A specific question regarding gaining or retaining muscle on a deficit

[tkdnj]

Hello all...not looking to dispute the laws of physics...just looking to understand them so I can use them to my advantage

Lets assume a person's TDEE is 2500
he weighs 175, at 20%, therefore has 140 pounds of LBM and 35 pounds on body fat
he intakes 2000 calories per day (with high protein - 200 grams) which puts him at a 500 calorie deficit
he is lifting heavy 4 days a week

here is my question: since he has available body fat stores; I would assume since he is lifting heavy and getting adequate protein, his body would go after his fat stores to make up the 500 calorie defict. Therefore, cancelling out the deficit (now calories expended = calories available). If that is all true, why can't he build muscle on that 500 deficit? Doesn't the availabe fat stores make up for (and cancel out) the deficit? And in turn, allow him to build muscle since: a) he has no "net" caloric deficit b) he is lifting heavy and c) he has adequate protien?

I guess what I am asking is that at end of the day, does it matter whether the calories come from food or body fat stores? If the available calories (sourced externally or internally) are adequate to cover the TDEE, then why would it still be considered a deficit, in turn impact the ability to gain/retain muscle?

Love to hear your thoughts...thanks!

[daddyuk]

The body will use carbs as its 1st source, fats as its 2nd and protein as its 3rd.

[michail71]

While we all know it works for beginners and high levels of body fat but I think there are some hormone complexities at play that are beyond my understanding.

I typically will have some minimal LBM losses in an extended deficit. However, it seems to come back right away and then some once the calories go back up. So I stopped worrying about it.

[EjnarKolinkar]

Doesn't the availabe fat stores make up for (and cancel out) the deficit?

No

Fat stores aren't very anabolic. They are sourced for use through a complicated set of chemical signals within the body. These signals for the most part are not anabolic. The fat stores themselves do not signal the body that it is time to lay down some MPS the way 500 cals of eaten food would. MPS still happens while dieting though.

Just keeping it simple here. The body is not stupid, it does not go and lay down tons of muscle mass when it is being starved. The leaner it is the less it want to lay muscle down. At very lean stages the body generally cant even stay even with muscle mass, even with adequate protein and training.

http://www.jissn.com/content/11/1/20


People who are detrained, or overweight and new to training, or usually experience the most muscle mass gain while dieting.

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat...ng-fat-qa.html





Train, eat to support the goal, let the rest sort itself out, profit. JMO

[OutOfStep]

here is my question: since he has available body fat stores; I would assume since he is lifting heavy and getting adequate protein, his body would go after his fat stores to make up the 500 calorie defict. Therefore, cancelling out the deficit (now calories expended = calories available). If that is all true, why can't he build muscle on that 500 deficit? Doesn't the availabe fat stores make up for (and cancel out) the deficit? And in turn, allow him to build muscle since: a) he has no "net" caloric deficit b) he is lifting heavy and c) he has adequate protien?

So now you're back at equilibrium. To build new tissue requires a caloric surplus. Muscle protein synthesis comes at a metabolic cost and so does extra lbm.

[tkdnj]

So now you're back at equilibrium. To build new tissue requires a caloric surplus. Muscle protein synthesis comes at a metabolic cost and so does extra lbm.

Makes sense....but then you would assume in the aforementioned scenario that you can at least RETAIN all your muscle, since you are netting out at maintenance (and working out and consuming adequate protein)...thoughts?

[trickyB]

Makes sense....but then you would assume in the aforementioned scenario that you can at least RETAIN all your muscle, since you are netting out at maintenance (and working out and consuming adequate protein)...thoughts?

A deficit is a deficit if your body is having to constantly break down stored energy to meet its needs. Maybe I missed something but unless you are eating at maintenance your body is either acting like there is a deficit or a surplus. These are separate metabolic processes that involve different pathways and end points.

I'm definitely guilty of being in a deficit for extended periods of time. Its a cycle I'm trying to break because as a natural bodybuilder you won't gain any muscle mass you will lose it. Lift heavy, and lift often. Hit all your macros not just protein.

[angrypenguin54]

I think as long as you are over around 15% bf, and you are getting the proteins and fats you need, you can maintain and even build muscle on a deficit. Your macros will need to be spot on though to build muscle coupled with decent genetics.

Once you start getting in the 12% to 15% range, the body can do slow recomps, but its no where near as efficient as bulking and cutting.

[jobronze]

Agreed with the above.

There is a continuum scale to this question, not just yes or no. Your either less likely or more likely given a set of circumstances.

No one ever said it was optimal, but again its a sliding scale. Once you hit 15ish or lower to the naked eye it may very well look like wheel spinning and best to move to a traditional bulk/ cut approach. But if your higher, I'd never recommend anyone go on a "bulk" unless on gear or a muscle prodigy or something.

[zaphod23]

So I have a related questing regarding this topic. I was going to post a separate thread, but it's seems to be along the same lines here.

As I'm just starting my journey in weight lifting, I've learned a lot here regarding nutrition and the whole deficit, maint, bulk process. There's still a lot I need to get my head wrapped around, but I know enough to get started.

I have a few female friends who work out as well, and it seems like they literally eat nothing. I would be surprised if they're hitting 1000 cal per day, and according to their TDEE (based on the stats I know about them) they are in a massive deficit. But, they seem to maintain their weight. This seems to fly in the face of what I know about nutrition. What am I missing here?

[ironwill2008]

So now you're back at equilibrium. To build new tissue requires a caloric surplus. Muscle protein synthesis comes at a metabolic cost and so does extra lbm.

^^^^ This.


Considering how difficult it is for joe average to build even just a couple of pounds of muscle (based on thousands of posts all over this site from frustrated trainees) past his relatively easy noob gains, it's difficult to understand how anyone would think it can be done while in a calorie deficit.

I have a few female friends who work out as well, and it seems like they literally eat nothing. I would be surprised if they're hitting 1000 cal per day, and according to their TDEE (based on the stats I know about them) they are in a massive deficit. But, they seem to maintain their weight. This seems to fly in the face of what I know about nutrition.


What am I missing here?

Most likely, you're giving them unearned credit for them to be actually weighing/measuring/tracking all their food portions. IOW, they're just guessing, and grossly underestimating, their calorie intake.

The laws of thermodynamics can't be cheated; if your weight remains the same, you're not in a calorie deficit.

[Mr. Someday]

Deficit isn't an all or nothing proposal. It can be used in a strategy to both shed fat and gain muscle. For me, I can get leaner eating in a very slight deficit on cardio only days, but I am never in a deficit on lifting days. And even deficit may be an overstatement...I eat less on cardio only days, lower my carb intake on those days and increase my healthy fat intake. The past month I've been eating about 2400 calories on cardio days and about 3400 on lifting days and keeping a very rigid cardio and lifting schedule. I've tightened up considerably and am down about 10 pounds, yet appear bigger. Strength definitely hasn't gone down whatsoever. I have used this type of cycling for years and as long as I'm feeding myself good quality foods, its always worked for me. It certainly isn't the fastest way to shed fat, but it is the most effective I have found seeing as my primary goal is to stay big/get bigger but at that same time shed some of that bodyfat that starts to accumulate when I am not doing enough to keep my metabolism stoked. Hell....I recall back when I was DC'ing eating in a heavy surplus almost daily yet I got significantly leaner and bigger...it just took me a good year to do! lol I think too many people are looking for that2 week magical transformation....I know for me I haven't found it. I'll see if I can't dig up that old thread cuz I think it had visual proof as well.


Went back and found the old thread....God I hate looking at "before" photos!! lol If I could stay disciplined ALL the time then there would never be any "before" photos!!!

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=940182