I admit it, I was wrong!

[DesertDude11]

No. Cut means "eat below maintenance". Bulk means "eat above maintenance". They're mutually exclusive by definition.

Got it. Isn't the end result of each to lose fat and gain muscle respectively?

[ngtvenfnty]

False. It is way too easy in today's society to eat 4-5k a day in calories and think you are making "healthy choices". Look at a large southwest salad from The Cheesecake Factory. It has something like 1500 calories in it. Some fat person will eat that for lunch thinking they are doing the right thing. On the other side of the coin, try getting some obese person off their a$$ and into the gym. They will likely be completely demotivated by the fact that it takes 3 hours on the treadmill to burn that "healthy" salad they ate at lunch.

Like someones sig says: Abs are made in the gym and shown in the kitchen.

As I said, I'm talking about an average guy with a few extra lbs. Yes it is easy to over eat, but a guy maintaining 20-30 lbs, not gaining, is not over eating quite to that extreme. More extreme circumstances of course are going to call more more extreme measures, but an "average" dude who wants to get fit, just needs to hit the weights. The fat/muscle ratio will move into a desired proportion in due course.

[Marius_Ursus]

Got it. Isn't the end result of each to lose fat and gain muscle respectively?

In general, but if you're a competitive lifter or thrower, sometimes you have to cut to make weight regardless of if it's fat or muscle and just pray that it's not too much muscle when you walk out on the pitch.

[induced_drag]

In my opinion, it can be done. (gain muscle and lose fat at the same time). However.....it is my belief that the further along you are in your development, the more difficult this becomes. When you are well below your potential....sure...not all that hard. Now get to within 5lbs of what has been observed as maximum mass potential.....it is not happening.


Too many want to lump things into absolutes. The rules change the longer you are in the game. It only gets harder.....

This is why you see guys who boast how well they progress and dont have to watch diet...etc. Yet they are 30lbs under where they probably could get naturally. I say to them.....get another 4-5 years training under your belt and then come try to say the same thing. There is a reason the guys at their peaks pretty much hold very similar views on nutrition (despite that they may engage in very different training styles). The rules as you progress get much tougher.

[PhiDelt234]

:d :d :d

[Smelly bull]

I completely understand your skepticism, given all the info that runs rampant on the net/forums. My info comes from a small library of books (getting bigger everyday) written by PhD's, RD's, MD's and other fun Acronyms.

Also, as stated in my sig, I am a Pro PTA certified personal trainer and nutrition tech who was taught by nutritionists and some of the world's top IFBB pro's. I live and breathe this lifestyle because it is so interesting to me. I remember Mike Sable once asking me what kind of oil I put in my car and once I answered he then asked about my macros and what type of carbs I use post workout. When I said I wasn't sure he replied with "so you know what kind of fuel your car needs, but not your body' 0.o?

The reason I find everything so interesting is that nobody knows everything and so there is still room for me to find that next big breakthrough (dreams).

But to directly answer your questions: I've no idea which book I read it in but I definitely did and practice that rule with myself and clients...more importantly it works.

As far as mass mover goes....just think about it. A caloric deficit will obviously limit your strength. Therefore, does it not make sense that you should lighten the load? That info comes from many Pro's I have learned from....ask Phil Heath, he likes that method. Again, I have tried and tested these methods on myself and clients and it is the most efficient use of your time in the gym.

Some suggested reading:

- Nancy Clark's Sports Nutrition Guidebook fourth edition.
- Power Eating Third Edition.
- Nutrient Timing for Peak performance.

Honestly, I won't read anything you suggest, mostly because i think you are full of it. I don't think you know what you are talking about. Nothing you said in your post makes sense. Think about this, I eat 4000 calories a day vs someone who eats 2000 calories a day. We both reduce our intake by 400 calories and We both hit starvation mode? I cannot believe there is a magicial number that one hits and bam, your body shifts into starvation mode. Plus the starvation mode is a process, not a one day event.

[hammerfelt]

In my opinion, it can be done. (gain muscle and lose fat at the same time). However.....it is my belief that the further along you are in your development, the more difficult this becomes. When you are well below your potential....sure...not all that hard. Now get to within 5lbs of what has been observed as maximum mass potential.....it is not happening.


Too many want to lump things into absolutes. The rules change the longer you are in the game. It only gets harder.....

