on your calves in a deficit at the end of 5mos of strength training. The first month or two??? MAYBE...but if that were the case I would impart this more to your previous activities than even being overweight. This is why I'm saying something is missing. Your caloric needs may have changed due to other factors in your life, or your weight loss may have impacted those caloric needs, thus skewing your TDEE number. There's a million factors involved in this..but the fact remains that if you're not feeding the muscle, it will NOT grow.

Just to point out, it's very easy to make an error when talking about a difference of 1/4 inch. Pulling the tape slightly tighter or looser, measuring a spot a few millimeters off from a previous measurement, etc. Especially if you are doing the measurements yourself. Heck, I changed one of my biceps measurements by almost a half inch just by touching the handle on my myotape.

Good point Tiger. I think she's saying that this new measurement is repeatable...but even so, it's another variable that we simply don't have any knowledge of.

jaymek92

Just to point out, it's very easy to make an error when talking about a difference of 1/4 inch. Pulling the tape slightly tighter or looser, measuring a spot a few millimeters off from a previous measurement, etc. Especially if you are doing the measurements yourself. Heck, I changed one of my biceps measurements by almost a half inch just by touching the handle on my myotape.

I'm very, very accurate when conducting my measurements. I do it in the exact same spot on my body under the same conditions (first thing in the morning before eating or drinking anything and after getting a similar night's sleep and eating similarly the night before).

jaymek92

It is curious...because, again...you didn't gain 1/4" of muscle on your calves in a deficit at the end of 5mos of strength training. The first month or two??? MAYBE...but if that were the case I would impart this more to your previous activities than even being overweight. This is why I'm saying something is missing. Your caloric needs may have changed due to other factors in your life, or your weight loss may have impacted those caloric needs, thus skewing your TDEE number. There's a million factors involved in this..but the fact remains that if you're not feeding the muscle, it will NOT grow.

I'm aware my TDEE number has changed and since I've started watching what I'm eating and lifting and running more seriously, I have increased my net caloric intake by 150.
If you feel that something is missing which makes you unable to determine what the increase came from, just come out and say it instead of dancing around it. I'd like to know what the gain came from.

ninerbuff

What is missing from the way I'm tracking things?
Right now, my primary goal is to lose fat, so I'm eating at a deficit. When my body fat is low enough to the point where I'm comfortable working to put on weight and serious muscle, I'll up my calories to above my TDEE. I know that I can't put on a significant amount of muscle while eating at a deficit, but the fact that I suddenly gained 1/4 inch on my calves (and it hasn't gone away in the past month) is pretty curious.

Maybe you didn't shave close enough? 1/4 "suddenly" isn't muscle building. Realize that to put on that much, especially in the calves which are the densest of all muscle fibers in the body, would take some phenomenal work along with serious nutrition.
So are you doing heavy calf raises, donkey calf raises, or seated calf raises to make them grow bigger?

A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

crisanderson27

It is curious...because, again...you didn't gain 1/4" of muscle on your calves in a deficit at the end of 5mos of strength training. The first month or two??? MAYBE...but if that were the case I would impart this more to your previous activities than even being overweight. This is why I'm saying something is missing. Your caloric needs may have changed due to other factors in your life, or your weight loss may have impacted those caloric needs, thus skewing your TDEE number. There's a million factors involved in this..but the fact remains that if you're not feeding the muscle, it will NOT grow.

I'm aware my TDEE number has changed and since I've started watching what I'm eating and lifting and running more seriously, I have increased my net caloric intake by 150.
If you feel that something is missing which makes you unable to determine what the increase came from, just come out and say it instead of dancing around it. I'd like to know what the gain came from.

I've came out and said a dozen times that something is missing and so (implied), I can't determine why you've gained 1/4" in your calves.

Add that to what Niner just posted:

Maybe you didn't shave close enough? 1/4 "suddenly" isn't muscle building. Realize that to put on that much, especially in the calves which are the densest of all muscle fibers in the body, would take some phenomenal work along with serious nutrition.
So are you doing heavy calf raises, donkey calf raises, or seated calf raises to make them grow bigger?

And it makes even less sense.

jaymek92

What is missing from the way I'm tracking things?
Right now, my primary goal is to lose fat, so I'm eating at a deficit. When my body fat is low enough to the point where I'm comfortable working to put on weight and serious muscle, I'll up my calories to above my TDEE. I know that I can't put on a significant amount of muscle while eating at a deficit, but the fact that I suddenly gained 1/4 inch on my calves (and it hasn't gone away in the past month) is pretty curious.

