Mythical "clean bulk"

rijlee
rijlee Posts: 13
in Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
Hello all! Sooo I'll get right to it. I know calories in vs. calories out determines weight loss or gain, and depending on your macros, those lbs will either be fat or muscle but what is a ballpark range for macro intake to maintain about 8-9% bf while gaining muscle mass. Right now, I am at about a 1.5g of protein per lb of weight but is sufficient? Also, what would be a good % of carbs? I am currently at about 32-35% is this considered high for a clean bulk? Any input is greatly appreciated :)
«13

Replies

  • Fithealthyforlife
    Fithealthyforlife Posts: 866 Member
    It's not mythical. It's the equivalent of a recomp...but for a person with low bodyfat. It's done with a small caloric surplus (under 300 cal), high protein (but you needn't go crazy...25-30% should be more than sufficient), and proper lifting. And yes, 1.5g/lb is sufficient...actually more than sufficient imho. Maybe even overkill.

    No one can tell you exactly how many carbs or calories or grams of anything you need. It takes trial and error. That said, 33% carbs is pretty low. I eat about 50% carbs in general.

    Disclaimer...I have no desire to intentionally clean bulk...although I've done it accidently when I underestimated exercise burns. I prefer to gain 0.5-1 lb per week.

    If you have a body that gains weight easily, a lean bulk might work really well. Shoot for 0.3-0.5 lbs gain per week if you really want to do it.

    And good luck!
  • JoRocka
    JoRocka Posts: 17,525 Member
    clean bulk = small calorie surplus
    dirty bulk = large calorie surplus

    not the quality of ze foodz.
  • rijlee
    rijlee Posts: 13
    ^im sorry but i disagree with your "clean/dirty" bulk definition. Yes, a surplus is a bulk regardless but clean/dirty isnt from the amount of surplus but rather where they come from. I.e. if you are at a 500 calorie surplus but most of it is from fat/carbs that would be considered dirty. Well, at least this is how I interpret it?
  • JoRocka
    JoRocka Posts: 17,525 Member
    It's not my definition- so you can feel free to disagree with me all you want- it doesn't make me wrong.
    yes, a surplus is a bulk regardless
    well- it's good we agree on that- because.um. well yeah- not sure why this needed stating.
    um but clean/dirty isn't from the amount of surplus but rather where they come from
    they come from the fridge to the plate to your mouth. That's really all that matters- is that you get them. And you get the #'s you need.
    Well, at least this is how I interpret it?

    lol- disagree then question and admit you're guessing as you're own interpretation. I chuckled.


    I wasn't posting an opinion.
    clean bulk- small surplus
    dirty bulk- big surplus

    Really when you are bulking- getting a ball bark of your macro's is good- but just getting your calories in is what you need.
  • TR0berts
    TR0berts Posts: 7,739 Member
    ^im sorry but i disagree with your "clean/dirty" bulk definition. Yes, a surplus is a bulk regardless but clean/dirty isnt from the amount of surplus but rather where they come from. I.e. if you are at a 500 calorie surplus but most of it is from fat/carbs that would be considered dirty. Well, at least this is how I interpret it?


    It's not her definition, and she's right.
  • rijlee
    rijlee Posts: 13
    so "dirty" would be a large caloric surplus? How much of a surplus would this be considered if u were to give it a ballpark range? And if this bulk were "clean" would that mean although there would be a surplus in calories, the weight gained would be mostly from muscle? Also, what would be a realistic body fat percent to maintain while on a clean bulk? I head it was something like 8%?
  • rijlee
    rijlee Posts: 13
    ^im sorry but i disagree with your "clean/dirty" bulk definition. Yes, a surplus is a bulk regardless but clean/dirty isnt from the amount of surplus but rather where they come from. I.e. if you are at a 500 calorie surplus but most of it is from fat/carbs that would be considered dirty. Well, at least this is how I interpret it?


    It's not her definition, and she's right.


    Thanks, this post was really informative and helped me a lot.

    But seriously, I'm just trying to learn as much as I can here. So if you would be so kind as to post things that are relevant I'd appreciate it.
  • TR0berts
    TR0berts Posts: 7,739 Member
    ^im sorry but i disagree with your "clean/dirty" bulk definition. Yes, a surplus is a bulk regardless but clean/dirty isnt from the amount of surplus but rather where they come from. I.e. if you are at a 500 calorie surplus but most of it is from fat/carbs that would be considered dirty. Well, at least this is how I interpret it?


