Lose the fat then gain muscle? Right or wrong?
Options
Replies
-
There are some others but this is the most talked about one.
For the study, 40 young men underwent a month of hard exercise while cutting dietary energy they would normally require by 40 per cent of what they would normally require
The high protein group (2.4 g/kg) gained 2 lb of muscle and lost 10 lb of body fat.
The low protein group (1.2 g/kg) lost negligible muscle and lost ~7.7 lb of body fat.
The researchers divided their subjects into two groups. Both groups went on a low calorie diet, one with higher levels of protein than the other. The higher-protein group experienced muscle gains – about 2.5 pounds – despite consuming insufficient energy, while the lower protein group did not add muscle
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/103/3/738
They state nothing about the individuals lifestyles, body composition, or activity level before the trial. That makes me dubious.
If "young men" whose testosterone is high and who've never worked out before started an exercise regimen it makes sense to me that they would make the well-known "newbie gains". Even obese individuals can make "newbie gains" while in a deficit when first starting.
It's my understanding that this doesn't last for very long.
In any case, it makes perfect sense that one needs adequate amino acids (specifically leucine) to build muscle mass and it isn't surprising that this is possible. Again though, I would take this with a grain of salt as this information was not provided and i'm fairly certain these individuals were untrained individuals.0 -
Yeah, they were untrained mostly. Let me look up some other studies that show even in trained individuals you can recomp with a high protein diet/calorie deficit with resistance training.
Ok, a recomp is one thing....and that is doable, it is just an extremely slow process....
If it is a recomp, then technically you are not in deficit.....your are trying to stay around maintenance.0 -
There are some others but this is the most talked about one.
For the study, 40 young men underwent a month of hard exercise while cutting dietary energy they would normally require by 40 per cent of what they would normally require
The high protein group (2.4 g/kg) gained 2 lb of muscle and lost 10 lb of body fat.
The low protein group (1.2 g/kg) lost negligible muscle and lost ~7.7 lb of body fat.
The researchers divided their subjects into two groups. Both groups went on a low calorie diet, one with higher levels of protein than the other. The higher-protein group experienced muscle gains – about 2.5 pounds – despite consuming insufficient energy, while the lower protein group did not add muscle
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/103/3/738
Thanks!0 -
Yeah, they were untrained mostly. Let me look up some other studies that show even in trained individuals you can recomp with a high protein diet/calorie deficit with resistance training.
Ok, a recomp is one thing....and that is doable, it is just an extremely slow process....
If it is a recomp, then technically you are not in deficit.....your are trying to stay around maintenance.
It is the process of loosing body fat while gaining muscle. You might be able to do it at maintenance but having a calorie deficit will make it a lot faster. Here is an article by Menno Henselmans who is crazy knowledgeable about what I am talking about.
https://bayesianbodybuilding.com/gain-muscle-and-lose-fat-at-the-same-time/
He has links to the journal articles he cited.1 -
There are some others but this is the most talked about one.
For the study, 40 young men underwent a month of hard exercise while cutting dietary energy they would normally require by 40 per cent of what they would normally require
The high protein group (2.4 g/kg) gained 2 lb of muscle and lost 10 lb of body fat.
The low protein group (1.2 g/kg) lost negligible muscle and lost ~7.7 lb of body fat.
The researchers divided their subjects into two groups. Both groups went on a low calorie diet, one with higher levels of protein than the other. The higher-protein group experienced muscle gains – about 2.5 pounds – despite consuming insufficient energy, while the lower protein group did not add muscle
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/103/3/738
How trained with the groups before the study?
How old were they (younger men have more testosterone which helps build muscle)?0 -
Yeah, they were untrained mostly. Let me look up some other studies that show even in trained individuals you can recomp with a high protein diet/calorie deficit with resistance training.
Beyond the zone: protein needs of active individuals.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11023001
Based on laboratory measures, daily protein requirements are increased by perhaps as much as 100% vs. recommendations for sedentary individuals (1.6-1.8 vs. 0.8 g/kg). Yet even these intakes are much less than those reported by most athletes. This may mean that actual requirements are below what is needed to optimize athletic performance, and so the debate continues. Numerous interacting factors including energy intake, carbohydrate availability, exercise intensity, duration and type, dietary protein quality, training history, gender, age, timing of nutrient intake and the like make this topic extremely complex.
Dietary protein for athletes: from requirements to optimum adaptation.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22150425
Elevated protein consumption, as high as 1.8-2.0 g · kg(-1) · day(-1) depending on the caloric deficit, may be advantageous in preventing lean mass losses during periods of energy restriction to promote fat loss. These recommendations may also be dependent on training status: experienced athletes would require less, while more protein should be consumed during periods of high frequency/intensity training.
Increased protein intake reduces lean body mass loss during weight loss in athletes (this one shows athletes which is important because they were'nt making huge gains).
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19927027
These results indicate that approximately 2.3 g x kg(-1) or approximately 35% protein was significantly superior to approximately 1.0 g x kg(-1) or approximately 15% energy protein for maintenance of lean body mass in young healthy athletes during short-term hypoenergetic weight loss.
From the Journal of Sports Sciences
olympiatoppen.no/fagomraader/idrettsernaering/Fagstoff/artikler/media39080.media
To optimize the ratio of fat-to-lean tissue mass loss during hypoenergetic periods, athletes are advised to ensure that they lower their carbohydrate intake to *40% of their energy intake (with an emphasis on consumption of lower GI carbohydrates), which usually means no more than 3–4 g kg/day , and increase their protein intake to *20–30% of their energy intake or *1.8–2.7 g kg in accordance with FFM/lean body tissue .... By engaging in resistance exercise during a hypoenergetic dieting period, athletes will also provide a markedly anabolic stimulus to retain muscle protein. All of the aforementioned strategies will, however, result in less absolute weight loss than if protein is not increased and resistive exercise is not performed, which may be important for some athletes.
I mean, i'd be interested to see more studies about this but everything i've seen so far has been for short-term hypoenergetic periods, on individuals who are untrained (who make some gains short-term), or on athletes (who are able to retain muscle).
I've never seen a study on an athlete who is well-trained going on a long-term calorie deficit making gains based on their protein intake. It's my understanding as well that as we are lower in body fat we have less wiggle-room in our calorie intakes. So if we're following a low-calorie diet we're inevitably eating lower carbs. As carbs are protein sparing, we may be forced to use protein through gluconeogenesis and fats through ketosis for our energy needs. This takes valuable amino acids that could have been used for their prospective functions to be used for general fuel and can require our bodies to use muscle tissue for fuel needs as well.
As a matter of fact i've never seen a study on a long-term calorie deficit that didn't result in SOME muscle loss; especially if the individual is already well-trained or low body fat.
0 -
I will defer to him then.
Not ssure how optimal it is though....0 -
Yeah, they were untrained mostly. Let me look up some other studies that show even in trained individuals you can recomp with a high protein diet/calorie deficit with resistance training.
Ok, a recomp is one thing....and that is doable, it is just an extremely slow process....
If it is a recomp, then technically you are not in deficit.....your are trying to stay around maintenance.
It is the process of loosing body fat while gaining muscle. You might be able to do it at maintenance but having a calorie deficit will make it a lot faster. Here is an article by Menno Henselmans who is crazy knowledgeable about what I am talking about.
https://bayesianbodybuilding.com/gain-muscle-and-lose-fat-at-the-same-time/
He has links to the journal articles he cited.
I do hope that is true. I maintain a deficit, lift heavy and keep a low carb high protein diet. I actually expected only to gain strength and maintain muscle mass from this while recomping. Hope in a few months I do see growth. Time will tell I guess. Thanks for the article.0 -
rainbowbow wrote: »Yeah, they were untrained mostly. Let me look up some other studies that show even in trained individuals you can recomp with a high protein diet/calorie deficit with resistance training.
