Skinny Fat- Cut/Bulk Confusion

[jslivs24]

I recommend to stop thinking about losing fat. You need to find out how many calories you need to eat to make consistent progress on your lifts.

I highly doubt you can do that on 1600 calories. I wouldn't try to lose any weight in your situation. Maintenance would be fine, or slightly above maintenance. Whatever works for you.

Okay, ill work my way back to maintenance level calories. Ill focus on building muscle and forget about losing weight. Being a kid who used to be overweight his whole life I strived to lose as much body fat as I could so I kinda fear gaining the weight back. Ill just be sure to eat clean calories and focus on building strength.

[Mrpb]

Ill focus on building muscle and forget about losing weight.

No, focus on getting stronger on your routine instead. The muscle will come as a result of that.

Ill just be sure to eat clean calories and focus on building strength.

Read the stickies please. "Clean eating" isn't necessary or recommended.

[jslivs24]

No, focus on getting stronger on your routine instead. The muscle will come as a result of that.



Read the stickies please. "Clean eating" isn't necessary or recommended.

Ill take a look

[hardyboysare]

I’m 19 years old, after losing 52 pounds through exercise and nutrition I feel stuck in a skinny fat stage.

I’m 5’4” 117 pounds.

My macros currently are 118g protein, 145g carbs, 45g fat. Goal calories are around 1700 but usually eat close to 1600ish.

I haven’t seen much change in my body fat levels dropping dramatically. It’s been 100 days since I started the cut.
I saw a post a long time ago saying someone with similar body fat levels should bulk and then cut later. What should I do?

Any nutritional/diet tips?

As I stated in this post:-

https://forum.bodybuilding.com/showt...hp?t=177822121

At 19 and at your weight I personally believe you are fine to aim for 2lbs a month. At your lifts number as well I believe you are still in the novice stage. As you have cut during the optimal stage of growth (other post states you having been losing weight for 3 years) and only been lifting for one year of this whilst still cutting you need to start an optimal growth stage with adequate calories for growth.

2lb a month is a perfectly fine target IMHO. That said the overall number is not the absolute focus, your gym performance is you must get stronger and increase volume whilst ensuring you are eating enough to achieve this, short changing yourself will be counterproductive though.

[colontos]

No need to be confused, here it is: if you are skinny fat, you need to bulk and cut. The order you do it is up to you.

If you cut first, you will look like a skeleton for a while until you start bulking.

If you bulk first, you will look a little fluffy for a bit until you start cutting.

Pick whichever one of those is less objectionable to you, and do it in a consistent dedicated way. Put another way: as an intermediate step on your journey, would you rather be too skinny for a while or too fat for a while? There's your answer.

[jslivs24]

No need to be confused, here it is: if you are skinny fat, you need to bulk and cut. The order you do it is up to you.

If you cut first, you will look like a skeleton for a while until you start bulking.

If you bulk first, you will look a little fluffy for a bit until you start cutting.

Pick whichever one of those is less objectionable to you, and do it in a consistent dedicated way. Put another way: as an intermediate step on your journey, would you rather be too skinny for a while or too fat for a while? There's your answer.

Thats what I originally thought when I first started. Ive been feeling like a skeleton so I guess I'm getting to that stage.

[rexfrommex]

Thats what I originally thought when I first started. Ive been feeling like a skeleton so I guess I'm getting to that stage.

dude just bulk up you don't want to lose any gains to the gains goblin because you aren't in a surplus. you can still make strength gains cutting but it is optimal to bulk more and then just cut later

[Mrpb]

At 19 and at your weight I personally believe you are fine to aim for 2lbs a month.

Food for thought: a study that compared bulking rates found that people who bulked at 0.4% body weight per week gained about 5 times more fat than people who bulked at 0.2% per week. There was no significant difference in LBM gains.

For someone weighing 117 pounds 0.2% per week equals about 1 pound per month. 0.4% equals 2 pounds per month.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full...91.2011.643923

[hardyboysare]

Food for thought: a study that compared bulking rates found that people who bulked at 0.4% body weight per week gained about 5 times more fat than people who bulked at 0.2% per week. There was no significant difference in LBM gains.

