Can't build muscle in a caloric deficit - why?

Options
2»

Replies

  • balboasuze
    balboasuze Posts: 7 Member
    Options
    My next question was/is going to be "if you can't build muscle in a caloric deficit, how does this explain success at a progressive weight lifting regime while losing weight by calorie restriction".

    To use myself as an example: I'm definitely in calorie deficit because I've lost an average of a pound a week for some time now. I've been lifting for a couple of months, have seen changes to my body - which I've assumed to be the result of reducing fat over the top of the muscles I already had. I can now lift things that I wouldn't have been able to even LOOK at a couple of months ago. How is that explained, if you assume that "no muscle gain in caloric deficit" is true? (Disclaimer: this is a genuine question - I'm not fishing for people to tell me that I've gained muscle...) Does muscular strength not equal muscular gain?

    But maybe this is the MFP equivalent of finding something which looks like a wasp's nest and thinking "hey, I wonder if I should kick this"...
  • WBB55
    WBB55 Posts: 4,131 Member
    Options
    balboasuze wrote: »
    My next question was/is going to be "if you can't build muscle in a caloric deficit, how does this explain success at a progressive weight lifting regime while losing weight by calorie restriction".

    To use myself as an example: I'm definitely in calorie deficit because I've lost an average of a pound a week for some time now. I've been lifting for a couple of months, have seen changes to my body - which I've assumed to be the result of reducing fat over the top of the muscles I already had. I can now lift things that I wouldn't have been able to even LOOK at a couple of months ago. How is that explained, if you assume that "no muscle gain in caloric deficit" is true? (Disclaimer: this is a genuine question - I'm not fishing for people to tell me that I've gained muscle...) Does muscular strength not equal muscular gain?

    But maybe this is the MFP equivalent of finding something which looks like a wasp's nest and thinking "hey, I wonder if I should kick this"...

    Yes, you can get stronger/more efficient without actually adding additional muscle cell fibers.
  • Pinnacle_IAO
    Pinnacle_IAO Posts: 608 Member
    edited August 2015
    Options
    balboasuze wrote: »
    My next question was/is going to be "if you can't build muscle in a caloric deficit, how does this explain success at a progressive weight lifting regime while losing weight by calorie restriction".

    To use myself as an example: I'm definitely in calorie deficit because I've lost an average of a pound a week for some time now. I've been lifting for a couple of months, have seen changes to my body - which I've assumed to be the result of reducing fat over the top of the muscles I already had. I can now lift things that I wouldn't have been able to even LOOK at a couple of months ago. How is that explained, if you assume that "no muscle gain in caloric deficit" is true? (Disclaimer: this is a genuine question - I'm not fishing for people to tell me that I've gained muscle...) Does muscular strength not equal muscular gain?

    But maybe this is the MFP equivalent of finding something which looks like a wasp's nest and thinking "hey, I wonder if I should kick this"...
    KICK IT!
    I always kick any kind of nest housing stinging insects... >:)

    Anyway, guys starting out can make muscle gains, but the value in the long run is muscle preservation and overall fitness.
    Maybe somebody into "Leangains" could advise you.
    I read up on the calorie cycling and meal/exercise timing and feel it produced some results in muscle retention, but some guys have claimed huge results with actual gains in a calorie deficit.

    I just don't know...

  • nordlead2005
    nordlead2005 Posts: 1,303 Member
    Options
    yarwell wrote: »
    nordlead2005 wrote: »
    yarwell wrote: »
    They are demonstrating muscle gain in a daily caloric deficit. So the latter for sure.
    When there are sufficient fat stores. It would be interesting to see a study done on athletes with not much body fat to lose.

    Indeed, however why would you put low body fat athletes on a hypocaloric diet :-)

    science!! But athlete may have been the wrong choice. Why not start with someone ~17% body fat (upper side of fit) and see what happens, rather than starting with +25% (obese). Of course, accuracy in measuring body fat and muscle mass may make a study on the lower end hard.
  • Fujiberry
    Fujiberry Posts: 400 Member
    Options
    I like simpler answers. :)

    Fat isn't converted into muscle. Muscle and fat are two different things.

    Anything that naturally physically grows needs something extra--plants, animals, people-- Muscle needs a caloric surplus and can't grow from air.

    However hypertrophy newbie gains are different. That happens when the stimuli (lifting) is completely new, and so your body forces itself to adapt to it. This -can- be possible with a SMALL deficit, but progress with a deficit will most likely be strength gains. Newbie gains are more likely to happen to someone who previously had a sedentary lifestyle and/or is overweight.

    Muscle =/= Strength

    Deficits on a newbie will result in muscle maintenance along with fat loss, which in a lot if cases looks like the person has gained muscle.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,874 Member
    Options
    balboasuze wrote: »
    I'm not challenging that this is correct, or anything. But I'm very much a "why?" person, so can someone explain why this is the case?

    I assume it is something to do with the body's ability to convert body fat to lean muscle, but I'm struggling to find explanations on other websites which don't look a bit like BS.

    What is the distinguishing factor of eating at maintenance/over maintenance which makes building muscle possible? Why is it possible for "newbies" to build "some" muscle in a caloric deficit? Is that even true?