Beyond the zone: protein needs of active individuals.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11023001
Based on laboratory measures, daily protein requirements are increased by perhaps as much as 100% vs. recommendations for sedentary individuals (1.6-1.8 vs. 0.8 g/kg). Yet even these intakes are much less than those reported by most athletes. This may mean that actual requirements are below what is needed to optimize athletic performance, and so the debate continues. Numerous interacting factors including energy intake, carbohydrate availability, exercise intensity, duration and type, dietary protein quality, training history, gender, age, timing of nutrient intake and the like make this topic extremely complex.
Dietary protein for athletes: from requirements to optimum adaptation.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22150425
Elevated protein consumption, as high as 1.8-2.0 g · kg(-1) · day(-1) depending on the caloric deficit, may be advantageous in preventing lean mass losses during periods of energy restriction to promote fat loss. These recommendations may also be dependent on training status: experienced athletes would require less, while more protein should be consumed during periods of high frequency/intensity training.
Increased protein intake reduces lean body mass loss during weight loss in athletes (this one shows athletes which is important because they were'nt making huge gains).
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19927027
These results indicate that approximately 2.3 g x kg(-1) or approximately 35% protein was significantly superior to approximately 1.0 g x kg(-1) or approximately 15% energy protein for maintenance of lean body mass in young healthy athletes during short-term hypoenergetic weight loss.
From the Journal of Sports Sciences
olympiatoppen.no/fagomraader/idrettsernaering/Fagstoff/artikler/media39080.media
To optimize the ratio of fat-to-lean tissue mass loss during hypoenergetic periods, athletes are advised to ensure that they lower their carbohydrate intake to *40% of their energy intake (with an emphasis on consumption of lower GI carbohydrates), which usually means no more than 3–4 g kg/day , and increase their protein intake to *20–30% of their energy intake or *1.8–2.7 g kg in accordance with FFM/lean body tissue .... By engaging in resistance exercise during a hypoenergetic dieting period, athletes will also provide a markedly anabolic stimulus to retain muscle protein. All of the aforementioned strategies will, however, result in less absolute weight loss than if protein is not increased and resistive exercise is not performed, which may be important for some athletes.
I mean, i'd be interested to see more studies about this but everything i've seen so far has been for short-term hypoenergetic periods, on individuals who are untrained (who make some gains short-term), or on athletes (who are able to retain muscle).
I've never seen a study on an athlete who is well-trained going on a long-term calorie deficit making gains based on their protein intake. It's my understanding as well that as we are lower in body fat we have less wiggle-room in our calorie intakes. So if we're following a low-calorie diet we're inevitably eating lower carbs. As carbs are protein sparing, we may be forced to use protein through gluconeogenesis and fats through ketosis for our energy needs. This takes valuable amino acids that could have been used for their prospective functions to be used for general fuel and can require our bodies to use muscle tissue for fuel needs as well.
As a matter of fact i've never seen a study on a long-term calorie deficit that didn't result in SOME muscle loss; especially if the individual is already well-trained or low body fat.
Effect of two different weight-loss rates on body composition and strength and power-related performance in elite athletes.
When weight loss (WL) is necessary, athletes are advised to accomplish it gradually, at a rate of 0.5-1 kg/wk. However, it is possible that losing 0.5 kg/wk is better than 1 kg/wk in terms of preserving lean body mass (LBM) and performance. The aim of this study was to compare changes in body composition, strength, and power during a weekly body-weight (BW) loss of 0.7% slow reduction (SR) vs. 1.4% fast reduction (FR). We hypothesized that the faster WL regimen would result in more detrimental effects on both LBM and strength-related performance. Twenty-four athletes were randomized to SR (n = 13, 24 ± 3 yr, 71.9 ± 12.7 kg) or FR (n = 11, 22 ± 5 yr, 74.8 ± 11.7 kg). They followed energy-restricted diets promoting the predetermined weekly WL. All athletes included 4 resistance-training sessions/wk in their usual training regimen. The mean times spent in intervention for SR and FR were 8.5 ± 2.2 and 5.3 ± 0.9 wk, respectively (p < .001). BW, body composition (DEXA), 1-repetition-maximum (1RM) tests, 40-m sprint, and countermovement jump were measured before and after intervention. Energy intake was reduced by 19% ± 2% and 30% ± 4% in SR and FR, respectively (p = .003). BW and fat mass decreased in both SR and FR by 5.6% ± 0.8% and 5.5% ± 0.7% (0.7% ± 0.8% vs. 1.0% ± 0.4%/wk) and 31% ± 3% and 21 ± 4%, respectively. LBM increased in SR by 2.1% ± 0.4% (p < .001), whereas it was unchanged in FR (-0.2% ± 0.7%), with significant differences between groups (p < .01). In conclusion, data from this study suggest that athletes who want to gain LBM and increase 1RM strength during a WL period combined with strength training should aim for a weekly BW loss of 0.7%.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21558571
The Effects of Intensive Weight Reduction on Body Composition and Serum Hormones in Female Fitness Competitors
In conclusion, a fitness diet in healthy young females accomplished by restricting carbohydrate ingestion and increasing aerobic exercise while maintaining high levels of protein intake and resistance exercise can be carried out without major decreases in lean mass/muscle size. Therefore, the diet almost exclusively decreased body fat and altered serum hormones, but most of those values recovered within 3–4 months with the increase in energy intake and decrease in high level of aerobic exercise. However, in some females this time period may not have been long enough for a full recovery (e.g., free T3 and testosterone hormones). Future studies should investigate the time-course of the changes during the diet and in the recovery period and whether repeating heavy diets for many times has any long-lasting negative effects.
http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fphys.2016.00689/full?&utm_source=Email_to_authors_&utm_medium=Email&utm_content=T1_11.5e1_author&utm_campaign=Email_publication&field&journalName=Frontiers_in_Physiology&id=242757#F20 -
There are some others but this is the most talked about one.
For the study, 40 young men underwent a month of hard exercise while cutting dietary energy they would normally require by 40 per cent of what they would normally require
The high protein group (2.4 g/kg) gained 2 lb of muscle and lost 10 lb of body fat.
The low protein group (1.2 g/kg) lost negligible muscle and lost ~7.7 lb of body fat.
The researchers divided their subjects into two groups. Both groups went on a low calorie diet, one with higher levels of protein than the other. The higher-protein group experienced muscle gains – about 2.5 pounds – despite consuming insufficient energy, while the lower protein group did not add muscle
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/103/3/738
Reread through the study - LBM increased - not muscle mass. Big difference there and usually the source of confusion (like gaining lean muscle mass, which isn't even a thing).
While there likely could have been some small amount - the fact of using it more also would have increased glucose storage with attached water in the muscle, perhaps blood volume to service more muscle being used now, ect.
All the studies saying lean tissue mass where they don't state right then the opposing fat tissue mass, are talking about the same thing, LBM vs FM.
I do like that 24 athlete study though, because it shows they may have been athlete with lower body stuff, but could still make gains on upper body despite diet.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/447514/athletes-can-gain-muscle-while-losing-fat-on-deficit-diet/p1
2 -
So it is a semantic issue? It could be an increase in muscle mass but it could also be they did not gain any muscle mass but gained extra fluid?0
-
So it is a semantic issue? It could be an increase in muscle mass but it could also be they did not gain any muscle mass but gained extra fluid?
Could be, especially if a new workout routine was started. You muscles will store more water to protect them and aid in recovery until your body gets used to the new routine... since the studies were over a short term most of the gain could relate to this. It would be interesting to see a study in which the same routine is carried on, over the long term and only the protein and calories changed. That would take care of most of the "water weight" gain issue.0 -
Yeah, they were untrained mostly. Let me look up some other studies that show even in trained individuals you can recomp with a high protein diet/calorie deficit with resistance training.
Ok, a recomp is one thing....and that is doable, it is just an extremely slow process....
If it is a recomp, then technically you are not in deficit.....your are trying to stay around maintenance.
It is the process of loosing body fat while gaining muscle. You might be able to do it at maintenance but having a calorie deficit will make it a lot faster. Here is an article by Menno Henselmans who is crazy knowledgeable about what I am talking about.
https://bayesianbodybuilding.com/gain-muscle-and-lose-fat-at-the-same-time/
He has links to the journal articles he cited.
IF you're in a deficit, Then it's gaining muscle in a cut not recomp.
There's Cutting...losing weight
Bulking.... gaining weight
recomp... maintaining weight and increasing LBM.0 -
Another semantic issue. I have always read it being used to describe loosing body fat while gaining muscle.0
-
1. Fat doesn't turn into muscle, and muscle doesn't turn into fat. These are two separate processes 2. Weight lifting and working out (exercise) doesn't create weight loss over time. 3. You can lose weight and build muscle simultaneously. Again, two separate functions of the body. 4. Muscle doesn't burn fat.0
-
Another semantic issue. I have always read it being used to describe loosing body fat while gaining muscle.
It's hard to say when we're only seeing abstracts here and not any additional information. Not to mention these studies have limited information on participants.
As i bolded above i think "Numerous interacting factors including energy intake, carbohydrate availability, exercise intensity, duration and type, dietary protein quality, training history, gender, age, timing of nutrient intake and the like make this topic extremely complex" and looking at one or two studies doesn't seem to be solving any of these questions.
Especially since it doesn't seem to be consensus.0 -
tunablue5150 wrote: »1. Fat doesn't turn into muscle, and muscle doesn't turn into fat. These are two separate processes 2. Weight lifting and working out (exercise) doesn't create weight loss over time. 3. You can lose weight and build muscle simultaneously. Again, two separate functions of the body. 4. Muscle doesn't burn fat.
1. 2. and 4 are already well know to this group and 3. can take place in limited circumstances. What did you feel was the great revelation in your post? Honestly, it seemed kind of random.
The discussion above is whether you can reduce fat and gain LBM in trained individuals.1 -
tunablue5150 wrote: »1. Fat doesn't turn into muscle, and muscle doesn't turn into fat. These are two separate processes 2. Weight lifting and working out (exercise) doesn't create weight loss over time. 3. You can lose weight and build muscle simultaneously. Again, two separate functions of the body. 4. Muscle doesn't burn fat.
1. 2. and 4 are already well know to this group and 3. can take place in limited circumstances. What did you feel was the great revelation in your post? Honestly, it seemed kind of random.
The discussion above is whether you can reduce fat and gain LBM in trained individuals.
honestly, 2 isn't necessarily true as written.
0 -
So it is a semantic issue? It could be an increase in muscle mass but it could also be they did not gain any muscle mass but gained extra fluid?
They may have gained some - but frankly for the body to feel the need to expend energy making more muscle which will then require more energy maintaining, all while eating less than the body really wants anyway, it must first be using what it has to the max, and then progressive overload being asked to do yet more.
Most of those studies are short enough, I really wonder where in the 4-6 weeks did they tap out existing muscle, and form improvements which could cause increases on the bar for awhile, and actually hit point where more muscle was the only solution left by the body.
As been mentioned, more stored glucose in more of the muscle for it all to be used increases water weight.
In some of those studies they used muscle not normally used in whatever athletic endeavor they were doing already.
Now once you get past using what you got and side effects of increased water weight there - I think the studies do spell out good potential if you keep going. Not likely the increased LBM the studies find, and the few that did DEXA to find out actual muscle mass increase, probably closer to that.
But body has so many needs for amino acids for regular stuff, that need for extra protein to support more muscle growth was stated nicely in post above.
And that need for reasonable deficit - even for a single individual, what is reasonable while getting little recovery because of heavy workload and terrible sleep from stress is going to be different than deficit amount when all is going great.
That's a hard one to hit unless you are in a research study being measured out the wazoo.2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 398 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
- 977 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions