Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below musclefattie
New member
Is this possible if the protein is high enough, or absolutely impossible? Is the muscle increase just a percentage of your overall weight and not an "actual" increase?
muscle increase while dieting
- Thread starter musclefattie
- Start date
B
Burning_Inside
Guest
Far as I know, there's no way to get stronger and lose fat all at once. It may look like you're losing fat if you're gaining muscle, but this is because you're not eating in caloric defacit, and you're gaining mass..When you gain this mass, it is going to stretch out the fat and displace it..it's not going to go away, it's just going to be thinned out, understand? That's why if you take a bodyfat test at week 1, and it reads 20%, and if you're dieting for mass gain, then 5 weeks or so later, you're going to look like you lost fat, and the test will read a lower fat %, but this is because you added more muscle, so of course your going to have a greater body area now, meaning you're going to have more of an area for the fat to collect, and have a less bodyfat%
endpoint
New member
"Far as I know, there's no way to get stronger and lose fat all at once"
you say that and then go on to talk about muscle.....they are two different things.
strength and muscles.
I have lost 4kgs in the last three weeks......but have made strength gains. dont know if this is possible but im going to look into it.
you say that and then go on to talk about muscle.....they are two different things.
strength and muscles.
I have lost 4kgs in the last three weeks......but have made strength gains. dont know if this is possible but im going to look into it.
burning_inside: of course it's possible to get stronger and lose fat at once...mainly through to neural adaptations. It's even possible to lose fat and gain muscle at the same time although this only applies if you're a beginner....experienced trainers will find it difficult, if not impossible to gain fat/lose muscle at an appreciable rate
M
Mr.X
Guest
I believe that the best statement is made by Dan Duchaine in BodyOpus:
"You eat, you train, you loose, you gain, but you never do all these things at once."
Simply put, it's hard for anyone but the beginners to gain muscle-mass while loosing body-fat.
I would say it's a good possibility to do so with a CKD (Ketonic 5 days , Carb-Load 2 days). If fact, I've seen a lot of advanced trainees loose up to 2lb of body-fat a week while gaining .5lb of muscle without "supplements" to aid their progress.
Mr.X
"You eat, you train, you loose, you gain, but you never do all these things at once."
Simply put, it's hard for anyone but the beginners to gain muscle-mass while loosing body-fat.
I would say it's a good possibility to do so with a CKD (Ketonic 5 days , Carb-Load 2 days). If fact, I've seen a lot of advanced trainees loose up to 2lb of body-fat a week while gaining .5lb of muscle without "supplements" to aid their progress.
Mr.X
dngu047 said:
Correct.
*Gives dngu047 a cookie*
Actually, as far as beginners losing fat and gaining muscle at the same time.....why this is possible early on and much more difficult for more experienced athletes is an interesting debate. There's not much biological/physiological basis for this claim, but empirically it seems to bear out. Any PhDs out there have any clue? I'm guessing it has to do with maintaining a certain "set" ratio of muscle mass to fat mass; under certain regular stress the body will seek to hold a genetically determined minimum muscle mass (Provided it is not starving). The adaptive value of this (for an organism is the wild) is pretty obvious. I'm wondering what the mechanisms responsible for this are....
Belial said:
Not a PHD, but I would say it is just because beginners are at the level of muscular development as far below their genetic ceiling as possible, as well as probably being above there bodyfat setpoint. An advanced trainee who gets very out of shape will respond like a begginer (or better) -- I can attest to this after an extended illness/hospital stay.
The mechanism behing the muscle part is likely that it is fairly easy to hypertrophy a fiber, but it does not take long for them to reach maximum size -- their is a study showing fiber sizes of bodybuilders to be the same as people training for just a few months. After that, hyperplasia is necessary for growth, and is likely more difficult.
For fat loss, if you are above your setpoint, leptin is high, making fat loss easy (it will also aid muscle gain, by keeping anabolic hormones up, even on lower calories.)
For all those that are interested, I will be attempting to do this. I think I have devised a program that will allow me to do this.
Here you can find the program I am talking about.
Since some of you are interested, I will keep weekly and daily updates of my progress. I want to find out if this will work.
Here you can find the program I am talking about.
Since some of you are interested, I will keep weekly and daily updates of my progress. I want to find out if this will work.
blood_drinker
New member
good luck bro
Mr.X said:I believe that the best statement is made by Dan Duchaine in BodyOpus:
"You eat, you train, you loose, you gain, but you never do all these things at once."
Simply put, it's hard for anyone but the beginners to gain muscle-mass while loosing body-fat.
Mr.X
Grr!! It's "losing" not "loosing". I can't believe how many people spell this wrong. It's now driving me nuts. Sorry for the rant.
M
Mr.X
Guest
Hey, Joker, you are so funny, my god, how about you post some info. that has value behind it? oh wait, spelling is a type of knowledge.....
Mr.X
Mr.X
Ok so a few people claim they can lose fat and gain muscle at the same time...but even if this is the case it's going to happen a lot slower than concentrating on one at a time
e.g you might gain a pound of muscle and lose a pound of fat over the course of 2 months, but in that time you may have gained say two pounds of muscle and lost two pounds of fat if you'd gone on a bulking/cutting routine
B
Burning_Inside
Guest
Sorry i didn't mention in the first place about how beginners can do it, I knew aboutt hat already, learned that years ago, but I didn't put it in there, cause i remember being pretty tired writing that, as you can tell by the way i was rambling on and no paragraphs.
Now to these people who say they are losing and gaining all at once, how long you been working out for? You beginners or what?
