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

stumblinthrulife

As I've said, though, it's mostly a moot point. If one can get stronger, add muscle size (due only to water+glycogen), and also have his/her muscles look dramatically bigger still merely due to uncovering them, then that's probably good enough to most people who are trying to lose fat. As a practical matter, that's a reasonable facsimile to 'adding muscle' for the non-bodybuilder, I'd think.

Well, now we're into the difference between 'building muscle' and 'creating a reasonable facsimile of more muscle mass'.

The latter is absolutely, 100% possible in a calorie deficit. But doesn't lead to the conclusion 'you can build muscle at a deficit'.

heybales

I've wasted many months of my life listening to people on these forums and getting no results because of it. I now trust MFP recommendations for the most part.
I've always wondered about this particular thing though. So when you get muscles while in a calorie deficit, are you revealing the ones you already had by burning the fat around them or building some muscle while burning fat?
In my experience I could see more muscle definition, but I had not lost any weight AT ALL while eating in a calorie deficit, so I wondered "Is it possible that I burned fat and built muscle simultaneously"?

You can gain Lean Body Mass (LBM) while in a deficit, because LBM is everything that is not fat, and that includes water, and muscle, and a bunch of other stuff.

Which is fine if it's just water, because that is increased metabolism too. Water usually stored with glucose, because now you are doing more and body needs immediate energy source.

So for a while you can gain LBM, if newbie to lifting and enough fat to spare maybe 1 or 2 lbs of muscle over 6 months if doing the lifting right and eating right at reasonable deficit too.

While LBM is increasing, you can be losing fat - weight stays the same.

And it don't take much fat loss to make inches of difference, you've probably seen the pictures comparing 1 lb of both, and the volume of both.

Here's study of men making a trade of LBM and fat at equal rates while eating at maintenance level even no deficit for 16 weeks, mere 3.5 lbs traded. They didn't scan for actual muscle mass changes though.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/778012-potential-muscle-gain-lifting-and-metabolism-improvement

AlchemyOfTheBlackSunCult

I've wasted many months of my life listening to people on these forums and getting no results because of it. I now trust MFP recommendations for the most part.
I've always wondered about this particular thing though. So when you get muscles while in a calorie deficit, are you revealing the ones you already had by burning the fat around them or building some muscle while burning fat?
In my experience I could see more muscle definition, but I had not lost any weight AT ALL while eating in a calorie deficit, so I wondered "Is it possible that I burned fat and built muscle simultaneously"?

You can gain Lean Body Mass (LBM) while in a deficit, because LBM is everything that is not fat, and that includes water, and muscle, and a bunch of other stuff.

Which is fine if it's just water, because that is increased metabolism too. Water usually stored with glucose, because now you are doing more and body needs immediate energy source.

So for a while you can gain LBM, if newbie to lifting and enough fat to spare maybe 1 or 2 lbs of muscle over 6 months if doing the lifting right and eating right at reasonable deficit too.

While LBM is increasing, you can be losing fat - weight stays the same.

And it don't take much fat loss to make inches of difference, you've probably seen the pictures comparing 1 lb of both, and the volume of both.

Here's study of men making a trade of LBM and fat at equal rates while eating at maintenance level even no deficit for 16 weeks, mere 3.5 lbs traded. They didn't scan for actual muscle mass changes though.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/778012-potential-muscle-gain-lifting-and-metabolism-improvement

Please look over my first post (its on page 5). Thermodynamically, its really not possible to build muscle while on a deficit. Your boddy is not going to store more glycogen if its maintaining its mass

heybales

I've wasted many months of my life listening to people on these forums and getting no results because of it. I now trust MFP recommendations for the most part.
I've always wondered about this particular thing though. So when you get muscles while in a calorie deficit, are you revealing the ones you already had by burning the fat around them or building some muscle while burning fat?
In my experience I could see more muscle definition, but I had not lost any weight AT ALL while eating in a calorie deficit, so I wondered "Is it possible that I burned fat and built muscle simultaneously"?

You can gain Lean Body Mass (LBM) while in a deficit, because LBM is everything that is not fat, and that includes water, and muscle, and a bunch of other stuff.

Which is fine if it's just water, because that is increased metabolism too. Water usually stored with glucose, because now you are doing more and body needs immediate energy source.

So for a while you can gain LBM, if newbie to lifting and enough fat to spare maybe 1 or 2 lbs of muscle over 6 months if doing the lifting right and eating right at reasonable deficit too.

While LBM is increasing, you can be losing fat - weight stays the same.

And it don't take much fat loss to make inches of difference, you've probably seen the pictures comparing 1 lb of both, and the volume of both.

Here's study of men making a trade of LBM and fat at equal rates while eating at maintenance level even no deficit for 16 weeks, mere 3.5 lbs traded. They didn't scan for actual muscle mass changes though.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/778012-potential-muscle-gain-lifting-and-metabolism-improvement

Please look over my first post (its on page 5). Thermodynamically, its really not possible to build muscle while on a deficit. Your boddy is not going to store more glycogen if its maintaining its mass

There is confusion of terms - I said LBM - which is NOT just muscle mass.

There is a big difference.

You can gain LBM on a deficit. Every single person losing inches and not losing weight proves it.

You just won't be gaining much if any real muscle mass. Unless you want to count the glucose stores and water in the muscle as muscle mass, which it's not.

There's a bad tendency to assume muscle mass = LBM - it doesn't.
And then there is this strange use of term Lean Muscle Mass - whatever that means. That's what you ask your butcher for, a cut of lean beef.

AlchemyOfTheBlackSunCult

I've wasted many months of my life listening to people on these forums and getting no results because of it. I now trust MFP recommendations for the most part.
I've always wondered about this particular thing though. So when you get muscles while in a calorie deficit, are you revealing the ones you already had by burning the fat around them or building some muscle while burning fat?
In my experience I could see more muscle definition, but I had not lost any weight AT ALL while eating in a calorie deficit, so I wondered "Is it possible that I burned fat and built muscle simultaneously"?

You can gain Lean Body Mass (LBM) while in a deficit, because LBM is everything that is not fat, and that includes water, and muscle, and a bunch of other stuff.

Which is fine if it's just water, because that is increased metabolism too. Water usually stored with glucose, because now you are doing more and body needs immediate energy source.

So for a while you can gain LBM, if newbie to lifting and enough fat to spare maybe 1 or 2 lbs of muscle over 6 months if doing the lifting right and eating right at reasonable deficit too.

While LBM is increasing, you can be losing fat - weight stays the same.

And it don't take much fat loss to make inches of difference, you've probably seen the pictures comparing 1 lb of both, and the volume of both.

Here's study of men making a trade of LBM and fat at equal rates while eating at maintenance level even no deficit for 16 weeks, mere 3.5 lbs traded. They didn't scan for actual muscle mass changes though.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/778012-potential-muscle-gain-lifting-and-metabolism-improvement

Please look over my first post (its on page 5). Thermodynamically, its really not possible to build muscle while on a deficit. Your boddy is not going to store more glycogen if its maintaining its mass

There is confusion of terms - I said LBM - which is NOT just muscle mass.

There is a big difference.

You can gain LBM on a deficit. Every single person losing inches and not losing weight proves it.

You just won't be gaining much if any real muscle mass. Unless you want to count the glucose stores and water in the muscle as muscle mass, which it's not.

Well I don't really understand why we are talking about "lean body mass" then, considering the title of this thread is "you can't build muscle on a caloric deficit". I didn't read through everything, I just put the fact of why we lose muscle mass while on caloric deficits

winchestervol63

As I've said, though, it's mostly a moot point. If one can get stronger, add muscle size (due only to water+glycogen), and also have his/her muscles look dramatically bigger still merely due to uncovering them, then that's probably good enough to most people who are trying to lose fat. As a practical matter, that's a reasonable facsimile to 'adding muscle' for the non-bodybuilder, I'd think.