For someone weighing 117 pounds 0.2% per week equals about 1 pound per month. 0.4% equals 2 pounds per month.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full...91.2011.643923

Wasn't that done on elite athletes? They would be closer to genetic potential so not sure how much that is related to this scenario. And was questioned in both the study itself and in this study when looking at novice bodybuilders:-

The researchers concluded that a 200–300 kcal per day surplus in highly trained athletes might be more appropriate than 500 kcal to minimize the risk of unnecessary increases in body fat. Untrained subjects, further from their genetic ceiling of muscle mass, may be able to gain muscle at a faster rate compared to trained individuals.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6680710/

Anyway I based my belief on the idea due to a few factors:-

1. It has been suggested that the average novice can cause muscle growth of around 1-1.5% of body weight a month which this would work out to be around 1.17lb to 1.75lbs.

https://rippedbody.com/how-to-bulk/

2. They have been cutting during puberty therefore less optimal growth during a key stage therefore less 'newbie gains'.

3. They have been training for one year again on a cut which is unlikely (although scientifically backed fully yet) to cause the best condition of muscle gains.

https://www.researchgate.net/publica...tance_training - newbies gained 3kg in 8 weeks with nearly 100% being lean mass.

4. I am not a believer in being able to build just muscle without fat gains (especially for beginners starting a caloric surplus due to the difficulty maintain such a strict adherence), you will gain fat when you bulk IMO in order to build optimal condition. This to be when a caloric surplus of adequate size for growth.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5786199/

[Mrpb]

Wasn't that done on elite athletes? They would be closer to genetic potential so not sure how much that is related to this scenario.

No, they were athletes in other sports. OP is actually stronger than them.

His calculated 1 rm squat is about 1.83x bw. His 1 rm bench is about 1.16x bw.

If you want to call that 'untrained' it's up to you of course. But scientists like Brad Schoenfeld, Stu Philips or Eric Helms wouldn't do that.

https://rippedbody.com/how-to-bulk/

That's not a scientific source, it's just a bunch of beliefs from someone working in the fitness industry.

Not that I would think that Andy Morgan would qualify the OP as a newbie btw, but even if he would it would irrelevant to me.

4. I am not a believer in being able to build just muscle without fat gains

Well there are dozens of studies showing that in fact it is possible. I usually go with the data instead of beliefs but that's just me.

(especially for beginners starting a caloric surplus..

It's actually especially possible for beginners. This is what the studies show. See below.

to the difficulty maintain such a strict adherence),

This sounds plausible at first sight, but the Garthe study I referred to actually showed that the group that didn't count calories at all had no problem gaining LBM. And there are dozens of studies where the participants didn't track their calories yet they had no problem gaining muscle. So the idea that one must adhere to a strict diet to gain muscle is another one that's not supported by the preponderance of scientific data.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5786199/

Better to look at actual data instead of narrative reviews or blogs.

Good study in beginners, both groups gaining LBM and losing fat: https://www.researchgate.net/profile...d-strength.pdf

And that's just one study, there are many more.

But what it comes down to: telling someone like OP (117 pounds) to gain weight at 2 pounds per month is a (relatively) aggressive bulk for someone his weight. Good scientific data shows that he will gain 5 (!) times as much fat compared to if he'd only gain about 1 pound per month.

With his genetics for fat storage, I expect the extra fat gains to go straight to his abdominal section (see picture 2).

Another consideration, although not a scientific source I do consider it to be true: Lyle McDonald: "The bottom line is that, in dieted down individuals, the body is primed to gain body fat at the expense of LBM to replenish what was lost during the diet".

[hardyboysare]

No, they were athletes in other sports. OP is actually stronger than them.

His calculated 1 rm squat is about 1.83x bw. His 1 rm bench is about 1.16x bw.

If you want to call that 'untrained' it's up to you of course. But scientists like Brad Schoenfeld, Stu Philips or Eric Helms wouldn't do that.


That's not a scientific source, it's just a bunch of beliefs from someone working in the fitness industry.

Not that I would think that Andy Morgan would qualify the OP as a newbie btw, but even if he would it would irrelevant to me.


Well there are dozens of studies showing that in fact it is possible. I usually go with the data instead of beliefs but that's just me.


It's actually especially possible for beginners. This is what the studies show. See below.


This sounds plausible at first sight, but the Garthe study I referred to actually showed that the group that didn't count calories at all had no problem gaining LBM. And there are dozens of studies where the participants didn't track their calories yet they had no problem gaining muscle. So the idea that one must adhere to a strict diet to gain muscle is another one that's not supported by the preponderance of scientific data.



Better to look at actual data instead of narrative reviews or blogs.

Good study in beginners, both groups gaining LBM and losing fat: https://www.researchgate.net/profile...d-strength.pdf

And that's just one study, there are many more.

But what it comes down to: telling someone like OP (117 pounds) to gain weight at 2 pounds per month is a (relatively) aggressive bulk for someone his weight. Good scientific data shows that he will gain 5 (!) times as much fat compared to if he'd only gain about 1 pound per month.

With his genetics for fat storage, I expect the extra fat gains to go straight to his abdominal section (see picture 2).

Another consideration, although not a scientific source I do consider it to be true: Lyle McDonald: "The bottom line is that, in dieted down individuals, the body is primed to gain body fat at the expense of LBM to replenish what was lost during the diet".

Lets agree to disagree on this one we are discussing a difference of 1lb a month if that. I could discuss more but I really not into this one I am afraid, if it made significant help for the OP I would consider but it really it will make no overall difference if he gains 6-12lbs in the next 6 months he will still be lean.

So in your opinion when does the amount change based on bw? Anyone sub 150lbs only gain a 1lb for example?

I understand the more complexity then simple weight but based on the limit advice usually on offer for these posts a set point would be advantageous.

[Mrpb]

Gaining 1 pound per month or 2 pounds per month extended for a year means gaining 12 pounds or gaining 24 pounds. Going by the only study that looked at it applied to OP would mean similar LBM gains while the latter would lead to way more fat gains.

So in your opinion when does the amount change based on bw? Anyone sub 150lbs only gain a 1lb for example?

The way I see it the recommended weight gain based on science for people not new to lifting (like OP) is 0.2% per week. Or about 0.8-0.9% per month. More advanced lifters may have to go slower.

I'm happy to change my recommendation when I see compelling evidence. The Helms paper you quoted (good paper btw) references the same Garthe study I referenced.

When the new study from Helms and Krieger comes out we'll have more useful data.

[AdamWW]

Mrpb....

Why is my replying to and quoting your input so irritating, but you’re willing to go back and forth with hardyboy without any negativity?

You don’t enjoy ‘debating your advice’, but that is precisely what is happening now.

I seriously don’t get this double standard.

Not that it matters, I’m just saying... consistency dude....

I thought this thread was just to ‘help OP’ and not exchange information or thoughts between forum members... per your own statements.

[jslivs24]

Mrpb....

Why is my replying to and quoting your input so irritating, but you’re willing to go back and forth with hardyboy without any negativity?

You don’t enjoy ‘debating your advice’, but that is precisely what is happening now.

I seriously don’t get this double standard.

Not that it matters, I’m just saying... consistency dude....

I thought this thread was just to ‘help OP’ and not exchange information or thoughts between forum members... per your own statements.

I think that issue has more than blown over now.. These guys have been sharing information which has helped me tremendously even though it may not have been directly aimed at my situation. I enjoy hearing everyone's point of view, including yours, its all valuable in its own way.

[AdamWW]

I think that issue has more than blown over now.. These guys have been sharing information which has helped me tremendously even though it may not have been directly aimed at my situation. I enjoy hearing everyone's point of view, including yours, its all valuable in its own way.

All I'm saying is that my back-and-forth was just as valid as this recent one.

Clearly conversations/debates between members have some value despite my being targeted specifically to not do so.

You said it yourself: you enjoyed hearing my point of view, and yet I was being told to NOT comment on or quote his statements whereas now it is apparently OK. It's important to encourage helpful exchanges on here, so if I'm going to be singled-out for no reason, I think that warrants calling out.

I was able to confirm my own suspicions that you actually do have newbie gains in you, despite mrpb's assumptions that you had been lifting properly and consistently while you lost weight... a perfect example of why my comments were helpful.

Cheers.

[hardyboysare]

An interesting exercise I thought I would try just for my personal info. I know the website is not that reliable but I decided to compare mine and the OP's lifts to see what difference existed between our level of strength vs body weight with estimated 1rm.

https://symmetricstrength.com/

The OP came out at 66.4 and mine at 72.2 (again I know a vast range of error rating exists but still was interesting). The OP has been weight training for one year and I have been weight training around 10-12 years.

Mine:- 1.47x BW (1rm 275lbs) OP:- 1.14x BW Bench (1rm 133.6lb est)
Mine:- 1.53x BW (1rm 286lbs) OP:- 1.84x BW Squat (1rm 215lb est)
Mine:- 2.24x BW (1rm 420lbs) OP:- 1.84x BW Deadlift (1rm 215lbs est)
Mine:- BW:- 190lbs OP:- BW 117lbs

Who knew we are both classed as intermediates according to our strength level vs body weight. I guess I have been doing something wrong for quite a while.

https://strengthlevel.com/

[rexfrommex]

Food for thought: a study that compared bulking rates found that people who bulked at 0.4% body weight per week gained about 5 times more fat than people who bulked at 0.2% per week. There was no significant difference in LBM gains.

For someone weighing 117 pounds 0.2% per week equals about 1 pound per month. 0.4% equals 2 pounds per month.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full...91.2011.643923

gtfo you gains goblin.

you are one of those people who give bad advice so that other dudes cant get gains so that other dudes wont get bigger than you. if you wanna get big you gotta eat big

[Mrpb]

Mrpb....

Why is my replying to and quoting your input so irritating, but you’re willing to go back and forth with hardyboy without any negativity?

Wow... you really don't see the differences.... There are so many.

He came into the thread trying to help the OP. You came into the thread trying to debate my advice.

The back and forth between me an Hardy happened because I questioned his advice for OP to bulk at 0.4% per week. I did so because I know it's in conflict with the existing evidence. So I say that and include the reference.

You've been questioning my advice dozens of times without having relevant references in the literature. You just question things for the sake of it, hoping to get a good explanation. That's your style of learning. I don't enjoy explaining and defending my advice to you. This is why I keep asking you: just let me give my advice to people like OP. If you must question my advice only do so if you have a compelling reason to. And keep in mind you've been ignoring my request for years.

I was able to confirm my own suspicions that you actually do have newbie gains in you, despite mrpb's assumptions that you had been lifting properly and consistently while you lost weight... a perfect example of why my comments were helpful.

Couple of errors in this post. You were wondering if he had been lifting at all. I was the one assuming he wasn't new to lifting. The information he gave actually 100% confirmed my suspicions: he's not new to lifting. What you're claiming were my assumptions are actually your assumptions about what I assumed, not something I actually assumed. What I did assume, based on his pictures, was that he's not new to lifting.

We found out his stats at 117 pounds:
Squat- 185 (4 sets of 6)
Deadlift- 185 (4 Sets of 6)
Bench- 115 (4 Sets of 6)

Newbie gains left? I personally doubt it will be a significant amount but we can never be sure. What we can be sure of: the only relevant study so far, in people slightly weaker than OP, showed way better results while gaining 0.2% pound per week vs. 0.4% per week. So this happens to back up my advice but only by a 100%.

Another error in your post: the post from you that brought up the useful information up was post #19, the post you created after I urged you to help the OP. It weren't the posts in which you try to debate my advice without any reference.

So something to keep in mind for next time: I will probably always get annoyed when you're not trying to help the OP but instead try to debate my advice without any references. My goal is to help people. Not be part of an endless debating club online.

A quick guide:

"You can shock your body into gaining more muscle by unexpectedly adding dextrose to your whey shake"

"A 117 pound male that isn't new to lifting will gain fat quickly if he bulks at 0.4% per week"

One of these statements should to be called out, one shouldn't be. But if you haven't read the literature you might not know which is which.

[Mrpb]

gtfo you gains goblin.

you are one of those people who give bad advice so that other dudes cant get gains so that other dudes wont get bigger than you. if you wanna get big you gotta eat big

Your ideas are understandable. But the science is quite clear: if you have some lifting experience like OP you're probably better off bulking at 0.2% per week vs. 0.4% per week.

At 0.4% you'd be gaining about 5 times more fat. That's a lot. Only exception would be if you're genetically blessed, but it's unlikely that applies to OP in regards to muscle gain.

An interesting exercise I thought I would try just for my personal info. I know the website is not that reliable but I decided to compare mine and the OP's lifts to see what difference existed between our level of strength vs body weight with estimated 1rm.

https://symmetricstrength.com/

The OP came out at 66.4 and mine at 72.2 (again I know a vast range of error rating exists but still was interesting). The OP has been weight training for one year and I have been weight training around 10-12 years.

Mine:- 1.47x BW (1rm 275lbs) OP:- 1.14x BW Bench (1rm 133.6lb est)
Mine:- 1.53x BW (1rm 286lbs) OP:- 1.84x BW Squat (1rm 215lb est)
Mine:- 2.24x BW (1rm 420lbs) OP:- 1.84x BW Deadlift (1rm 215lbs est)
Mine:- BW:- 190lbs OP:- BW 117lbs

Who knew we are both classed as intermediates according to our strength level vs body weight. I guess I have been doing something wrong for quite a while.

https://strengthlevel.com/

What makes his stats even more impressive is that he says he's able to maintain his performance over 4 sets of 6. This would probably mean he could do more on the first set if he tried to max out.

Anyway, you probably agree he doesn't qualify as untrained anymore.

Eric Helms recommends intermediates should gain 0.5% to 1.0% per month. Those numbers applied to OP would mean about 0.6 to 1.2 pounds per month.

[AdamWW]

Wow... you really don't see the differences.... There are so many.

He came into the thread trying to help the OP. You came into the thread trying to debate my advice.

The back and forth between me an Hardy happened because I questioned his advice for OP to bulk at 0.4% per week

You've been questioning my advice dozens of times without having relevant references in the literature. You just question things for the sake of it, hoping to get a good explanation. That's your style of learning. I don't enjoy explaining and defending my advice to you

Might wanna check your evidence here

See my first post, #13, where all I did was seek understanding of your input. I wasn’t questioning it, I was asking for information... there’s a difference. I was 100% intent on helping the OP, I didn't just ask arbitrarily or just to stir a debate. I very calmly asked for information to make sure i grasped your view.... precisely what you’re doing with hardy.

My future comments were all elaborating on why I asked for clarity and explaining my skepticism of you saying he’d look ‘pregnant’ if he gained 6 pounds in 3 months... which I still find ridiculous. I don't care if he's 5-4, someone at 5-4 gaining 6 pounds even if it were 100% to his upper body would not resemble someone who is 6 months pregnant especially when he weighs 117lb. That's moving from BMI 20 to BMI 21.

And you’re wrong about me thinking he ‘never lifted’. Check post 15 where I clearly said ‘hasn’t been lifting OR lifting very poorly’. It’s possible for someone to follow a crap routine and never exhaust their newb gains, especially after only 100 days.

You chose to get surly for no good reason, because you’re hypersensitive to me simply typing on a keyboard as if thread real estate is in short supply. More importantly, OP said he liked hearing my input, so clearly I fulfilled the goal of ‘helping OP’ which you supposedly hold paramount to any other form of discussion in here.

How about this: given I have freedom of speech and all I did was ask questions and in an effort to give my opinion and advice (which is generally what forums are for), you can simply ignore me instead of engaging. Seems like that would solve the problem, no?

Or, feel free to try and intimidate me out of doing precisely what everyone else is doing. I don’t actually care, because it’s just not that big of a deal.

[Mrpb]

Adam, you keep making erroneous interpretations. This is exactly why I don't want to be in these debates with you and why I keep requesting you to let me give my advice and just focus on giving your own advice, instead of starting up all these tedious debates.

Since you've already started up this debate I'll give you more examples of where you're wrong. And I'm sure you'll deny it but these are all literal quotes.

What I actually said: "You were wondering if he had been lifting at all."

Your reply (which is a misinterpretation of what I actually said): "And you’re wrong about me thinking he ‘never lifted’."

What you actually wrote: "I'm not so sure... it seems like in whatever time he's been 'exercising' he either hasn't been lifting or lifting very poorly."

So this is just a fact: you were wondering if he had been lifting at all. Yes you also wondered about another possibility but that doesn't change the fact that you were wondering if he had been lifting at all.

In b4 more misinterpretations and straw men.

OK I'll point out on more:

his upper body would not resemble someone who is 6 months pregnant

I didn't say 6 months. You just added that in there. And obviously looking pregnant was written tongue in cheek but I guess not everyone picks that up. And it's actually not that far fetched.

Imagine adding say 2-3 pounds of fat on this abdominal section, the place where he seems to store most of his fat.



Yeah he'll look like a couple of months pregnant.





I'll let you decide how many months. You keep bringing up the BMI argument but that's largely irrelevant. Two people can look completely different at a BMI of 21.

More importantly, OP said he liked hearing my input, so clearly I fulfilled the goal of ‘helping OP’ which you supposedly hold paramount to any other form of discussion in here.

You can also give your input by simply addressing him and giving your input.

Or you can continue to start up tedious debates with people that have already expressed that they have no desire to be in debates with you.

I'll let you decide what will be a more effective way of communicating.

@jslivs24 let me know if you have any problem with your picture being here. I'll of course remove it if you want me to.

[jslivs24]

@jslivs24 let me know if you have any problem with your picture being here. I'll of course remove it if you want me to.

Haha yeah I don’t care, If they wanna look at pictures of my stomach, good for them.

[AdamWW]

Or you can continue to start up tedious debates with people that have already expressed that they have no desire to be in debates with you.

Doesn't want to debate...

Keeps debating...

I'm done dude... but carry on if you feel like it.

[Mrpb]

Doesn't want to debate...

I already mentioned that in the post above: since you started it and kept spreading misinterpretations, I kept replying.

And yes I don't want these debates with you. Hopefully you can keep that in mind next time you want to start debating me when I'm trying to help someone improve their body composition.