Also, are you absolutely positive that the case isn't exactly how I stated, about how you're either dropping fat and it's looking like you're adding muscle too because you're getting more cut (it's the illusuion that you're getting more musclulaar when you're just shedding your fat) or are you just adding muscle and displacing your fat? I mean are you getting bodyfat % tests done? What are the results?
I mean you can be training and dieting for mass gains, and put on x amount of mass, and also put on some fat too, but not as much fatas the amount of muscle you put on. In that case, if you took a before and after bf% test, you'd have gained more fat than you even had to begin with, yet still be at a lower bf% in the end due to all the muscle added. However people might fail to recognize this intentionally, because they don't want to acknowledge fat gain of any sorts.
Also about this "same time" thing..Think about how impossible it sounds...To lose weight, you need to eat minus your daily maintenance..To gain mass, you need to eat in excess..Now how can someone do both at the same time?
Are you sure you don't mean one week you are dropping fat and the next week you are gaining muscle?
Exactly what time period are you using as a measurement to declare "same time"?
Now to these people who say they are losing and gaining all at once, how long you been working out for? You beginners or what?
Also, are you absolutely positive that the case isn't exactly how I stated, about how you're either dropping fat and it's looking like you're adding muscle too because you're getting more cut (it's the illusuion that you're getting more musclulaar when you're just shedding your fat) or are you just adding muscle and displacing your fat? I mean are you getting bodyfat % tests done? What are the results?
I mean you can be training and dieting for mass gains, and put on x amount of mass, and also put on some fat too, but not as much fatas the amount of muscle you put on. In that case, if you took a before and after bf% test, you'd have gained more fat than you even had to begin with, yet still be at a lower bf% in the end due to all the muscle added. However people might fail to recognize this intentionally, because they don't want to acknowledge fat gain of any sorts.
Also about this "same time" thing..Think about how impossible it sounds...To lose weight, you need to eat minus your daily maintenance..To gain mass, you need to eat in excess..Now how can someone do both at the same time?
Are you sure you don't mean one week you are dropping fat and the next week you are gaining muscle?
Exactly what time period are you using as a measurement to declare "same time"?
cozmokramer
New member
I believe that you can do it but diet plays an important role... for example I DO NOT think its possible to do stricly on the atkins diet...
sure you have high protein intake but without carbs...
that protein is never really getting absorbed by the muscle like it should be....
I think on CKD it is very possible!
sure you have high protein intake but without carbs...
that protein is never really getting absorbed by the muscle like it should be....
I think on CKD it is very possible!
B
Burning_Inside
Guest
Cosmo, i deon't see personally how you can build muscle on a CKD. I never heard of that before, if you do it right, you're not even eating enough protein in the diet to maintain your muscle, never mind gain any.
I still say that this increase in muscle and loss in fat that people swear they experience (non beginners) is an illusion caused by exactly what i stated in my first post.
The laws of physiology, as much of it as I've learned portaining to bodybuilding over the years, just simply don't allow for the gain of muscle mass AND actual loss, not displacement of fat, at the same exact time.
I still say that this increase in muscle and loss in fat that people swear they experience (non beginners) is an illusion caused by exactly what i stated in my first post.
The laws of physiology, as much of it as I've learned portaining to bodybuilding over the years, just simply don't allow for the gain of muscle mass AND actual loss, not displacement of fat, at the same exact time.
blood_drinker
New member
Excuse me if I'm wrong, but I believe cozmo was a beginner before he got ripped. So he probably experienced an increase in muscle mass as this was the body's natural response to the sudden shock and radical change of lifestyle.
WTF, if someone goes from eating burgers and chips all day, to training on a sound diet, you bet your ass you're gonna gain muscle AND lose fat.
I don't care about the laws. That's how it works; for begginers.
And Burning, I understand that VISION you get when you gain more muscle and your bf % entage dropping, but before I started training, I had a gut, and couldn't bench for shit. My chest ballooned up to 45 inches (which is still pretty small, but heck im still somewhat a beginner) and my bench doubled, while I lost my gut.
it is very possible...
WTF, if someone goes from eating burgers and chips all day, to training on a sound diet, you bet your ass you're gonna gain muscle AND lose fat.
I don't care about the laws. That's how it works; for begginers.
And Burning, I understand that VISION you get when you gain more muscle and your bf % entage dropping, but before I started training, I had a gut, and couldn't bench for shit. My chest ballooned up to 45 inches (which is still pretty small, but heck im still somewhat a beginner) and my bench doubled, while I lost my gut.
it is very possible...
Last edited:
Ok guys there seems to be some confusion so here are a few things:
1. Beginners can and do break the laws of weight lifting. They can build muscle and lose fat, however this phenomenon doesn't last forever. After a year or so your body is over the initial shock and will start to obide by the laws of physics.
2. Getting stronger while dieting does not mean in an increase in muscle mass. Strength is affected by the CNS which doesn't necessarily mean an increase in muscle mass. It is absolutely possible to get stronger without gaining muscle mass, in fact wrestlers and other athletes strive for this phenomenon to stay in their weight class. So just because you are stronger while dieting doesn't mean you have more muscle mass.
3. Drugs break all the rules as well. If you're on the juice then arguing that you can do it isn't valid. The thread should be focused on "natural" athletes.
4. It "IS" physically impossible to gain muscle and lose fat simultaneously. Your body can only be anabolic or catabolic, not both at the same time. Building muscle is anabolic and burning fat is catabolic so they can't exist together. However that doesn't mean that you can't switch between both states fairly rapidly to give the illusion of both. If your body was in an anabolic state after your workout for 6 hours then goes back to catabolic for the next 12 hours, over time this could make a dramatic change to your body composition. Realize however that you aren't truly burning muscle and gaining fat at the same time.
