Muscle gain and Fat loss

You will not lose fat eating over maintenance. If you eat at a surplus, you'll gain fat along with muscle. You can eat at maintenance and still train hard/heavy and do a long, slooooooooooow recomp where you'll lose some fat, but gain some muscle. But, it's my understanding that is a painfully slow process.

Just do 5x5 workout and you'll make far more progress!!

Do you think I should only lift heavy using the 5x5 or do progressive heavy like the way I am doing in my technique. My goal at the end is to gain good muscle mass for endurance as I do martial arts but not like very bulky muscle mass.

Either 5x5 or 3x5 would be best if you want to build strength and not bulk. Reps in the 8 to 12 range are for hypertrophy, which woulde result in bulk assuming adequate calories.

I don't know why everyone is saying that you can't build muscle and lose fat because I definitely have.. I haven't been building insane amounts of muscle or anything which I guess would require a calorie surplus but I've still built muscle while on a calorie deficit. I just do strength training regularly, and so when your body is lifting regularly it will have to adapt therefore muscle will have to be built even when one is on a calorie deficit..

I don't know why everyone is saying that you can't build muscle and lose fat because I definitely have.. I haven't been building insane amounts of muscle or anything which I guess would require a calorie surplus but I've still built muscle while on a calorie deficit. I just do strength training regularly, and so when your body is lifting regularly it will have to adapt therefore muscle will have to be built even when one is on a calorie deficit..

You will gain muscle mass as a beginner but the results are ever deceasing - anyone who has not lifted before will gain mass but only for a short period.

That is why there are all these fad exercise programs out there telling you you will achieve great things in x weeks if you follow out program. These sellers jump on the beginners gains to sell the product.

I don't know why everyone is saying that you can't build muscle and lose fat because I definitely have.. I haven't been building insane amounts of muscle or anything which I guess would require a calorie surplus but I've still built muscle while on a calorie deficit. I just do strength training regularly, and so when your body is lifting regularly it will have to adapt therefore muscle will have to be built even when one is on a calorie deficit..

All metabolic processes are called either "anabolic" or "catabolic". Anabolic processes build complex molecules out of simpler ones, while catabolic processes tear complex molecules down into simpler ones.

Building muscle is anabolic process -- it (in part) builds muscle proteins out of amino acids in the bloodstream. But storing fat is also an anabolic process -- it (in part) builds fat out of fatty acids in the bloodstream.

On the flip side, burning fat is a catabolic process -- but so is burning muscle.

At any given moment, the overall hormonal state (relative levels of hormones like testosterone, insulin, human growth hormone, cortisol, ...) of the bloodstream is primarily anabolic or primarily catabolic. The anabolic state is favorable to building muscle but also to storing fat. Likewise the catabolic state is favorable to burning fat but also to tearing down muscle.

In an overall calorie surplus, the body favors anabolic processes; in an overall calorie deficit, catabolic ones. I emphasize "overall" and "favors" because short of disease you can't keep the body in a purely anabolic or catabolic state for a long time -- "building up" and "tearing down" are both essential phases (for example, dead cells have to be torn down, and new cells have to built up).

Now, to get to your question ;-), "energy" has little to do with this -- it doesn't take all that much energy for digestion to break dietary protein into amino acids, or to reassemble amino acids into muscle proteins. Even in a large calorie deficit, food supplies enough energy to do those things. It's far more a matter of "convincing" the body it "should" use amino acids to build muscle instead of burning them for energy, and of boosting levels of anabolic hormones, while cutting levels of catabolic hormones, in the bloodstream. Short of taking anabolic steroids, strength-training and consuming an overall calorie surplus are the most effective ways to do this.

Get a feel for what a balancing act this is? Losing fat without losing muscle too is, to some extent, fighting the body's natural tendencies, and the further you are from calorie balance the harder that fight is (for example, the larger the overall calorie deficit and the longer it's sustained, the more time the body will spend in catabolic states than in anabolic states, making it a struggle for most people (genetics do vary) to avoid losing muscle too).