    Thanks, guys!

    the same way you can't "build" fat in a deficit...you can't build something from nothing...you can't really be in a catabolic state and be anabolic...gaining muscle or fat would be anabolic.

    you can become much stronger without putting on actual muscle mass, even in a deficit...and many people mistake the revealing of existing muscle by cutting fat to be building muscle...it is not...the individual is simply cutting fat and revealing what was already there. lifting while in a deficit helps to preserve that muscle mass while in a cut so you look awesome and ripped and whatnot when you're done.

    also, people mistake "pump" for building muscle...pump is just fluid in your muscles which in fact will increase the size of the muscle, but you're not actually building new muscle...it's just fluid. This explains why a lot of people take measurements and note a growth and insist they are building muscle...but any "growth" will quickly stall because, again, it's just water.
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    edited August 2015
    Options
    yarwell wrote: »
    Another black swan study "In obese, protein-depleted surgical patients net protein anabolism and clinical efficacy can be achieved with hypocaloric, high-protein feeding. Abundant endogenous fat stores provide obligatory energy." http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3098083

    Do me a solid and save me the clicking - are they describing a PSFM-like protocol?
  • SergeantSausage
    SergeantSausage Posts: 1,673 Member
    Options
    balboasuze wrote: »

    the body's ability to convert body fat to lean muscle

    <boggle>

    Exactly what the h-e-double-hockeysticks is being taught about how the body works in schools these days?

    The body *never* "converts fat to muscle"

    Fat is converted to *energy*.

    Energy is *used by* muscle (among other things).

    The body turns *Proteins* into muscle.

  • sjohnson__1
    sjohnson__1 Posts: 405 Member
    Options
    SergeantSausage wrote: »
    balboasuze wrote: »

    the body's ability to convert body fat to lean muscle

    <boggle>

    Exactly what the h-e-double-hockeysticks is being taught about how the body works in schools these days?

    The body *never* "converts fat to muscle"

    Fat is converted to *energy*.

    Energy is *used by* muscle (among other things).

    The body turns *Proteins* into muscle.

    Lol. I don't understand how people really think fat cells will magically turn into muscle cells. They're two different things. It's not that simple, but it's really not that difficult to understand.

    OP - if you're wondering if it's possible to gain LBM while in a caloric deficit the answer is yes - lean body mass can increase if your ratio of fat-free mass to fat mass is increased. Therefore, if while in a caloric deficit you lose fat-free mass (muscle) slower than you lose fat mass, you'll have an increase.
  • DeterminedFee201426
    DeterminedFee201426 Posts: 859 Member
    Options
    stevencloser wrote: »
    blackcoffeeandcherrypie wrote: »
    I also am curious about this. I have been eating a heck of a lot of protein and doing weights, hoping to build some muscle but if it's not possible in a deficit then I may be wasting my time :-(
    It's good for keeping the muscle you have while in a deficit, no wasted time.
    it's defenately not a waste of time .. while your in a deficit and eating high protien you retain your muscle mas which is very good thing.

  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    edited August 2015
    Options
    balboasuze wrote: »
    How is that explained, if you assume that "no muscle gain in caloric deficit" is true? (Disclaimer: this is a genuine question - I'm not fishing for people to tell me that I've gained muscle...) Does muscular strength not equal muscular gain?

    I don't have a position on the overall subject, but I did experience this:

    DEXA in late August 2014, about 150 lb, about 100 lb lean mass.

    DEXA in late January 2015, about 130 lb, about 96 lb lean mass.

    During that same time period I was working a progressive strength training program, made substantial strength gains, and looked more muscular at the end of it (which obviously is due to less fat to cover it up).
  • WBB55
    WBB55 Posts: 4,131 Member
    edited August 2015
    Options
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    balboasuze wrote: »
    How is that explained, if you assume that "no muscle gain in caloric deficit" is true? (Disclaimer: this is a genuine question - I'm not fishing for people to tell me that I've gained muscle...) Does muscular strength not equal muscular gain?

    I don't have a position on the overall subject, but I did experience this:

    DEXA in late August 2014, about 150 lb, about 100 lb lean mass.

    DEXA in late January 2015, about 130 lb, about 96 lb lean mass.

    During that same time period I was working a progressive strength training program, made substantial strength gains, and looked more muscular at the end of it (which obviously is due to less fat to cover it up).

    So for 20 lbs lost, 4 of them were lean mass. Or 1:5. That's better than 1:3 (in this case 7 lbs of lean mass) which seems to be the kind of result you'd expect without lifting weights.
  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    Options
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    balboasuze wrote: »
    How is that explained, if you assume that "no muscle gain in caloric deficit" is true? (Disclaimer: this is a genuine question - I'm not fishing for people to tell me that I've gained muscle...) Does muscular strength not equal muscular gain?

    I don't have a position on the overall subject, but I did experience this:

    DEXA in late August 2014, about 150 lb, about 100 lb lean mass.

    DEXA in late January 2015, about 130 lb, about 96 lb lean mass.

    During that same time period I was working a progressive strength training program, made substantial strength gains, and looked more muscular at the end of it (which obviously is due to less fat to cover it up).

    Mmmm great info

Categories