That being said I think most of us think of only 2 phases; bulking and cutting. In reality you can bulk and cut during the same phase by timing your eating and workouts and thus achieving both goals simultaneously. If you "bulked" cleanly on workout days and dieted "cleanly" on off days you would slowly gain muscle and burn fat. However you aren't truly doing both simultaneously however it may seem.
If you had 12 weeks to get in shape would you prefer to bulk 6 then diet 6? That'd be the worst way to do it. I'd prefer to alternate bulk and cutting cycles during those 12 weeks to minimize muscle loss and fat gain during each mini cycle. I truly believe you'd come out better in the end.
1. Beginners can and do break the laws of weight lifting. They can build muscle and lose fat, however this phenomenon doesn't last forever. After a year or so your body is over the initial shock and will start to obide by the laws of physics.
2. Getting stronger while dieting does not mean in an increase in muscle mass. Strength is affected by the CNS which doesn't necessarily mean an increase in muscle mass. It is absolutely possible to get stronger without gaining muscle mass, in fact wrestlers and other athletes strive for this phenomenon to stay in their weight class. So just because you are stronger while dieting doesn't mean you have more muscle mass.
3. Drugs break all the rules as well. If you're on the juice then arguing that you can do it isn't valid. The thread should be focused on "natural" athletes.
4. It "IS" physically impossible to gain muscle and lose fat simultaneously. Your body can only be anabolic or catabolic, not both at the same time. Building muscle is anabolic and burning fat is catabolic so they can't exist together. However that doesn't mean that you can't switch between both states fairly rapidly to give the illusion of both. If your body was in an anabolic state after your workout for 6 hours then goes back to catabolic for the next 12 hours, over time this could make a dramatic change to your body composition. Realize however that you aren't truly burning muscle and gaining fat at the same time.
That being said I think most of us think of only 2 phases; bulking and cutting. In reality you can bulk and cut during the same phase by timing your eating and workouts and thus achieving both goals simultaneously. If you "bulked" cleanly on workout days and dieted "cleanly" on off days you would slowly gain muscle and burn fat. However you aren't truly doing both simultaneously however it may seem.
If you had 12 weeks to get in shape would you prefer to bulk 6 then diet 6? That'd be the worst way to do it. I'd prefer to alternate bulk and cutting cycles during those 12 weeks to minimize muscle loss and fat gain during each mini cycle. I truly believe you'd come out better in the end.
Hang on there the body actually burns fat 24 hours a day (resting muscles use fat primarily for energy) also tthe body is constantly building muscle (even something as gentle as walking cause muscle damage from the eccentric portion which must be rebuilt) so they do happen at pretty much the same time
now i'd agree so far as to say that appreciable accumulation of muscle protein does not usually occur with simultaneous significant depletion of body fat stores i.e yes "only 2 phases: bulking and cutting"...but don't get the physiology confused
Yes the body does burn fat all day long, however burning fat that we ingest is different from burning fat that we have already stored. If we supply enough energy from our caloric intake then there is no reason for the body to tap into it's stored energy. If we don't supply enough energy then it will be forced to tap into stored energy in the form of fat and muscle. We obviously want it to focus on fat as much as possible.
If our body truly burned stored energy even in a hypercaloric state then the old fashioned ultra low-fat diets would work. You say resting muscle burns primarily fat, well if we offered our body no intake of fats it would have no choice but to burn stored body fat at all times. Unfortunately we all know this doesn't work and fat intake is crucial to healthy, sustained fat loss. The only way to tap into our fat stores is to be in a hypocaloric state, which induces catabolism, which is an environment in which muscle growth cannot occur unless a few extreme circumstances are met in which I've explained in my previous post.
If our body truly burned stored energy even in a hypercaloric state then the old fashioned ultra low-fat diets would work. You say resting muscle burns primarily fat, well if we offered our body no intake of fats it would have no choice but to burn stored body fat at all times. Unfortunately we all know this doesn't work and fat intake is crucial to healthy, sustained fat loss. The only way to tap into our fat stores is to be in a hypocaloric state, which induces catabolism, which is an environment in which muscle growth cannot occur unless a few extreme circumstances are met in which I've explained in my previous post.
B
Burning_Inside
Guest
Body burns fat all day long huh?
Maybe if you're in a ketogenic state..other than that, you're burning glucose guys.
Can Mr.X or MS please come in and dispense some mass amounts of smack upon our asses please?
And blood drinker..like I said...Beginners.... But you have to look at the facts of physiology like Vegeta stated, and it IS the truth. your body is either in a catabolic, neutral or anabolic state. Muscle growth and fat loss do not happen at the same time during any of those phases.
Maybe if you're in a ketogenic state..other than that, you're burning glucose guys.
Can Mr.X or MS please come in and dispense some mass amounts of smack upon our asses please?
And blood drinker..like I said...Beginners.... But you have to look at the facts of physiology like Vegeta stated, and it IS the truth. your body is either in a catabolic, neutral or anabolic state. Muscle growth and fat loss do not happen at the same time during any of those phases.
Yes your body does burn fat all day long. With the low carb craze it seems everyone has forgotten that the body is fully capable of burning fat without being in ketosis. Folks your body is highly capable of burning fat all day long without ever reaching a state of ketosis. If it weren't true then every single gram of fat you consumed would automatically be stored as fat. Then without ketosis how would you ever burn it off? And what off the ongoing cardio controversy? Do it in the morning to attack fat stores faster? If your body had to be in ketosis to burn fat why would there be any controversy in regards to cardio timing?
