Bulking - Cutting useless...

B

Blizz

New Member
Hello guys...

As the topic says, I really think that the bulking and cutting cycles aren't necessary to achieve your goals. What I am talking about is by going way over your calorie needs for bulking and the need to cut after, that just doesn't make sense IMO.

If you gain more fat during a bulk session it's just because your body did get all he needs for muscle recovery and growth, the rest is store as fat. So the latter implies that you did consume too much calories than you needed and you're getting fat wich implies a cutting cycle to loose the excess fat.

Why not increase the calorie intake just to allow muscle growth without storing body fat and at the same time not have to do a cutting cycle ?

Just my tought.

Blizz
 
Because nobody ever has success trying to eliminate all fat gain during a bulk unless they are on drugs. Even if you do a "slow bulk" to minimize fat gain, you still have to accept _some_ fat gain. In a perfect world, you could gain weight and have it all be muscle, but this isn't a perfect world.
 
To pick up on what Tot said, natural athletes gain fat and muscle simultaneously. The goal is to influence your partitioning ratio through exercise.

An untrained person may gain 50% fat, 50% muscle, and lose weight in the same ration. Someone else may gain and lose muscle and fat at a 60%-40% ratio, etc. depending on genetics.

Through training, you improve your ratio in both the gaining and losing phase. You may be able to influence the muscle to fat gain to say, 70%-30%. Then in cutting, training will reverse the ratio instead of maintaining it. That is, a 30%-70% muscle to fat loss. The result is a net gain.

You are right that eating way too much will lead to unneccesary fat gain. And for the sake of appearance, not having to switch wardrobes, etc., a lower calorie bulk may be desireable. But there will always be fat gain, and the eventual need for fat loss.

But many body builders seem to have a "more is better" mentality. You know what I mean -- eat 4 grams of protein per pound of bodyweight. Drink 3 gallons of water per day. Take 10 grams of creatine per day, etc. I'd hate to see a body builder need chemo therapy. WHy not take the whole bottle of pills at once, and really knock out that cancer...
wow.gif
 
Hello gentlemen,

Been lurking on this forum for almost two years and just recently joined. Fantastic resource.

Anyway, as a follow up question to the initial post question... If during a hypothetical bulking phase in which 6 lb of the gain is muscle and 4 lb is fat, why is it incorrect to assume that roughly 40% of the surplus calories consumed were not needed?

If I understand correctly what you guys are saying, if the caloric surplus would have been reduced, then the muscle gains would have also been reduced and fat would have been gained anyway. Is that right?
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">why is it incorrect to assume that roughly 40% of the surplus calories consumed were not needed? </div>

Okay, say you now gain 6 lbs instead of 10 lbs. That 6 lbs may be over 2 lbs fat with the same ratio. There are a lot more factors that go into it though, but as others have said, all fat gain will not be eliminated. What makes a slow bulk successful is the limited amount of fat gain you will have -- your body fat % will either stay the same or go down as you gain some fat.
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">If I understand correctly what you guys are saying, if the caloric surplus would have been reduced, then the muscle gains would have also been reduced and fat would have been gained anyway. Is that right? </div>

Yep. You can't gain 100% muscle simply because you choose to. All you can do is find the best training routine to shape your p-ratio, and choose a diet to gain as much or little as you want. But some fat will come and go along with the muscle.
 
I've heard it said very often that two groups of individuals can violate this 'rule,' gaining muscle and losing fat at the same time: drug users and 'newbies.' Does anyone know what the actual biochemical mechanisms are that allow newbies to perform this miracle? That would be an interesting study...
 
