trainers or professional bodybuilders opinion needed
Options
Replies
-
You do not gain 0.3lb per week from just water/glycogen - you gain a bunch when you get back to lifting
Let's do some maths again. 13.2lbs in 10 weeks, 0.5lb/week max according to the article. So according to this limit I could only have gained 5lbs of muscle. This means I gained 8.3lbs of water and glycogen in one big hit? Not likely.You really do not seem to realize what FFM is. It includes water and food weight - its anything not fat. Your comment about bones and organs, unless you were being facetious is kind of adding to your lack of credibility.
I calculated FFM by subtracting the fat mass from the total weight, jusst for interest. It went down by 3.9kg over the data collection period. I took all measurements at the same time of day and in as similar conditions are possible (hydration, after toilet, clothes, placement of scales, temperature of room). So you think before I was carrying around 3.9kg of food and now I'm empty? What do you attribute the loss in FFM to?
I'm not confusing FFM and muscle as I have clearly given them separate columns.
0 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »
Hahahshaha! Omg.0 -
You are using a BIA device for your data - which is fundamentally flawed
Some people will never be happy. Yes the BIA method is not perfect but the rise in muscle correlated with my increase in training and the drops in body fat correlate with lower calorie periods (you can even cross check with my food diary if you're that bothered). I am aware of its limitations but when it gives you results you expect based on your calories and activity I am inclined to at least consider its validity.and yes, I notice the uptick - but you are still down. What's up with that?
Down over the total period. The most recent period I have gained muscle and lost fat, which the internet article said could not be done.
0 -
You should then go to BB.com or Getbig.com and sell your program to them. All them dudes looking to gain mounds of muscle would (especially the amateurs looking to get their pro card) gladly pay you rather than pay for gear.ScottJTyler wrote: »I tracked my weight and I was 77kg morning weight in the first and 83kg in the second. That's 6kg/13.2lbs in 10 weeks. The photo below is from August as well and in a similar stance. I didn't track anything other than weight or do proper before and after photos because I didn't expect such rapid results. I just trained my *kitten* off and this is what happened.
According to that article the limit is 0.5lb/week. So I must have gained 8.2lbs or more of just water and glycogen. Seems unlikely.
If you are so cynical and distrustful that only DEXA scan data will be sufficient evidence for you then you're going to be disappointed. Even if I did provide those you'd bring into question the accuracy of that method and highlight its prediction flaws.
The article says you can't build muscle in a calorie deficit which is nonsense and something I actually do have data for. These data are from a BIA scale.
This is from my current cut. My muscle mass was trending downwards initially because I lowered my volume and intensity because this is the common thing people say on the internet. Then right at the lowest point I decided to screw it and up my training again. Lo and behold, my muscle mass (actual muscle mass, not fat free mass) has been trending upwards while going from 11 to 9.5% bodyfat. And I'm not what you'd call 'untrained'.
Sounds obvious but if you increase the muscle building stimulus... you will build muscle, regardless of whether you’re in a calorie surplus or a deficit. Your body will find a way.
It doesn’t matter if you are in a ‘cut’ and/or you’re advanced, increase training volume and you’ll build muscle. Increase it rapidly and you will build muscle rapidly. Try it and prove me wrong.
Challenge someone like Layne Norton, or other pros in nutrition and hypertrophy instead of us novices here. We'll stick to science since we're still not convinced.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
ScottJTyler wrote: »You are using a BIA device for your data - which is fundamentally flawed
Some people will never be happy. Yes the BIA method is not perfect but the rise in muscle correlated with my increase in training and the drops in body fat correlate with lower calorie periods (you can even cross check with my food diary if you're that bothered). I am aware of its limitations but when it gives you results you expect based on your calories and activity I am inclined to at least consider its validity.and yes, I notice the uptick - but you are still down. What's up with that?
Down over the total period. The most recent period I have gained muscle and lost fat, which the internet article said could not be done.
