"You can't build muscle on a calorie deficit"

jackielou867

Here's my experience.
1. Lost most of my goal weight but reached a plateau
2. Put myself on maintenance and started lifting.
3. Increased weights steadily, ate back calories but no extra.
4. After 6 weeks dropped 2% body fat but very tiny IBM drop, no gain in muscle, measurements all dropped slightly, including weight.
5 Dropped back to 1200 cals to try last push to goal weight. still lifting fairly heavy (compared to when I started)
6 dropped a kilo first week, had body fat rechecked at gym. 2% gain, and slight drop in lbm
7 went straight back to maintenance, plus exercise calories, plus 300, well theoretically. Only managed the plus 300 once this week, but that's a mental block I have to overcome if I want a little more muscle.

Unfortunately this is first week, so I can't tell you if it will work. But I will update at next check up.

I agree with previous comments though. DO NOT stick to 1200 long term, have breaks, reset your body. It really does work better that way. If you are not feeling as good as when you started you are either eating crap, or you need a break, or both!

mustgetmuscles1

all I gotta say is "I've done it" some say it's impossible but I feel like that would only be if you have absolutely no fat on your frame AND you're in a calorie deficit....then you wont/cant gain muscle.

If your body has fat reserves for energy than why couldn't you use that energy for muscle growth as well as vital body functions?? I'm confused does your fat "know" that it's energy is only for involuntary muscle fibers....Do fat cells come with brains now or something?

You need energy and protein at the same time (surplus) to create new muscle. You can not build something from nothing with nothing.

Say you provide the protein but not with a surplus of energy. The consumption of protein produces insulin. Insulin prevents the the body from burning fat stores. Look it up. So in a calorie deficit your body will use the protein as energy leaving none to create muscle. It is just not possible to do what you are saying in a normal human.

BUT you are not always in a calorie deficit even while dieting. When you eat you are probably providing more energy than your body can immediately use. You are in a surplus at least for awhile depending on how much you ate. You can create new mass around this time although it will be a very small amount. This very small amount could add up over the course of a prolonged cutting phase to show that new muscle was created in a overall calorie deficit but it would take a REALLY long time for a very small gain.

To put "very small" into context, a young male with good training and a consistent surplus can hope to gain around 1 lbs of new muscle in a month. The amount you might build with only a couple hour per day where you had enough ingredients to make new muscle would be a small fraction of a pound per month.

pcastagner

I can't believe this is still happening. Lol

It seems to go like this:
Science: it is 100% impossible to build muscle while you are eating in a deficit. This is irrefutable. We have evidence in many studies. The evidence is overwhelming. So much so, that is no longer a conversation that scientists, doctors, or those in the field of health even question or discuss anymore. It's a little like questioning if the world is round vs flat.

MFP person: Well, when I lifted for 2 weeks, I got stronger and bulky, so I know I built muscle while eating 1200 calories a day, and I lost 10 lbs. so, whatever with your science.

Science: :-/

But again, it's not helpful to go touting science and not understand that when science says "in a deficit" it doesn't mean "in a daily deficit" or "in a weekly deficit", and it applies to overall muscle mass and not isolated areas of tissue. Easy thought experiment: can a person suffering from muscle atrophy and obesity address both issues at the same time?

It's not helpful to blend scientific precision with colloquial and imprecise language that involves the same words. And sorry, but the words "irrefutable" and "science" aren't compatible. You need to read a bit of Popper.

pcastagner

I can't believe this is still happening. Lol

It seems to go like this:
Science: it is 100% impossible to build muscle while you are eating in a deficit. This is irrefutable. We have evidence in many studies. The evidence is overwhelming. So much so, that is no longer a conversation that scientists, doctors, or those in the field of health even question or discuss anymore. It's a little like questioning if the world is round vs flat.

MFP person: Well, when I lifted for 2 weeks, I got stronger and bulky, so I know I built muscle while eating 1200 calories a day, and I lost 10 lbs. so, whatever with your science.

Science: :-/

But again, it's not helpful to go touting science and not understand that when science says "in a deficit" it doesn't mean "in a daily deficit" or "in a weekly deficit", and it applies to overall muscle mass and not isolated areas of tissue. Easy thought experiment: can a person suffering from muscle atrophy and obesity address both issues at the same time?

It's not helpful to blend scientific precision with colloquial and imprecise language that involves the same words. And sorry, but the words "irrefutable" and "science" aren't compatible. You need to read a bit of Popper.

LOL. Thanks for your helpful insight.

Are you just being dismissive because you don't have a way to answer these points, or did you actually find my points so humorous that you laughed out loud?

I doubt you laughed out loud, so I'll just assume you have no way to answer, because you don't understand how science works yet.

Popper is a pretty good place to start.

Mr_Knight

Science: it is 100% impossible to build muscle while you are eating in a deficit. This is irrefutable.

When did that become "irrefutable"? I was under the impression that, at a minimum, even "science" was willing to acknowledge that under *some* conditions - ie, high obesity, low fitness level - that it might actually be possible to add muscle mass while at some levels of deficit.

Your statement, taken literally (because this is "science", after all) says that if I eat just 1 calorie below maintenance, I cannot add muscle mass, but if I eat just that one calore extra, I can. I have seen no study anywhere that suggests the human body - or any other complex organism - works on such fine precision.

If I have a large meal, creating a momentary surplus, how would my body know *as that food is being digested and metabolized* that I will end the day at a calorie deficit?

