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: