Do we really need a calories surplus to gain muscle on High Doses of AAS

[qbkilla]

I’ve talked about this a bunch here, my apologies in advance to those who have heard this from me lol, but this thread is my jam.

Anyway, in 2017 I drastically cut down calories to around 1500ish, protein down to about 75-100gm, due to severe stomach issues. Followed a mostly ketogenic diet.

It’s 2021, so 3+ years and I’ve yet to lose an ounce of measurement size anywhere other than my waist, nor have I ever lost any strength. I’m not a bodybuilder, nor the biggest guy here by a long shot, I’m 5’7, around 165lbs , 18 inch neck, 42 chest, 28 waist (just to give you an idea... I’d say my height/size is similar to UFC fighter Sean Sherk), my waist was 32 before starting this. This isn’t exactly big obviously, but considering I’m down to like 40-80g of protein per day and still average about 1500 calories, I’d say it’s not too bad. Only on legit TRT.

The caveat? I started lifting 20 years ago, built all of my size on traditional stuff-your-face diet, and was on gear for like three years back in 2006ish. So I can only speak as someone maintaining what they already built. I do believe like the gentleman above me said, I am an anomaly and possibly hyper-responder to food? I have no cravings or hunger pangs on 1200-1500 calories, once I start going above 2000 I feel stuffed and just bloated and sick for hours on end, heart rate gets significantly elevated etc.

Not recommending it or not recommending it, I know nothing and just stumbled on this, I just know I look and feel significantly better doing this. There are a few here and there doing similar (Not sure if the link will work, not a techie guy lol)

Do you ever experience fatigue or loss of libido on such low calories for so long? The lowest I've gone long term is 2000 and it just zaps my energy. I was doing tons of cardio too

 

[FuriousAngus]

To the guys saying you need to eat big (a statement I agree with, generally); where do you draw the line? In fact, it almost feels like an empty statement the more I hear it because the word "eat big" is rarely defined. What is eating big to a guy who's 150lbs? 190lbs? 230lbs? It has to be different, no? What about a guy who's extremely active vs one who isn't? Do they eat "just as big"?

What kind of surplus are we talking about here? 300? 500? 1000? The line has to be drawn somewhere...

 

[N.L....M.....]

To the guys saying you need to eat big (a statement I agree with, generally); where do you draw the line? In fact, it almost feels like an empty statement the more I hear it because the word "eat big" is rarely defined. What is eating big to a guy who's 150lbs? 190lbs? 230lbs? It has to be different, no? What about a guy who's extremely active vs one who isn't? Do they eat "just as big"?

What kind of surplus are we talking about here? 300? 500? 1000? The line has to be drawn somewhere...

Just like anything else it’s individual. The line is drawn per person. Just like when we say train hard that’s going to be individual.
Nothing is black and white. It’s not an empty statement at all. Eating big to Ronnie Coleman is a hell of a lot different than eating big to a kid who is 150lbs. You’re not going to get a concrete answer because there isn’t one.
Common sense would tell anyone that your caloric intake needs to be different depending on goals and activity level. I’m not really sure what you’re getting at

 

[FuriousAngus]

Just like anything else it’s individual. The line is drawn per person. Just like when we say train hard that’s going to be individual.
Nothing is black and white. It’s not an empty statement at all. Eating big to Ronnie Coleman is a hell of a lot different than eating big to a kid who is 150lbs. You’re not going to get a concrete answer because there isn’t one.
Common sense would tell anyone that your caloric intake needs to be different depending on goals and activity level. I’m not really sure what you’re getting at

We all agree on this; it's simple and it makes sense. Yet we still can't define "big". 300 over maint? 500 calories? 1000 calories? 2000 calories? What is the right surplus? Every surplus will cause weight gain, yet not every surplus is ideal. I'm sure eating 10000 calories a day as a 150lb person will result in insane fat gain. Do you see why it's really not a useful statement at all? The discussion needs to shift more towards a discussion of what is the idea surplus as opposed to talking about statements that could be interpreted a different million ways.

 

[N.L....M.....]

We all agree on this; it's simple and it makes sense. Yet we still can't define "big". 300 over maint? 500 calories? 1000 calories? 2000 calories? What is the right surplus? Every surplus will cause weight gain, yet not every surplus is ideal. I'm sure eating 10000 calories a day as a 150lb person will result in insane fat gain. Do you see why it's really not a useful statement at all?

So then lifting heavy, hard or intense are useless statements as well then?

 

[FuriousAngus]

So then lifting heavy, hard or intense are useless statements as well then?

Without a definition yes (to some extent, it's not all black and white), but can talk about this in PM if you'd like to discuss it further; I'd rather focus on the topic at hand as it's a topic of actual interest and could lead to a good discussion when pointed in the right direction.

