Can people gain muscle mass whilst simultaneously loosing bodyfat?
I was having this discussion with a PT friend of mine who is pretty cluey and has been in the game for a long time... I won't say what either of us thought about it just yet, but i wanted to hear other people's thoughts...
I know this topic is pretty debated so I was hoping to hear and see:
1) Peoples opinions and anecdotal evidence...
2) Actual studies that would present a case for either side...
Today I will do what you won't so Tomorrow I can do what you can't!
Screw the studies for this one mate.
It's happened in a million cases - especially assisted trainers.
Make the most out of every moment, every situation and never wait for the next time. It is almost always true that opportunity doesn't knock twice. You could put things off until tomorrow but tomorrow may not come. . .
Scottie - I can confirm personally it can be done and I had it DEXA confirmed.
Trucks loads of dedication and lower night time carbs is what did it for me, that and a now normal T level!
Definatley when first picking up a weight and eating some greens.
I would like to listen to your thoughts..
But I think yes, you do lose or atleast tone when lifting while gaining mass.
Some would argue that it is not the most efficient method of transforming one's physique (i.e. it might be better to choose one goal and pursue it rather than attempt both at the same time)... but nonetheless it is definitely doable, most noticebly by new starters, "assisted" trainers or even those that make an effort with diet, heck I've have even done it myself.
I started out very fat, by the time I wad s under 90kg I had grown dome muscle, and no it didn't exist under the fat so I'm proof it happens. Doesn't work that way anymore though.
So anecdotal so far... And I am swayed to believing it happen with assisted training, but still not sold on natty...
I get that when people begin to train and diet well it appears that this happens... However my thinking is that once the new muscle grows, the maintence calorie intake increases whilst the person generally eats at the same level... It is this shift from surplus to defecit due to the extra caloric needs that then causes the fat loss... Now due to the fact that the muscle may not have been able to be seen previously, this gives the image that both have happened simultaneously, when in fact one was a pre-cursor to the other...
This is why I was looking for studies, it seems that almost every bit of info there is on this out there is anecdotal... The actual hard evidence (ie. human physiology textbooks) that I have seen point to the contrary....
Today I will do what you won't so Tomorrow I can do what you can't!
I've certainly put on muscle when losing fat, but there is a limit. I also put on muscle easily but find it more difficult to lose fat, but when I do cut, I keep the muscle pretty easily.
Wow open a can of worms why don't you Scottie.. lol .. big topic.
My simple reply is .. Yes you can but the rate of achievement for either change will be inhibited... kinda like two people leaning against each other as hard as they can while trying to travel forward... as individuals the destination is arrived at sooner and with greater emphasis.
As a general rule of thumb, .. Your either cutting or bulking, anabolic or catabolic ..... you cant naturally do both things at the same time and expect to push the limits of either phases potential.
This said, there are always ways to make both phases work at the same time especially in the initial stages of training. - topic all of its own.
As a definite statement, the use of steroids & peptides etc greatly increases your ability to do both but I clearly state this should not be used as a shortcut for the uninitiated or those without the appropriate education.
Muscles burn calories, this includes calories stored as adipose tissue, this is why it's always crucial to encourage clients / interested parties re: "weight loss" to promote muscle growth in order to increase fat loss.
The more muscle you have the greater your ability to burn calories, this will even continue into times of rest.
Please also have a look at the relationship between muscle catabolism and cortisol, if you can manage cortisol you have a greater chance of losing fat and keeping / even gaining a little muscle.
* - don't forget cortisol isn't all bad, its serves a greater purpose and total inhibition of it can cause skin issues, potassium/sodium deficiencies add to this the relationship cortisol has with gastric secretions and anti-inflammatory effects.... another topic all of its own.
Great to see you back, Razz!Originally Posted by RazZ
And thanks for the reply... Seems as though thie topic isn't as hot as i thought it might have been...
Today I will do what you won't so Tomorrow I can do what you can't!
I saw Charles Poliquin talk about this recently and he said that the majority of studies (relating to advanced exercise, nutrition and this particular topic) were usually not in English e.g. German. I think most people agree now that the idea of cutting and bulking is antiquated and that you make lean muscle gains while losing substantial body fat.
PubMed might be worth a look but nothing really specific to what you are after:
Longitudinal study of body composition changes associated with weight change and physical activity.
Kyle UG, Zhang FF, Morabia A, Pichard C.
Clinical Nutrition, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
OBJECTIVE: Weight changes result in fat-free mass (FFM) and body fat (BF) changes. This study determined FFM and BF changes after weight gain or loss and whether these changes differ by gender, physical activity, and age. METHODS: Healthy volunteers, recruited between 1991 and 2003, were followed for 1 y (n = 400) or 3 y (n = 305). Active subjects performed >3 h of physical activity of > or =4.0 metabolic equivalents/wk, sedentary subjects performed <3 h/wk. Body weight and body composition by bioelectrical impedance analysis were determined at year 0, 1, or 3. RESULTS: At years 1 and 3, FFM and BF decreased with weight loss and increased with weight gain. BF was more sensitive (P < 0.03) to weight change than FFM. Compared to weight-stable individuals at year 1, weight gains of 1.0-1.9, 2.0-2.9, and > or =3.0 kg changed FFM by -0.04 (P = 0.90), +0.48 (P = 0.15), and +1.39 kg and BF by +1.35, +1.87, and +3.09 kg, respectively (all P < 0.001). Comparable FFM and BF decreases were observed for weight losses (FFM -0.28 kg, P = 0.38; -0.75 kg, P = 0.04; -1.51 kg, P < 0.001; BF -1.01 kg, P < 0.01; -1.55 kg, P = 0.01; -3.13 kg, P < 0.001). These relations were similar across gender and age strata. At year 1, active individuals were less likely to gain BF with weight gain and more likely to lose BF with weight loss than were sedentary individuals, except for weight losses >3 kg. At year 3, the association between body weight and FFM and BF change was similar between active and sedentary individuals. CONCLUSION: Greater weight changes (>3 kg) are necessary for weight change to have a significant effect on FFM than to have an effect on BF.
Body fat content influences the body composition response to nutrition and exercise.
Forbes GB.
University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, New York 14642, USA.
In most situations involving a significant change in body weight, both fat-free body mass (FFM) and body fat participate, but the relative contribution of FFM and fat to the total weight change is influenced by the initial body fat content. Overfeeding: In experiments of at least 3-weeks' duration, the weight gain of thin people comprises 60-70% lean tissues, whereas in the obese it is 30-40%. Underfeeding: In humans, there is an inverse curvilinear relationship between initial body fat content and the proportion of weight loss consisting of lean tissue. The same trend holds for animals and birds, including loss during hibernation. Another factor is the magnitude of the energy deficit: as energy intake is reduced, lean tissue makes up an increasing fraction of the total weight loss. Exercise: If individuals lose much weight with exercise, the result is usually some loss of lean tissue as well as fat, and once again the proportion of lean loss to total weight loss is greater in thin people than in those who have larger body fat burdens. Members of twin pairs often differ in weight. In thin individuals, lean accounts for about half of the intrapair weight difference, whereas in the obese it accounts for only one quarter. Body fat content must be taken into account in evaluating body composition changes induced by nutrition and exercise.
PMID: 10865771 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Define simultaneous; as I think in the context of this post it's a misleading term.
I mean it in its literal sense.. "existing or occurring at the same time; exactly coincident"
I don't see how that is misleading...
Today I will do what you won't so Tomorrow I can do what you can't!
Well, in the literal sense, I think it's even more misleading.
Do we measure muscle gain/fat loss, second by second? No. Then using simultaneous in this question is useless. It's like saying, can you rub your stomach and pat your head at the same time. Some can, some can't. But that's not the issue here.
Body composition changes happen over time, and you can either: focus on losing fat, focus on gaining muscle, or you can do both. It's my view that natural or assisted, you can do both, given that the process is not one measured simultaneously, but over a given length of time.
perhaps the corollary question is which method is "better", losing fat, gaining muscle, or doing both?
Posting Permissions 
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