"Losing weight" is a lot easier than just losing fat; likewise "gaining weight" is a lot easier than just gaining muscle (and seeing as you have first-hand experience with this one, hoping to be exempt from the other isn't likely to be rewarded

So for gaining muscle i now understand that I need to bulk up a bit for the muscle and then do a calorie deficit with the same exercise amount to get rid of the extra fat. Do you think this is the right approach.

Pretty much. You don't say your height but you seem like you do not need to lose a lot. Try 200 to 300 over maintenance, cut down on the cardio and lift in the hypertrophy range, 8 to 12 reps, if you want to gain muscle mass. This will minimize fat gains (not eliminate them). Once you feel you've gained some decent mass, go back to deficit and burn off some fat. Rinse and repeat til you have the physique you want.

I don't know why everyone is saying that you can't build muscle and lose fat because I definitely have.. I haven't been building insane amounts of muscle or anything which I guess would require a calorie surplus but I've still built muscle while on a calorie deficit. I just do strength training regularly, and so when your body is lifting regularly it will have to adapt therefore muscle will have to be built even when one is on a calorie deficit..

A lot of time seeing more muscle is confused with building muscle.

Fat covers your muscles... as you lose fat you will begin to see more muscle however htat doesn't mean you have actually built new muscle mass.

You need a surplus of calories to build muscle outside of really small newbie gains.

I don't know why everyone is saying that you can't build muscle and lose fat because I definitely have.. I haven't been building insane amounts of muscle or anything which I guess would require a calorie surplus but I've still built muscle while on a calorie deficit. I just do strength training regularly, and so when your body is lifting regularly it will have to adapt therefore muscle will have to be built even when one is on a calorie deficit..

All metabolic processes are called either "anabolic" or "catabolic". Anabolic processes build complex molecules out of simpler ones, while catabolic processes tear complex molecules down into simpler ones.

Building muscle is anabolic process -- it (in part) builds muscle proteins out of amino acids in the bloodstream. But storing fat is also an anabolic process -- it (in part) builds fat out of fatty acids in the bloodstream.

On the flip side, burning fat is a catabolic process -- but so is burning muscle.

At any given moment, the overall hormonal state (relative levels of hormones like testosterone, insulin, human growth hormone, cortisol, ...) of the bloodstream is primarily anabolic or primarily catabolic. The anabolic state is favorable to building muscle but also to storing fat. Likewise the catabolic state is favorable to burning fat but also to tearing down muscle.

In an overall calorie surplus, the body favors anabolic processes; in an overall calorie deficit, catabolic ones. I emphasize "overall" and "favors" because short of disease you can't keep the body in a purely anabolic or catabolic state for a long time -- "building up" and "tearing down" are both essential phases (for example, dead cells have to be torn down, and new cells have to built up).

Now, to get to your question ;-), "energy" has little to do with this -- it doesn't take all that much energy for digestion to break dietary protein into amino acids, or to reassemble amino acids into muscle proteins. Even in a large calorie deficit, food supplies enough energy to do those things. It's far more a matter of "convincing" the body it "should" use amino acids to build muscle instead of burning them for energy, and of boosting levels of anabolic hormones, while cutting levels of catabolic hormones, in the bloodstream. Short of taking anabolic steroids, strength-training and consuming an overall calorie surplus are the most effective ways to do this.

Get a feel for what a balancing act this is? Losing fat without losing muscle too is, to some extent, fighting the body's natural tendencies, and the further you are from calorie balance the harder that fight is (for example, the larger the overall calorie deficit and the longer it's sustained, the more time the body will spend in catabolic states than in anabolic states, making it a struggle for most people (genetics do vary) to avoid losing muscle too).

"Losing weight" is a lot easier than just losing fat; likewise "gaining weight" is a lot easier than just gaining muscle (and seeing as you have first-hand experience with this one, hoping to be exempt from the other isn't likely to be rewarded

Ok, while you cannot be anabolic and catabolic at the same time, how quickly can you alternate? One could eat at a deficit long term (say, over 6 months), while strategically exceeding TDEE in spurts to allow for muscle gain, right?

It's called calorie cycling and it is generally tedious and not particularly effective at either building muscle or losing fat. Look at is over a week. The net effect is likely neither defcit or surplus. Thus, mostly spinning your wheels. I assuming you mean shorter cyles like that. Longer cycles would be called cut/bulk cyles and are typically how people in weight training find in most efficient to gain muscle and lose fat.

I don't know why everyone is saying that you can't build muscle and lose fat because I definitely have.. I haven't been building insane amounts of muscle or anything which I guess would require a calorie surplus but I've still built muscle while on a calorie deficit. I just do strength training regularly, and so when your body is lifting regularly it will have to adapt therefore muscle will have to be built even when one is on a calorie deficit..

All metabolic processes are called either "anabolic" or "catabolic". Anabolic processes build complex molecules out of simpler ones, while catabolic processes tear complex molecules down into simpler ones.

Building muscle is anabolic process -- it (in part) builds muscle proteins out of amino acids in the bloodstream. But storing fat is also an anabolic process -- it (in part) builds fat out of fatty acids in the bloodstream.

On the flip side, burning fat is a catabolic process -- but so is burning muscle.

At any given moment, the overall hormonal state (relative levels of hormones like testosterone, insulin, human growth hormone, cortisol, ...) of the bloodstream is primarily anabolic or primarily catabolic. The anabolic state is favorable to building muscle but also to storing fat. Likewise the catabolic state is favorable to burning fat but also to tearing down muscle.

In an overall calorie surplus, the body favors anabolic processes; in an overall calorie deficit, catabolic ones. I emphasize "overall" and "favors" because short of disease you can't keep the body in a purely anabolic or catabolic state for a long time -- "building up" and "tearing down" are both essential phases (for example, dead cells have to be torn down, and new cells have to built up).

Now, to get to your question ;-), "energy" has little to do with this -- it doesn't take all that much energy for digestion to break dietary protein into amino acids, or to reassemble amino acids into muscle proteins. Even in a large calorie deficit, food supplies enough energy to do those things. It's far more a matter of "convincing" the body it "should" use amino acids to build muscle instead of burning them for energy, and of boosting levels of anabolic hormones, while cutting levels of catabolic hormones, in the bloodstream. Short of taking anabolic steroids, strength-training and consuming an overall calorie surplus are the most effective ways to do this.

Get a feel for what a balancing act this is? Losing fat without losing muscle too is, to some extent, fighting the body's natural tendencies, and the further you are from calorie balance the harder that fight is (for example, the larger the overall calorie deficit and the longer it's sustained, the more time the body will spend in catabolic states than in anabolic states, making it a struggle for most people (genetics do vary) to avoid losing muscle too).

"Losing weight" is a lot easier than just losing fat; likewise "gaining weight" is a lot easier than just gaining muscle (and seeing as you have first-hand experience with this one, hoping to be exempt from the other isn't likely to be rewarded

Ok, while you cannot be anabolic and catabolic at the same time, how quickly can you alternate? One could eat at a deficit long term (say, over 6 months), while strategically exceeding TDEE in spurts to allow for muscle gain, right?

It's called calorie cycling and it is generally tedious and not particularly effective at either building muscle or losing fat. Look at is over a week. The net effect is likely neither defcit or surplus. Thus, mostly spinning your wheels. I assuming you mean shorter cyles like that. Longer cycles would be called cut/bulk cyles and are typically how people in weight training find in most efficient to gain muscle and lose fat.

Thank you, but that's not exactly what I am talking about.

I challenge this "absolute rule" because it is not absolute. I understand that people who have lifted previously and have taken time off, people who are obese, and extreme athletes are all documented exceptions to the "can't gain on a deficit" rule. That tells me that the rule is false, misstated, or overstated.

At what point is one measuring the anabolic/catabolic state? per hour? day? week? month? If one's body has the raw materials at hand to build muscle when the body is ready to do so, I would think that the body will build muscle. It doesn't care that two days later a caloric deficit may exist, or that three days prior it existed. Similarly, while one does lose muscle on a caloric deficit, that can be mitigated by protein consumption, moderate deficits (20% TDEE or less) and strength training.