Maybe you didn't shave close enough? 1/4 "suddenly" isn't muscle building. Realize that to put on that much, especially in the calves which are the densest of all muscle fibers in the body, would take some phenomenal work along with serious nutrition.
So are you doing heavy calf raises, donkey calf raises, or seated calf raises to make them grow bigger?

A.C.E. Certified Personal/Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

None of the above. I'm not doing any calf-specific exercises because I do (did) a lot of running hills in my half marathon training and preferred to save my calves for long runs since I'm not specifically focusing on muscle-building right now.

Trail_Addict

I just don't understand why some people insist so vehemently that they somehow defy the laws of nature, especially when they didn't scientifically track their progress.

It's almost like "Hey! I lost 20lbs of fat while gaining 10lbs of muscle. How do I know? Because I said so."

jaymek92

I just don't understand why some people insist so vehemently that they somehow defy the laws of nature, especially when they didn't scientifically track their progress.

It's almost like "Hey! I lost 20lbs of fat while gaining 10lbs of muscle. How do I know? Because I said so."

Or it's like "Hey! I lost 26 pounds and all of my measurements have decreased except for this one that got bigger. For what reason did this one get bigger?"

Trail_Addict

I just don't understand why some people insist so vehemently that they somehow defy the laws of nature, especially when they didn't scientifically track their progress.

It's almost like "Hey! I lost 20lbs of fat while gaining 10lbs of muscle. How do I know? Because I said so."

Or it's like "Hey! I lost 26 pounds and all of my measurements have decreased except for this one that got bigger. For what reason did this one get bigger?"

Unless you conducted your study in a lab, I'm going to go with human error on some part. I run the hell out of hills, and in the first 6 months, my calves got very ripped, and decreased in size. A year later they are back to the original measurement, minus the fat. It certainly didn't happen "all of a sudden". I'm guessing it was a slight measurement error; it's very easy to do.

crisanderson27

I just don't understand why some people insist so vehemently that they somehow defy the laws of nature, especially when they didn't scientifically track their progress.

It's almost like "Hey! I lost 20lbs of fat while gaining 10lbs of muscle. How do I know? Because I said so."

Or it's like "Hey! I lost 26 pounds and all of my measurements have decreased except for this one that got bigger. For what reason did this one get bigger?"

Unless you conducted your study in a lab, I'm going to go with human error on some part. I run the hell out of hills, and in the first 6 months, my calves got very ripped, and decreased in size. A year later they are back to the original measurement, minus the fat. It certainly didn't happen "all of a sudden". I'm guessing it was a slight measurement error; it's very easy to do.

Don't give her that 'I run hills' line man...save it for your friends list!



Seriously though...Trail_Addict isn't fooling...he both runs and trains...HARD. That's why I keep telling you that if you truly believe your measuring method is accurate and hasn't changed, something is missing from what you're saying. I don't believe that you're omitting anything on purpose of course...but the fact remains that it flies in the face of logic, and science. I'd love to find out why too.

jadedone

I just got into an arguement with someone today about this very thing. I have gained muscle and I have lost weight. Everybody is different. My legs are bigger. My arms and back are much more defined. My stomach is flattened out. My hips and stomach are smaller but my legs are bigger. My pants fit really badly right now. Too small in some places and too big in others. I like having muscletone so this really doesn't bother me. I just have to find pants that are cut differently. I still have about 5 more pounds to lose. I'm going to continue to eat at a deficit and alternate cardio one day with strength training the next until my weight is where I want it, then I will up my calories to maintain. I feel great.

I have actually had this pants problem since around age 8 or 10....so I figure it actually can't get any worse for me, even if I lift more weights. Stretch is your friend. Also try Gap Long and Lean. Try curvy cut pants and Ann Taylor as well. I sized out of Express a while ago, but they used to be a good option too.

I have some jeans in my closet that are my "skinny jeans," They are about 2-3 inches too big in the waist, and really snug in the thigh.

FlyeredUp

I just don't get why this has to be hill that people want to die on. The science says, with a few exceptions for the obese, newbies gains and atheletes reconditioning, you cannot gain muscle on a deficit. Chris has explained over and over why people see size gains. It's neuromuscular adaption of EXISTING muscle tissue. Yes you get bigger. Yes you get stronger, yes you look better. But you likely didn't grow new muscle cells unless you fit into one of the categories above. And newbie gains are minimal at best.