Ketosis is simply the state in which your body is forced to burn fat as it's "primary" source of energy because glycogen stores are completely depleted. It has no choice but to start producing ketones in order for the body to survive. When glycogen levels are sufficient it will burn them primarily, however it is still capable of burning fat. There would be no way for a person to burn bodyfat without inducing ketosis if this fact were not true.
How else are people losing weight on isocaloric diets and the such?
Ketosis is simply the state in which your body is forced to burn fat as it's "primary" source of energy because glycogen stores are completely depleted. It has no choice but to start producing ketones in order for the body to survive. When glycogen levels are sufficient it will burn them primarily, however it is still capable of burning fat. There would be no way for a person to burn bodyfat without inducing ketosis if this fact were not true.
How else are people losing weight on isocaloric diets and the such?
Need some proof? I've included it below...now sure it gets pretty damn technical but all you need to read is the first sentence "Adipose tissue is a major source of metabolic fuel" translation --> body fat provides lots of energy...it just happens that sure, it provides energy but then we eat food and replenish it again
Ok so from a theoretical perspective fat is burnt all the time...but getting back to the real world I've consistently agreed with all of you that significant fat loss and muscle gain does not happen at the same time (except maybe in beginners)
------------------------------------
Proc Nutr Soc 2000 Aug;59(3):441-6 Related Articles, Books
Sir David Cuthbertson Medal Lecture. Regulation of lipid metabolism in adipose tissue.
Samra JS.
Department of Surgery, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, NSW, Australia. [email protected]
Adipose tissue is a major source of metabolic fuel. This metabolic fuel is stored in the form of triacylglycerol. Lipolysis of triacylglycerol yields non-esterified fatty acids and glycerol. In human subjects in vivo studies of the regulation of lipid metabolism in adipose tissue have been difficult because of the heterogeneous nature of the tissue and lack of a vascular pedicle. In the last decade the methodology of study of adipose tissue has improved with the advent of the anterior abdominal wall adipose tissue preparation technique and microdialysis. These techniques have demonstrated that lipid metabolism in adipose tissue is finely coordinated during feeding and fasting cycles, in order to provide metabolic fuel when required. Lipolysis takes place both in extracellular and intracellular space. The extracellular lipolysis is regulated by lipoprotein lipase and the intracellular lipolysis is regulated by hormone-sensitive lipase. In pathophysiological conditions such as trauma, sepsis and starvation profound changes are induced in the regulation of lipid metabolism. The increased mobilization of lipid fuel is brought about by the differential actions of various counter-regulatory hormones on adipose tissue blood flow and adipose tissue lipolysis through lipoprotein lipase and hormone-sensitive lipase, resulting in increased availability of non-esterified fatty acids as a source of fuel. In recent years, it has been demonstrated that adipose tissue produces various cytokines and these cytokines can have paracrine and endocrine effects. It would appear that adipose tissue has the ability to regulate lipid metabolism locally as well as at distant sites such as liver, muscle and brain. In future, it is likely that the mechanisms that lead to the secondary effects of lipid metabolism on atheroma, immunity and carcinogenesis will be demonstrated.
Nugg
"The laws of physiology, as much of it as I've learned portaining to bodybuilding over the years, just simply don't allow for the gain of muscle mass AND actual loss, not displacement of fat, at the same exact time"
There are several studies that refute this- not all deal with bodybuiders however, it is not FACT- that you can't buid muscle and burn fat
In one study, obese, un-athletic women were asked to restrict food and lift weights. They averaged a weight loss of more than 35 pounds in three months and gained a lot of muscle.
JE Donnelly, T Sharp, J Houmard, MG Carlson, JO Hill, JE Whatley, RG Israel American Journal of Clinical Nutrition OCT 1993;58(4)
A second study , for which I am still looking for the study ref.
Claimed an increase of muscle 2.2kg in lbw and a reduction of body fat 4 kg in one month, all of this on a near starvation diet. 800 kcals per day.
"The laws of physiology, as much of it as I've learned portaining to bodybuilding over the years, just simply don't allow for the gain of muscle mass AND actual loss, not displacement of fat, at the same exact time"
There are several studies that refute this- not all deal with bodybuiders however, it is not FACT- that you can't buid muscle and burn fat
In one study, obese, un-athletic women were asked to restrict food and lift weights. They averaged a weight loss of more than 35 pounds in three months and gained a lot of muscle.
JE Donnelly, T Sharp, J Houmard, MG Carlson, JO Hill, JE Whatley, RG Israel American Journal of Clinical Nutrition OCT 1993;58(4)
A second study , for which I am still looking for the study ref.
Claimed an increase of muscle 2.2kg in lbw and a reduction of body fat 4 kg in one month, all of this on a near starvation diet. 800 kcals per day.
Nugg did you bother reading all the posts? I don't think anyone is arguing that a beginner can't break the percieved laws of physiology. We all know that a beginner can actually burn fat and gain muscle. All of these studies are on untrained individuals so the results are anything but surprising. Also these studies don't explain "how" this phenomenon happens, only that it does happen. It is theorized that the stress caused by weight lifting is so great on the body that it creates some hormonal environment that favors muscle gain and fat loss. My guess is that somehow stored energy(fat) is somehow preferred over ingested protein and thus it is spared. That way all protein ingested is used to build muscle and the body turns to stored energy to compensate. Thus we end up gaining muscle and burning fat.
