Opinions needed on muscle building while lowering body fat

1235

Replies

  • britcurl
    britcurl Posts: 110 Member
    Gaining muscle = calorie surplus

    Losing fat = calorie deficit

    Doing both at the same time = impossible unless genetic freak or new to training as the body adjusts.
    I think calorie surplus would be fat Gaining.
    I don't see where extra calories would make you gain muscle.

    It's called bulking
  • lizziebeth1028
    lizziebeth1028 Posts: 3,602 Member
    Gaining muscle = calorie surplus

    Losing fat = calorie deficit

    Doing both at the same time = impossible unless genetic freak or new to training as the body adjusts.

    I'm not doubting you because from your pic you obviously know what you are doing!! But I get confused on this issue too! Is it pointless then to strength train while you're still trying to lose weight? What if you are just trying to 'tone' your muscles? Is there a difference between toning and building muscle....or is it one and the same thing? I'm making the transition to lifting heavier weights but I'm still wavering between a slight calorie deficit and maintenance calories. From everything I keep reading....it's an exercise in futility because I may not be consuming enough calories?!?!
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    Gaining muscle = calorie surplus

    Losing fat = calorie deficit

    Doing both at the same time = impossible unless genetic freak or new to training as the body adjusts.

    I'm not doubting you because from your pic you obviously know what you are doing!! But I get confused on this issue too! Is it pointless then to strength train while you're still trying to lose weight? What if you are just trying to 'tone' your muscles? Is there a difference between toning and building muscle....or is it one and the same thing? I'm making the transition to lifting heavier weights but I'm still wavering between a slight calorie deficit and maintenance calories. From everything I keep reading....it's an exercise in futility because I may not be consuming enough calories?!?!

    Firstly, it is never an exercise in futiliy to weight train, if only for the benefitial impact to your bone density which is especially difficult for women.

    You do not actually gain new muscle on a deficit, but you strength train to try to maintain the muscle you have. Also, if you strength train, even on a deficit, you will improve the existing muscles you have.

    Oversimplification here but:

    - eat at a deficit and strength train - improve the strength and 'definition' of your pre-existing muscle
    - eat at a surplus and strength train - the above plus gain new muscle.

    Also, as a female, even at a surplus, you have to train really hard and eat right to make more than relatively small gains.
  • lizziebeth1028
    lizziebeth1028 Posts: 3,602 Member
    Gaining muscle = calorie surplus

    Losing fat = calorie deficit

    Doing both at the same time = impossible unless genetic freak or new to training as the body adjusts.

    I'm not doubting you because from your pic you obviously know what you are doing!! But I get confused on this issue too! Is it pointless then to strength train while you're still trying to lose weight? What if you are just trying to 'tone' your muscles? Is there a difference between toning and building muscle....or is it one and the same thing? I'm making the transition to lifting heavier weights but I'm still wavering between a slight calorie deficit and maintenance calories. From everything I keep reading....it's an exercise in futility because I may not be consuming enough calories?!?!

    Firstly, it is never an exercise in futiliy to weight train, if only for the benefitial impact to your bone density which is especially difficult for women.

    You do not actually gain new muscle on a deficit, but you strength train to try to maintain the muscle you have. Also, if you strength train, even on a deficit, you will improve the existing muscles you have.

    Oversimplification here but:

    - eat at a deficit and strength train - improve the strength and 'definition' of your pre-existing muscle
    - eat at a surplus and strength train - the above plus gain new muscle.

    Also, as a female, even at a surplus, you have to train really hard and eat right to make more than relatively small gains.

    Thanks for your response! I'm a firm believer in strength training in addition to cardio for a well rounded fitness routine. And I really am only interested in improving the muscle I have...not making any gains.
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    Thanks for your response! I'm a firm believer in strength training in addition to cardio for a well rounded fitness routine. And I really am only interested in improving the muscle I have...not making any gains.

    Keep doing what you are doing - not a waste of time at all. :smile:
  • mmapags
    mmapags Posts: 8,934 Member
    Gaining muscle = calorie surplus

    Losing fat = calorie deficit

    Doing both at the same time = impossible unless genetic freak or new to training as the body adjusts.

