Well, you know I've only gained 3 lbs in the last 14 weeks (2 lbs muscle), but that's due mostly to underestimating my TDEE. I've been eating a primal diet for over a year now. I've increased my carbs recently because it was the easiest way to up my calories. Re: the importance of carbs for building muscle....the only time they help is up to 60 min post workout when combined with protein--they get the protein into your bloodstream faster, but that's their only real benefit.

I'm Paleo and I like to lift heavy. Feel free to add me as a friend. You need to EAT....like not under eat to see some real muscle gains. Protein is your main focus with fats and carbs bringing up the rear. Have you read The Paleo Diet for Athletes? Might help you out... Carb macros are NOT one size fits all. It takes some experimenting and tweaking for your individual needs.

I'm 5ft2 and 112.4 lbs....I eat around 2100-2200 minus my lifting sessions per day.

This one specifically mentions for strength.
http://www.amazon.com/Paleo-Diet-Athletes-Guide-Endurance/dp/1623151376/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1389661487&sr=8-2&keywords=paleo+for+athletes

I'm Paleo and I like to lift heavy. Feel free to add me as a friend. You need to EAT....like not under eat to see some real muscle gains. Protein is your main focus with fats and carbs bringing up the rear. Have you read The Paleo Diet for Athletes? Might help you out... Carb macros are NOT one size fits all. It takes some experimenting and tweaking for your individual needs.

I'll check this book out for sure!

I'm around 125g of carbs today, I understand Paleo doesn't equal low carbs, but I thought building muscle = starchy carbs. I guess I will try to have my oats or sweet potato post workout. I may be underestimating my TDEE as well because I've been eating 500 more calories than last month and I have actually lost weight in the past week. I guess it's time to up the cals, again... Not that I mind I'm at 2000 right now, will up to 2100-2200? Seems like a LOT, I'm 5'5 and 120 pounds.

Everyone's different, but ya, eating a little higher carb on a bulk is recommended for most.

I don't know what it's like to bulk (always looking to lose, haha) but I'm hoping to get to that stage. I think that if you work on upping your calories, you'll definitely get there.

Are you doing any cardio? I'm thinking that if it's muscle you're looking to build, minimizing or eliminating the cardio and just focusing on lifts would probably get you there more easily.

Paleo/Primal can form a great base diet for someone looking to gain lean muscle mass. As with anything, your body will react its own way to what you eat, so it might take some tweaking before you get the right balance/timing of macros.

The first thing you have to establish for yourself is how you plan to fuel your workouts. Muscles generally need glycogen to perform (and that comes from glucose and fructose). You can lift on a high fat, low carb diet, but you might run into energy (fatigue) issues if you're not fat adapted. While you can burn fat and gain muscle at the same time, it isn't the most efficient way to go about it. If your goal is muscle mass, you'll probably find it easier to do so on a diet with moderate carbs and a slight calorie excess. When I say carb, I'm not talking grain or starch, but I am including fruits and vegetables.

Protein is the tricky part. Most people overshoot their protein needs. Excess protein messes with digestion and can lead to fat gain. Be prepared to back it down and find the right balance.

Paleo/Primal can form a great base diet for someone looking to gain lean muscle mass. As with anything, your body will react its own way to what you eat, so it might take some tweaking before you get the right balance/timing of macros.

The first thing you have to establish for yourself is how you plan to fuel your workouts. Muscles generally need glycogen to perform (and that comes from glucose and fructose). You can lift on a high fat, low carb diet, but you might run into energy (fatigue) issues if you're not fat adapted. While you can burn fat and gain muscle at the same time, it isn't the most efficient way to go about it. If your goal is muscle mass, you'll probably find it easier to do so on a diet with moderate carbs and a slight calorie excess. When I say carb, I'm not talking grain or starch, but I am including fruits and vegetables.

Protein is the tricky part. Most people overshoot their protein needs. Excess protein messes with digestion and can lead to fat gain. Be prepared to back it down and find the right balance.

Just out of curiosity, why do you suggest fruits over starches for a carb increase when lifting?

And I'm a little confused re: excess protein leading to fat.

As for protein, there is a process that turns it into glucose for energy (when there is more than you need to rebuild) and therefore is subject to the same rules as carbs past that. Jimmy Moore goes into this a bit on his podcasts and his book. He lost to a point on low carb. He stalled and actually started gaining weight again. He dropped his protein, kept his carbs low, increased fat (going ketogenic) and started losing again. Protein is harder for the body to use for energy, but it will. Having too much is a problem for body fat maintenance.

I get this, but probably the protein level should be extremely high to reach this point.

Probably depends on your definition of "extremely high." It really only needs to be above what the body needs for building/repairing. After that, it's fair game as fuel (and, for that matter, under the right conditions, it's fair game, anyway). So, at most, if you're doing low carb, low fat, high protein, you're looking at any level above the .5g/lb of LBM that is the minimum for most people before working out. That can be as little as about 50g of protein.

