What macro do you increase first for lean mass?

[LBJK88981]

Grow faster? You should always strive to gain muscle as fast as you can.....muscle, not weight. Like I said before, you will be disappointed IF you rely on diet to accomplish that. Your answer lies in my first response.......BUT, I know I preach LBAs all day long but look at the studies on nitrogen retention........now see why hospitals use them now as their protein source?

I will contribute to this. The issue is far too complex to address with a simple answer. All variables aside, does a larger, more muscular physique require more calories than a smaller, less muscular physique to maintain? - generally yes. I agree with Phil here, however specifically with respect to one point he is making:

Lets imagine a 200lb male bodybuilder (recreational) at 10% bodyfat. let's say his maintenance calories are about 3,000 broken down into 40/40/20 macronutrient ratio's (for the sake of conversation).

Scenario 1 - this athlete is not using any anabolics or performance enhancement drugs. The calories and macronutrients that he consumes are being put to their respective physiological uses at say x% efficiency.

Scenario 2- this athlete begins taking 500mg Testosterone Cypionate per week with 4iu HGH per day. The calories and macronutrients that he consumes are now being put to their respective physiological uses at x*y % efficiency.

WHY?

-Simply put, the testosterone and Human Growth Hormone are facilitating increases in protein anabolism, decreases in protein catabolism, increases in nitrogen retention, improvements in training intensity/strength etc etc etc. All of which are causing the individuals 'maintenance' calories to be used more efficiently and thus they become more like 'muscle building' calories.

Why is the issue too complex to sugar coat? a few reasons that I'll touch on:

-When you consume larger quantities of quality food (proteins, complex carbohydrates, healthy fats), you increase the thermic load of your food intake, thus "speeding up" your metabolism to a certain degree. There is of course a point of diminishing returns here.

There is ever only a SLIGHT surplus in raw materials necessary to build lean muscle mass. I do not even like to use the word surplus because in actuality any true surplus over what is needed to grow lean muscle WILL be stored as body-fat or excreted as waste (likely a higher % toward the former option).

The best summarizing advice in my opinion is to achieve the leanest physique possible while maintaining your current LBM (most people will probably find that as they get leaner and learn their body more, thus improving their nutrition, they may gain a few lbs of LBM). Once quite lean, you will have a very good idea of where your "maintenance" calories are. Simply put them to work as efficiently as possible, and as you gain LBM you increase your "maintenance" calories. If you are 205lbs of LBM and you grow to 210lbs LBM you will likely be consuming some additional calories however they never really exceed your "maintenance" calories for that given weight target as (unless gifted with a unique metabolism) any significant surplus will likely be stored as fat.

-Alex

 

[dr intensity]

hi phil,
just trying to clarify what i have understood from your posts in the thread...

for example HYPOTHETICALLY a person 150 pounds ht 5 feet 8 inches wants to be 200lbs ... trains naturally for 3 years came upto 180 pounds and he ate
protien = target body wt x 1.5 = 200 x 1.5 = 300 grams = 1200 calories
carbs = same as protien = 300 grams = 1200 calories
Fats = 120grams = 120 x 9 = 1080 calories

total calories = 3500 cal/day every day

now after 3 years of training naturally he has plateaued
plateau = not being able to improve his lifting poundages so the muscle have no reason to adapt and become bigger....


he does two 500mg test cycle 12 weeks in the 4 rth year ( still the diet remained the same).... he reaches 200 lbs ....

now his new target is 250 lbs in the next 2 years now he reconstructs his diet...

protien = target bodywt x 2 = 500grams= 2000cal
carbs = same as protien = 500 grams= 2000cal
fats = 150 grams = 1350 cals

total of 5400cals/day..... now does a 750mg cycle (12 - 16 weeks)
reaches 215lbs

at 215 lbs does a 1000mg cycle reaches 230 pounds

at 230 lbs does a 1200mg cycle reaches 240 pound

at 240 lbs does a 1500mg cycle reaches 250 pounds

however he keeps his calories 5400/day for the whole 2 year period....

yeah while he kept on training the whole time with progressively heavier wts....

is this is how a person should approach his bodybuilding....