    I'm not doubting you because from your pic you obviously know what you are doing!! But I get confused on this issue too! Is it pointless then to strength train while you're still trying to lose weight? What if you are just trying to 'tone' your muscles? Is there a difference between toning and building muscle....or is it one and the same thing? I'm making the transition to lifting heavier weights but I'm still wavering between a slight calorie deficit and maintenance calories. From everything I keep reading....it's an exercise in futility because I may not be consuming enough calories?!?!

    Firstly, it is never an exercise in futiliy to weight train, if only for the benefitial impact to your bone density which is especially difficult for women.

    You do not actually gain new muscle on a deficit, but you strength train to try to maintain the muscle you have. Also, if you strength train, even on a deficit, you will improve the existing muscles you have.

    Oversimplification here but:

    - eat at a deficit and strength train - improve the strength and 'definition' of your pre-existing muscle
    - eat at a surplus and strength train - the above plus gain new muscle.

    Also, as a female, even at a surplus, you have to train really hard and eat right to make more than relatively small gains.

    Saurak2sf pretty much nailed it here. You won't build muscle in a deficit but you'll get neuro-muscular adptation. You muscles tissue will appear (and probably get) slightly larger and more defined and your get stronger leaner and healthier. All good things. Unless we want to get bigger, there are not a lot of reasons to need to grow new muscle tissue. Some, but not a lot and even fewer for women.
  • Matt_Wild
    Matt_Wild Posts: 2,673 Member
    Gaining muscle = calorie surplus

    Losing fat = calorie deficit

    Doing both at the same time = impossible unless genetic freak or new to training as the body adjusts.

    I'm not doubting you because from your pic you obviously know what you are doing!! But I get confused on this issue too! Is it pointless then to strength train while you're still trying to lose weight? What if you are just trying to 'tone' your muscles? Is there a difference between toning and building muscle....or is it one and the same thing? I'm making the transition to lifting heavier weights but I'm still wavering between ha slight calorie deficit and maintenance calories. From everything I keep reading....it's an exercise in futility because I may not be consuming enough calories?!?!

    You can't tone, it doesn't exist. You either build muscle or lose fat. People tend to use the word 'tone' when they lose fat and expose the muscle they have underneath.

    In terms of cardio, it is good for you, helps nutrient uptake and overall as said, the body prefers to be well fed and calories burnt off rather than underfed due to hormonal controls within the body concerning leptin and thyroid hormones.
  • iWaffle
    iWaffle Posts: 2,208 Member
    You can't tone, it doesn't exist. You either build muscle or lose fat.

    THIS!! I wish we could strike the word "tone" or have it automatically replaced with "build muscle" anytime someone says this. My other favorite is when people want to "tone up a little". Yeah, just do it a little because you would look awesome if you did it a lot.
  • crisanderson27
    crisanderson27 Posts: 5,343 Member
    You can't tone, it doesn't exist. You either build muscle or lose fat.

    THIS!! I wish we could strike the word "tone" or have it automatically replaced with "build muscle" anytime someone says this. My other favorite is when people want to "tone up a little". Yeah, just do it a little because you would look awesome if you did it a lot.

    While I agree...I've kind of come to think of 'toning' as a generic word for neuromuscular adaptation.

    *shrug*
  • lizziebeth1028
    lizziebeth1028 Posts: 3,602 Member
    So........if I am lifting weights but at a slight deficit to maintenance calories -

    What type of benefits and results will I see?

    Just curious...I'm going to keep lifting regardless because I like it and it feels good. I'm just not comfortable with upping my calories when I feel I have a few more pounds to go.
  • Matt_Wild
    Matt_Wild Posts: 2,673 Member
    You can't tone, it doesn't exist. You either build muscle or lose fat.

    THIS!! I wish we could strike the word "tone" or have it automatically replaced with "build muscle" anytime someone says this. My other favorite is when people want to "tone up a little". Yeah, just do it a little because you would look awesome if you did it a lot.

    While I agree...I've kind of come to think of 'toning' as a generic word for neuromuscular adaptation.

    *shrug*

    WHAT are you toning?
  • mmapags
    mmapags Posts: 8,934 Member
    You can't tone, it doesn't exist. You either build muscle or lose fat.

    THIS!! I wish we could strike the word "tone" or have it automatically replaced with "build muscle" anytime someone says this. My other favorite is when people want to "tone up a little". Yeah, just do it a little because you would look awesome if you did it a lot.

    While I agree...I've kind of come to think of 'toning' as a generic word for neuromuscular adaptation.

    *shrug*


    Me too, although it is a little like fingernails on a blackboard when I see it.
  • mmapags
    mmapags Posts: 8,934 Member
    So........if I am lifting weights but at a slight deficit to maintenance calories -

    What type of benefits and results will I see?

    The benefits that were previously stated, improved bone density, improved strength and muscle structure and all kinds of postive hormonal benefits, reduced body fat and improved weight control.
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    You can't tone, it doesn't exist. You either build muscle or lose fat.

    THIS!! I wish we could strike the word "tone" or have it automatically replaced with "build muscle" anytime someone says this. My other favorite is when people want to "tone up a little". Yeah, just do it a little because you would look awesome if you did it a lot.

    While I agree...I've kind of come to think of 'toning' as a generic word for neuromuscular adaptation.

    *shrug*

    I think (or assume) that this is what people mean. Most folks will not even know the accurate way to explain what they are trying to say.

    While the word 'toning" may be annoying to some, it really should be read in the context of what the person is trying to say, and "neuromuscular adaptation' is a little long and not exactly 'catchy'.
  • cnwofor
    cnwofor Posts: 9 Member
    Hi again

    Someone posted the following in response to my post.

    "I don't doubt your expertise for one minute, however I'm not so sure of your theory. If you bump up your calories to 3000 you are NOT still getting 600 from your fat stores, as your body will not use these stores whilst it is getting enough from the easier to burn fuel source that you're giving it. It won't 'save' 600 of those calories for future muscle growth!"

    You have to realize that your body continually burns energy while you only feed it 3-5 times a day. If you are eating closer to 2-3 times a day the periods when your body dig into your reserves will be extended. Remember when you eat some of those calories become stored and some even turned to fat until slightly later when they are needed.

    I couldn't pin point the article I was referring to but if you head over at http://www.bengreenfieldfitness.com and either search yourself or ask for the study link, you should get it.

    My previous post was a theory, a possible explanation for why it is possible and people are losing fat when adding muscle.
  • Matt_Wild
    Matt_Wild Posts: 2,673 Member
    Sorry, if you eat 3000 cals in 2-3 meal or 3000 in 6, you still consume 3000 calories in total and the amount needing to be used for you to maintain is 3000. This has been shown in studies. More meals just make it easier for some people to stomach.
  • Wonderob
    Wonderob Posts: 1,372 Member
    Sorry, if you eat 3000 cals in 2-3 meal or 3000 in 6, you still consume 3000 calories in total and the amount needing to be used for you to maintain is 3000. This has been shown in studies. More meals just make it easier for some people to stomach.

    Ok I get what you are saying there and wouldn't disagree - 3000 calories is 3000 calories. Meal timing doesn't alter that. Meal timing DOESN'T matter.

    However.....

    Athletes, bodybuilders, professional sporsmen all seem to follow a strict eating regime. Pasta for carbs BEFORE a football match, banana or similar DURING a tennis match. Some kind of nutrients AFTER a workout (I'm sure you have had your own pre and post workout food regime at some time) So meal timing DOES matter???
  • Matt_Wild
    Matt_Wild Posts: 2,673 Member
    It helps with recovery it is argued. Many people equally argue that as long as the aminos and carbs etc are in your blood, it doesnt matter about specific timings.

    Thats NOTHING to do with fat loss.
  • Wonderob
    Wonderob Posts: 1,372 Member
    It helps with recovery it is argued. Many people equally argue that as long as the aminos and carbs etc are in your blood, it doesnt matter about specific timings.

    Thats NOTHING to do with fat loss.

    Doesn't change the 3000 calories is 3000 calories regardless of when you consume them statement but I would argue that your workout intensity or your high intensity cario session will be affacted by your meal timings

    i.e. The person eating 4 or 5 meals a day is able to perform a high intensity session (high fat burn)
    The starving hungry person who has 2 meals a day and has gone 16 hours since he has last eaten is only able to perform a low intensity worout (low fat burn)

    So indirectly????
  • mmapags
    mmapags Posts: 8,934 Member
    It helps with recovery it is argued. Many people equally argue that as long as the aminos and carbs etc are in your blood, it doesnt matter about specific timings.

    Thats NOTHING to do with fat loss.

    What Matt has said here! As an example, I just recently adjusted my carb intake before and after my lifting session as I was having issues with recovery and fatigue. Found out that, as the weights were getting heavier (I am doing Stronglifts 5x5) I was experienceing too much anaerobic glycolysis, a fancy way of saying I was utilizing too much glycogen and not replacing it adequately, so my body would be stressed for a day or 2 and I'd be tired until it would finally recover. I upped carbs and my recovery is much better. I didn't do it just before or just after my workout. I just did it within a 24 to 36 hour period. It had no effect on fat loss or overall calorie intake.
  • mmapags
    mmapags Posts: 8,934 Member
    It helps with recovery it is argued. Many people equally argue that as long as the aminos and carbs etc are in your blood, it doesnt matter about specific timings.

    Thats NOTHING to do with fat loss.

    Doesn't change the 3000 calories is 3000 calories regardless of when you consume them statement but I would argue that your workout intensity or your high intensity cario session will be affacted by your meal timings

    i.e. The person eating 4 or 5 meals a day is able to perform a high intensity session (high fat burn)
    The starving hungry person who has 2 meals a day and has gone 16 hours since he has last eaten is only able to perform a low intensity worout (low fat burn)

    So indirectly????

    Fasted training, which is what you are describing and nutrient timing are 2 different things, although related. The example of training after a 16 hour fast is somewhat of an extreme. There are those that follow the Leangains protocol that do it though! There are a few assumptions in your last paragraph that I would respecfully challenge. The first is that a person who has 2 meals per day is "starving hungry". I follow a 16/8 intermittent fasting plan 5 days per week as loosely based on Leangains. I am never starving hungry. I get up in the morning on rest days and have nothing more than coffee and water until 11 or 12. My system has adjusted to this and I truly do not have hunger pangs. I take in my nutrition mid day and at dinner time and eat all the calories in my plan. I actually find it easier and have less complusive hunger than eating more often.

    On workout days, the only difference is that I work out fasted at about the 12 hour point from my last meal and have a protein shake right after. It doesn't affect my intensity at all. So, I don't agree with the 2 assumptions in your statement. Only my expereince and not a study but I don't think what you are saying nessesarily follows. It might for some.
  • Wonderob
    Wonderob Posts: 1,372 Member

    On workout days, the only difference is that I work out fasted at about the 12 hour point from my last meal and have a protein shake right after. It doesn't affect my intensity at all. So, I don't agree with the 2 assumptions in your statement. Only my expereince and not a study but I don't think what you are saying nessesarily follows. It might for some.
    [/quote]

    Well they werent really assumptions because the person in the example was me! I WOULD be starving hungry if I hadn't eaten for 16 hours, and it would certainly affect the intensity of my workout; it would be an assumption to say that everyone would be starving hungry, but I'm aware that my eating habits are not that of most
  • mmapags
    mmapags Posts: 8,934 Member
    [/quote]

    On workout days, the only difference is that I work out fasted at about the 12 hour point from my last meal and have a protein shake right after. It doesn't affect my intensity at all. So, I don't agree with the 2 assumptions in your statement. Only my expereince and not a study but I don't think what you are saying nessesarily follows. It might for some.
    [/quote]

    Well they werent really assumptions because the person in the example was me! I WOULD be starving hungry if I hadn't eaten for 16 hours, and it would certainly affect the intensity of my workout; it would be an assumption to say that everyone would be starving hungry, but I'm aware that my eating habits are not that of most
    [/quote]

    Ah, I see!! LOL Well it sounds as if you know what it takes for you.
  • Matt_Wild
    Matt_Wild Posts: 2,673 Member
    The theory put forward here does make sense to me in terms of what is being said in terms of intensity and yes I guess if you can train harder in theory you could burn more fat. Could. However one must question how long it takes for someone to normalize to fasted training and then how different it may be, if at all.
  • crisanderson27
    crisanderson27 Posts: 5,343 Member
    You can't tone, it doesn't exist. You either build muscle or lose fat.

    THIS!! I wish we could strike the word "tone" or have it automatically replaced with "build muscle" anytime someone says this. My other favorite is when people want to "tone up a little". Yeah, just do it a little because you would look awesome if you did it a lot.

    While I agree...I've kind of come to think of 'toning' as a generic word for neuromuscular adaptation.

    *shrug*

    WHAT are you toning?

    You're not lol...I hate the word myself. But when people think they're building muscle on a deficit...and strength gains (neuromuscular adaptation) reinforce this in their brain...along with losing bodyfat for more defined muscles...the combination works out to 'toning'. They don't have the knowledge base to know what it really is...they just know they want more visible muscle, along with more strength. Glycogen storage plays its part in this too...but is often referred to as 'bulking' lol.

    Its silly of course, but the toning part can certainly be applied without harm.
  • conwaytas
    conwaytas Posts: 5
    You can try carb cycling which tends to work really well for people that are under 15%bf.
    http://www.leangains.com/
    Have a read of it.
  • crisanderson27
    crisanderson27 Posts: 5,343 Member
    You can try carb cycling which tends to work really well for people that are under 15%bf.
    http://www.leangains.com/
    Have a read of it.

    Carb/calorie cycling...not just carb cycling.

    But yes...it's definitely effective. For pure fat loss (even at large bodyfat %'s) it seems that ESE has been more effective in my experience...and a combination of the two even moreso.
  • Nataliaho
    Nataliaho Posts: 878 Member
    You can't tone, it doesn't exist. You either build muscle or lose fat.

    THIS!! I wish we could strike the word "tone" or have it automatically replaced with "build muscle" anytime someone says this. My other favorite is when people want to "tone up a little". Yeah, just do it a little because you would look awesome if you did it a lot.

    While I agree...I've kind of come to think of 'toning' as a generic word for neuromuscular adaptation.

    *shrug*

    WHAT are you toning?

    You're not lol...I hate the word myself. But when people think they're building muscle on a deficit...and strength gains (neuromuscular adaptation) reinforce this in their brain...along with losing bodyfat for more defined muscles...the combination works out to 'toning'. They don't have the knowledge base to know what it really is...they just know they want more visible muscle, along with more strength. Glycogen storage plays its part in this too...but is often referred to as 'bulking' lol.

    Its silly of course, but the toning part can certainly be applied without harm.

    After reading a million of these threads, I have to agree. I think the term 'toning' is a necessary evil because otherwise we get statements like "you either build muscle or burn fat".. which is true, however sooooooo many people seem to take this to mean "no point in lifting weights if you still have fat to lose"... this couldn't be further from the truth. At least the term toning gives a third option...

    The other thing that I think needs stressing is that even if you are in deficit and not technically building muscle you will continually be able to lift progressivly heavier stuff (unless you are already a pretty sh!thot lifter in which case you're not asking these questions!) So aside from the scientific stuff, you will get better form, better technique, more confidence with the weight... Seeing those improvements week in and week out is awesome for motivation, pride and confidence.
  • lindsy721
    lindsy721 Posts: 350 Member
    I was able to lose 5 pounds of fat AND put on 2.5 pounds of muscle in the same 4 week period. I did it on a 1700 calorie diet, staying away from junk food, lifting weights 4-5 days a week and doing cardio i think 3 times a week.
  • Sarauk2sf
    Sarauk2sf Posts: 28,072 Member
    I was able to lose 5 pounds of fat AND put on 2.5 pounds of muscle in the same 4 week period. I did it on a 1700 calorie diet, staying away from junk food, lifting weights 4-5 days a week and doing cardio i think 3 times a week.

    Wow - how did you do that?
This discussion has been closed.

Categories