Your trends went up by half a pound over 4-ish weeks? While using a method that's notoriously inaccurate that gives you readings fluctuating by over 2 pounds on a day to day basis. And you think that can't possibly be water weight retention, because...0 -
ScottJTyler wrote: »You are using a BIA device for your data - which is fundamentally flawed
Some people will never be happy. Yes the BIA method is not perfect but the rise in muscle correlated with my increase in training and the drops in body fat correlate with lower calorie periods (you can even cross check with my food diary if you're that bothered). I am aware of its limitations but when it gives you results you expect based on your calories and activity I am inclined to at least consider its validity.and yes, I notice the uptick - but you are still down. What's up with that?
Down over the total period. The most recent period I have gained muscle and lost fat, which the internet article said could not be done.
Its not a case of never being happy - BIA devices are wildly inaccurate - which you can read up about if you bother to click the link LolBro provided. It does not indicate an increase in muscle and trying to use a BIA in any event to show anything, especially over such a short time is futile. I am not sure how you are not understanding that LBM =/= muscle mass. I have raised this point before - quite a few times as have others.
Also, you did not answer the question regarding the decrease in your apparent muscle (other than implying you had a loss in bone density and your organs were smaller!!). You cannot argue both sides - one minute its representative of muscle and the next it is not (hint: it's the latter).0 -
I'm not doubting that there is some real change there- but the if you're taking "before and after" photos specifically to prove a point that's got an entire community gawfing with incredulity- do you think you would use something more standard- like two side by sides- not one cleared posed and dieted vs one not flexed and a bad angle?ScottJTyler wrote: »You're being assumptive and slanderous.
These two pictures were taken in June and then August last Year. Sadly I don't have the data to show you as I wasn't as meticulous then. For context: the first picture was at the end of a 3 month break from weights and the second was after going straight back into 2 hours a day training for around 10 weeks.
The guy who gained two stone was previously athletic but had been sedentary for about a year prior to starting. He was naturally lean and skinny but when I got him simply eating more his strength and size shot up. The weight gain is self-reported so can be treated with a little skepticism but the rapid gain in size is visually apparent.
Do people actually believe you usually when you show them these pictures?
I believe his graphs...which show a .2kg muscle mass gain in 1 month.
That's what I find laughable- it's not like someone going from a mere 350 to 150- no matter which way you stand- it's going to be damn obvious.
Those pictures- at his size- he should know better.
0 -
I'm not doubting that there is some real change there- but the if you're taking "before and after" photos specifically to prove a point that's got an entire community gawfing with incredulity- do you think you would use something more standard- like two side by sides- not one cleared posed and dieted vs one not flexed and a bad angle?
That's what I find laughable- it's not like someone going from a mere 350 to 150- no matter which way you stand- it's going to be damn obvious.
Those pictures- at his size- he should know better.
The second one I posted is a similar pose. Clearly leaner, clearly bigger, no matter what you say about angles, lighting, flexed, etc. I said I didn't take proper before and after pictures, these are the best I have from that time.
Also there was a big increase in leg size. I don't have a before picture for that but I must have put on a good few pounds on each quad.
I am not sure how you are not understanding that LBM =/= muscle mass. I have raised this point before - quite a few times as have others.
At no point did I say the 13.2lbs was all muscle. I said I gained that weight and got leaner. But it is too large a gain in weight to attribute it to water/food/glycogen in order to get it to fit into your absolute scientific certainty of 0.5lbs of muscle gain/week. Yes I gained weight partly in food/water/glycogen/bone density/whatever but not 8.2lbs worth or 62% of it. Seems like too much. I lost fat as well so my FFM most likely increased by more than 13.2lbs. But I thought I wouldn't even mention that.Its not a case of never being happy - BIA devices are wildly inaccurate - which you can read up about if you bother to click the link LolBro provided. It does not indicate an increase in muscle and trying to use a BIA in any event to show anything, especially over such a short time is futile.
