Over weight people bulking out of obesity

BeSophisticate

Hmmmm, I don't know. Someone who is obese has added strain on the heart to begin with. I would think the most important first step would be to reduce that added strain before doing any kind of serious training. And then you have the joint strain that goes along with obesity. I think the best place to start, for an obese person, is simple walking, then working up to something more vigorous. Recently, it seems that the importance of heart health has completely gone by the wayside, and the only way to improve heart conditioning is to reduce the amount of weight you carry (for a number of reasons) and get some measurable cardio exercise.

For a person who is overweight, though, rather than obese, perhaps it could be a workable option. I think it would depend a lot on personality type. For me, it wouldn't work. I would get very frustrated. I've tried adding serious workouts without changing my diet. The added muscle, without any fat reduction, actually made my clothing more uncomfortable. That's a huge negative if somebody is heavy enough for all clothing to be uncomfortable at the start.

Azdak

So i was thinking about muscle building and fat loss and got to wondering.
Since you can only build a small amount of muscle on a deficit. Plus weight loss is a very slow process and alot of obese people struggle to loose weight and eat at a surplus anyway which is the reason probably 95% of people are obese in the first place.

Would it not make more sense for an obese person to clean bulk first/recomp and try to gain as much muscle as possible for a year or two before they try to loose weight? If you could gain 18 or so kg of muscle without putting on much fat not only would your body fat composition improve but if you chose to get to a lower body fat:
it would be quicker for one
you would have a lower chance of loose skin.
your bmr would be higher since you are carrying more weight
you get to eat more so you would stick to it more
Plus you would look better when you dropped your body fat

The only people who it would not be a good idea for is the very obese but they can gain muscle while cutting anyway.
Am i dreaming or does it make sense for the majority of people to bulk out of obesity ?

The fundamental flaw in this reasoning is the idea that adding 18kg (that's roughly 40lbs) of muscle is the basic standard that everyone should aspire to.

Azdak

2) Obese people already have a decent amount of muscle.

Ding!

FrenchMob

So i was thinking about muscle building and fat loss and got to wondering.
Since you can only build a small amount of muscle on a deficit. Plus weight loss is a very slow process and alot of obese people struggle to loose weight and eat at a surplus anyway which is the reason probably 95% of people are obese in the first place.

Would it not make more sense for an obese person to clean bulk first/recomp and try to gain as much muscle as possible for a year or two before they try to loose weight? If you could gain 18 or so kg of muscle without putting on much fat not only would your body fat composition improve but if you chose to get to a lower body fat:
it would be quicker for one
you would have a lower chance of loose skin.
your bmr would be higher since you are carrying more weight
you get to eat more so you would stick to it more
Plus you would look better when you dropped your body fat

The only people who it would not be a good idea for is the very obese but they can gain muscle while cutting anyway.
Am i dreaming or does it make sense for the majority of people to bulk out of obesity ?

18kg of muscle? If you you're diet was perfect, you're genetically gifted, and you did killer hard weight lifting, you MIGHT get that done in 5 years, not 1 or 2.

Obese individuals already have a decent amount of muscle. I'm 255 lbs and 36% BF which puts me at 163 lbs LBM on a 5'10" frame - at 15% BF I'd still weigh around 180 if I maintain most of my LBM. I'd rather maintain as much LBM as possible will cutting cals and dropping the fat, than staying fat to gain more muscle.

Sarauk2sf

Why would you want to put off weight loss all to gain a pound or two of muscle which basically give you an additional incremental BMR of less than 6 cals per lb of muscle a day?

muscle mass = health.

better hormone function, higher bone density.. and its more than 6cals per muscle ur missing out on other variables that muscle building contributes too primarily hormonal and intracellular ones.

I am not disagreeing that muscle mass is important. My point is, being obese is far worse for your health than the benefits of a few extra pounds of muscle.

ETA: article that gives the 9 calories for muscle (less the 3 for fat = 6) but also gives the additional benefits of muscle mass.