Start adding in things like endurance running on the same diet, and if you don't increase your carbs or fat enough, any amount of protein you eat (and even the protein you don't - ie your muscles) will start getting broken down for fuel. There's a reason the Olympic-level long-distance runners look like they've been starving for the past five years.

I know the extremely high is a relative term , lol.

Anyway, Could you point out some reference regarding to 0.5 g protein per LBM? I have never seen suggested number that low. ( maybe it is 0.5 per total weight if you are in the normal weight range?) I only see women eating that low, who are on 1200 cal diet and have not touched the default MFP setting.
I only seen suggestion between 0.8 g per LBM to 1.2 g per LBM. Suggesting 0.8 is the miminum required just to keep your muscle mass while eating on deficit, and getting the best out of strength training needs closer to 1 and for muscle mass gain, you should be closer to 1.2.

My LBM is ~125 lb, and i have been aiming between 0.8-1 g per LBM, which is 100-125g for me. The lower bound is something I can reach daily from food, but the higher bound is rather hard. When I do strength training I aim to 1.2 g per LBM , which is 150 g for me, and that is a LOT. That I can not achieve without constant protein powder.

Probably depends on your definition of "extremely high." It really only needs to be above what the body needs for building/repairing. After that, it's fair game as fuel (and, for that matter, under the right conditions, it's fair game, anyway). So, at most, if you're doing low carb, low fat, high protein, you're looking at any level above the .5g/lb of LBM that is the minimum for most people before working out. That can be as little as about 50g of protein.

Start adding in things like endurance running on the same diet, and if you don't increase your carbs or fat enough, any amount of protein you eat (and even the protein you don't - ie your muscles) will start getting broken down for fuel. There's a reason the Olympic-level long-distance runners look like they've been starving for the past five years.

I know the extremely high is a relative term , lol.

Anyway, Could you point out some reference regarding to 0.5 g protein per LBM? I have never seen suggested number that low. ( maybe it is 0.5 per total weight if you are in the normal weight range?) I only see women eating that low, who are on 1200 cal diet and have not touched the default MFP setting.
I only seen suggestion between 0.8 g per LBM to 1.2 g per LBM. Suggesting 0.8 is the miminum required just to keep your muscle mass while eating on deficit, and getting the best out of strength training needs closer to 1 and for muscle mass gain, you should be closer to 1.2.

My LBM is ~125 lb, and i have been aiming between 0.8-1 g per LBM, which is 100-125g for me. The lower bound is something I can reach daily from food, but the higher bound is rather hard. When I do strength training I aim to 1.2 g per LBM , which is 150 g for me, and that is a LOT. That I can not achieve without constant protein powder.

The .5 is the bare minimum for a sedentary person that's neither looking to lose or gain weight, but just maintain where they're at. Most people, especially here, don't fall into that category (hence my phrasing "minimum before working out"), but that's still the bare minimum for anyone to eat. If you're losing weight, even if you're doing it through dietary means only, your protein needs go up, if you're exercising, your protein needs go up, etc. So, to clarify my earlier point:

If you're sedentary and maintaining, you only need about 50g of protein to maintain your LBM. Anything above that will be used for fuel by getting turned into glucose.

If you're active or attempting to lose weight, you'll lose LBM if you don't increase your protein intake adequately, because the body will get its extra calories in part from your muscles (again, through the same process it turns excess dietary protein into fuel). If you increase your protein intake beyond what you need, then that excess will be turned into fuel. For a very active person, like, say, a bodybuilder, that amount could be "very high," sometimes as much as 2g/lb LBM.

http://lowcarbdiets.about.com/od/zonediet/a/zoneprotein.htm
http://evidencemag.com/dieting-protein-needs/ (remember 1kg = ~2.2lb, so 2g/kg = ~.91g/lb, so the lower end of the sedentary recommendation is about .5g/lb)

http://evidencemag.com/dieting-protein-needs/ (remember 1kg = ~2.2lb, so 2g/kg = ~.91g/lb, so the lower end of the sedentary recommendation is about .5g/lb)

This is exactly what I thought, when I read your 0.5 g . My point was the 0.5g is probably the minimum per TOTAL body mass and NOT lean body mass even for sedentary who is maintaining. There is a big difference between the two.
This article you just linked talks about total body mass /body weight everywhere and not the LBM.
"The current RDI for protein is 0.8 gram per kilogram <B> of body weight </B> per day (g/kg/day). This is the minimum amount needed to keep 97.5% of people over the age of 19 healthy.3,4,9 It’s the standard protein intake for most diet recommendations."

From that link, right below the chart:

These values are for your lean body mass, not your total body mass.

The recommendations based on LBM are going to be lower per lb/kg than the ones for total weight, since you (obviously) weigh more in total than just your LBM. In my opinion, though, calculating based on LBM is more accurate, since it's what actually uses the protein.