Well, now we're into the difference between 'building muscle' and 'creating a reasonable facsimile of more muscle mass'.

The latter is absolutely, 100% possible in a calorie deficit. But doesn't lead to the conclusion 'you can build muscle at a deficit'.

Neither asserting that 'you can't build muscle in a deficit' nor observing that it's easier/more effective to build muscle in a surplus lead to the conclusion that it's impossible, either.

If that assertion were entirely and literally true, wouldn't it be virtually impossible to lower BF% while maintaining weight as well? After all, if you're eating at approximately balance, half of your days are likely slightly in deficit.

Haven't read it yet, but here's an article that discusses the matter. I'll look for scientific studies as well.

http://scoobysworkshop.com/gain-muscle-lose-fat/

heybales

I've wasted many months of my life listening to people on these forums and getting no results because of it. I now trust MFP recommendations for the most part.
I've always wondered about this particular thing though. So when you get muscles while in a calorie deficit, are you revealing the ones you already had by burning the fat around them or building some muscle while burning fat?
In my experience I could see more muscle definition, but I had not lost any weight AT ALL while eating in a calorie deficit, so I wondered "Is it possible that I burned fat and built muscle simultaneously"?

You can gain Lean Body Mass (LBM) while in a deficit, because LBM is everything that is not fat, and that includes water, and muscle, and a bunch of other stuff.

Which is fine if it's just water, because that is increased metabolism too. Water usually stored with glucose, because now you are doing more and body needs immediate energy source.

So for a while you can gain LBM, if newbie to lifting and enough fat to spare maybe 1 or 2 lbs of muscle over 6 months if doing the lifting right and eating right at reasonable deficit too.

While LBM is increasing, you can be losing fat - weight stays the same.

And it don't take much fat loss to make inches of difference, you've probably seen the pictures comparing 1 lb of both, and the volume of both.

Here's study of men making a trade of LBM and fat at equal rates while eating at maintenance level even no deficit for 16 weeks, mere 3.5 lbs traded. They didn't scan for actual muscle mass changes though.

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/778012-potential-muscle-gain-lifting-and-metabolism-improvement

Please look over my first post (its on page 5). Thermodynamically, its really not possible to build muscle while on a deficit. Your boddy is not going to store more glycogen if its maintaining its mass

There is confusion of terms - I said LBM - which is NOT just muscle mass.

There is a big difference.

You can gain LBM on a deficit. Every single person losing inches and not losing weight proves it.

You just won't be gaining much if any real muscle mass. Unless you want to count the glucose stores and water in the muscle as muscle mass, which it's not.

Well I don't really understand why we are talking about "lean body mass" then, considering the title of this thread is "you can't build muscle on a caloric deficit". I didn't read through everything, I just put the fact of why we lose muscle mass while on caloric deficits

Because that is exactly what confuses people. And that includes the post I was actually responding to.
And if you read through the posts, you will clearly see the confusion thrown out by both sides actually of the argument.

Someone says they aren't losing any weight but they can see their muscles better, or fat is dropping off their waist.

And almost everyone on their friends list says .... "Oh, you are gaining muscle and dropping fat" or similar thought.

There is this other huge category of what is actually happening - gaining LBM and maybe not a spec of muscle, while dropping fat and maintaining weight.
Happens to many starting up cardio exercise, because body is storing more glucose to meet the endurance demand placed on it.
The reason some can actually GAIN weight while in a deficit. Great, required, metabolism increasing water weight.

caly_man

no matter where the truth may be,

you can definitely show off what you already have as your body starts to shed off excess fat

bottom line: please continue lifting while on a deficit

jennifershoo

Bump to read later

trojanbb

^^^ Exactly. LBM includes water weight and other factors. It's not restrictive to actual muscle fiber and skeletal mass.

Most people over complicate this. The only people who will gain significant amounts of muscle while on a calorie deficit are beginners or those using drugs. For everyone else, it IS possible but only a small amount of muscle can be built this way.