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/84/3/475.full

Just read that article, I'm seeing a theoretical 10 cal/kg/day for Protein turnover only.
See first and last sentence:

The synthesis and breakdown of muscle protein are principally responsible for the energy expenditure of resting muscle. Whereas the precise in vivo energetics of muscle protein turnover are uncertain, a conservative estimate can be made on the basis of muscle protein synthesis. The average 24-h (including response to meal feeding) fractional synthetic rate (FSR) of muscle protein is ≈0.075%/h (22). The absolute synthetic rate can be calculated as the product of the FSR and muscle mass. We have found the average muscle mass of young, healthy males to range from 35 to 50 kg (22). In contrast, an elderly woman may have ≤13 kg muscle. Thus, muscle protein synthesis ranges from ≈0.23 to 0.90 kg/d, depending on the amount of muscle mass. Because 4 mol ATP is utilized per mole of amino acids incorporated into protein (21), and because the hydrolysis of 1 mol ATP releases 20 kcal energy (23), the energy released per day as a result of muscle protein synthesis may range from ≈485 kcal/d in a well-muscled young man to ≈120 kcal/d in an active elderly woman. These estimates are consistent with the observed increase in REE during an infusion of amino acids at a rate known to stimulate muscle protein synthesis (24). Extremes in muscle mass, eg, young male body builders to frail elderly, would be even greater. In terms of whole-body energy balance, a difference in REE of ≈365 kcal/d, stemming from a difference in muscle protein turnover, would lead to a gain or loss of 47 g fat mass/d because 1 kg of fat stores 7700 kcal. If activity and diet remained constant, this would mean a gain or loss of ≈1.4 kg fat mass/mo. This effect on energy balance is particularly striking when it is realized that the estimate given above for the energy expenditure associated with muscle protein turnover is likely an underestimate, because protein breakdown also requires the hydrolysis of ATP, and the energy released in this process is above and beyond the contribution of muscle protein synthesis to energy production. It is evident from these estimations that, when a long-term perspective is considered, even relatively small differences (eg, 10 kg) in muscle mass could have a significant effect on energy balance. Every 10-kg difference in lean mass translates to a difference in energy expenditure of ≈100 kcal/d, assuming a constant rate of protein turnover.

This also assumes muscle tissue does not increase burn from NEAT or normal cell respiration.

Agreed that the number I quoted does not include NEAT which I why I mentioned that it was the impact on BMR. The point that I was making was that the benefit of gaining LBM is far outweighed by losing fat for an obese individual who will have a higher LBM anyway and will be able to maintain as much as possible while losing fat if they strength train. If they want to add more LBM it makes sense to do it at a healthier BF%.

fraser112

So i was thinking about muscle building and fat loss and got to wondering.
Since you can only build a small amount of muscle on a deficit. Plus weight loss is a very slow process and alot of obese people struggle to loose weight and eat at a surplus anyway which is the reason probably 95% of people are obese in the first place.

Would it not make more sense for an obese person to clean bulk first/recomp and try to gain as much muscle as possible for a year or two before they try to loose weight? If you could gain 18 or so kg of muscle without putting on much fat not only would your body fat composition improve but if you chose to get to a lower body fat:
it would be quicker for one
you would have a lower chance of loose skin.
your bmr would be higher since you are carrying more weight
you get to eat more so you would stick to it more
Plus you would look better when you dropped your body fat

The only people who it would not be a good idea for is the very obese but they can gain muscle while cutting anyway.
Am i dreaming or does it make sense for the majority of people to bulk out of obesity ?

18kg of muscle? If you you're diet was perfect, you're genetically gifted, and you did killer hard weight lifting, you MIGHT get that done in 5 years, not 1 or 2.

Obese individuals already have a decent amount of muscle. I'm 255 lbs and 36% BF which puts me at 163 lbs LBM on a 5'10" frame - at 15% BF I'd still weigh around 180 if I maintain most of my LBM. I'd rather maintain as much LBM as possible will cutting cals and dropping the fat, than staying fat to gain more muscle.

Thanks for the added imput people making for a good read.

I was going more for me and the numbers i see quoted since my lbm is about 160 i think and my genetic potential puts me near 200 pounds if i remember right in a perfect world i thought 12kg in your first year was a standard aim ? about 24 pounds then 12 the next then 6 the next and 2-3 pounds a year in a perfect world.

I do get people saying its best to get the strain off the body but the idea just struck me as possibly having a better long term outcome.

ixap

Actually some research on this topic has been done.

Doesn't seem to be terribly effective.

Here is a review of recent literature:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-789X.2011.00931.x/full
Resistance training itself failed to induce significant reduction in VAT (visceral adipose tissue) when compared with the control group.

Bakkasan

Slight deficit or surplus is how I have worked the last year. It has served me all right and I am really happy I concentrated on muscle building over "weight" loss. 80lb down with an increase of LBM. Everyone is different and few can do it.

fraser112

Actually some research on this topic has been done.

Doesn't seem to be terribly effective.

Here is a review of recent literature:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-789X.2011.00931.x/full
Resistance training itself failed to induce significant reduction in VAT (visceral adipose tissue) when compared with the control group.

Thanks for the link i skimmed it but now my brain hurts so i will need to hit it again later :laugh: