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

"Muscular" has the connotation that there is a high PERCENTAGE of muscle in the body which is why it is not uncommon to hear weight lifters described as muscular. A morbidly obese person has a lot of lbs of muscle in their body but that doesn't mean its a high percentage; by your definition, everyone biggest loser contestant is muscular.

Well I'm betting their legs and calves are for carrying around all that weight. Ever notice that even with tremendous loss of weight that practically all of them have huge calves? Progressive overload with calorie surplus did that.


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

Just because I had a lot of muscle doesn't mean I was muscular

"Muscular" has the connotation that there is a high PERCENTAGE of muscle in the body which is why it is not uncommon to hear weight lifters described as muscular. A morbidly obese person has a lot of lbs of muscle in their body but that doesn't mean its a high percentage; by your definition, everyone biggest loser contestant is muscular.

Nope. I started out fat with no muscle.


Muscular means having lots of muscle.


Fact still remains, bmi is not a good tool for gauging progress.

You had no muscle? How did you move?

I used my powers of not taking **** so literally you are unable to comprehend colloquial English.

I LOL'd

You need to take your PC in, I think the sarcasm detector is broken.

Don't bears eat fish? Most BEARS are omnivores....they get their fish oils! Don't HATE!
:P

I would say your first two months would be considered newb stage. Here you should focus on hypertrophy and then muscular endurance. Especially if you're not following a specific program.

Obese is a term based on the BMI. I am obese on the BMI. Just means you are carrying around too much weight for your height. This does not take into account your fat/muscle ratio...although I have recently found a newer BMI that calculates your waist size as well. Which says I'm "normal"

I'm 180lbs 5'6 with 16% BF. I started at 183lbs (same height) and 23%BF. For the first two months my gains were noticeable but in the grand scheme small. Now that I have gotten on a program as of the latest 3 months, gains are much more noticeable and fine tuned as weight and volume has increased.

I would say in your first couple months depending on your goals (Caloric deficit unless bulking), you should notice an increase in energy, slight increase in muscle gains, while leaning out a bit. It's easy to lose weight, but my goal was to lose weight and gain lean mass. Which the only way you can do simultaneously is to carb cycle on your training days

In the 3-5 month range I have noticed my chest is picked up and more pronounced. My legs are developing tear drop muscle striations. I am stronger. I am tighter in my core, my core is rock-hard. Definition and striations have increased around shoulders and upper body as well.

I still have fat around my lower pec's in front of my arm pits, and a much smaller spare tire around mid section. Just keeping the work going, giving it my all, and as a shout out, I have been on Intermittent Fasting for about a week and a half. 16/8 fast every day. I love it. and definitely has helped me reach my caloric goals, as well as drop about 1-2% BF in a week.

Best of Luck!

Much chi

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?

No such thing as no fat on your frame. You'd be dead.
You're either being anabolic (building) or catabolic (tearing down) tissue. If one is in deficit, then they are in a catabolic state. Not only does one lose fat, but also some muscle along with it. It's inevitable.
In surplus (anabolic) one builds muscle, but also adds fat. Muscle building is an energy consuming process which is why a surplus yields better results.


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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

This content has been removed.

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?

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?

Lol @ this thread and the nay sayers.