This is why you see guys who boast how well they progress and dont have to watch diet...etc. Yet they are 30lbs under where they probably could get naturally. I say to them.....get another 4-5 years training under your belt and then come try to say the same thing. There is a reason the guys at their peaks pretty much hold very similar views on nutrition (despite that they may engage in very different training styles). The rules as you progress get much tougher.

My nomination for post of the year.

[Tommy W.]

In my opinion, it can be done. (gain muscle and lose fat at the same time). However.....it is my belief that the further along you are in your development, the more difficult this becomes. When you are well below your potential....sure...not all that hard. Now get to within 5lbs of what has been observed as maximum mass potential.....it is not happening.


Too many want to lump things into absolutes. The rules change the longer you are in the game. It only gets harder.....

This is why you see guys who boast how well they progress and dont have to watch diet...etc. Yet they are 30lbs under where they probably could get naturally. I say to them.....get another 4-5 years training under your belt and then come try to say the same thing. There is a reason the guys at their peaks pretty much hold very similar views on nutrition (despite that they may engage in very different training styles). The rules as you progress get much tougher.

Agree

[ljimd]

In my opinion, it can be done. (gain muscle and lose fat at the same time). However.....it is my belief that the further along you are in your development, the more difficult this becomes. When you are well below your potential....sure...not all that hard. Now get to within 5lbs of what has been observed as maximum mass potential.....it is not happening.


Too many want to lump things into absolutes. The rules change the longer you are in the game. It only gets harder.....

This is why you see guys who boast how well they progress and dont have to watch diet...etc. Yet they are 30lbs under where they probably could get naturally. I say to them.....get another 4-5 years training under your belt and then come try to say the same thing. There is a reason the guys at their peaks pretty much hold very similar views on nutrition (despite that they may engage in very different training styles). The rules as you progress get much tougher.

Honestly, I won't read anything you suggest, mostly because i think you are full of it. I don't think you know what you are talking about. Nothing you said in your post makes sense. Think about this, I eat 4000 calories a day vs someone who eats 2000 calories a day. We both reduce our intake by 400 calories and We both hit starvation mode? I cannot believe there is a magicial number that one hits and bam, your body shifts into starvation mode. Plus the starvation mode is a process, not a one day event.

I agree with both of these gentlemen.

[drudixon]

Your first mistake is your deficit. The max caloric deficit your body will handle without going into starvation mode is 400, seriously I promise = not "bro science".

Having said that I generally suggest people taper down to 400 i.e. begin with 200 then 3 then 4. Rome wasn't built in a day and neither are abs.

However, you will not make strength gains while on a deficit, quite the opposite. Therefore, while on your deficit switch over to volume training i.e. more reps and less weight.

When you are done with your cut add on 200 a day until you hit a surplus of 500/day (about 85% from carbs) and increase weight. I generally prefer more "lifting" style at this point i.e. move the weight from point a to b, in order to recoup strength. Then I return to bodybuilding i.e. focusing on form and contraction.

Starvation mode... umm... lol No. Your body wants to be efficient with what it has (part of SAID principle). It will adapt through time to run at the caloric level it's used to. That said, in vs out still holds. I hope you realize that true, medical starvation takes weeks, not a couple days at some mythical 400 calorie deficit. Deficits are always relative to the TDEE of the individual. 5,000 calories to me would make me obese in a few months. BTO eats that by lunch time. It's relative.

As for not gaining strength, the constituent parts of a myofibril (actin and myosin) are miniscule (as compared to the complex process of sarcoplasmic construction). Your body can create sarcomere binding sites on a moderate deficit.

Don't confuse ATP depletion with weakening. They are NOT the same thing. At a true deficit, when blood and liver and muscles are glycogen deprived, yes, your strength will temporarily go down. The nice part about that is it comes right back once you feed. Interestingly, for the carb cyclers, or people who workout fed, they can sustain a caloric deficit and keep ATP/glycogen loaded for their workouts. The issue is really more that of timing than anything.

Your advice re volume training doesn't make sense. At a real, glycogen depleted deficit, there's no glycogen to deplete from the muscle. The point of sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is to deplete the glycogen from the cell. The subsequent bodily response is to adapt my making sure the next time that load is encountered there's more than enough glycogen available. In other words, your example is self-defeating in a fasted state.

[Getsum]

I just try to add an extra rep or more weight to the bar than I did on my last workout. Sometimes I win, sometimes I lose.

[Tommy W.]

Realistically we need to change from daily cal intake to weekly cal intake mentality. You will not hit exactly 2,000 cals a day perfectly every day if that's what you're shooting for or the "I eat 1,900 cals a day but my 4,000 cal cheat day on Saturday doesn't figure in". This daily cal intake is the biggest detrement to reality within the context of overall diet protocol.

[1325AIR]

OP do what you think will best help achieve your goals. I stand by the numbers. I would further add that the 400 cal deficit would be best reached through exercise (cardio) than eating less, however.

To the naysayers: Of course there is no "magic number" but there are consistencies and inconsistencies. The data I have read says 300 for Women and 400 for Men in order to lose the most fat while maintaining the most lean muscle, anything more and you will sacrifice more muscle. Keep at it for too long and bam let the skinny fat begin.

With regards to "starvation mode". Yes, it will not happen in a day...nothing in this sport/lifestyle does. But we are offering advice for the long haul...not a day.

Back to the OP: My final bit of advice is to get started. You can read for months all the silver tongued wanna be Phd's pontifications about mTOR pathways and glycogen depletion but it's really not that difficult. Hit the weights, cardio and food CONSISTENTLY and adjust according to the mirror. Scales lie and skinfold tests are nonsense - if I said you look great with 11%BF but you still felt like crap what would it matter. The only thing that matters is whether you are happy.

Hit me up if you have any questions

[Tommy W.]

OP do what you think will best help achieve your goals. I stand by the numbers. I would further add that the 400 cal deficit would be best reached through exercise (cardio) than eating less, however.

To the naysayers: Of course there is no "magic number" but there are consistencies and inconsistencies. The data I have read says 300 for Women and 400 for Men in order to lose the most fat while maintaining the most lean muscle, anything more and you will sacrifice more muscle. Keep at it for too long and bam let the skinny fat begin.

With regards to "starvation mode". Yes, it will not happen in a day...nothing in this sport/lifestyle does. But we are offering advice for the long haul...not a day.

Back to the OP: My final bit of advice is to get started. You can read for months all the silver tongued wanna be Phd's pontifications about mTOR pathways and glycogen depletion but it's really not that difficult. Hit the weights, cardio and food CONSISTENTLY and adjust according to the mirror. Scales lie and skinfold tests are nonsense - if I said you look great with 11%BF but you still felt like crap what would it matter. The only thing that matters is whether you are happy.

Hit me up if you have any questions

Wow

[Jtbny]

ITT I leaned that:

Eat 401 below my maintaince I'll starve and

When in doubt blame the salad.

Thanks!

[Smelly bull]

OP do what you think will best help achieve your goals. I stand by the numbers. I would further add that the 400 cal deficit would be best reached through exercise (cardio) than eating less, however.

To the naysayers: Of course there is no "magic number" but there are consistencies and inconsistencies. The data I have read says 300 for Women and 400 for Men in order to lose the most fat while maintaining the most lean muscle, anything more and you will sacrifice more muscle. Keep at it for too long and bam let the skinny fat begin.

With regards to "starvation mode". Yes, it will not happen in a day...nothing in this sport/lifestyle does. But we are offering advice for the long haul...not a day.

Back to the OP: My final bit of advice is to get started. You can read for months all the silver tongued wanna be Phd's pontifications about mTOR pathways and glycogen depletion but it's really not that difficult. Hit the weights, cardio and food CONSISTENTLY and adjust according to the mirror. Scales lie and skinfold tests are nonsense - if I said you look great with 11%BF but you still felt like crap what would it matter. The only thing that matters is whether you are happy.

Hit me up if you have any questions

Just stop.

[DesertDude11]

So it's the salad's fault and not the consumer's for educating himself?

Get real dude, we here on this site are the 1%. Take a walk through the mall some day and count in your head how many people would go so far as to educate themselves about nutrition. Now take that number and divide it by 10. That is the number of people willing to ACTUALLY DO anything about it.

Even with the nutritional info plastered all over McDonald's fat a$$'s STILL eat there.

[2nd_chance]

Cut=cut fat Bulk=add muscle?

Not really. The terms are diet terms and refer to caloric intake. What you mean is "lose fat and gain muscle" not cut and bulk. In the right circumstance it can be done, but it's not easy and may not be the fastest way to getting where you want to be. For a noob it's more realistic to accomplish.

[Marius_Ursus]

Get real dude, we here on this site are the 1%. Take a walk through the mall some day and count in your head how many people would go so far as to educate themselves about nutrition. Now take that number and divide it by 10. That is the number of people willing to ACTUALLY DO anything about it.

Even with the nutritional info plastered all over McDonald's fat a$$'s STILL eat there.

Good, we've determined that it is, in fact, the salad's fault.

[Smelly bull]

Good, we've determined that it is, in fact, the salad's fault.

And we are the 1%. Excellent.

[drudixon]

A good laugh I had years ago was when I waited tables. This lady comes in, her ass is pulling a Niagara falls off the sides of the chair. I ask her for her order and she says "I'm on a diet (I think thank god...), and she orders a salad - the fried chicken salad with extra cheese, eggs, tortilla strips, and triple dressing....

I replied, "If you're on a diet, you should go for the bacon double cheeseburger. It has less calories than the salad you just ordered."

A tip was not given that day. ;(

[Smelly bull]

A good laugh I had years ago was when I waited tables. This lady comes in, her ass is pulling a Niagara falls off the sides of the chair. I ask her for her order and she says "I'm on a diet (I think thank god...), and she orders a salad - the fried chicken salad with extra cheese, eggs, tortilla strips, and triple dressing....

I replied, "If you're on a diet, you should go for the bacon double cheeseburger. It has less calories than the salad you just ordered."

A tip was not given that day. ;(

Lol, I suspect Kommandant Krane would give you a stern lecture, maybe even a phone call, about customer service!

[tryintorebuild]

A good laugh I had years ago was when I waited tables. This lady comes in, her ass is pulling a Niagara falls off the sides of the chair. I ask her for her order and she says "I'm on a diet (I think thank god...), and she orders a salad - the fried chicken salad with extra cheese, eggs, tortilla strips, and triple dressing....

I replied, "If you're on a diet, you should go for the bacon double cheeseburger. It has less calories than the salad you just ordered."

A tip was not given that day. ;(

Hmm.. Interesting. I would have given a tip for that kind of information.

The term salad can be very misleading when you are dining out. And some people don't really have a clue about it. A lot of what seems to be common knowledge on here isn't so well known by folks IRL. I'm amazed at the number of "dieters" I know who will skip a meal and then eat 3 or 4 cookies because they are hungry and feel like they can afford the calories because they didn't eat lunch.

[DesertDude11]

Good, we've determined that it is, in fact, the salad's fault.

Is English your first language or are you just f**king with me? I think you need a remedial reading comprehension class or two.

[Jtbny]

Is English your first language or are you just f**king with me? I think you need a remedial reading comprehension class or two.

Defending what you think/write is OK but insulting someone for what they think/write is NOT IMO.

[Marius_Ursus]

Is English your first language or are you just f**king with me? I think you need a remedial reading comprehension class or two.

English is my first language, yes. My reading comprehension is just fine, thankyouverymuch. I've understood every word you've written and continue to disagree with your assessment of personal responsibility. Therefore, not only have we determined that fat people can blame their food but also that if I use sarcasm in my replies I'm automatically remanded to the remedial reading class during 4th period.

I find your excusing of lifestyle choices and their resultant repercussions both disingenuous and distasteful.

[bustasinclair]

Your first mistake is your deficit. The max caloric deficit your body will handle without going into starvation mode is 400, seriously I promise = not "bro science".

This lady must have fallen below the 400 calorie deficit threshhold.......If only she'd have eaten just one more rice cake per day.......

[ArchAngel'73]

Get real dude, we here on this site are the 1% .

No, you're not.
You're among the 15-20% of the general populaion that looks after thmselves in the gym.
Of that population those that compete in anything related to lifting are the 1%.

[drudixon]

This lady must have fallen below the 400 calorie deficit threshhold.......If only she'd have eaten just one more rice cake per day.......

I really wish I could "un-see" that lady's pic ....

Just think, If her deficit was 299 it'd have been all good.

[Smelly bull]

This lady must have fallen below the 400 calorie deficit threshhold.......If only she'd have eaten just one more rice cake per day.......

Sorry Bustasinclair, he did say "no broscience"...Therefore Internet protocol dictates he is telling the truth. if he said "Broscience" then we could assume he is full of crap. And he is a trainer who knows what motor oil he puts in his car. To much evidence pointing to him telling the truth.....