Why does this really matter to those who claim you did grow muscle tissue. Is it not enough to have a better developed muscle structure, less fat, more strength and look great?? Do you really need to believe that you've beaten the laws of biophysiology too?? Hey, you've accomplished a lot. You look and feel better and you are more healthy. Can't you just give it a rest??!!

Nope, the reason I posted my results is because 90 + % of the people on MFP. are newbies to lifting and also over weight, ( the people who can gain muscle while on a deficit) And in my opinion weight training is the single most important thing I did to change my body ( to me weight training is like finding the fountain of youth!) and dont want anyone to be discouraged from implementing a weight training program of their own because they read these threads and might think its not worth the effort.

I kind of figured you had a helpful reason behind it...you're a good guy from all I've seen.

The problem is...your results (and I still doubt you've gained much, if any actual mass)...aren't typical (even for newbies...you've pushed HARD...like I did, and most just don't) for one, for two...they only really apply to men. Women in general...even the most naturally testosterone filled one you can pick out of a crowd...will not have the same results.

And here's the thing...seeing all of these posts about building muscle on a deficit...turns them AWAY from lifting. Most women don't want to build muscle...and that's good because they can't easily. But seeing a relatively well built guy saying over and over that they will (which again...the evidence says they won't)...is disheartening.

Do you get what I mean?

Also...I still want to know your opinion on why I'm working my way towards gaining 2" (over 1.5" now) on my right biceps. The answer applies directly to your specific circumstances.

Chris your a good guy aswell and there is nothing wrong with us disagreeing.:drinker: I will be back later to answer your questions ( and like you always point out to women that they shouldn't expect to see the same gains as men but regardless its still very much worth their time to lift) But I have to leave for a wedding. But here is a pic of me at 25 year old right after started gaining my weight, I was 180 lbs back then and then my current pic at 213 lbs and a smaller waist. I didnt gain 33 + lbs of muscle between then and now just from being lazy, eating bad, drinking alot of beer and gaining 50 lbs of fat. ( if you are correct about me just losing fat and uncovering my existing muscle)
( not saying I didnt gain muscle from gaining fat) Be back later.

Sorry - but these pictures are a little disingenuous. I know there are a bunch of pics 'in between' where there is a significant weight gain (cause you have posted them before) so you must have been eating at a surplus. You did not go from pic #1 straight to pic #2 by building muscle at a deficit.

Sorry I was in a rush to get out the door as I was typing my last post, Yes like I said before, In between the two pics, I gained alot of fat from becomming lazy, laying on the couch, eating bad food and alot of it and driunking alot of beer. Then losing 83 lbs.
But there is no way I went from my before pic to my after pic. just by being lazy, eating bad and drinking beer, and then losing the fat. For example, at 287 lbs, my highest weight I didnt have any traps, just like I didnt prior to gaining the weight, I also didnt gain any noticable muscle in my legs or calves and my calves are now over an inch larger than they were at my highest weight. Also at 287 lbs, I could wrap my thumb and middle finger around my forearm ( right above my wrist) and touch my fingers together, now I cant even come close. I didnt gain any lean muscle in these area's from gettting fat. ( not saying I didnt gain any lean muscle from getting fat)

FlyeredUp

Chris your a good guy aswell and there is nothing wrong with us disagreeing. I will be back later to answer your questions ( and like you always point out to women that they shouldn't expect to see the same gains as men but regardless its still very much worth their time to lift) But I have to leave for a wedding. But here is a pic of me at 25 year old right after started gaining my weight, I was 180 lbs back then and then my current pic at 213 lbs and a smaller waist. I didnt gain 33 + lbs of muscle between then and now just from being lazy, eating bad, drinking alot of beer and gaining 50 lbs of fat. ( if you are correct about me just losing fat and uncovering my existing muscle)
( not saying I didnt gain muscle from gaining fat) Be back later.

I think you would be amazed at how much muscle is built on a caloric surplus (particularly over time!) when you're carrying around a crapload of weight just moving your body around. Yes, this includes in your arms, shoulders, back, everywhere. My little brother is a perfect example. He went from overweight/obese, to this picture in his first year of strength training (I wish I had a before picture!).



Eating on a calorie deficit, being anal about his protein intake, and hard strength training did that. It was all existing mass, with the size stimulated by neuromuscular response, and glycogen storage. He gained over 3" on his arms alone.