If a study could be done that can nail down what exactly is triggered when a beginner begins to weight train, and then find a way to apply this phenomenon to a well trained athlete, then that is a study I would like to read.
If a study could be done that can nail down what exactly is triggered when a beginner begins to weight train, and then find a way to apply this phenomenon to a well trained athlete, then that is a study I would like to read.
agreed
I did bother to read all the posts, slow down...
I am only interested in good diet conversation but this is your exact quote
"It "IS" physically impossible to gain muscle and lose fat simultaneously. Your body can only be anabolic or catabolic, not both at the same time. Building muscle is anabolic and burning fat is catabolic so they can't exist together."
This is what I read after I gave it a second "and more thorough look
"If your body was in an anabolic state after your workout for 6 hours then goes back to catabolic for the next 12 hours, over time this could make a dramatic change to your body composition. Realize however that you aren't truly burning muscle and gaining fat at the same time. "
I was responding to the first half of your post, after re reading it I may have jumped the gun.
I am just stating that it is possible to lose bodyfat and gain muscle at the same time, no one has shown me a study to dissuade me from my stance. (I wish someone would)
I did bother to read all the posts, slow down...
I am only interested in good diet conversation but this is your exact quote
"It "IS" physically impossible to gain muscle and lose fat simultaneously. Your body can only be anabolic or catabolic, not both at the same time. Building muscle is anabolic and burning fat is catabolic so they can't exist together."
This is what I read after I gave it a second "and more thorough look
"If your body was in an anabolic state after your workout for 6 hours then goes back to catabolic for the next 12 hours, over time this could make a dramatic change to your body composition. Realize however that you aren't truly burning muscle and gaining fat at the same time. "
I was responding to the first half of your post, after re reading it I may have jumped the gun.
I am just stating that it is possible to lose bodyfat and gain muscle at the same time, no one has shown me a study to dissuade me from my stance. (I wish someone would)
I think the biggest problem we all have is the perception of what the "same time" is. It is physically impossible for a still picture to animate. It is a static object. However if you move enough still pictures in a row it will give the perception of motion, even though it really isn't moving. Look at the animated smilies on this page. It looks as if they're moving but in reality it is a few frames of the same picture that are slightly changed and then looped. It gives the perception that the smiley is in motion when in reality it is not.
Same applies to weight gain and loss. I really don't think it is possible for the body to be anabolic and catabolic at the same time under normal hormonal situations. However it can switch between these phases multiple times a day and over the course of a few weeks you may be able to drop fat and gain muscle. Again this is just a perception looking at the big picture. If we could somehow simply do a test on our body at any given time that would show what it is doing we'd probably see that it's not doing both at the same time. However if we tested every 30 mins throughout the day we might find that it switches gears often and thus over time a slow body composition change is happening.
The problem is optimizing this timing. I don't know how long it takes to switch from anabolism to catabolism and vice versa. If studies could be done to figure out how long it takes to do so and how many times this can be done daily I'm sure there exists a way to essentially get rid of long bulking and cutting phases. Even if we figured out the optimal time for each phase of anabolism and catabolism to promote LBM gains and fat loss, the fact would still stand you aren't doing both simultaneously. It just seems that way when viewed as a larger picture.
As I theorized above maybe there truly is a way that the body can catabolize fat tissue to provide energy while anabolism is occuring. That would be the ultimate state to be in at all times. I don't think however it is something that a seasoned lifter can accomplish regardless of diet and exercise timing. It would probably be a very special hormonal state that is triggered when the body is first introduced to weight training.
Perhaps certain drugs can accomplish this state again. Oxandrolone is well known for building LBM while in a hypocaloric state as well as burning fat during a hypercaloric state. Both of these are supposed to be impossible yet they seem to happen. Perhaps this drug as well as others can promote this perfect hormonal state just like when you were new to weight training.
Believe me I'd love to find out that an experienced weight lifter can reach this perfect hormonal state without drugs. Unfortunately I still stand by my arguement that unless you're a beginner or using AS, this state is impossible to reach. That doesn't mean that you can't try alternating states of anabolism and catabolism to give the same result over a period of time. This is what I plan on doing after I reach my bodyfat goal. I will be alternating a bulk and cut cycle 1 week at a time to increase LBM while keeping my fat mass constant. At least this is what I want to try and accomplish. If it works I will most likely adopt this type of cycle throughout the year so I'm never in one phase longer than a week or so. Thus looking at my results over the coarse of a year I have effectively lost fat and gained muscle simultaneously.
Same applies to weight gain and loss. I really don't think it is possible for the body to be anabolic and catabolic at the same time under normal hormonal situations. However it can switch between these phases multiple times a day and over the course of a few weeks you may be able to drop fat and gain muscle. Again this is just a perception looking at the big picture. If we could somehow simply do a test on our body at any given time that would show what it is doing we'd probably see that it's not doing both at the same time. However if we tested every 30 mins throughout the day we might find that it switches gears often and thus over time a slow body composition change is happening.
The problem is optimizing this timing. I don't know how long it takes to switch from anabolism to catabolism and vice versa. If studies could be done to figure out how long it takes to do so and how many times this can be done daily I'm sure there exists a way to essentially get rid of long bulking and cutting phases. Even if we figured out the optimal time for each phase of anabolism and catabolism to promote LBM gains and fat loss, the fact would still stand you aren't doing both simultaneously. It just seems that way when viewed as a larger picture.