If you are natural and have been training a couple years...muscle gains on a deficit MIGHT amount to a couple lbs over 6-12 months at best, for a male.. for women, much much less. Hormones are primarily what determine muscle gain under these conditions.

If your goal is to gain muscle and not wait several years for a noticeable increase, you will need to increase calories.


And there have been some insanely illogical comments by people, asking "why keep lifting if you cant gain muscle on a deficit?" The answer should be clear to everyone. So you dont lose it.

SanteMulberry

I think that if you are pretty fat, flabby and weak, that you can definitely trim fat and get stronger and harder muscles...for a while. I certainly have in the nearly six months that I have been exercising at the pool (which is a combination of cardio and resistance work) and lifting. But, when I started exercising, I was at 32-33% body fat (currently at 27%). I suspect that to make any further gains though, that I would have to eat at a surplus, which I am hesitant to do until I get my body fat down to 25%. But I will continue to challenge my muscles in order to try to keep the muscle wastage to a minimum and fat loss to a maximum.

I read this weight-lifting study that they did at a nursing home somewhere. They had to supplement the residents' diets with protein drinks (because of poor appetite) and then they started them lifting weights. They all lost body fat (on average, four pounds) and most of them gained, on average, four pounds of muscle during the two-month study. This is great news because it means that you CAN sometimes build muscle and lose body fat at the same time, depending on how fat/flabby you are. I'm guessing this example is likely illustrating what they call "newbie gains". One of the main health problems with the elderly is sarcopenia (loss of lean body mass) due to lack of exercise and loss of appetite. This leads to falls, fractures and many other assorted health problems as a result.

Sarauk2sf

Perhaps... your shirt shrunk. :laugh: Or you're counting your calories incorrectly.

Or, depending on what margin of error we're talking about for your shirt sleeves, you're retaining water. Since you're noticing a difference, and it seems unlikely that you gained... say, 1" around your arms while lifting and not eating all that much, I'm going to suggest it's one of these other explanations.

Lol I hope not, I like that dress!

But there's muscle there where there was once just thinner arms. Unless..........water is stored in the shaped of muscle?

Oh come on, I'm not lying to you - I'm being very honest, there was no muscle and now there is and you're just trying to poo poo my argument with WATER WEIGHT on my arms. Piffle!

You are totally missing the point of what water weight people are talking about - it IS in the muscle - glycogen and water.

But surely I would see a increase/decrease in my muscle, as these stores are replenished and depleted.

If you stop lifting.

winchestervol63

Then why did you make your comment if you understand...as I was not saying what you said I was?

He said he gained muscle and gained strength. He wasn't saying that he had gained strength because of the muscle. Which is what I was presuming you meant by 'Strength gains =/= sarcoplasmic hypertorphy'.

/smh

=/= means does not equal.

He assumed that he had gained muscle due to strength, I was correcting him.

Perhaps you're right, but it just seems counterintuitive. About 4 years ago, I lost about 40 lbs over the course of several months and my bench press went from about 210 to exactly 310 during that same period of time. It's just hard to fathom that happening without any gain in muscle at all.

I agree that you can't add a ton of muscle at a deficit, that it's far easier to add in a surplus, and that bodybuilders (who have little excess fat and who are near their muscle growth peak) will necessarilly lose muscle in a cut, but I'm just not so sure the average MFP user who has excess fat can't build a little muscle while also losing fat.

Suppose without body scans, we'll all just have to agree to respect each other (if not each other's opinion!) and to recognize that the right course of action is the same either way (keep lifting). Have a good rest of the day.

Sarauk2sf

Then why did you make your comment if you understand...as I was not saying what you said I was?

He said he gained muscle and gained strength. He wasn't saying that he had gained strength because of the muscle. Which is what I was presuming you meant by 'Strength gains =/= sarcoplasmic hypertorphy'.

/smh

=/= means does not equal.

He assumed that he had gained muscle due to strength, I was correcting him.