All with existing muscle.

Oh, and for the record...this picture was after 6mos of bulking, and 3mos cutting, net weight gain was only 4lbs:



Not a lot of difference in size...is there.

Chris please read my previous post. You dont have a before pic of your brother prior to him getting fat? And then after getting fat?

Sarauk2sf

I just don't get why this has to be hill that people want to die on. The science says, with a few exceptions for the obese, newbies gains and atheletes reconditioning, you cannot gain muscle on a deficit. Chris has explained over and over why people see size gains. It's neuromuscular adaption of EXISTING muscle tissue. Yes you get bigger. Yes you get stronger, yes you look better. But you likely didn't grow new muscle cells unless you fit into one of the categories above. And newbie gains are minimal at best.

Why does this really matter to those who claim you did grow muscle tissue. Is it not enough to have a better developed muscle structure, less fat, more strength and look great?? Do you really need to believe that you've beaten the laws of biophysiology too?? Hey, you've accomplished a lot. You look and feel better and you are more healthy. Can't you just give it a rest??!!

Nope, the reason I posted my results is because 90 + % of the people on MFP. are newbies to lifting and also over weight, ( the people who can gain muscle while on a deficit) And in my opinion weight training is the single most important thing I did to change my body ( to me weight training is like finding the fountain of youth!) and dont want anyone to be discouraged from implementing a weight training program of their own because they read these threads and might think its not worth the effort.

I kind of figured you had a helpful reason behind it...you're a good guy from all I've seen.

The problem is...your results (and I still doubt you've gained much, if any actual mass)...aren't typical (even for newbies...you've pushed HARD...like I did, and most just don't) for one, for two...they only really apply to men. Women in general...even the most naturally testosterone filled one you can pick out of a crowd...will not have the same results.

And here's the thing...seeing all of these posts about building muscle on a deficit...turns them AWAY from lifting. Most women don't want to build muscle...and that's good because they can't easily. But seeing a relatively well built guy saying over and over that they will (which again...the evidence says they won't)...is disheartening.

Do you get what I mean?

Also...I still want to know your opinion on why I'm working my way towards gaining 2" (over 1.5" now) on my right biceps. The answer applies directly to your specific circumstances.

Chris your a good guy aswell and there is nothing wrong with us disagreeing.:drinker: I will be back later to answer your questions ( and like you always point out to women that they shouldn't expect to see the same gains as men but regardless its still very much worth their time to lift) But I have to leave for a wedding. But here is a pic of me at 25 year old right after started gaining my weight, I was 180 lbs back then and then my current pic at 213 lbs and a smaller waist. I didnt gain 33 + lbs of muscle between then and now just from being lazy, eating bad, drinking alot of beer and gaining 50 lbs of fat. ( if you are correct about me just losing fat and uncovering my existing muscle)
( not saying I didnt gain muscle from gaining fat) Be back later.

Sorry - but these pictures are a little disingenuous. I know there are a bunch of pics 'in between' where there is a significant weight gain (cause you have posted them before) so you must have been eating at a surplus. You did not go from pic #1 straight to pic #2 by building muscle at a deficit.

Sorry I was in a rush to get out the door as I was typing my last post, Yes like I said before, In between the two pics, I gained alot of fat from becomming lazy, laying on the couch, eating bad food and alot of it and driunking alot of beer. Then losing 83 lbs.
But there is no way I went from my before pic to my after pic. just by being lazy, eating bad and drinking beer, and then losing the fat. For example, at 287 lbs, my highest weight I didnt have any traps, just like I didnt prior to gaining the weight, I also didnt gain any noticable muscle in my legs or calves and my calves are now over an inch larger than they were at my highest weight. Also at 287 lbs, I could wrap my thumb and middle finger around my forearm ( right above my wrist) and touch my fingers together, now I cant even come close. I didnt gain any lean muscle in these area's from gettting fat. ( not saying I didnt gain any lean muscle from getting fat)

I did not mean that you that you did it by basically sitting on your *kitten* - I hope you did not take it that way. I know it takes a shi*t load of work to get into the shape you are in now. The point I was trying to clarify, and that you had already pointed out earlier, was that you went from a larger size down to where you are now. Most people do not read all the way through these threads most of the time.