 

[BoredStiff]

Do you ever experience fatigue or loss of libido on such low calories for so long? The lowest I've gone long term is 2000 and it just zaps my energy. I was doing tons of cardio too

Nope, none at all. Actually have less fatigue.

I think nutrient density matters. I get around 8-12 servings of various vegetables per day, 3-4 servings of fermented foods, and the majority of my calories from fat (mainly tallow, butter, goose and duck fat from a local farm). I’ve tried doing a more bro-like brown rice, asparagus and chicken type diet a few times, at this low of calories, and I did not feel satiated at all.

 

[jeroendebleser]

To the guys saying you need to eat big (a statement I agree with, generally); where do you draw the line? In fact, it almost feels like an empty statement the more I hear it because the word "eat big" is rarely defined. What is eating big to a guy who's 150lbs? 190lbs? 230lbs? It has to be different, no? What about a guy who's extremely active vs one who isn't? Do they eat "just as big"?

What kind of surplus are we talking about here? 300? 500? 1000? The line has to be drawn somewhere...

You're completely right but like you yourself already said, it's going to vary widely between individuals. Personally I always push it as hard or as high as my body fat gain will allow me to.

Some body fat gain comes with the territory but you should never be fat and sloppy neither. That's where I draw the line.

So basically push the surplus up as high as your body fat allows you to.

 

[TheOtherOne55]

VERY dependant on the person.

I've found, that in my case, I need to eat PAST hunger. Eating when I'm hungry can get me decent gains and maintenance. But in order to go, you need to be a food processing machine. Every 2-3 hours, you need to be consuming SOMETHING. For some guys it's 350 cals in those 2-3 hours, for others its 1200. Either way, you need to be fueling yourself to build.
What usually happens is that you'll keep eating for weeks on end and your bf will creep up too high for you to be comfortable with. Once again, that is very individual AND it depends on what you're running. This was one of the first offseasons when I was realllly shoveling food and never got "out of control" BF % wise.

Like someone mentioned at the beginning of this thread, I have yet to meet a MASSIVE BBer who isn't eating allll the time.

 

[Orville Shreddenbacher]

I think you can definitely gain muscle without a surplus as long as you have enough body fat to use for the energy to build the muscle as long as you eat enough of the right proteins . you shouldn't be able to gain much weight , if any at all . the leaner you are the more trouble you'll have gaining and I would think that you would plateau very quickly no matter how much gear you take

 

[BoredStiff]

Another interesting thing pointing to nutrient density, and this isn’t the most perfect example, but it’s just food for thought

I worked in a very hippie commune at one point and observed how they ate. These were very eccentric types, a lot of them fasted extensively, and when they ate, it was usually broth/soup or fruits and veggies, lots of nuts, some legumes. Very low calorie but very high nutrient. We mostly worked manual labor. A lot of them walked around a lot, many of them were anti-pollution (you know the types lol) and would just bike every where.... these weren’t bodybuilders obviously, but they were significantly active/mobile through the day and I never saw anyone looking fatigued, they were all actually pretty vibrant.

On the flip side, It’s not that uncommon for me to see bodybuilders at 2200 calories walking around sulking and looking like they are about to drop dead, no libido, need naps etc. Now, there’s hard work here for sure, but a lot of these guys are doing tons of machine work and cardio on a treadmill at 3.5mph..... not exactly training for an MMA camp or triathalon. Then these guys post their diets..... Meal 1: Egg whites and oatmeal, meal 2: chicken, asparagus and a tbsp of olive oil, meal 3: tilapia and green beans, meal 4: ground turkey, a cup of spinach, 28g of almonds etc.

Again, lifestyle differences means not an even comparison, but the usual bodybuilder diets I see are so nutritiously poor - severe lack of variety, high omega-6 fats, low saturated fats, low salt/mineral intake, little to no attention to gut bacteria/micro biome - that it does make me hypothesize that nutrient density plays a big role in how much food you need to feel alert and just function properly.

This only applies to naturals or those on HRT, I think once you start upping the anabolics you’re technically not fully human any more, and bicep size/skin thinness takes precedence over health, at that point I do think you need to start eating more. But to just be the biggest, most athletic guy in just about any every-day situation? I don’t think you need all those calories.

 

[qbkilla]

Nope, none at all. Actually have less fatigue.

I think nutrient density matters. I get around 8-12 servings of various vegetables per day, 3-4 servings of fermented foods, and the majority of my calories from fat (mainly tallow, butter, goose and duck fat from a local farm). I’ve tried doing a more bro-like brown rice, asparagus and chicken type diet a few times, at this low of calories, and I did not feel satiated at all.

Can you give more examples of the foods you use? I feel like strawberry, apple, peach, asparagus, are very satiating, along with mushrooms. Chicken too, more so than fish as a protein source. I usually put down 10oz with sauerkraut added, 1.5 cup, to fill me up

 

[BoredStiff]

Can you give more examples of the foods you use? I feel like strawberry, apple, peach, asparagus, are very satiating, along with mushrooms. Chicken too, more so than fish as a protein source. I usually put down 10oz with sauerkraut added, 1.5 cup, to fill me up

Sure, it varies but I’ll just list what I ate yesterday

Morning: Drank an entire bottle of bone broth (i just toss the bones in a slow cooker, I eat those too)
Lunch: 4oz bison, mushrooms, bell peppers, squash, garlic, carrots, all cooked in 2 tbsp of duck fat.
Dinner: Beef liver and kidney (maybe like 3-4oz) and half a bag of kale cooked in 2 tbsp of tallow.

That’s pretty typical, I vary the types of vegetables and meats weekly depending on what’s available. I don’t like many fruits but I do have mangos, kiwi and berries as often as I can find them. I drink kefir milk and aged cheeses fairly regularly too.

 

[juggy38]

People can argue what surplus is needed or whatever. But it’s pretty fucking simple to “eat big” depending on your size.

do two weeks, track everything and keep calories stable. Then add 4-500 calories...asses weight change. Did the scale move? How much? Gained 1lb? Good. Hold. Next week only gain .4lbs? Add 200-300 calories. No gain at all? Add 500 calories.

progressive food week in and week out. It’s dumb when noobs say, I’m starting my bulk with 4,000 calories. Umm what’s your maintance? No idea....ok well that’s overshooting probably and your gonna get fat. But on the flip side, they start at a good maintaince, slowly increase food, but then they get to a point where 4,200-4,500 calories daily they can’t do.

then If you want to be a mammoth...like Jordan Peters, or 260+, they have no idea the struggle to eat 5,000-6000 fucking calories a day, function in life, and lift

go look at the biggest fuckers past logs on how they BUILT the size. I guarantee you it’s gonna be 4,500-5,000+ calories for LONG periods of time, with the drugs of course

 

[N.L....M.....]

Another interesting thing pointing to nutrient density, and this isn’t the most perfect example, but it’s just food for thought

I worked in a very hippie commune at one point and observed how they ate. These were very eccentric types, a lot of them fasted extensively, and when they ate, it was usually broth/soup or fruits and veggies, lots of nuts, some legumes. Very low calorie but very high nutrient. We mostly worked manual labor. A lot of them walked around a lot, many of them were anti-pollution (you know the types lol) and would just bike every where.... these weren’t bodybuilders obviously, but they were significantly active/mobile through the day and I never saw anyone looking fatigued, they were all actually pretty vibrant.

On the flip side, It’s not that uncommon for me to see bodybuilders at 2200 calories walking around sulking and looking like they are about to drop dead, no libido, need naps etc. Now, there’s hard work here for sure, but a lot of these guys are doing tons of machine work and cardio on a treadmill at 3.5mph..... not exactly training for an MMA camp or triathalon. Then these guys post their diets..... Meal 1: Egg whites and oatmeal, meal 2: chicken, asparagus and a tbsp of olive oil, meal 3: tilapia and green beans, meal 4: ground turkey, a cup of spinach, 28g of almonds etc.

Again, lifestyle differences means not an even comparison, but the usual bodybuilder diets I see are so nutritiously poor - severe lack of variety, high omega-6 fats, low saturated fats, low salt/mineral intake, little to no attention to gut bacteria/micro biome - that it does make me hypothesize that nutrient density plays a big role in how much food you need to feel alert and just function properly.

This only applies to naturals or those on HRT, I think once you start upping the anabolics you’re technically not fully human any more, and bicep size/skin thinness takes precedence over health, at that point I do think you need to start eating more. But to just be the biggest, most athletic guy in just about any every-day situation? I don’t think you need all those calories.

Because those hippies lacked any significant amount of muscle and also manual labor is a different stress on the body metabolically than actually lifting weights and training. The human body doesn’t want to be big and muscular for the most part. You said you’re 156lbs it’s because you don’t eat enough to gain muscle.

 

[juggy38]

I guess that was a really long winded post of me saying “eating Big” is relative to size and activity level”

just think if you did one year of slowly upping calories progressively that you always gained at least .5-.7lbs of weight per week for a whole year. That’s 25-35lbs. If your 6ft or under, that’s a drastic change in appearance

obviously that is hypothetical, as everyone will need deloads, time off, and a mental break.

just food for thought. Hehe

 

[BoredStiff]

Because those hippies lacked any significant amount of muscle and also manual labor is a different stress on the body metabolically than actually lifting weights and training. The human body doesn’t want to be big and muscular for the most part. You said you’re 156lbs it’s because you don’t eat enough to gain muscle.

1. I’ve made it very clear that if you are trying to be a national level bodybuilder, that is a different ball-game and I do think you have to eat more.

2. I agree with you, I AM smaller than you at 165-170 (not 156). But I do have to state, if you think that someone who isn’t bodybuilding-obsessed sees a guy nicknamed, “the muscle shark” (Sean Sherk), at 5’6 155lbs and they think “he’s so small, he needs to eat more”, if you think someone sees a guy like Yoel Romero at 5’10 185lbs and thinks “gosh, his calves are really lagging and he needs bigger biceps”..... I can assure you, this is not how people think and you are viewing the world from a very narrow perspective.

3. I’m not stopping you from eating how you like, I’m just saying if I eat the way you do, I end up with a bigger waist, a lot more gas, worse bloodwork and shit-cardio, with no noticeable strength or size increase.... so I have no reason to do so. If it works for you, that’s awesome, I’m envious that you have way more fun cheat meals than me to be honest, we are just having a conversation and sharing experiences.

 

[TheOtherOne55]

Nutrient density does matter. I 100% agree.
But there is a huge difference between that hippie commune vs BBers.
I'm the first one to admit that eating as a BBer is a function of fuel and being very precise to create a look.
Versus a regular athlete of some sort, they are eating for fuel but its still verryyy different.
Versus a healthy active person, probably eats much more for enjoyment.
The further you go into the "fuel" spectrum, the less the enjoyment it seems like.
I feel like PLers have it the best. Progressive lifting and just loving training AND the ability to eat for fuel AND enjoyment.

The older I get the more i realize just how different being a BBer is. I can't just sprint down the street lol
I am NOT an athlete anymore. If I tried that, I would tear something like Brad Rowe did trying to touch the rim of a bball hoop. So I'm HIGHLY specialized in my training compared to an athlete or some random dude. And then my diet is just _____ + ______. There is little variation, even in the offseason to competition dieting, its just the volume lol

 

[N.L....M.....]

1. I’ve made it very clear that if you are trying to be a national level bodybuilder, that is a different ball-game and I do think you have to eat more.

2. I agree with you, I AM smaller than you at 165-170 (not 156). But I do have to state, if you think that someone who isn’t bodybuilding-obsessed sees a guy nicknamed, “the muscle shark” (Sean Sherk), at 5’6 155lbs and they think “he’s so small, he needs to eat more”, if you think someone sees a guy like Yoel Romero at 5’10 185lbs and thinks “gosh, his calves are really lagging and he needs bigger biceps”..... I can assure you, this is not how people think and you are viewing the world from a very narrow perspective.

3. I’m not stopping you from eating how you like, I’m just saying if I eat the way you do, I end up with a bigger waist, a lot more gas, worse bloodwork and shit-cardio, with no noticeable strength or size increase.... so I have no reason to do so. If it works for you, that’s awesome, I’m envious that you have way more fun cheat meals than me to be honest, we are just having a conversation and sharing experiences.

Out of curiosity how do I eat exactly? Who said anything about cheat meals? What are you talking about? I’m not stopping you from eating how you like either. I said it’s individual I’m also saying in order to grow you have to be in a surplus. You’re giving anecdotes about hippy communes which serves absolutely no relevance here. You’re also confused because no one can give you a solid number on what eat big aka a surplus in order to grow is. No grown man is going to grow on 1600 calories. You’re also confused by someone with appreciable muscle mass needing more calories to maintain than a skinny fat vegan hippy.
Maybe you need your hormones checked idk. I never said get fat did I? I never said stuff your face on pizza and ice cream. But an objective fact is the body can’t make something from nothing. Literally in order to grow a person has to eat above maintenance.
You’re all over the place trying to make points or refute things that have no relevance here on a bodybuilding forum or never said in the first place.
Honestly you’ve added nothing of value at all here. There’s another poster you remind me of.

 

[Dugbet]

Another interesting thing pointing to nutrient density, and this isn’t the most perfect example, but it’s just food for thought

I worked in a very hippie commune at one point and observed how they ate. These were very eccentric types, a lot of them fasted extensively, and when they ate, it was usually broth/soup or fruits and veggies, lots of nuts, some legumes. Very low calorie but very high nutrient. We mostly worked manual labor. A lot of them walked around a lot, many of them were anti-pollution (you know the types lol) and would just bike every where.... these weren’t bodybuilders obviously, but they were significantly active/mobile through the day and I never saw anyone looking fatigued, they were all actually pretty vibrant.

A fairly simple explanation, those people in the commune did not have extreme stress or self-demands on themselves. Bodybuilders live very active lives and are slaves of the hour to eat, social networks, contracts, criticism etc ...