Perhaps you're right, but it just seems counterintuitive. About 4 years ago, I lost about 40 lbs over the course of several months and my bench press went from about 210 to exactly 310 during that same period of time. It's just hard to fathom that happening without any gain in muscle at all.

I agree that you can't add a ton of muscle at a deficit, that it's far easier to add in a surplus, and that bodybuilders (who have little excess fat and who are near their muscle growth peak) will necessarilly lose muscle in a cut, but I'm just not so sure the average MFP user who has excess fat can't build a little muscle while also losing fat.

Suppose without body scans, we'll all just have to agree to respect each other (if not each other's opinion!) and to recognize that the right course of action is the same either way (keep lifting). Have a good rest of the day.

I get where it may seem that way re strength gains - but it is correct. Obviously, at some point, there is a ceiling and you will need to make more mass gains to capitalize on strength gains, but they can be mutually exclusive.

And I was purely talking about strength gains not necessarily meaning that you have made mass gains. Someone who is significantly overweight, who is untrained, is male, applies a reasonable sensible training program and has a reasonably sensible diet, can absolutely make gains on a deficit.

Note: you do not necessarily need all the above to apply all the time - but I am listing the factors that should make it a 'slam dunk' that you will gain muscle mass.

Edited to fix typo.

likitisplit

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.

You can also get muscle gains if you were once in shape but then lost it.

I lost 14 pounds of fat and gained 2 pounds of muscle on a 12-week deficit, measured by a hydrostatic weigh-in. It's really rare to be able to do that - you cannot do it losing quickly - and I'm eating at maintenance + to build some additional muscle before losing the last of my fat because I know building muscle on a deficit is not sustainable.

TheDirtyBulker

Is this kind of like the same "scientific theory" where they claim that saturated fat causes heart disease?

To be honest, I really don't think they really know 100% what the deal is. All I know is that I HAVE put muscle on while on a deficit and continue to do so.

patentguru

Is this kind of like the same "scientific theory" where they claim that saturated fat causes heart disease?

To be honest, I really don't think they really know 100% what the deal is. All I know is that I HAVE put muscle on while on a deficit and continue to do so.

Yep. I have done this too. It is not easy to put on muscle while losing fat, but it can be done. I drink the whole milk too.

heybales

You can also get muscle gains if you were once in shape but then lost it.

I lost 14 pounds of fat and gained 2 pounds of muscle on a 12-week deficit, measured by a hydrostatic weigh-in. It's really rare to be able to do that - you cannot do it losing quickly - and I'm eating at maintenance + to build some additional muscle before losing the last of my fat because I know building muscle on a deficit is not sustainable.

And this is exactly why I posted the differences between LBM, and muscle mass, which is one part of LBM.

Hydrostatic bodyfat measurements do NOT measure muscle mass.

They estimate Fat Mass - end of story.

Weight minus Fat Mass = Lean Body Mass

LBM is muscle, mainly water weight, blood, bone, organs, brain, ect, ect.

You have no idea what you gained. May likely have been some muscle, but how much was blood volume, or stored glucose?

Unless you DEXA scanned it, you have no possible way of knowing.

runfreddyrun

in 5 months time i lost 13.5 lb of fat and gained 3.5 lbs of muscle, all while eating at a deficit with 1450 calories (this included exercise calories burned). this was measured both times by the bod pod. during that time i worked out 3-5 hours a week with strength training and some cardio.

EDIT: that should be 3.5 lbs of LBM, not necessarily muscle. i hope it's muscle

Sarauk2sf

in 5 months time i lost 13.5 lb of fat and gained 3.5 lbs of muscle, all while eating at a deficit with 1450 calories (this included exercise calories burned). this was measured both times by the bod pod. during that time i worked out 3-5 hours a week with strength training and some cardio.

Muscle or LBM?

runfreddyrun

yes, i should edit to say LBM. since it is just the bod pod and not a dexa scan, there is no way to know what comprised that LBM gain.