I was not trying to give you a hard time maliciously :flowerforyou:

FlyeredUp

I just don't get why this has to be hill that people want to die on. The science says, with a few exceptions for the obese, newbies gains and atheletes reconditioning, you cannot gain muscle on a deficit. Chris has explained over and over why people see size gains. It's neuromuscular adaption of EXISTING muscle tissue. Yes you get bigger. Yes you get stronger, yes you look better. But you likely didn't grow new muscle cells unless you fit into one of the categories above. And newbie gains are minimal at best.

Why does this really matter to those who claim you did grow muscle tissue. Is it not enough to have a better developed muscle structure, less fat, more strength and look great?? Do you really need to believe that you've beaten the laws of biophysiology too?? Hey, you've accomplished a lot. You look and feel better and you are more healthy. Can't you just give it a rest??!!

Nope, the reason I posted my results is because 90 + % of the people on MFP. are newbies to lifting and also over weight, ( the people who can gain muscle while on a deficit) And in my opinion weight training is the single most important thing I did to change my body ( to me weight training is like finding the fountain of youth!) and dont want anyone to be discouraged from implementing a weight training program of their own because they read these threads and might think its not worth the effort.

I kind of figured you had a helpful reason behind it...you're a good guy from all I've seen.

The problem is...your results (and I still doubt you've gained much, if any actual mass)...aren't typical (even for newbies...you've pushed HARD...like I did, and most just don't) for one, for two...they only really apply to men. Women in general...even the most naturally testosterone filled one you can pick out of a crowd...will not have the same results.

And here's the thing...seeing all of these posts about building muscle on a deficit...turns them AWAY from lifting. Most women don't want to build muscle...and that's good because they can't easily. But seeing a relatively well built guy saying over and over that they will (which again...the evidence says they won't)...is disheartening.

Do you get what I mean?

Also...I still want to know your opinion on why I'm working my way towards gaining 2" (over 1.5" now) on my right biceps. The answer applies directly to your specific circumstances.

Chris your a good guy aswell and there is nothing wrong with us disagreeing.:drinker: I will be back later to answer your questions ( and like you always point out to women that they shouldn't expect to see the same gains as men but regardless its still very much worth their time to lift) But I have to leave for a wedding. But here is a pic of me at 25 year old right after started gaining my weight, I was 180 lbs back then and then my current pic at 213 lbs and a smaller waist. I didnt gain 33 + lbs of muscle between then and now just from being lazy, eating bad, drinking alot of beer and gaining 50 lbs of fat. ( if you are correct about me just losing fat and uncovering my existing muscle)
( not saying I didnt gain muscle from gaining fat) Be back later.

Sorry - but these pictures are a little disingenuous. I know there are a bunch of pics 'in between' where there is a significant weight gain (cause you have posted them before) so you must have been eating at a surplus. You did not go from pic #1 straight to pic #2 by building muscle at a deficit.

Sorry I was in a rush to get out the door as I was typing my last post, Yes like I said before, In between the two pics, I gained alot of fat from becomming lazy, laying on the couch, eating bad food and alot of it and driunking alot of beer. Then losing 83 lbs.
But there is no way I went from my before pic to my after pic. just by being lazy, eating bad and drinking beer, and then losing the fat. For example, at 287 lbs, my highest weight I didnt have any traps, just like I didnt prior to gaining the weight, I also didnt gain any noticable muscle in my legs or calves and my calves are now over an inch larger than they were at my highest weight. Also at 287 lbs, I could wrap my thumb and middle finger around my forearm ( right above my wrist) and touch my fingers together, now I cant even come close. I didnt gain any lean muscle in these area's from gettting fat. ( not saying I didnt gain any lean muscle from getting fat)

I did not mean that you that you did it by basically sitting on your *kitten* - I hope you did not take it that way. I know it takes a shi*t load of work to get into the shape you are in now. The point I was trying to clarify, and that you had already pointed out earlier, was that you went from a larger size down to where you are now. Most people do not read all the way through these threads most of the time.

I was not trying to give you a hard time maliciously :flowerforyou:

Oh, I know you wern't I just thought you misunderstood my previous post because I was in a rush and didn't convey what I was trying to say very well.

crisanderson27

My brother was never not fat...well, not from his late teens anyhow. I still think you're underestimating how much muscle you have when you've got to carry around nearly 300lbs of body. I understand you talking about things like traps and your wrist, but the small amount of growth necessary to change those things from looking nonexistent to visible falls well within the range of glycogen storage and again...neuromuscular adaptation.