1. First setting up a fixed food intake.
2. constantly making small increments in the cycle dosage every next cycle.
3. constantly trying to lift heavier poundages.


wud appreciate your input phil
consider me a noob.... don know anything... so just needed to clarify a few things from the master himself
thank you

 

[LBJK88981]

I'm not Phil, however I can relate to your way of thinking. Over-all the trends you portray are accurate. Larger amounts of lean mass will require larger amounts of 'maintenance' calories which should be split up into relative macro-nutrient breakdowns that work best for you and your body. More LBM = more muscle tissue and thus more androgen receptors which necessitates a slightly higher dose of anabolics to achieve the same effect. It's hard (nearly impossible) to put exact numbers on paper but it's good to set ideals and then adjust accordingly as you actually progress to your bodyweight milestones.

Just my .02 as I tend to lay things out on paper like you have - more for a general overview of my ideal progression towards my goal.

-Alex

 

[dr intensity]

I'm not Phil, however I can relate to your way of thinking. Over-all the trends you portray are accurate. Larger amounts of lean mass will require larger amounts of 'maintenance' calories which should be split up into relative macro-nutrient breakdowns that work best for you and your body. More LBM = more muscle tissue and thus more androgen receptors which necessitates a slightly higher dose of anabolics to achieve the same effect. It's hard (nearly impossible) to put exact numbers on paper but it's good to set ideals and then adjust accordingly as you actually progress to your bodyweight milestones.

Just my .02 as I tend to lay things out on paper like you have - more for a general overview of my ideal progression towards my goal.

-Alex

you`ve made some excellent points... especially the one emphasising on increasing the efficiency of the diet with hormonal manuplition.

thanks

 

[tkav1980]

Phil for once on one point i disagree, or maybe i dont but right now it seems i do.

here's what im thinking. I followed eat when hungry, fantastic results. Kept that theory and added it to DC training, dropped the use of AAS. maintained mass for a bit then began to gain again. Much more slowly than with AAS but gained none the less. Then i decided to play with eating when hungry. I ate when hungry but ate until i was more full, stuffed would be the word. I added WPI with LBA to solid food meals. That increased over calorie and protien intake. I was still hungry again after a meal in about the same time frame as with your first plan.


Now the difference. I gained faster. I gained alittle bit of bodyfat in the first month and increased morning cardio to combat that. BF problem solved. strength still going up, but had to switch to the DC 3 way split to combat exhaustion. Super D and ScottMcD said i had to because of the weights i have been using. But as of right now im carrying more mass than with the use of AAS, but to do this it was necessary to increase my overall nutrition intake for each day.


My list of possible reasons for this is -
1. Never reached my genetic limit in the first place.
2. Change in training frequency and length of sessions is reduced dramatically resulting in less calories consumed per session.
3. i just stumbled onto a better set of macros for me.


Keep in mind im not trying to discount anything you say or your methods. Im still learning my body and im thinking i learned something new about the way it likes to function to add lean mass. However, logic would dictate that without AAS i SHOULDN'T be bigger or stronger than i was. Id love your insight on this.

 

[speed]

i do understand the quaestion, but would it still be contradicting to say just incresae one considering pro and fats should be raised together as one united in the correct percentages

 

[Dancho]

Phil for once on one point i disagree, or maybe i dont but right now it seems i do.

here's what im thinking. I followed eat when hungry, fantastic results. Kept that theory and added it to DC training, dropped the use of AAS. maintained mass for a bit then began to gain again. Much more slowly than with AAS but gained none the less. Then i decided to play with eating when hungry. I ate when hungry but ate until i was more full, stuffed would be the word. I added WPI with LBA to solid food meals. That increased over calorie and protien intake. I was still hungry again after a meal in about the same time frame as with your first plan.


Now the difference. I gained faster. I gained alittle bit of bodyfat in the first month and increased morning cardio to combat that. BF problem solved. strength still going up, but had to switch to the DC 3 way split to combat exhaustion. Super D and ScottMcD said i had to because of the weights i have been using. But as of right now im carrying more mass than with the use of AAS, but to do this it was necessary to increase my overall nutrition intake for each day.


My list of possible reasons for this is -
1. Never reached my genetic limit in the first place.
2. Change in training frequency and length of sessions is reduced dramatically resulting in less calories consumed per session.
3. i just stumbled onto a better set of macros for me.


Keep in mind im not trying to discount anything you say or your methods. Im still learning my body and im thinking i learned something new about the way it likes to function to add lean mass. However, logic would dictate that without AAS i SHOULDN'T be bigger or stronger than i was. Id love your insight on this.

you have gained mainly fat(i am sure you would disagree), this makes you a little bit stroner but not more muscular, diet down and you will see how much muscle you have... there is no way you carry more muscle naturally except if you were doing things very wrong while on.

 

[Twatta]

confused?

After reading all this, I am really confused now? I've always changed macros and cut calories/added calories to change the way I look, you guys are saying there is a much better way? Please explain?

 

[LBJK88981]

After reading all this, I am really confused now? I've always changed macros and cut calories/added calories to change the way I look, you guys are saying there is a much better way? Please explain?

Not really, just a better way of understanding why and how it is necessary to change one's diet according to LBM and LBM increases. Not understanding this logic is what causes people to over-eat, get fat and decrease LBM-gain efficiency

-Alex

 

[nickman1978]

...

 

[gmarceau]

1. If someone keeps getting stronger while dieting, are they actually building muscle or are they also becoming more capable of doing a particular movement? Is there some muscle growth, but also some coordination/skill adaptation, too?

2. How do people grow muscle when they've lost the muscle they built due to lack of training, and aren't doing anything special with their diet, yet they gain all this muscle back? Does the body use it's own fat as a calorie source?

3. I thought food was supposed to be anabolic and that cardio and carb cutoffs were there to prevent fat gain. I was under the impression that the goal was to try and work up to eating greater and greater amounts of food, especially protein, and a person would be growing at an optimal rate. Also Protein + Fat, and Protein+ Carb meals were used to further minimize fat gain.

4. How much protein does someone really need? How do people gain muscle on low protein, or less than 100 grams a day? I think this has been observed by others- I know Dan Duchaine spoke about it back in the day.

 

[Scott21]

If you notice, most of the featured members voted "I increase everything". Something to take in consideration!

 

[NRIP427]

you can't build a wall without any bricks.

i just have to disagree with what seems to be the general consensus here that throwing more gear at this will make you bigger. i have always thought of it like this:

say you are building a wall - assuming you have sturdy foundation all you really need is someone to do the work, bricks, and cement or substituted binding agent.

as the metaphor breaks down the person doing the work is the person who is gonna go lift. if no one puts the wall together it won't get built - enough said.
the bricks are the macros - more macros (bricks) the bigger the wall can get.
the cement is hormones - i don't care where they came from they just need to be there otherwise nothing will stick.

if in theory you have two piles of bricks to make two walls one one has 25% more bricks than needed while the other has 25% more cement than needed. all other things being equal i submit to you that the pile of bricks with an overabundance of bricks and an adequate amount of cement will be taller than the one with an over abundance of cement and an adequate amount of bricks.

my vote is increase everything. sorry for the long-winded post.

 

[tkav1980]

you have gained mainly fat(i am sure you would disagree), this makes you a little bit stroner but not more muscular, diet down and you will see how much muscle you have... there is no way you carry more muscle naturally except if you were doing things very wrong while on.

i completely agree with this now, when i posted it i probably would not agree.

Being back working with phil, ive learned a few new tricks.

 

[Magnolia5]

I need to hire phil....

 

[Buildinthaskinnys]

I just voted what Shelby and phil and a couple other smart dudes like Lenny voted that way when people look at who voted they will stop and say "hey, that buildin' guy must know some shit too!".

 

[bigblue2010]

Good reading here.

 

[b-boy]

well

I voted add more carbs because that is the first thing i do. I will eventually add more of everything. but when I first start out i lower protein and add more carbs, my calories will very slowly increase but not much because i have lowered protein (don't need as much protein when going high carb as carbs are protein sparring and im not taking in a huge surplus of calories). As i get further along I will start slowly adding in protein and fat and lowering carbs very very slightly (i still get my calorie increase from the higher fat and protein). I have found that this is better for me to stay a little leaner in the offseason than i have in the past. Not saying this is the best way, just saying so far this is the best way for ME

 

[Matt007]

So a few questions here:
1- as a natural (tested) athlete..how does one manipulate hormones to a meaningful degree?

2 - With the Eat only when Hungry, if you do know your base calories for the day, but only eat when hungry, do you still need to monitor getting those base calories in? I know some days I am ravenous (usually the day after heavy squats or deads) and some I could eat once only and be happy. How do I interpret all that?

Might have to restock on LBA here in Aus....

 

[thatbloke]

STEROIDS