As I theorized above maybe there truly is a way that the body can catabolize fat tissue to provide energy while anabolism is occuring. That would be the ultimate state to be in at all times. I don't think however it is something that a seasoned lifter can accomplish regardless of diet and exercise timing. It would probably be a very special hormonal state that is triggered when the body is first introduced to weight training.
Perhaps certain drugs can accomplish this state again. Oxandrolone is well known for building LBM while in a hypocaloric state as well as burning fat during a hypercaloric state. Both of these are supposed to be impossible yet they seem to happen. Perhaps this drug as well as others can promote this perfect hormonal state just like when you were new to weight training.
Believe me I'd love to find out that an experienced weight lifter can reach this perfect hormonal state without drugs. Unfortunately I still stand by my arguement that unless you're a beginner or using AS, this state is impossible to reach. That doesn't mean that you can't try alternating states of anabolism and catabolism to give the same result over a period of time. This is what I plan on doing after I reach my bodyfat goal. I will be alternating a bulk and cut cycle 1 week at a time to increase LBM while keeping my fat mass constant. At least this is what I want to try and accomplish. If it works I will most likely adopt this type of cycle throughout the year so I'm never in one phase longer than a week or so. Thus looking at my results over the coarse of a year I have effectively lost fat and gained muscle simultaneously.
I've been meaning to ask; Exactly how is it possible to become stronger without muscle gains? Neurons adaption to heavier weights only works if muscles are bigger so that they can lift them. However much the CNS adapts to weight lifting, surely it's not possible to lift more without more muscle?
Jeus, I'm not an expert on muscle physiology but I believe the reason is due to the body learning to work more efficiently with what muscle it already has. That as well as factors like increased tendon strength, etc...
Think of it this way. When you are a new weight lifter your body is not used to this phenomenon. When you lift a certain weight your muscles have to contract to move the weight. But because your muscles aren't used to this they aren't very efficient at it. Your CNS will adapt to this new stimulai by learning how to push this weight by recruiting more fibers. Therefore you are pushing more and more weight with the same amount of muscle due to increased efficiency within the muscle. Most of your strength increase in the beginning will happen this way. Soon your muscle themselves will begin to grow to accomodate this load, aka hypertrophy. Now you've got more muscle to work with and as your body learns to be more efficient with the new muscle you will get even stronger.
There are some sports, specifically ones with weight classes, that people want strength with no mass. By concentrating on CNS adaption(low reps, heavy weights) and not hypertrophy they can get much stronger without putting on much weight.
Think of it this way. When you are a new weight lifter your body is not used to this phenomenon. When you lift a certain weight your muscles have to contract to move the weight. But because your muscles aren't used to this they aren't very efficient at it. Your CNS will adapt to this new stimulai by learning how to push this weight by recruiting more fibers. Therefore you are pushing more and more weight with the same amount of muscle due to increased efficiency within the muscle. Most of your strength increase in the beginning will happen this way. Soon your muscle themselves will begin to grow to accomodate this load, aka hypertrophy. Now you've got more muscle to work with and as your body learns to be more efficient with the new muscle you will get even stronger.
There are some sports, specifically ones with weight classes, that people want strength with no mass. By concentrating on CNS adaption(low reps, heavy weights) and not hypertrophy they can get much stronger without putting on much weight.
Sure it is POSSIBLE to gain muscle while losing fat. Not just in theory, but in practice. It is not so much to do with training experience as it has to do with how close an individual is to there "set point' of bodyfat. As an example you can take an Olympic heavyweight powerlifter who is, say, 25%BF. She is 25%bf because all that matters to her is strength, so she eats all she wants (plus a bit more for good measure) and trains like a mofo. If you put her on a moderate, well planned diet that is 5% below her AMR, there is a good chance that she can continue to increase in strength and muscle mass while losing fat. This has a lot to do with leptin levels/leptin sensitivity and varies hugely from one person to the next. So this chick diets for a while, and reaches her own 'set point' for bodyfat. She actually drops a couple percent below her setpoint before leptin levels drop and her body realizes that there is a calorie deficit. At this point muscle gains stop, though fatloss may continue at a reduced rate. If she continues dieting below this point then she risks losing some muscle mass, even with anabolics….
Which leads me to my next comment on this very excellent thread. Many terms are used very loosely on these boards. Anabolic and catabolic are prolly the two most misused IMHO. We also need to think of muscle growth/loss in terms of ANTI catabolic or ANTI anabolic, and many other shades of gray in between. Technically speaking Vageta is correct to view muscle gain while dieting as two steps forward and one step back. This is because in normal folks not taking AS, muscle growth absolutely requires catabolic processes. This is otherwise known as the Calpain/Calpistatin system of protein turnover and is hugely important for muscle growth. To put it another way you have to catabolize muscle in order to remodel and build new muscle. The known exceptions to this include the now infamous Myocin D mutants of double-muscled Belgian Blue cattle and the rare human genetic freaks such as Flex Wheeler (and many more I'll bet). It also includes many folks on anabolic steroids since it appears that anabolic steroid's main anti-catabolic effects are through the calpain/calpistatin system. An irrelevant side note is that (so far) all attempts to increase LBM in cattle and sheep have shown that you inevitably get tougher meat whether or not they are genetic mutants of MyoD, or you give them anabolic steroids (euphomistically called growth promoters in the meat industry). So the take home message is that it would be tough to eat the likes of Flex.
Coming back to the original question, you can gain muscle while losing fat to a certain extent without too much difficulty. Beyond that point you need some clever dietary and training manipulation. The more "in touch" with your body the easier this is. This thread is already too long to even begin with the details. But I assure you it has a lot to do with manipulating calories, macronutrient ratios, training intensity and frequency blah blah blah and it also varies from person to person. If you choose not to use ergogenic supplements then you really have to dial it in very precisely.
OH one last thought for jeus…… There is no doubt that strength can increase without an increase in muscle mass as Vageta said. This is yet another reason why all those tiny folks in Olympic powerlifting can move such huge weights in proportion to their bodyweight. It had a lot to do with the neurological ability to recruit maximal muscle fiber for a single lift (ie increase strength by working the brain).
Which leads me to my next comment on this very excellent thread. Many terms are used very loosely on these boards. Anabolic and catabolic are prolly the two most misused IMHO. We also need to think of muscle growth/loss in terms of ANTI catabolic or ANTI anabolic, and many other shades of gray in between. Technically speaking Vageta is correct to view muscle gain while dieting as two steps forward and one step back. This is because in normal folks not taking AS, muscle growth absolutely requires catabolic processes. This is otherwise known as the Calpain/Calpistatin system of protein turnover and is hugely important for muscle growth. To put it another way you have to catabolize muscle in order to remodel and build new muscle. The known exceptions to this include the now infamous Myocin D mutants of double-muscled Belgian Blue cattle and the rare human genetic freaks such as Flex Wheeler (and many more I'll bet). It also includes many folks on anabolic steroids since it appears that anabolic steroid's main anti-catabolic effects are through the calpain/calpistatin system. An irrelevant side note is that (so far) all attempts to increase LBM in cattle and sheep have shown that you inevitably get tougher meat whether or not they are genetic mutants of MyoD, or you give them anabolic steroids (euphomistically called growth promoters in the meat industry). So the take home message is that it would be tough to eat the likes of Flex.
Coming back to the original question, you can gain muscle while losing fat to a certain extent without too much difficulty. Beyond that point you need some clever dietary and training manipulation. The more "in touch" with your body the easier this is. This thread is already too long to even begin with the details. But I assure you it has a lot to do with manipulating calories, macronutrient ratios, training intensity and frequency blah blah blah and it also varies from person to person. If you choose not to use ergogenic supplements then you really have to dial it in very precisely.
OH one last thought for jeus…… There is no doubt that strength can increase without an increase in muscle mass as Vageta said. This is yet another reason why all those tiny folks in Olympic powerlifting can move such huge weights in proportion to their bodyweight. It had a lot to do with the neurological ability to recruit maximal muscle fiber for a single lift (ie increase strength by working the brain).
Ok it works like this...let's say that in your biceps you have 500 000 muscle fibres. Now, let's say you do a set of bicep curls you may only use 250 000 fibres. But then, the next time you do it due to neural adaptations you're able to recruit more muscle fibres (say 270 000)
Therefore you can increase the weight without an increase in muscle fibre size (hypertrophy) or number (hyperplasia)...
B
Burning_Inside
Guest
Vegeta:
http://www.nutrition.cornell.edu//nutriquest/041799/burnfat.html
There's a little link I figured I'd post that explains what it takes for the body to burn fat.
http://www.nutrition.cornell.edu//nutriquest/041799/burnfat.html
There's a little link I figured I'd post that explains what it takes for the body to burn fat.
Well I read the article and it seems to back up what I and a few others were saying. You don't have to be in ketosis to burn fat. All that article said was that to burn fat you need oxygen. Well eating, sleeping, sitting, living... it all requires oxygen. Life is aerobic though not in the form we think of.
" If you are engaging in a long-term low intensity activity, such as walking, this allows aerobic metabolism to proceed and therefore your body utilizes fatty acids as well as carbohydrates for fuel. "
This mentions nothing about ketosis so it about sums up my arguement.
I will reiterate my stance that we burn fat all day long. Our body will favor glycogen of course, but it will switch to fat eventually. Also remember we are talking about ingested fat not stored fat. So long as you are in a negative or netural caloric balance you will burn every ounce of fat you ingest, regardless if you're in ketosis or not. If you are in a positive calorie balance then you will of course store any extra fat ingested, or if the extra calories are from protein or carbs they will be converted to fat. The latter is actually better because the conversion from either of these two sources will burn up energy in the process. Especially the protein. Therefore when bulking get lots of extra protein as less will ultimately convert to fat.
To burn stored fat one must only be in a negative calorie balance. Once your body realizes it doesn't have enough energy to sustain itself it will mobilize fat stores and begin burning them. It can also burn muscle but of course we are trying to prevent that as much as possible.
" If you are engaging in a long-term low intensity activity, such as walking, this allows aerobic metabolism to proceed and therefore your body utilizes fatty acids as well as carbohydrates for fuel. "
This mentions nothing about ketosis so it about sums up my arguement.
I will reiterate my stance that we burn fat all day long. Our body will favor glycogen of course, but it will switch to fat eventually. Also remember we are talking about ingested fat not stored fat. So long as you are in a negative or netural caloric balance you will burn every ounce of fat you ingest, regardless if you're in ketosis or not. If you are in a positive calorie balance then you will of course store any extra fat ingested, or if the extra calories are from protein or carbs they will be converted to fat. The latter is actually better because the conversion from either of these two sources will burn up energy in the process. Especially the protein. Therefore when bulking get lots of extra protein as less will ultimately convert to fat.
To burn stored fat one must only be in a negative calorie balance. Once your body realizes it doesn't have enough energy to sustain itself it will mobilize fat stores and begin burning them. It can also burn muscle but of course we are trying to prevent that as much as possible.