If you don't believe the pictures and dismiss the BIA data then there's not much more I can do for you. Like I said, I'm aware that it can give crappy results sometimes but it seems to be showing what I expect it to for now so I'm convinced by it.
0 -
Even if we believe your BIA data, it clearly does NOT say you gained "a good few pounds" on your legs alone. It shows a half pound uptrend at the end over a whole month.
And no, your two pictures did not have similar poses at all. Check out the video I posted on how easily you can make yourself look bigger or smaller within a few hours.0 -
ScottJTyler wrote: »If you don't believe the pictures and dismiss the BIA data then there's not much more I can do for you. Like I said, I'm aware that it can give crappy results sometimes but it seems to be showing what I expect it to for now so I'm convinced by it.
Well, there you have it. Like I said earlier: it's the "I want to believe" method.0 -
At no point did I say the 13.2lbs was all muscle. I said I gained that weight and got leaner. But it is too large a gain in weight to attribute it to water/food/glycogen in order to get it to fit into your absolute scientific certainty of 0.5lbs of muscle gain/week. Yes I gained weight partly in food/water/glycogen/bone density/whatever but not 8.2lbs worth or 62% of it. Seems like too much. I lost fat as well so my FFM most likely increased by more than 13.2lbs. But I thought I wouldn't even mention that.
Sounds legit!
How are you making the categorical assumption that its muscle - what are your assumptions? The BIA device?. Also, that would imply that you lost muscle and gained muscle in the degree of lbs daily? Really? How does that even make sense to you?
BTW: additional glycogen, water etc etc can easily account for 8lbs. But you do not want to believe that.
Also, you seem to have missed my point about newb gains. It is possible for some to gain more than 0.5lb of muscle a week, particularly when returning back to lifting (like newb gains), but posting as if people are their own limiting factor and you can sustain a higher than average muscle gain is disingenuous and just not true - it also totally ignores genetics. Your results more recently do not exactly make the argument for you. The 0.5lb is not a hard number, but people claiming results way outside that will be called into question, especially when they do not have a single piece of credible data to back it up.
0 -
ScottJTyler wrote: »If you don't believe the pictures and dismiss the BIA data then there's not much more I can do for you. Like I said, I'm aware that it can give crappy results sometimes but it seems to be showing what I expect it to for now so I'm convinced by it.
Well, there you have it. Like I said earlier: it's the "I want to believe" method.
No confirmation bias there...nope...none whatsoever0 -
At no point did I say the 13.2lbs was all muscle. I said I gained that weight and got leaner. But it is too large a gain in weight to attribute it to water/food/glycogen in order to get it to fit into your absolute scientific certainty of 0.5lbs of muscle gain/week. Yes I gained weight partly in food/water/glycogen/bone density/whatever but not 8.2lbs worth or 62% of it. Seems like too much. I lost fat as well so my FFM most likely increased by more than 13.2lbs. But I thought I wouldn't even mention that.
Sounds legit!
How are you making the categorical assumption that its muscle - what are your assumptions? The BIA device?. Also, that would imply that you lost muscle and gained muscle in the degree of lbs daily? Really? How does that even make sense to you?
BTW: additional glycogen, water etc etc can easily account for 8lbs. But you do not want to believe that.
Also, you seem to have missed my point about newb gains. It is possible for some to gain more than 0.5lb of muscle a week, particularly when returning back to lifting (like newb gains), but posting as if people are their own limiting factor and you can sustain a higher than average muscle gain is disingenuous and just not true - it also totally ignores genetics. Your results more recently do not exactly make the argument for you. The 0.5lb is not a hard number, but people claiming results way outside that will be called into question, especially when they do not have a single piece of credible data to back it up.