    It's not her definition, and she's right.


    Thanks, this post was really informative and helped me a lot.

    But seriously, I'm just trying to learn as much as I can here. So if you would be so kind as to post things that are relevant I'd appreciate it.



    Yes, it was informative. It should help you, as it was completely relevant to your misunderstanding of terms.
  • rijlee
    rijlee Posts: 13
    It's not my definition- so you can feel free to disagree with me all you want- it doesn't make me wrong.
    yes, a surplus is a bulk regardless
    well- it's good we agree on that- because.um. well yeah- not sure why this needed stating.
    um but clean/dirty isn't from the amount of surplus but rather where they come from
    they come from the fridge to the plate to your mouth. That's really all that matters- is that you get them. And you get the #'s you need.
    Well, at least this is how I interpret it?


    lol- disagree then question and admit you're guessing as you're own interpretation. I chuckled.


    I wasn't posting an opinion.
    clean bulk- small surplus
    dirty bulk- big surplus

    Really when you are bulking- getting a ball bark of your macro's is good- but just getting your calories in is what you need.

    I chuckle too because I don't understand where your logic really comes from. If you could explain scientifically that'd be nice. So yes, we mutually agree a caloric surplus will lead to WEIGHT GAIN, of course. But I ask you this- 2 people both at 1800+ caloric surplus from their daily caloric needs, both exercise vigorously. One gets that surplus from mainly fats/carbs while the other gets their caloric surplus mainly from protein and some from controlled fat/carbs. So you're saying both would be considered "dirty" bulk because they are at a relatively large caloric surplus and this term "dirty" isnt derived from WHERE their macros are coming from??
  • TR0berts
    TR0berts Posts: 7,739 Member
    so "dirty" would be a large caloric surplus? How much of a surplus would this be considered if u were to give it a ballpark range? And if this bulk were "clean" would that mean although there would be a surplus in calories, the weight gained would be mostly from muscle? Also, what would be a realistic body fat percent to maintain while on a clean bulk? I head it was something like 8%?


    It depends upon the person. For me, a clean bulk would be no more than 250 Cals per day surplus. A dirty bulk would be more than 500 Cals per day surplus. In between 250 and 500 would just be a bulk.

    You won't really "maintain" any particular body fat percent on a clean bulk. You will still gain fat, along with muscle - the amount depends upon exactly how much surplus and exactly what your lifting routine is.

    Don't overthink things. Eat. Lift. When you have more body fat than you want, cut.
  • TR0berts
    TR0berts Posts: 7,739 Member

    I chuckle too because I don't understand where your logic really comes from. If you could explain scientifically that'd be nice. So yes, we mutually agree a caloric surplus will lead to WEIGHT GAIN, of course. But I ask you this- 2 people both at 1800+ caloric surplus from their daily caloric needs, both exercise vigorously. One gets that surplus from mainly fats/carbs while the other gets their caloric surplus mainly from protein and some from controlled fat/carbs. So you're saying both would be considered "dirty" bulk because they are at a relatively large caloric surplus and this term "dirty" isnt derived from WHERE their macros are coming from??


    Yes. Exactly that.
  • rijlee
    rijlee Posts: 13

    I chuckle too because I don't understand where your logic really comes from. If you could explain scientifically that'd be nice. So yes, we mutually agree a caloric surplus will lead to WEIGHT GAIN, of course. But I ask you this- 2 people both at 1800+ caloric surplus from their daily caloric needs, both exercise vigorously. One gets that surplus from mainly fats/carbs while the other gets their caloric surplus mainly from protein and some from controlled fat/carbs. So you're saying both would be considered "dirty" bulk because they are at a relatively large caloric surplus and this term "dirty" isnt derived from WHERE their macros are coming from??


    Yes. Exactly that.

    So then, is there a ballpark range of carb/fat % that can maximize muscle gain but minimize said fat gain?
  • lrmall01
    lrmall01 Posts: 377 Member
    Just FYI, not everyone defines "dirty" and "clean" bulking the way JoRocka does. See here for an example:

    http://bulkingdietplan.com/dirty-bulking/

    If you want to bulk while minimizing fat gain, I think this is a good overview:

    http://www.muscleforlife.com/the-best-way-to-gain-muscle-not-fat/

    Good luck.
  • rijlee
    rijlee Posts: 13
    Just FYI, not everyone defines "dirty" and "clean" bulking the way JoRocka does. See here for an example:

    http://bulkingdietplan.com/dirty-bulking/

    If you want to bulk while minimizing fat gain, I think this is a good overview:

    http://www.muscleforlife.com/the-best-way-to-gain-muscle-not-fat/

    Good luck.

    Oooo thanks~!
  • rijlee
    rijlee Posts: 13
    I think my problem was getting too hung up on numbers and percentages. But I tried to quantify these things because everything I have are just rough estimates and after training for a bit, even small changes over time make a big difference so I wanted to be really efficient and not waste my time.
  • lrmall01
    lrmall01 Posts: 377 Member
    I think my problem was getting too hung up on numbers and percentages. But I tried to quantify these things because everything I have are just rough estimates and after training for a bit, even small changes over time make a big difference so I wanted to be really efficient and not waste my time.

    Be sure to note this statement in the second link I gave you:
    If you still have a ways to go before reaching your genetic potential in terms of muscle growth, you want to tweak your diet until you are gaining between .5 - 1.5 pounds of weight per week.

    - If you’re gaining more than 2 pounds per week for any more than your first 2 – 3 weeks of weightlifting, then you’re eating too much (you’re gaining too much fat).

    - If you’re gaining less than 1 pound per week and you still haven’t gained your first 20 pounds of muscle, then you can benefit from eating a bit more.

    All of the calculations and such are starting points but you'll need to adjust up or down until you gain at a rate within this range. If you are gaining 5lb per week, for example, then you are eating too much because you aren't going to be gaining 5lb of muscle per week as a natural bodybuilder. The danger is that you are too conservative and don't eat enough to actually build any new muscle. Be sure you monitor appropriately and adjust as needed.
  • JoRocka
    JoRocka Posts: 17,525 Member
    I think my problem was getting too hung up on numbers and percentages. But I tried to quantify these things because everything I have are just rough estimates and after training for a bit, even small changes over time make a big difference so I wanted to be really efficient and not waste my time.

    Just eat all the things.

    You need carbs to grow muscles. Low carb and muscle growth are not going to happen efficiently. Bulk- needs surplus. So don't sweat it- ball park the macro's and just get your surplus in- you can be spot on your macro's all day long for months on end and only be 100 over your maintenance- and you are just are NOT going to be getting where you need to go.

    250-500 over for a guy is good start point- I like to wait 3 weeks to see changes- if nothing is happening after 4 time to edit.

    Also depends on how long your bulk is- if you are going for a shorter bulk- you probably want to go ham. If it's longer- you should be a little be more metered. 0.5 to 1.5 is good. - for me it's going to be less (that whole vagina thing- so pesky)

    Also- remember it's not a fixed point- it's kind of a 'range' like I shoot for 2200 or so- but as I've gotten bigger and my metabolism has gone up- I've been feeling more and more that I need more food- averaging 2500 as I get further into this. So- evaluate- tweak and move on.
    Just FYI, not everyone defines "dirty" and "clean" bulking the way JoRocka does. See here for an example:

    lulz- not my definition.... just to be clear.
  • lrmall01
    lrmall01 Posts: 377 Member
    lulz- not my definition.... just to be clear.

    Where did you get it from? Honestly not being combative - just curious as I've really not heard "dirty bulking" described that way either. Since you and TR0berts both agree that is a popular explanation I'd like to read more if you can recall who / where you first heard it.
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 48,902 Member
    A bulk is obviously a surplus in calories. And one could eat as clean or as dirty as they want while ensuring they are still getting enough protein for muscle building.
    But overall, putting on size will have to also include genetics, how one's body reacts with protein synthesis, training program, rest, and hormone level.

    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
  • richardheath
    richardheath Posts: 1,276 Member
    Just FYI, not everyone defines "dirty" and "clean" bulking the way JoRocka does. See here for an example:

    http://bulkingdietplan.com/dirty-bulking/

    If you want to bulk while minimizing fat gain, I think this is a good overview:

    http://www.muscleforlife.com/the-best-way-to-gain-muscle-not-fat/

    Good luck.

    But actually, that does agree with the def Jo gave, even if in a roundabout way. Eating a large calorie surplus (from lots of junk or "dirty" food) is a dirty bulk; while a lower calorie surplus (from "clean" foods) is a clean bulk. The first site even says "While being the best option for your health though, it’s a lot more difficult to eat enough calories, fat, and protein while clean bulking." (on the Clean bulking link). In reality, it IS all about the level of the surplus (and a debate on what constitutes "clean" and "dirty" foods).

Categories