KarenJanine

Look at it this way, supposing you did make some newby gains and built muscle while eating 1200 cals, this will not last long.

Eating so little your body will soon start looking for energy sources to top up the large deficit needed to keep your vital organs running. Your body will protect your heart, brain and lungs above anything else. Therefore as your BF decreases your body will have to start breaking down your muscle sooner or later to keep you alive. Therefore by continuing to eat at a large deficit you will eventually lose any muscle that you may have built and more. If you are not going to fuel your body correctly then whether or not you gained muscle initially is a moot point in the long term.

Joehenny

It's possible, but only under certain conditions, very rare and definitely not optimal. Also going on a diet and not lifting is the perfect way to atrophy the little muscle you do have.

pinkraynedropjacki

You can build on a deficit. It really is true, don't let anyone say you can't unless you eat more than you should. It's not the truth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oi-jnsG0Z7Y

Joehenny

Why is everyone on this forum on Scooby's nuts?

pinkraynedropjacki

Why is everyone on this forum on Scooby's nuts?

Kinda cause he knows what he's talking about more than other numbnuts on here... just sayin

jimmmer

You can build on a deficit. It really is true, don't let anyone say you can't unless you eat more than you should. It's not the truth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oi-jnsG0Z7Y

He said "fight like the ****ens" - worth watching for that alone!

JeninBelgium

You actually and physically can't build appreciable muscle on a deficit, just like you can't build fat on a deficit. You have to have materials build IYSWIM.

But that doesn't mean you shouldn't lift weights while in a deficit. Why lift?

1. Weight lifting is exercise, and while people fight and argue about how much it burns (answer-no one knows), it will contribute to your calorie deficit in some manner.
2. While you can't build muscle on a deficit, you can build strength and coordination-two good things to have.
3. While you can't build muscle, you can preserve what you already have, what this means is you have to lose less weight to get to a lower body fat percentage-end result is many people are happier with their bodies.

Have you been measuring your arms? Just because the muscle is more defined doesn't mean it is actually bigger. More likely is that as you have lost weight, you have lost fat which makes it more visible. (ie#3) Either that or you took the picture directly after lifting so it is pumped.

I need to find the link of the article on just read on this (from a scientific peer reviewed journal like obesity or sports medicine or similar and it will drive me nuts if I cannot find it so watch this space) which actually studied this it turns out that those who are overweight can build muscle while on a deficit and here is why- while the person is eating less than they need to maintain their weight and thus those calories are not building fat, muscle etc- they also carry with them large stores of calories in the form of fat- those stores of fat can be used as fuel to build muscle if the body needs it to be- but this is very difficult- essentially the person needs to be either strenuously active (ie working in construction, manual labor etc or lifting a lot every day so that the body had a requirement for the muscle (and it turns out that for lifting the amount of weight was also not important- lifting heavy led to better/faster results but those in the study that lifted relatively light but did tons of reps also could build muscle)

the article went on to say that metabolism is not just a build or break-down process ) it is both anabolic and catabolic and thus throughout our day we are all doing a combination of both but on average those losing weight also lose not gain muscle unless they really train/ work hard and that gaining muscle during weight loss is exceptional (ie not often done)

now, I would think that even if you are eating at a deficit and not building muscle strength training will still help to strengthen the muscle you have so that when the fat comes off there is something nice and toned underneath- but I didn't read about that in the article

Joehenny

You can build on a deficit. It really is true, don't let anyone say you can't unless you eat more than you should. It's not the truth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oi-jnsG0Z7Y

A video from 2011 with information that has been dis-proven with peer-reviewed research mult times. Also daily cardio while trying to build muscle and in a caloric deficit LOL gtfoh

jimmmer

You can build on a deficit. It really is true, don't let anyone say you can't unless you eat more than you should. It's not the truth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oi-jnsG0Z7Y

He said "fight like the ****ens" - worth watching for that alone!

Oh really MFP? The name of one of the English Language's most love authors is a swear word now?