And what if i eat at a small surplus for 24 hours and then at larger deficit for 24 hours? Can I gain muscle mass during that 24 hours of surplus? But that means I gained muscle mass over the 48 hour period, which is at a net deficit.

If 48 hours is too fast a cycle, what about six weeks? If I eat at a moderate surplus for six weeks, and then at a slightly larger deficit for six weeks, can I come out at the end of 12 weeks - 12 weeks where I am eating at a net deficit - with more muscle mass than I started?

I do not accept your binary, black/white viewpoint on the "science" of this issue. As a general rule, such viewpoints are anathema to science and greatly limit understanding.

Whoever it was that brought Popper into this - bang on!

james6998

Ok let me assist this by saying. Look up inmates in prison. They grow to amazing sizes and yet they only have a certain amount of calories to deal with. Most eat well into a deficit. Evidence has proven that its the levels of testosterone that are increased with the so called "survival instinct that is cutting in, allowing them to grow massive in size.

Cherimoose

Ok let me assist this by saying. Look up inmates in prison. They grow to amazing sizes and yet they only have a certain amount of calories to deal with.

My guess is they were pretty muscular before they entered prison and simply lost bodyfat, which makes them appear more "cut" and muscular.

mustgetmuscles1

Ok let me assist this by saying. Look up inmates in prison. They grow to amazing sizes and yet they only have a certain amount of calories to deal with.

My guess is they were pretty muscular before they entered prison and simply lost bodyfat, which makes them appear more "cut" and muscular.

Prison is hardly the control that some people make it out to be. Some people get huge, true, but that in no way proves anything. Some people get really fat. Some lose weight. Lots of time for training with lots of time for rest. Drugs are not out of the question either.

pcastagner

My conclusion from the prison thing is I have a good argument next time a girlfriend doesn't want to do it "the other way".

"But, but, it makes the prison guys get all ripped! You want me to be ripped, don't you babe?"

MrsFowler1069

The point is that fuel is needed to create muscle.

By eating at a deficit, you are exhausting all that fuel just in the process of living, so the body has none left for niceties like building non-essential muscle. Your body's concern is survival, not how good you look on the beach, so it will not expend precious energy on non-essential muscle.

There are three things happening to you -

1. You are losing fat, which is revealing muscle.
2. A small degree of 'newbie gains' which are possible at a deficit.
3. A small degree of water retention in healing muscle. i.e. a 'pump'

Weight loss = body in a catabolic state
Muscle gain = body in an anabolic state

Catabolic and anabolic are opposite. While many professionals believe it is possible to rapidly switch between the two states in order to bulk and cut simultaneously, this is out of reach of most of us who aren't highly trained athletes with a team of trained coaches and nutritionists behind us.

Nice explanation. Thanks.

ninerbuff

Ok let me assist this by saying. Look up inmates in prison. They grow to amazing sizes and yet they only have a certain amount of calories to deal with. Most eat well into a deficit. Evidence has proven that its the levels of testosterone that are increased with the so called "survival instinct that is cutting in, allowing them to grow massive in size.

Hate to tell you that inmates have access to higher calorie foods too as well as protein sources (like canned tuna) through commissary. Steroids are just as available as other drugs for the correct price.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

pcastagner

I can't believe this is still happening. Lol

It seems to go like this:
Science: it is 100% impossible to build muscle while you are eating in a deficit. This is irrefutable. We have evidence in many studies. The evidence is overwhelming. So much so, that is no longer a conversation that scientists, doctors, or those in the field of health even question or discuss anymore. It's a little like questioning if the world is round vs flat.

MFP person: Well, when I lifted for 2 weeks, I got stronger and bulky, so I know I built muscle while eating 1200 calories a day, and I lost 10 lbs. so, whatever with your science.

Science: :-/

But again, it's not helpful to go touting science and not understand that when science says "in a deficit" it doesn't mean "in a daily deficit" or "in a weekly deficit", and it applies to overall muscle mass and not isolated areas of tissue. Easy thought experiment: can a person suffering from muscle atrophy and obesity address both issues at the same time?

It's not helpful to blend scientific precision with colloquial and imprecise language that involves the same words. And sorry, but the words "irrefutable" and "science" aren't compatible. You need to read a bit of Popper.

LOL. Thanks for your helpful insight.

Are you just being dismissive because you don't have a way to answer these points, or did you actually find my points so humorous that you laughed out loud?

I doubt you laughed out loud, so I'll just assume you have no way to answer, because you don't understand how science works yet.

Popper is a pretty good place to start.

I understand. I am laughing at the idiocy of all this.

You feel it is idiotic to look for answers on a difficult to understand subject with multiple variables that are difficult to quantify and work synergistically? Or to criticize your really deficient explanation of the issues at play, because it really leads nowhere useful? Or to make a distinction between practical advice and absolute dogma?

You're losing me bro.

SideSteel

It seems to go like this:
Science: it is 100% impossible to build muscle while you are eating in a deficit. This is irrefutable. We have evidence in many studies. The evidence is overwhelming. So much so, that is no longer a conversation that scientists, doctors, or those in the field of health even question or discuss anymore. It's a little like questioning if the world is round vs flat.

You're not suggesting the above is true, are you?

willemjmartins

Is building strength and building muscle very different?

In terms of a calorie deficit, if protein is ahead and carbs are behind leaving a deficit, is that still a constraint towards building strength and muscle?

JaxDemon

Lol @ this thread and the nay sayers.