Well, as we progress, we slowly roast the myostatin gene...nah...
All I could add here is that IF it were possible for intermediates to mesomorph out all at once without drugs, I would be that success story. I tried six types of training on maintenance diets and stayed the same. Doesn't work. Bad plan.
Now, lately I've noticed that I can't seem to gain muscle without a lot of fat, and lose fat without losing more muscle than before (IMO). That would indicate to me that age makes things worse (ya think?) and a heavier bulk and cut are needed than before, but I'm not sure.
 
ha. Interesting quad.
My reluctance to emotionally accept the bulking cutting theory stems from the fact that I always tend to be sedentary for long enough periods, that when i return to exercise, I have that virgin ability to burn fat and grow muscle for a few months. For the first time however, I'm hitting a plateau in this regard i think...
I say I think because my ability to read these things is exacerbated by the fact that my fat loss tends to be horrifically non linear...as in a month of fluctuating from 190-193 to wake up one morning with that range suddenly set to 185-188; instead of the idyllic loss of ~1 lb a week, I lose four at once (no this isn't water, 'cause I consider the range of weight, and it stays off every time). so week to week I can never really tell what the hell is going on!
Considering a TKD or a CKD. In fact based on what I do tomorrow I'll be doing one of those full blown!
 
Resident protein expert says CKD is better. I don't know either; I seem to suk at cutting. IF worked for a while, but now my metabolism is slowed down I think. I feel crappy.
 
Thats good news, because I opted for the CKD Day two, 2nd glycogen depletion workout today, don't feel so bad at all. Lets see how this goes. Did you try a CKD?
Sorry to hear about the cutting issues. Have you tried supplementation...tonalin CLA, upping the fiber intake to 40gr a day, chromium picolinate, fish oil capsules, etc? These seem to help me drop a lot of weight fast, until I get to this point where I'm at now (~15% bf). Then it all goes to sh*t!
 
Haven't tried keto diets yet: still looking for groceries, 'cause I KNOW I'll be bored with it. Fish oil is a standard part of the diet for me, when I remember to take them.
My experiment with high fibre - a giant bowl of FibreOne cereal in milk - resulted in all day explosions the day after...man, you have to EASE up on that fiber! I eat a LOT of broccoli; thankfully love the stuff! And split pea soup...well, I don't know about the fiber in that, but I'm just addicted to pea soup.
 
In very simple terms your body sees muscle as being a liability since it is caloricaly expensive. The more muscle the more maintenance calories required. Your body sees this as a risk of death from famine, if fat stores are already low, it is very hard to convince the body to add muscle. Same principles apply when cutting, if you reduce too quickly the body sees this as famine and starts to slow your metabolism down in an effort to survive.
 
<div>
(dawaro @ May 20 2008,9:35)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">In very simple terms your body sees muscle as being a liability since it is caloricaly expensive. The more muscle the more maintenance calories required. Your body sees this as a risk of death from famine, if fat stores are already low, it is very hard to convince the body to add muscle. Same principles apply when cutting, if you reduce too quickly the body sees this as famine and starts to slow your metabolism down in an effort to survive.</div>
Sad for natural bodybuilders, but so true.
 
ahhhh. I miss the days of being a long distance runner...when it was simply good enough to be emaciated...and how easy it was to become emaciated !
 
I tried CKD diets for years. I began in about 96 and stayed on until 99. They I tried another a few years later where it was not cyclical but constant ketosis.

After do these diets I have concluded that they are terrible for fat loss. They work well for average, fat, couch potoato because it gets them to eat less, but does nothing for a bodybuilder. I found I had to starve myself if I wanted to lose weight. This last time around, my fat was not budging, so just for fun I lowered my calories from 2500 to 2000, then 1500, finally 900!!!! My weight did not move after 3 weeks! So these diet would be perfect if I was lost in the woods and had access to meat
smile.gif


Anyway I finally smartened up and spoke to a registered dietitian that specializes in athletics. They recommend that carbohydrates are the key to fat loss and muscle gain. Recent research has shown that bodybuilder mis-use the amount of protein in their diets. Too much protein strains the kidneys and creates dehydration due to uric acid flushing. I was having severe back spasms and it was from too much protein recommended by the bodybuilding community. Too much protein was also preventing my fat loss! So now that I have lowered my protein percentage and increase my carbohydrates I am finally losing fat again! How much protein am I having in a day....about 80 grams tops! I have been losing fat, and my shirts have been getting too tight in the chest at the same time!

Just an aside, my brother-in-law is a kidney surgeon and he told me many of his transplantation patients are bodybuilders. Upon hearing the bad news they confess to doing steroids and he tells them &quot;the steroids are not the problem, it's excess protein that ruined your kidneys.&quot;
 
<div>
(Vin_G @ May 23 2008,9:54)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Anyway I finally smartened up and spoke to a registered dietitian that specializes in athletics. They recommend that carbohydrates are the key to fat loss and muscle gain. Recent research has shown that bodybuilder mis-use the amount of protein in their diets. Too much protein strains the kidneys and creates dehydration due to uric acid flushing. I was having severe back spasms and it was from too much protein recommended by the bodybuilding community. Too much protein was also preventing my fat loss! So now that I have lowered my protein percentage and increase my carbohydrates I am finally losing fat again!</div>
Whooo, boy! Wait till Martin reads this one...!
wink.gif
 
I'm glad things worked out for you Vin. I'll let you know how this run goes for me. So far, I am in sharp disagreement with you as to the value of carb cycling in general and specifically in the UD2.0 form. Seems to be 'working already.' but I could change my mind in days...
I don't 'not believe you' about the protein issue, but remember, that could be an affect of:

1) your physiology, kidneys, etc. maybe your kidneys suck at filtration, just like my pancreas sucks at using the 'right amount' of insulin to control blood sugar (I'm slightly hypoglycemic).
2) what exactly is TOO much? clearly most bodybuilders are excessive and neurotic to boot, but that doesn't mean lifters don't benefit from more protein than the useless RDA up to a point
3) I'm skeptical of the stated etiology of your back spasms,. Back is a hairy area, no pun intended.
4) With all due respect, and I say this as a future M.D., most doctors really don't know as much as we think they do, let alone about steroids use, and I'd take a deep breath before I listened to a surgeon about anything besides scalpels and arthroscopes (ironically again, I'm saying this is someone that wants to go into surgery!). The reality is that steroid using bodybuilders will tend to take in A LOT more than 150-180 grams of protein a day. Try double that. Yeah, that could cause a kidney problem. And so can steroids.
5) You're right. Martin will love this...
smile.gif
 
beingisbeing,

I agree we all respond differently to certain diets. Many have lost weight on CKD diets (and yes I too have done the UD2.0). I was the biggest advocate of keto diets as I thought they were genious, and exciting to do. But I can't argue with my dietician. Everything she has said about what typically works and what doesn't is very hard to agrue with. I find, in the bodybuilding community, a new idea/concept comes along and is posted in some books and magaizines, then others get a hold of this information and publish their own articles in magazines. As a result ideas become fact and no one has realized that these are only theories and not actually based on imperical evendence. The notes that I mentioned that worked for me (i.e. less protein and more carbs) comes from my dietician who trains professional atheltes and has been doing so for 35 years. If you ever spoke with her you would realize that she is not assertive, just giving the facts of what she has seen over her career and lastest medical research.

And as far as my brother-in-law goes, he does not claim to be a steroid expert at all, but he does know kidney damage from excess protein consumption and he sees trends in bodybuilders. I am not mentioning this to back up how little protein I am started consumeing....or stopped consuming, but I am just trying to make a point that the amound of protein that we needs requires some testing and I don't believe at all that more is better.

I thought my post would be a thought-provoking read for some and I believe you should do what works for you. However I am not afraid to challenge ideas in the bodybuilding community as most of them do not seem to be founded on anything and I have seen more failure in natural bodybuilders than success from adhering to much mis-guided advice. I have not reached any conclusions, but I know I have to do more research on the protein and carbohydrate issue. For me, the mainstream advice that I have read in magazines and have been told by bodybuilding trainers has not worked......but they did tell it is not working due to not using any juice. So I need to know what works for naturals and what has been tested.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top