The secret to building muscle

135

Replies

  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,136 Member
    NasMax wrote: »

    Yet some people are still unaware of this concept (some even argue against it who haven't yet become familiar with the science & application) ...your posts are now pointless and taking away from the topic. This topic is obviously not of any use to you, so there's no point in you commenting anymore unless it's to help contribute.

    I am contributing by pointing out that people should read the most helpful posts...
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,136 Member
    edited July 2016
    NasMax wrote: »

    you are the one resorting to name calling, not me.

    It is an open forum and I can comment anywhere I choose/see fit...

    sorry, captain obvious...
  • NasMax
    NasMax Posts: 138 Member
    edited July 2016
    ndj1979 wrote: »

    you are the one resorting to name calling, not me.

    It is an open forum and I can comment anywhere I choose/see fit...

    sorry, captain obvious...
    mate seriously, have a word with yourself, you're making yourself look silly.
  • artichokes4algernon
    artichokes4algernon Posts: 1 Member
    Another study as of last week regarding this issue, Pumping iron: Lighter weights just as effective as heavier weights to gain muscle, build strength:
    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/07/160712094259.htm

    (Read the peer-reviewed article in the Journal of Applied Physiology here if you have access: http://jap.physiology.org/content/121/1/129)

    This study dealt specifically with men but I've (female) had the best results with lighter weights/many reps. This is probably due more to body type and genetics than we currently have an understanding of. What works for one person may not for another.

    (me = just wishing to tone and not add bulk)

  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,136 Member
    NasMax wrote: »
    mate seriously, have a word with yourself, you're making yourself look silly.

    the only silliness I see is, is repeating obvious statements that are common knowledge and acting like you are doing everyone a favor...
  • NasMax
    NasMax Posts: 138 Member
    edited July 2016
    Another study as of last week regarding this issue, Pumping iron: Lighter weights just as effective as heavier weights to gain muscle, build strength:
    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/07/160712094259.htm

    (Read the peer-reviewed article in the Journal of Applied Physiology here if you have access: http://jap.physiology.org/content/121/1/129)

    This study dealt specifically with men but I've (female) had the best results with lighter weights/many reps. This is probably due more to body type and genetics than we currently have an understanding of. What works for one person may not for another.

    (me = just wishing to tone and not add bulk)

    Hey, yep great study!

    Im not saying 'heavier weights are better' im saying you have to get stronger... regardless of the rep range you're using... even if thats a 12-15 rep range.

    Hope that makes sense? ☺
  • NasMax
    NasMax Posts: 138 Member
    Sued0nim wrote: »
    Can you can it with the "mates" you sound like a cockney crawled up your *armadillo* and died :)

    That said...I think if you want to reach those who don't know this stuff, you should spread your wisdom around the threads when people ask for help or advice ...jump in and add to the chorus

    But I'd work on making my posts shorter too...cos people don't read walls of text generally

    Nope not cockney, just British lol ☺
  • NasMax
    NasMax Posts: 138 Member
    edited July 2016
    Sued0nim wrote: »

    thats no excuse for talking like a bad Michael Caine script :)

    LMAO! :smiley:
  • NasMax
    NasMax Posts: 138 Member
    ndj1979 wrote: »

    the only silliness I see is, is repeating obvious statements that are common knowledge and acting like you are doing everyone a favor...

    If you think this is common knowledge you obviously havent read through this thread, as its mostly uncommon to the majority of people conversing in here.. anyway, im not interested in a pointless argument. Bye x
  • SideSteel
    SideSteel Posts: 11,068 Member
    Hornsby wrote: »
    This isn't that controversial, folks.

    To get bigger, you have to get stronger. It's inevitable. People are reading to much into this I think.

    I generally agree with this.

  • Hornsby
    Hornsby Posts: 10,322 Member

    Not exactly what you're after but a good read of itself.
    http://classic.jap.physiology.org/content/121/1/129

    Not exactly what you're after but a good read of itself.
    http://classic.jap.physiology.org/content/121/1/129

    Seems to be testing endurance training vs Hypertrophy, no?
  • piperdown44
    piperdown44 Posts: 958 Member
    Hornsby wrote: »

    Seems to be testing endurance training vs Hypertrophy, no?

    Not really. From the discussion it doesn't seem to matter whether the weight was heavy or lighter as long as it went to failure. Saw increases in both hypertrophy and strength (with one exception, bench).
    I bolded the quote below from the study discussion.
    Interestingly, they picked a larger sample group that had at least 2 years worth of training with weights more than 2x per week.

    "Twelve weeks of supervised, higher- and lower-load per
    repetition RT programs were similarly effective at inducing
    skeletal muscle hypertrophy
    in resistance-trained participants
    when RT was performed to volitional failure. Additionally,
    when participants were tested periodically for maximal
    strength (i.e., essentially being allowed to practice their 1RM),
    the increases in muscular strength were not significantly different
    between groups. The exception was bench press 1RM, which
    increased to a greater extent in the LR group. Additionally,
    postexercise levels of circulating hormones did not change as a
    result of the RT intervention and were unrelated to changes in
    muscle mass and strength."
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 49,052 Member
    Genetics matter too. I'm not that strong compared to a lot of guys my height and weight, but physique wise a lot of times my muscle size is bigger than theirs. They may bench more (my highest bench ever was 275lbs in my 20's), but my pec size would make it seem I'm just as strong. Granted, to get bigger I did have my bench go up, but I really never benched more than 225lbs for reps because I was going more for volume training to build size and not just by progressively increasing my bench numbers.

    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

    9285851.png
  • CharlieBeansmomTracey
    CharlieBeansmomTracey Posts: 7,682 Member
    you all got me confused. I was told yesterday you can gain muscle in a deficit if the conditions are right,but when I first joined and over time most people on here who have lifted and built muscle says NO you cant and thats what I thought so as well, so which one is it? (aside from newbie gains,getting back to lifting and so on)
  • SideSteel
    SideSteel Posts: 11,068 Member
    you all got me confused. I was told yesterday you can gain muscle in a deficit if the conditions are right,but when I first joined and over time most people on here who have lifted and built muscle says NO you cant and thats what I thought so as well, so which one is it? (aside from newbie gains,getting back to lifting and so on)

    You will gain muscle at a faster rate being in an energy surplus.
    It is still possible to gain muscle in a net deficit over time but the success of that happening (and amount of muscle gained) will be influenced by a number of different factors such as genetics (responsiveness to exercise and nutrient partitioning/p-ratio), how much body fat you have, how large of a deficit, how well structured your training program is, protein intake, etc.

    And I list out all this context because it matters.

    There's a very big difference between an overweight teenage male with 6 months to a year of experience (not a complete noob) eating in a small deficit and training intelligently vs a female contest level physique athlete in her 40's in the last 3 weeks of a contest prep diet.

    One of those people will very likely gain muscle and the other will very likely lose it, but both are in a deficit.
  • NasMax
    NasMax Posts: 138 Member
    SideSteel wrote: »

    You will gain muscle at a faster rate being in an energy surplus.
    It is still possible to gain muscle in a net deficit over time but the success of that happening (and amount of muscle gained) will be influenced by a number of different factors such as genetics (responsiveness to exercise and nutrient partitioning/p-ratio), how much body fat you have, how large of a deficit, how well structured your training program is, protein intake, etc.

    And I list out all this context because it matters.

    There's a very big difference between an overweight teenage male with 6 months to a year of experience (not a complete noob) eating in a small deficit and training intelligently vs a female contest level physique athlete in her 40's in the last 3 weeks of a contest prep diet.

    One of those people will very likely gain muscle and the other will very likely lose it, but both are in a deficit.

    100% this, great answer!
  • RoxieDawn
    RoxieDawn Posts: 15,488 Member
    edited July 2016
    bioklutz wrote: »

    While it isn't a secret I would say based on some of the questions I see people just don't have the knowledge.

    So my point that this is not a "secret" has been made, and this is really about just giving basic advice to anyone that wants assistance with setting up their goals, or just has a basic question to help them further their goals.

    edited to add: their seems to be a little bit of boasting going on about how much knowledge OP has, etc... When a topic of discussion has been written in the forums, it is always up for debate or interpretation by all that wish to join in the conversation. I watched this thread form for the past couple of days and some possible ego is in here as well.
  • sgt1372
    sgt1372 Posts: 3,997 Member
    I agree completely w/the basic principles stated by the OP that "calorie deficit" = "weight loss" and that "getting stronger" = "gaining muscle."

    What is often not understood (especially here on MFP) is that, while one can lose weight and get stronger to a certain level of stasis, ultimately you cannot get stronger and gain muscle (if that is your primary goal) w/o also gaining weight, which is contrary to what so many people on MFP say they want to do, which is lose weight and get stronger.

    It is a paradox of body recomposition that is a source of much confusion.
  • KetoneKaren
    KetoneKaren Posts: 6,412 Member
    sgt1372 wrote: »
    I agree completely w/the basic principles stated by the OP that "calorie deficit" = "weight loss" and that "getting stronger" = "gaining muscle."