Right there is the biggest problem, IMO. We know the data is inaccurate, as evidenced by the wild daily swings in what you think is total muscle mass. With inaccurate data, no meaningful conclusions can be drawn - because you/we don't actually know what the real values are at any particular point.
eta: Just to reiterate what others have mentioned - you've obviously done a good job at getting and maintaining your physique. Nobody is saying otherwise. In fact, that part I'd say is admirable. But the numbers you're throwing about don't make any lick of sense and the data you've shown is - quite simply - bad.0 -
My scale does BIA. This morning I weighed 195 pounds with 28.4% body fat. After breakfast and lunch I weighed 198 pounds with 26.6% body fat. That means I gained 5.7 pounds of lean mass since I woke up.0
-
The fact that your numbers are all over the place - from day to day - should tell you right away your method is utter crap
Seriously - look at the last entry for "Muscle lbs." You really think you gained 1.9 lbs of muscle overnight?
He seems to think LBM = muscle and place too much reliance on the accuracy of BIAs that are notoriously inaccurate.
Also, when returning to lifting, I can easily gain 5lb in water/glycogen and I have less muscle mass so someone with more could easily gain more.
When I switch to a bulk from maintenance - I gain almost exactly 7lbs in the first week or so. This appears to be how much water I retain, so your 5lbs sounds right.0 -
At no point did I say the 13.2lbs was all muscle. I said I gained that weight and got leaner. But it is too large a gain in weight to attribute it to water/food/glycogen in order to get it to fit into your absolute scientific certainty of 0.5lbs of muscle gain/week. Yes I gained weight partly in food/water/glycogen/bone density/whatever but not 8.2lbs worth or 62% of it. Seems like too much. I lost fat as well so my FFM most likely increased by more than 13.2lbs. But I thought I wouldn't even mention that.
Sounds legit!
How are you making the categorical assumption that its muscle - what are your assumptions? The BIA device?. Also, that would imply that you lost muscle and gained muscle in the degree of lbs daily? Really? How does that even make sense to you?
BTW: additional glycogen, water etc etc can easily account for 8lbs. But you do not want to believe that.
Also, you seem to have missed my point about newb gains. It is possible for some to gain more than 0.5lb of muscle a week, particularly when returning back to lifting (like newb gains), but posting as if people are their own limiting factor and you can sustain a higher than average muscle gain is disingenuous and just not true - it also totally ignores genetics. Your results more recently do not exactly make the argument for you. The 0.5lb is not a hard number, but people claiming results way outside that will be called into question, especially when they do not have a single piece of credible data to back it up.
Right there is the biggest problem, IMO. We know the data is inaccurate, as evidenced by the wild daily swings in what you think is total muscle mass. With inaccurate data, no meaningful conclusions can be drawn - because you/we don't actually know what the real values are at any particular point.
eta: Just to reiterate what others have mentioned - you've obviously done a good job at getting and maintaining your physique. Nobody is saying otherwise. In fact, that part I'd say is admirable. But the numbers you're throwing about don't make any lick of sense and the data you've shown is - quite simply - bad.
It would not be so bad but 1) he has none of the data he is showing for the time he says he gained all this muscle 2) his data actually contradicts what he is saying. He is saying that 8lb/13lb (ratio of muscle:weight gain of 0.46:1) is assuming too large of an amount as non muscle LBM yet his 'stats' for the recent period show it to be too low. FFM gained on the chart = 3.3kg. Muscle gaines = 1kg. That is a 0.30:1 ratio. It is even worse than the number he is trying to argue is too low. His interpretation of the data (even if it were assumed as accurate) is faulty in the extreme. I realize that he is going to tell us to use his cherry picked data points where he 'gained muscle' - the last month - the period where on the last day he apparently gained 1.9lb of muscle in 24 hours however.
If the data does not make sense when looked at in detail, then you probably should not be using it to make claims, particularly when they are outside the norm. Also, when trying to prove a point, you do not take a period of time (2 1/2 months) that equates to that period which you are using to prove said point (2 1/2 months) and cherry pick the best numbers from a one month period because the data from the 2 1/2 month period does not support, and actually counteracts your assertion. It just does not fly.0 -
Mmmmmm.....anabolic dreams.
Like wet dreams, only better. You get GAINZZZZ!!!!!!0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 401 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 996 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions