Balanced diet

Another thing to bear in mind, as far as fat is concerned, is that each person has a genetically pre-determined way that their body distributes and stores fat. Some people deposit more fat around their organs and less at the 'surface' under their skin. Apparently, this is more true of folks with black skin than white, so black folks often tend to look leaner than their white counterparts for the same level of body fat.

In my case (very fair/white skin), I tend to have a fairly even layer of fat all over. I can carry more fat than some of my mates without looking as fat because I don't get the typical middle-aged bloke's belly and love handles. However, trying to get veins popping and cuts in my quads when dieting just doesn't happen until I'm at very low levels of bf. By contrast, one of my mates has very lean and defined legs and arms but has a lot of belly and back fat.
 
Old and Grey said:
Fat is not fat. There is the increase in each individual fat cell and then there is the increase in the number of fat cells. The former can be dieted off rather easily. The latter is there forever although you can still shrink the size of them, there is just more of them to shrink.

Although most body builders would probably disagree, my personal philosophy is to stay within 10 pounds of my lean body weight. Yo-yo dieting is not good for people in general, including body builders. It makes it tougher to stay lean when you want to. Just my 1/2 cent.
Click to expand...

Obviously there is a limit to the success of bulk-cut, and keeping fat cell #'s down is central to that, but I doubt that Rihad is exceeding that 22-25% bf mark by any measurable amount.
 
Totentanz said:
You can keep searching all the quotes you want. You aren't going to gain muscle and lose fat at the same time. Sorry. Unless you get your hands on some Tren, slin and gh, it's not going to happen.
Click to expand...

Not meaning to stir things up, but following up to the discussion:
Wow, you mean we don’t have to eat over maintenance (whatever that is) even during a bulk? I’d be glad to eat less, as I tend to get fat, but would I still grow?
Click to expand...

That is what I said, yes. Not only does the body make use of ingested calories, but also stored calories in the body (fat stores). The more fat you have, the greater the available energy (unless you cut calories too hard).
Click to expand...
Simple as that, take it or leave it. http://borgefagerli.com/myo-reps-in-english/#comment-534
 
Last edited:
You do realize that he was wrong when he said that, right? He's not some sort of god who is omnipotent.

But go ahead. Try it. You'll stay small, I promise you.
 
I will admit that as an aside, I did manage a recomp once but I was still on a calorie surplus following workouts, a slight deficit prior to the window of increased protein synthesis. It's in one of my logs somewhere, I don't really feel like digging it up. But the idea that you can grow muscle on a calorie deficit is a false one. In my example, I ended the week at a slight surplus. I only did a "recomp" in the fact that I gained very little bodyfat and a decent amount of muscle, such that my bodyfat percentage stayed the same - you realize that at an increased bodyweight, bodyfat % staying the same still means that you gained fat along with the muscle, right? And my example was a pretty extreme situation with some serious manipulation of calories, macros and timing. My muscle gains were not that great, and it was really not worth all the effort I put into it. I made considerably better gains when I bulked up and cut down like a normal person.

So no, you won't gain muscle on a calorie deficit. You will not raise protein synthesis higher than protein breakdown on a deficit - it won't happen. If protein synthesis is not greater, then you will not accumulate muscle mass.

Keep in mind that I am talking about relatively normal people. Those on a serious drug regimen or who are morbidly obese can sometimes experience muscle growth and fat loss simultaneously.
 
Recomping is possible, but more in the realm of mini-bulk/cut cycles, not in the sense of simultaneous lose fat/ gain muscle in one day.
 
Totentanz said:
You do realize that he was wrong when he said that, right? He's not some sort of god who is omnipotent.

But go ahead. Try it. You'll stay small, I promise you.
Click to expand...

I agree with Totz.

For what it's worth, this has been my experience: When i'm worried about fat gain, I gain nothing... no muscle, no fat. I even spent some time really focusing on fat burning, eating fewer carbs, more cardio, heavy weights, lots of BCAAs, etc... I ended up losing fat... and muscle. My body fat % stayed the same, so all that time was basiclly wasted. When I've focused on just gaining, I do indeed gain some fat, but I also gain muscle. I don't eat junk, I just eat more good stuff. You can't build something from nothing (physically impossible). More calories are required to build muscle; I believe this is especially true if you are an ectomorph-type since you have less overall bodymass to begin with.

Since starting HST I'm up from 165 to 177.8. My bodyfat % has remained pretty close to constant at 13-14%; which means I've gained both muscle and fat.

Unless you are a genetic super-freak (pro athletes/body builders/models) or using steroids (pro athletes/body builders/models) you're simply not going to lose fat and gain muscle on a calorie deficit.
 
Look at what Blade said: "That is what I said, yes. Not only does the body make use of ingested calories, but also stored calories in the body (fat stores). The more fat you have, the greater the available energy (unless you cut calories too hard)."

Just because something is "physically possible" doesn't mean it is probable for you and your body type/current body composition.

If you have a lot of stored fat, your body may indeed be more likely to gain muscle and lose fat on a calorie deficit because your body is buring both ingested calories and stored fat to build muscle... because there is SO much stored fat to burn. The amount of stored fat is the key, and I would guess that the less and less stored fat available, the more difficult it becomes to utilize that stored fat to build anything.

For ectomorphs it may well indeed be "technically physically/scientifically possible" to utilize that 10-12% bodyfat to build muscle on a calorie deficit; I just don't see how it is probable for 99% of us. Also, which approach is more efficient? Which approach will utilize greater muscle growth and fat loss over the course of a given time period? Bulk/Cut? or Calorie deficit? I'm guessing that the traditional Bulk/Cut will yield more efficiency over the long run. That's been my experience, anyway as a non steroid user and non-genetic-super-freak.
 
nativetroutbum said:
If you have a lot of stored fat, your body may indeed be more likely to gain muscle and lose fat on a calorie deficit because your body is buring both ingested calories and stored fat to build muscle... because there is SO much stored fat to burn. The amount of stored fat is the key, and I would guess that the less and less stored fat available, the more difficult it becomes to utilize that stored fat to build anything.
Click to expand...
Well, this does tell me one thing: as I'm close to 25% bf I can "lean bulk" till I get somewhere near 15%, from there I can eat normal and keep fat in check.
 
Ok. Good luck. I'll be interested to track your progress in attempting to gain muscle and burn fat at the same time, starting at BW 165@ 25% bf. Again, good luck.
 
I love contemplating various before-after pics of Blade's trainees. This one in particular:
JCK-before-after.jpg

Add left guy's fat (and some more) to the middle guy and it's more or less like me (although his pecs look slightly more developed). BTW I hate the leanness and veins of the "final" guy on the right, although he does have developed thighs. The middle semi-leanness is what I think I should be trying to achieve myself, and work up from there without compromising on looks.
 
Last edited:
Thanks, Totentanz, do you think this one will do? It's simple, cheap & has free delivery to where I live. I wonder why you're not using an electronic tester available from the site you provided, it's so much easier.

I finally saw on that illustration where exactly to pinch the fat. I can tell you mine is easily 25-30 mm.

Image040.jpg
 
Last edited:
Those are similar to the calipers I use.

Electronic testers are easier, that doesn't mean they are accurate. Easy is for the sheep. I would rather spend a few dollars and get consistent results than spend a ton on something that might not be accurate.

Don't use the seven site test, just use the three site because it is simpler so you are more likely to measure each area consistently every time you measure. Also, it is one of the few that you can do yourself, just take chest, thigh and abdominal folds - easy to do once a week or whatever. Make sure to test each skin fold a few times to make sure you are consistent with your measurements. http://www.linear-software.com/malesites.html will tell you how to do each site.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top