    What is often not understood (especially here on MFP) is that, while one can lose weight and get stronger to a certain level of stasis, ultimately you cannot get stronger and gain muscle (if that is your primary goal) w/o also gaining weight, which is contrary to what so many people on MFP say they want to do, which is lose weight and get stronger.

    It is a paradox of body recomposition that is a source of much confusion.

    To be sure I understand, you are saying that people cannot gain muscle while losing weight, correct?
  • NasMax
    NasMax Posts: 138 Member

    To be sure I understand, you are saying that people cannot gain muscle while losing weight, correct?

    Only to a certain/small degree...
  • KetoneKaren
    KetoneKaren Posts: 6,412 Member
    Am I being ridiculous to want to be the exception?
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    Am I being ridiculous to want to be the exception?
    Not at all - it's a great goal to have even if it doesn't work out you will have done the best you can.

    Funny enough nearly the whole debate around gaining muscle in a deficit is around the outcome and not the methods used. So whether you end up gaining some or just preserving the maximum amount of your existing muscle mass is a bit of a moot point.
  • KetoneKaren
    KetoneKaren Posts: 6,412 Member
    edited July 2016
    t31065.gif
    t1911.gif
  • NasMax
    NasMax Posts: 138 Member
    edited July 2016
    Am I being ridiculous to want to be the exception?

    No, but it's kinda like the 'fitness' equivalent of wanting to be a multimillionaire & also wanting to relax everyday and never work

    The two things oppose each other (mostly)
  • chocolate_owl
    chocolate_owl Posts: 1,695 Member
    Am I being ridiculous to want to be the exception?

    Think of it this way - if you preserve the muscle you have while in a deficit, instead of shrinking down to a smaller version of your current self, you significantly change your body composition. You don't need to build new muscle while losing weight to see big benefits. If you're not happy when you get to goal, that's when you can think about recomping or gaining.
  • sarahlifts
    sarahlifts Posts: 610 Member
    usmcmp wrote: »

    The secret to building muscle is adequate calories and progressive overload, which doesn't necessarily come from adding strength.

    And that is all!

    I swear I was waiting for OP to say caloric surplus lol nope.

    I do get stronger in a cut occasionally and I'm def not growing muscle in a cut bc science says I need a caloric surplus.

    Now I do get stronger in a bulk yep bc I have more calories and carbs available to me.

  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,136 Member
    Am I being ridiculous to want to be the exception?

    you are basically searching for the "holy grail" of lifting....so good luck ..but you would be better served looking at bulk/cut cycles or recomp ....
  • rgrstetson
    rgrstetson Posts: 121 Member
    Am I being ridiculous to want to be the exception?

    Karen, I've personally lost weight and increased my lean body mass by 35lbs in a period of three months. This was driven by a variety of factors ranging from nutrition to how and when I was working out. The fact is that it is possible for you to increase lean body mass while losing weight, you just may not lose the weight as fast as you want to. Another fact is to help you lose weight you need to increase your lean body mass as this will increase your metabolic rate.

    Now, as far as the OP. Yes, if you want to gain lean mass you need to get stronger. It is, but it isn't, that simple. If you are going to weight train you need to periodize your training to work your body through phases to put the entire picture together. For the 1st 4 weeks of any "strength" intervention you are making gains through improvements in your neuromuscular system, not and increase in mass. Your body is remembering how to do the movements and recruiting more of the right muscle fibers to do them thus making you more efficient.

    After this phase you want to phase in a specific muscular growth phase commonly referred to as your hypertrophic (bulking) phase. This will increase the number of type IIx muscle fibers (think strength/power) in the muscle belly. After this phase is when you focus on the strength phase which will continue to have hypertrophic effects. If you follow your strength phase with a power phase you will be creating more explosive power in the muscle mass you have built and thus making your neuromuscular system more efficient, not necessarily making you stronger or improving lean body mass.

    Each of these phases can be structured a variety of ways. I have been studying this for years and have a masters in Kinesiology with a focus on Sports Performance and am and NSCA CSCS certified strength coach. There are an abundant amount of theories and ways to address increasing lean body mass through proper progression and periodization. When I am training people I tell them to train like an athlete and that their sport is life. Whose theory I decide to use for that athlete depends on a wide variety of factors.

    So the short answer is...as the OP said, you have to get stronger to increase mass. The long answer is you have to address each system to get stronger without injury and properly build the mass you are looking for.

    All the best,
    Scott
This discussion has been closed.