Before we continue this discussion though, I want you to explain to me how I've grown over 1.5" on my right biceps (and climbing)...no gain on my left...in this short period of time.

On a calorie deficit.

FlyeredUp

My brother was never not fat...well, not from his late teens anyhow. I still think you're underestimating how much muscle you have when you've got to carry around nearly 300lbs of body. I understand you talking about things like traps and your wrist, but the small amount of growth necessary to change those things from looking nonexistent to visible falls well within the range of glycogen storage and again...neuromuscular adaptation.

Before we continue this discussion though, I want you to explain to me how I've grown over 1.5" on my right biceps (and climbing)...no gain on my left...in this short period of time.

On a calorie deficit.

Chris, I don't know the circumstances of your surgery, damaged tissue etc. but my cousin is a surgeon and I will ask him what the possibilities are tomorrow. See, if i would have gained the same amount of muscle in my legs and calves from carrying all the extra weight around as I did in my arms, chest, back and shoulders you might have a point, but I didnt, my legs and calves wern't much different at 287 lbs as they were at 180. And you would think my legs and calves would have benefited as much if not more than other area's of my body. I also understand about glycogen storage and water retention, I lift at one of the top gyms ( the York Barbell Gym) in the country, Its the birth place of body buildiing, weight lifting and unfortunately steriods in the USA. (actually ninerbuff knows about it and has either drove past it or took a tour when he was in the area) The thing is glycogen and water levels flucuate in your body, my monthly measurements taken by very knowledgeable trainers never flucutated over time (after the 4th or 5th month) my measurements either stayed the same or increased, they never decreased after the 5th month.

crisanderson27

My brother was never not fat...well, not from his late teens anyhow. I still think you're underestimating how much muscle you have when you've got to carry around nearly 300lbs of body. I understand you talking about things like traps and your wrist, but the small amount of growth necessary to change those things from looking nonexistent to visible falls well within the range of glycogen storage and again...neuromuscular adaptation.

Before we continue this discussion though, I want you to explain to me how I've grown over 1.5" on my right biceps (and climbing)...no gain on my left...in this short period of time.

On a calorie deficit.

Chris, I don't know the circumstances of your surgery, damaged tissue etc. but my cousin is a surgeon and I will ask him what the possibilities are tomorrow. See, if i would have gained the same amount of muscle in my legs and calves from carrying all the extra weight around as I did in my arms, chest, back and shoulders you might have a point, but I didnt, my legs and calves wern't much different at 287 lbs as they were at 180. And you would think my legs and calves would have benefitted as much if not more than other area's of my body. I also understand about glycogen storage and water retention, I lift at one of the top gyms ( the York Barbell Gym) in the country, Its the birth place of body buildiing, weight lifting and unfortunately steriods in the USA. (actually ninerbuff knows about it and has either drove past it or took a tour when he was in the area) The thing is glycogen and water levels flucuate in your body, my monthly measurements taken by very knowledgeable trainers never flucutated over time (after the 4th or 5th month) my measurements either stayed the same or increased, they never decreased after the 5th month.

The muscles in your legs are more dense (particularly your calves). They react in a different way than upper body muscles.

As for my injury, I ripped my right lower biceps tendon off of my forearm. For two weeks before the surgery...the biceps couldn't contract, because there was nothing to contract against. Post surgery, it was in a partially immobile splint for two weeks. When the splint was removed...my biceps was flaccid, it would barely flex, and the muscle was visibly smaller (this had nothing to do with the surgery or injury itself...that was strictly the tendon, totally unrelated to the tissue...my biceps is, and was...whole). In less than a month, it was nearly at its previous size, would flex, and my strength increase was rapid. Easily as quickly as when I first started lifting. It's still gaining in size, every week.

Pre injury:


Night of the injury:


I've been on a deficit the entire time.

I'm asking you this for a very specific reason...so please bear with me before we continue your part of the discussion, as I feel this has a very direct relation.

FlyeredUp

So why has the muscles in my legs responded to lifting the same as other muscle groups then, but my legs didnt respond to carrying around 287 lbs on a daily basis?

Chris No offense but if you think that you know more about what I gained or havent gained better than the trainers and the body builders that train there you would be mistaken. ( not saying that your not knowledgable) Also there is now way I gained what .66 lbs of muscle for every 1 lb. of fat from just being lazy, drinking, eating bad and then carrying that extra weight around. Heck I'm currently bulking right now and have gained 11 lbs so far, mise well quit workingout and eating healthy and just gain 30 more lbs and then cut to reach my goal. Instead of bulking, cutting, eating healthy and busting my *kitten* for the next 2 years.
LIke I said I will talk to my cousin tomorrow to find out what the possiblilites are.

crisanderson27

So why has the muscles in my legs responded in my legs to lifting the same as other muscle groups then but my legs didnt respond to carrying around 287 lbs on a daily basis?

Chris No offense but if you think that you know more about what I gained or havent gained than the trainers and the body builders that train there you would be mistaken. ( not saying that your not knowledgable) Also there is now way I gained what .66 lbs of muscle for every 1 lb. of fat from just being lazy, drinking, eating bad and then carrying that extra weight around. Heck I'm currently bulking right now and have gained 11 lbs so far, mise well quit workingout and eating healthy and just gain 30 more lbs and then cut to reach my goal. Instead of bulking, cutting, eating healthy and busting my *kitten* for the next 2 years.
LIke I said I talk to my cousin tomorrow to find out what the possiblilites are.

Not offended...it takes more than that...and you're just conversing like I am...no worries.

I'm not saying I know more...at all. Trust me there lol.

By the way...it will be interesting to hear what your cousin has to say. When I told my ortho the issue, then told him my belief of what it was...he was very surprised. He flat said that of every one of these procedures he had ever performed...100% across the board...I was the only one who figured out the right answer on my own. This is hundreds and hundreds...pro athletes, competitive lifters...body builders...etc. Its not that I'm smarter...or know more either. It's just that I knew how...and more importantly...had the desire...to find out WHY. I asked him what the others thought it was...and the answer was gaining muscle....invariably.

It's a very logical assumption.

FlyeredUp

So why has the muscles in my legs responded in my legs to lifting the same as other muscle groups then but my legs didnt respond to carrying around 287 lbs on a daily basis?

Chris No offense but if you think that you know more about what I gained or havent gained than the trainers and the body builders that train there you would be mistaken. ( not saying that your not knowledgable) Also there is now way I gained what .66 lbs of muscle for every 1 lb. of fat from just being lazy, drinking, eating bad and then carrying that extra weight around. Heck I'm currently bulking right now and have gained 11 lbs so far, mise well quit workingout and eating healthy and just gain 30 more lbs and then cut to reach my goal. Instead of bulking, cutting, eating healthy and busting my *kitten* for the next 2 years.
LIke I said I talk to my cousin tomorrow to find out what the possiblilites are.

Not offended...it takes more than that...and you're just conversing like I am...no worries.

I'm not saying I know more...at all. Trust me there lol.

By the way...it will be interesting to hear what your cousin has to say. When I told my ortho the issue, then told him my belief of what it was...he was very surprised. He flat said that of every one of these procedures he had ever performed...100% across the board...I was the only one who figured out the right answer on my own. This is hundreds and hundreds...pro athletes, competitive lifters...body builders...etc. Its not that I'm smarter...or know more either. It's just that I knew how...and more importantly...had the desire...to find out WHY. I asked him what the others thought it was...and the answer was gaining muscle....invariably.

It's a very logical assumption.

Oh I know the answer isnt muscle and from the way you keep hinting i'm almost 100% sure I know the answer, I just need to find out today how damaged and surgically repaired tissue in one of your arms applys to me or even your other arm ( if at all) Just like using your brother to compare to me when you don't know how much lean muscle mass he had prior to gaining the weight like we do with me. Basicly I dont need to find out what the answer to your question is, just if we are comparing apples to apples or apples to oranges.

crisanderson27

Not offended...it takes more than that...and you're just conversing like I am...no worries.

I'm not saying I know more...at all. Trust me there lol.

By the way...it will be interesting to hear what your cousin has to say. When I told my ortho the issue, then told him my belief of what it was...he was very surprised. He flat said that of every one of these procedures he had ever performed...100% across the board...I was the only one who figured out the right answer on my own. This is hundreds and hundreds...pro athletes, competitive lifters...body builders...etc. Its not that I'm smarter...or know more either. It's just that I knew how...and more importantly...had the desire...to find out WHY. I asked him what the others thought it was...and the answer was gaining muscle....invariably.

It's a very logical assumption.

