The secret to building muscle

Options
12346

Replies

  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,139 Member
    Options
    Hornsby wrote: »
    This would also mean you lost 44lbs of fat WHILE gaining 35lbs of muscle...all in 3 months, correct. Just want to make sure I'm reading this right.

    sounds legit...
  • Krisfit40
    Krisfit40 Posts: 106 Member
    Options
    LMFAO @ gaining 35lbs of muscle in 3 months PED free!! BAHAHAHAHAHA
    OK, sorry, had to do it
  • NasMax
    NasMax Posts: 138 Member
    edited July 2016
    Options
    sarahlifts wrote: »
    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.

    I understand what you're saying and you're right... BUT you're talking about the small extra %... im talking about specifically adding as much new lean tissue as one can while specifically shooting for that exact goal ☺
  • NasMax
    NasMax Posts: 138 Member
    Options
    NasMax wrote: »
    Well it's not really a secret... just as needing a 'calorie deficit' to lose weight is not really a secret either

    BUT, for one reason or another the concept of a calorie deficit is non existent to the overwhelmingly masses of the population

    Add in the fact that there is a massive monopoly in the so called 'fitness industry' by insincere sales people who prefer to keep you confused as an easy ploy to take you're money, rather than help you achieve your goals, get a solid reputation and let their clients advertise your business as multiple walking, talking billboards.

    (I'm all for the later)

    Anyway, when it comes to losing fat the simple truth is that you need to create a caloric deficit.. that's it, there's no way around it. There's millions of ways to balance & adhere to a calorie deficit on a personal level... but none the less, you need to be in a calorie deficit.

    So, on the flip flop (cool slang for flip slide, which is cool slang for opposite side) building muscle and gaining LEAN weight also comes down to ONE SIMPLE THING....

    ...but, just like the mythical fat loss solution (the calorie deficit) you're again never told what it is, because *kitten* usually sells better than truth.

    Now before you even think about rubbishing this concept, just for a small moment try to recall some of the concepts that you were ADAMANT about before you came over to the good side & accepted that the calorie deficit was the God of fat loss... remember all those silly things you believed?

    If you're looking to pack on new lean muscle tissue, you NEED to get stronger.

    Yep, that's it.

    FCK the fluff & pretty bb.com workout plans (they're created to sell you supplements by taking advantage of your naivety)

    Just like the calorie deficit for fat loss, there is no way around this.

    You HAVE to get stronger (if you're natural/not on steroids that is) if you want to get bigger

    Have a quick cheeky read of this piece by the one & only great Dr Lyle McDonald

    "Taking this out of the volume thread. For years I noticed that while natural bodybuilders often made no progress in muscle size, powerlifters always do. Always.

    Here's why: powerlifting is BASED around adding weight to the bar. It's the explicit point of the sport. You can dick around bodybuilding with squeeze and pump and feel and find guys using the same weight for years.

    And I don't care how much volume or frequency or anything else you're doing: adding weight to the bar > EVERYTHING else.

    We knew this in the late 70's: PROGRESSIVE TENSION OVERLOAD is THE primary stimulus to growth. Everything else is secondary.

    As Dante Trudell put it "Make strength gains in a moderate repetition range and you will grow." The end.

    Or as I stated in that thread: find me a big natural bodybuilder who's not strong. Because I can find you thousands of small guys who are weak. And the difference is the last word of each sentence."

    I'm doing a bb.com workout that is actually working. Yes, I'm in a caloric deficit and I've increase my protein intake and limited myself on carbs (not in ketosis). I've developed strength in my arms, back and legs. I am including a bit of cardio just to burn off excess energy that the strength training didn't rid; I'm not doing stable cardio, more on the lines of a HIIT concept. I don't buy any of the products from bb.com and I'm only taking protein shakes, that's it. Everything else is from the food I consume.

    So it's not all bad on bb.com; their programs work as long as you stay committed to doing them. They aren't for everyone no, but it's something for me to try. Don't shy people away from an opportunity that bb.com may have for them. If it doesn't work, ok it didn't work; try something else. Give someone a chance and if they want a program from bb.com, let them have it. Don't deter them just because you have a strong opinion against bb.com.

    I do understand your point, but i cant in good faith recommend or direct anyone asking for advice to bb.com knowing what i know about this industry... it would invalidate my personal integrity. But by all means, do what you enjoy ☺
  • FSLSBSmfp
    FSLSBSmfp Posts: 38 Member
    Options
    What happens if you keep getting stronger while losing weight? Do your muscles get denser?

    I'm trying to lose body fat, so far been getting stronger, looking leaner but body weight isn't changing much.
  • sgt1372
    sgt1372 Posts: 3,979 Member
    edited July 2016
    Options
    To be sure I understand, you are saying that people cannot gain muscle while losing weight, correct?

    Not exactly.

    You can lose weight and gain strength to the extent the weight loss is primarily attributable to fat (not muscle) loss and to the extent that strength gain is due to improving the strength of the existing muscle mass by working out w/weights (or in other ways) and perhaps increasing some lean muscle mass in the process.

    However, if you lose any lean muscle mass due to excessive dieting and cardio, you will become weaker in an absolute sense (whether you like if or not), so for each person there is a tipping point where losing more weight would be undesirable from a strength perspective.

    After you achieved your max fat loss (w/o losing any or at least a minimal amount of lean muscle mass), any additional strength gain will only come from increasing your body weight, which will allow your body to develop increased muscle mass and strength, which will come from eating more and working out with increasingly heavier weights.

    That said, there is a point at which each person will reach his/her maximum physical/genetic potential for size and strength based on their skeletal and muscular structure. You'll see this in the diminishing gains in strength over time and the need to resort to more advanced methods of programming and training to eek more strength out of your workouts.

    This can be a point of frustration for people who want to get stronger but have reached the limit of their unique physical ability to do so. Some people do not like the idea of "limits" and consider it defeatist to accept the idea that they can't do more. But, if you refuse to recognize your limits and continue to try to lift heavier weights beyond your physical/genetic capacity to do so, the ultimate result will only be injury.

    That's the time to stop, reassess and try other ways to further develop your strength and fitness.

  • zoeysasha37
    zoeysasha37 Posts: 7,089 Member
    Options
    This thread has me beating my head against my desk.
    Dude come on seriously! Give it up already. Nobody is gaining 35 lbs of muscle in three months. Your making that up .
  • NasMax
    NasMax Posts: 138 Member
    edited July 2016
    Options
    The topic of this thread has taken a de-tour lol
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,394 MFP Moderator
    Options
    NasMax wrote: »
    The topic of this thread has taken a de-tour lmao!

    35lbs of lean mass gain & 45lbs of fat loss in 3 months NATURALLY in your mid-30's?

    Dude... c'mon lol

    You're telling me that one can't gain more muscle in 3 months than most 18 year olds gain in 1 year... I am shocked!


    And it was only 9 lbs of fat.. but who's counting. lol.
  • zoeysasha37
    zoeysasha37 Posts: 7,089 Member
    Options
    Dude you should post your dexa scan as proof of your 35 lb muscle gain in 90 days .....I can't wait to see this! You must be a modern miracle because your claims are out of this world!
    ( And out of the realm of reality)
  • NasMax
    NasMax Posts: 138 Member
    edited July 2016
    Options
    Just to clarify for anyone new jumping into this thread... this is not my (The OP) claim, this is someone else's claim who commented in this thread.
  • cityruss
    cityruss Posts: 2,493 Member
    Options
    Hornsby wrote: »
    The Piana plan?

    Gotta confuse those forum goers, right babe?
  • trigden1991
    trigden1991 Posts: 4,658 Member
    Options
    cityruss wrote: »
    Hornsby wrote: »
    The Piana plan?

    Gotta confuse those forum goers, right babe?

    Whatever it takes!
  • NasMax
    NasMax Posts: 138 Member
    Options
    cityruss wrote: »
    Hornsby wrote: »
    The Piana plan?

    Gotta confuse those forum goers, right babe?

    Whatever it takes!

    8 hour arm workout then straight into jumping jack dead-lifts to confuse the muscle.
  • sgt1372
    sgt1372 Posts: 3,979 Member
    edited July 2016
    Options
    Sued0nim wrote: »
    I'm sorry but someone lost 44lbs fat and gained 35lbs muscle in 3 months

    Not sure how you could do possibly do that. Do you have any facts to support it?

    By way of example, 3 years ago, I lost 40 lbs from 198 lbs to 158 lbs over 5 months and dropped from over 28% down to 15% body fat, which translated into a loss of about 32 lbs of fat and 8 lbs of muscle mass. This was determined by hydrostatic measurement.

    158 was too low of a weight for me (unrealistic) and I quickly regained 17 lbs back to 175 (which is my preferred weight) over another 5 months with an increase of 2% in BF (15 to 17) which resulted in an increase of about 6 lbs in fat (23.7 to 29.7) and 11 lbs of muscle (134.3 to 145.2). Again, determined by hydrostatic measurement.

    This was an 10 month procress that took place at a fairly rapid pace but no way I could have done it in just 3 months.
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,394 MFP Moderator
    edited July 2016
    Options
    sgt1372 wrote: »
    Sued0nim wrote: »
    I'm sorry but someone lost 44lbs fat and gained 35lbs muscle in 3 months

    Not sure how you could do possibly do that. Do you have any facts to support it?

    By way of example, 3 years ago, I lost 40 lbs from 198 lbs to 158 lbs over 5 months and dropped from over 28% down to 15% body fat, which translated into a loss of about 32 lbs of fat and 8 lbs of muscle mass. This was determined by hydrostatic measurement.

    158 was too low of a weight for me (unrealistic) and I quickly regained 17 lbs back to 175 (which is my preferred weight) over another 5 months with an increase of 2% in BF (15 to 17) which resulted in an increase of about 6 lbs in fat (23.7 to 29.7) and 11 lbs of muscle (134.3 to 145.2). Again, determined by hydrostatic measurement.

    This was an 10 month procress that took place at a fairly rapid pace but no way I could have done it in just 3 months.

    Something isn't adding up with your numbers.

    198 * (1-.28) = 142.5 lbs of lean body mass
    158 * (1-.15) = 134.3 lbs of lbm.

    That would suggest a loss of lean body mass (not same as muscle). Even if that is wrong, 198 - 32 + 8 =/= 158.


    Am I missing something?
  • sgt1372
    sgt1372 Posts: 3,979 Member
    edited July 2016
    Options
    psulemon wrote: »
    Something isn't adding up with your numbers.

    198 * (1-.28) = 142.5 lbs of lean body mass
    158 * (1-.15) = 134.3 lbs of lbm.

    That would suggest a loss of lean body mass (not same as muscle). Even if that is wrong, 198 - 32 + 8 =/= 158.

    Am I missing something?

    I think you're missing the changes in BF and LBM from 158 back up to 175. Here's summary which should be clearer:

    198 lbs: 28% BF -- Fat 55.44 lbs vs LBM 142.56 lbs

    158 lbs: 15% BF -- Fat 23.70 lbs (-31.74 lbs) vs LBM 134.3 lbs (-8.26 lbs)

    175 lbs: 17% BF -- Fat 29.75 lbs (+6.05 lbs) vs+ LBM 145.25 lbs(+10.95lbs)



  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,394 MFP Moderator
    Options
    sgt1372 wrote: »
    psulemon wrote: »
    Something isn't adding up with your numbers.

    198 * (1-.28) = 142.5 lbs of lean body mass
    158 * (1-.15) = 134.3 lbs of lbm.

    That would suggest a loss of lean body mass (not same as muscle). Even if that is wrong, 198 - 32 + 8 =/= 158.

    Am I missing something?

    I think you're missing the changes in BF and LBM from 158 back up to 175. Here's summary which should be clearer:

    198 lbs: 28% BF -- Fat 55.44 lbs vs LBM 142.56 lbs

    158 lbs: 15% BF -- Fat 23.70 lbs (-31.74 lbs) vs LBM 134.3 lbs (-8.26 lbs)

    175 lbs: 17% BF -- Fat 29.75 lbs (+6.05 lbs) vs+ LBM 145.25 lbs(+10.95lbs)



    Essentially you lost 8 lbs of lbm and then regain 10lbm.. keeping in mind lbm is more than muscle.