I guess that I'm just skeptical of this absolute rule when logic and evidence run contrary to it.

.02

Honestly, this is pretty much an academic exercise line of thinking in my view. With all the research that has been put into this subject and all the money riding on it for the proffesional atheltes, power lifters and body builder, if there was a more efficient way to bulk and cut, I beleive it would have been discovered by now.

Fair enough. I don't think that we are speaking the same language, anyway. cheers! :drinker:

I am curious as to what you really mean? I was thinking exactly like mmapags. Are you thinking something similar to calorie cycling or are you taking a month of bulk followed by a month of cut or even a program like leangains where you eat at a surplus on lifting days and a deficit on cardio?

Fair enough. I don't think that we are speaking the same language, anyway. cheers! :drinker:

I am curious as to what you really mean? I was thinking exactly like mmapags. Are you thinking something similar to calorie cycling or are you taking a month of bulk followed by a month of cut or even a program like leangains where you eat at a surplus on lifting days and a deficit on cardio?

As mmapags said, I think this is academic (but interesting). I get put off by "can't," "won't," "never" absolutes when contrary evidence exists. See, e.g., what I noted above about obesity, etc.

To answer your question, I am thinking more along the leangains way - short periods of each state in the process of a person's normal efforts to lose fat. I agree that one cannot - in the same moment - be adding muscle and losing fat for the reasons that mmapags noted. I do think that a blanket statement that one cannot add muscle during the course of a steady, long-term fat loss period (say 6 months plus) is incorrect, however. Example - one is lifting hard and heavy regularly and exceeds TDEE for a few days for whatever reason. Will they add muscle? No reason why not, in my mind.

I also question how long the body takes to react to the deficit/surplus state. I cannot imagine it is instantaneous: There has to be lag.

Interested to learn more.

I see what you mean and I would agree a person couldn't instantaneously change the metabolic condition. But even with lean gains, it's more about either cutting fat and minimize muscle loss or muscle gain with minimizing fat gain. I would almost think it would take a few weeks to stabilize and alter conditions. While it isn't impossible to gain muscle in a calorie deficit, it may be assumed it's highly unlikely and I have only heard about it when a person is morbidly obese or noob gains but it's limited to only a few lbs.

Fair enough. I don't think that we are speaking the same language, anyway. cheers! :drinker:

I am curious as to what you really mean? I was thinking exactly like mmapags. Are you thinking something similar to calorie cycling or are you taking a month of bulk followed by a month of cut or even a program like leangains where you eat at a surplus on lifting days and a deficit on cardio?

As mmapags said, I think this is academic (but interesting). I get put off by "can't," "won't," "never" absolutes when contrary evidence exists. See, e.g., what I noted above about obesity, etc.

To answer your question, I am thinking more along the leangains way - short periods of each state in the process of a person's normal efforts to lose fat. I agree that one cannot - in the same moment - be adding muscle and losing fat for the reasons that mmapags noted. I do think that a blanket statement that one cannot add muscle during the course of a steady, long-term fat loss period (say 6 months plus) is incorrect, however. Example - one is lifting hard and heavy regularly and exceeds TDEE for a few days for whatever reason. Will they add muscle? No reason why not, in my mind.

I also question how long the body takes to react to the deficit/surplus state. I cannot imagine it is instantaneous: There has to be lag.

Interested to learn more.

From my anecdotal n=1 study of me (lol), there is a lag. When I did the only bulk/ cut cycle I've ever done, it took about a month before I began to see any measureable muscle size increase and when I switched to cut, I saw some slight measureable gains for about the same time frame. Much of the reason why I think this kind of protocol is "wheel spinning" is based on that and having tried Leangains for about 3 months with little in terms of measureable muscle gains.

I think IF in general is great for fat loss due to the nutrient/ insulin spike and then the long fasted period. I still do it a couple of days per week. But more for the fat burning advantages than for any hope of gaining muscle.

i read every single word in this thread..... with the conclusion that i just wanna reduce my body fat percentage.... nothing more.... ::sits in corner and cries in confusion::