Oh I know the answer isnt muscle and from the way you keep hinting i'm almost 100% sure I know the answer, I just need to find out today how damaged and surgically repaired tissue in one of your arms applys to me or even your other arm ( if at all) Just like using your brother to compare to me when you don't know how much lean muscle mass he had prior to gaining the weight like we do with me. Basicly I dont need to find out what the answer to your question is, just if we are comparing apples to apples or apples to oranges.

The tissue wasn't damaged, it was just effectively immobilized for nearly a month. The tendon was damaged, but only in the area where it was ripped from the bone. The muscle is and was 100% intact. Here's a 3D animated video of the exact procedure they did on me.

http://youtu.be/n2Yut-0l2oU

And I'll just skip to the point...though I'd still love to hear your cousins response. During the course of that immobilization, the connections between my brain, and my biceps...fell into disuse. This happens amazingly quickly. Also because of the fact it was no longer usable...the muscle stopped storing glycogen virtually completely. It wasn't necessary anymore...and this caused an almost Instant and very drastic reduction in size. Once the tendon was repaired at the bone, suddenly my biceps became usable again. There hadn't been enough time for real atrophy to occur, and yet...I had no strength. The muscle was fundamentally like that of an infant again. Soft, and useless. It was all there still, but it didn't really matter. Within a week of normal use, it grew in size some (not a lot), I still couldn't effectively 'flex' it...but I could cause it to move again. When I hit the gym though...things began happening in a very dramatic manner.

It flat grew.

According to my ortho, most inactive people, particularly obese people...normally hang in a range much closer to the infant end of the scale, than the lifter/athlete end. Their muscles only store enough glycogen, and the level of communication with the brain (which requires energy expenditure) is only maintained to the level necessary for motion. I had friends a couple years back who were twins. One was a construction worker (that's how we met), the other a sales clerk at a clothing store. Neither worked out, they lived together so their diet I assume was relatively similar...but their physiques were completely, totally different...to the point they looked more like cousins or regular brothers than twins. Virtually identical genetics. Anyway, the point is...that just the simple act of going to the gym, is MORE than enough to cause very quick increases in strength, and in male individuals, a decent amount of size. Firmness is improved quickly as well. My gains were accelerated dramatically by the previous level of fitness I had maintained. Some people it takes months and more to come to that same level...even without new muscle 'growth'.

Again, it looked like there was NO biceps there! I don't mean just a soft version of the larger muscle...I mean my arm looked almost entirely straight from shoulder to elbow. You talk about having no traps? I had no biceps. There was no 'belly' at my elbow even when not flexed. Nothing.

I will put in an email to my ortho (we still communicate, he fully released me three full weeks before any person he'd performed this surgery before, and asked me to keep in touch if I had any further issues)...and see if he'll give me his take on this. I truly believe he's going to say that if you put on any effective muscle, it was minimal...and that virtually all of your gains came from your body using what it already had.

As another quick and only semi related example...did you know that as a child, if the muscles in one eye or the other focus differently for a lengthy period of time, your brain will literally STOP using that eye? You will literally lose vision, permanently and irrevocably, due to the lack of proper communication between your brain, and the muscles of your eye. Our brains and muscular structures are very, very strange and complicated things.

Anyway, my brother...the point that I was making is that due to his weight, there was actual muscle mass under there. Grab a fat mans arm, tell him to flex...yes, there may be half an inch of fat surrounding it...but under that, is muscle. It's LARGE (if not strong and hard). And yes, he gained it while being lazy and drinking beer and overeating. If more men strength trained from obesity, while maintaining appropriate protein intake, I think we'd all be very, very jealous of their results. I personally don't know any man that has done that...other than my brother. They ALL do substantial cardio first.

FlyeredUp

Chris what Im getting at is what occured to you injured arm isn't relevant because it is like comparing apples to oranges when comparing it to me or even your other arm. And no offense other than your brother busting his butt lifting from day one because I did the same thing, nothing else you just posted is either.

crisanderson27

Chris what Im getting at is what occured to you injured arm isn't relevant because it is like comparing apples to oranges when comparing it to me or even your other arm. And no offense other than your brother busting his butt lifting from day one because I did the same thing, nothing else you just posted is either.

Muscle to muscle is apples to oranges? A muscle being forcibly returned to a state of disuse (obesity), and then returning to use through lifting and a calorie deficit and growing substantially...apples to oranges?

I think you'd be pretty surprised at the relevancy if you were open to it, but it's clear you're not seeing it. Others can though...so we'll leave it at that.