Yes you must be in a hypercaloric state to build muscle, it doesn't appear out of thin air. This is the reason many ectomorphs can't put on muscle. They "think" they eat alot, when in reality they are only eating enough to sustain weight.
Again there is a phenomenon for new lifters to be able to put on new muscle even when in a hypocaloric state, however I don't beleive to this day there is an actual explanation for it. Just some theories.
So if you aren't a beginner or aren't using AS then you MUST eat more calories than you burn to build muscle. Try to get the extra calories in the form of protein as this is the nutrient that is used for the muscle. Also how many extra calories determines the rate at which you can build muscle. Eating 50 extra calories a day isn't going to allow you to put on 10 pounds of muscle in 12 weeks. Generally you want to shoot for a 1 pound a week gain so 500 calories a day extra. Some of this gain will most likely be fat but nonetheless you will put on some muscle in the process.
Again there is a phenomenon for new lifters to be able to put on new muscle even when in a hypocaloric state, however I don't beleive to this day there is an actual explanation for it. Just some theories.
So if you aren't a beginner or aren't using AS then you MUST eat more calories than you burn to build muscle. Try to get the extra calories in the form of protein as this is the nutrient that is used for the muscle. Also how many extra calories determines the rate at which you can build muscle. Eating 50 extra calories a day isn't going to allow you to put on 10 pounds of muscle in 12 weeks. Generally you want to shoot for a 1 pound a week gain so 500 calories a day extra. Some of this gain will most likely be fat but nonetheless you will put on some muscle in the process.
B
Burning_Inside
Guest
Yeah but vageta, there's one part in the article that explains the conditions the body has to go through for fat loss...it doesn't happen just sitting around, the body has to be put under certain amounts of stress for certain periods, or so I gather from what I read. It states that fat is burned through aerobic metabolism.
"The amount of fat you burn also depends upon what type of activity you are performing (for example, sprinting vs. walking), how long you are engaging in the activity, and what kind of shape your body is in. If you are engaging in a long-term low intensity activity, such as walking, this allows aerobic metabolism to proceed and therefore your body utilizes fatty acids as well as carbohydrates for fuel."
there's a link at the bottom of that page which I posted here.
http://external.aomc.org/HOD2/fitness/AerobicMetabolism.html
basically it explains aerobic metabolism, and brings into play the "target heart rate" for fat burning that some people like to shun these days. So going by these facts, it looks to me like the body doesn't burn fat all day long, but will only burn it through aerobic metabolism, and the body can't reach this sort of metabolism unless certain conditions are met..Or maybe I'm missing something.
"The amount of fat you burn also depends upon what type of activity you are performing (for example, sprinting vs. walking), how long you are engaging in the activity, and what kind of shape your body is in. If you are engaging in a long-term low intensity activity, such as walking, this allows aerobic metabolism to proceed and therefore your body utilizes fatty acids as well as carbohydrates for fuel."
there's a link at the bottom of that page which I posted here.
http://external.aomc.org/HOD2/fitness/AerobicMetabolism.html
basically it explains aerobic metabolism, and brings into play the "target heart rate" for fat burning that some people like to shun these days. So going by these facts, it looks to me like the body doesn't burn fat all day long, but will only burn it through aerobic metabolism, and the body can't reach this sort of metabolism unless certain conditions are met..Or maybe I'm missing something.
Burning, well at least I understand what your arguement is now. I will agree that certain conditions will favor fat loss more than others. As in a specific heart rate will target fat more than a faster or slower heart rate. So in effect the body won't burn fat at every single waking minute. I believe you took my statement 100% literally when I meant it in a general way.
I will narrow down my statement and say the body is fully capable of burning fat all day long if conditions are favorable, none of which require ketones to be present. My main arguement was that so long as you are in a hypocaloric state you basically cannot store any ingested fat as it will be burned off before it gets a chance to.
If you were only to do weight training and no aerobics, and were in a hypocaloric state at all times, it would be impossible under these circumstances to store fat. The only exception is if you ingested all of your daily calories in one meal. Then of course you won't burn it off fast enough thus it will be stored. However since you won't get any food the rest of the day it will be forced to burn off what was already stored and then some. That is an extreme example and most of us aren't going to be in that situation.
And again if you couldn't burn fat this easily then diets like iso-caloric and zone ones that have up to 33% of their calories in fat simply wouldn't work. In fact they work quite well especially when a one day refeed, aka carb up, is followed to keep leptin levels up. With this refeed I believe these diets are just as effective as keto diets with a bit less extremity.
I will narrow down my statement and say the body is fully capable of burning fat all day long if conditions are favorable, none of which require ketones to be present. My main arguement was that so long as you are in a hypocaloric state you basically cannot store any ingested fat as it will be burned off before it gets a chance to.
If you were only to do weight training and no aerobics, and were in a hypocaloric state at all times, it would be impossible under these circumstances to store fat. The only exception is if you ingested all of your daily calories in one meal. Then of course you won't burn it off fast enough thus it will be stored. However since you won't get any food the rest of the day it will be forced to burn off what was already stored and then some. That is an extreme example and most of us aren't going to be in that situation.
And again if you couldn't burn fat this easily then diets like iso-caloric and zone ones that have up to 33% of their calories in fat simply wouldn't work. In fact they work quite well especially when a one day refeed, aka carb up, is followed to keep leptin levels up. With this refeed I believe these diets are just as effective as keto diets with a bit less extremity.
B
Burning_Inside
Guest
OK i got ya. yeah i did take the burning fat all day long thing literally.
