Kurt havens: This PED bodybuilding knowledge is wrong (video)

[bjjgear]

Yet to listen but I imagine what he’s saying (he spoke about it on another podcast with vigorous Steve and John Jewett I think) is that the amount of calories above surplus to grow maximally can be a lot less than people may think and the latest studies indicate it’s possible to add muscle upto a 500 calorie deficit.

I believe Justin Harris has said similar in regards to protein consumption

That's really interesting. Thanks for sharing

 

[Big Dave Smith]

Yet to listen but I imagine what he’s saying (he spoke about it on another podcast with vigorous Steve and John Jewett I think) is that the amount of calories above surplus to grow maximally can be a lot less than people may think and the latest studies indicate it’s possible to add muscle upto a 500 calorie deficit.

I believe Justin Harris has said similar in regards to protein consumption

This is the whole point. Just saw the same JJ thing too.

Honestly, I keep growing as I get older, I eat less food, but I’ve hand tracked every meal for the last few years.

In the past, I never had an actual accounting of anything. Offseason, more food was better. But I got soft and didn’t gain muscle any faster than now. Precontest I tracked, but almost had to start at a random point and track down.

It doesn’t mean eat less, it just means “find out what’s necessary and titrate up from there”.

 

[hawkmoon]

I dislike this man as most of you know, but I do like Lyle and how he tries to speak with people - always very humble and genuinely curious.
I'll give it a listen and share my impressions later as objectively as possible.

 

[dantes]

I'll never listen to it to see what type of nuance is there in whatever claim it is, but try growing without steroids. It will work. Try growing without training. It will work. Now try growing without food.

Maybe I am dumb but can you explain how you can grow without any training stimulus?

 

[hawkmoon]

I dislike this man as most of you know, but I do like Lyle and how he tries to speak with people - always very humble and genuinely curious.
I'll give it a listen and share my impressions later as objectively as possible.

I think Kurt was more measured this time, possibly in part due to Lyle’s mannerisms.

Funny enough (and this is admittedly a bit trite), I think not seeing Kurt’s eyes because of his hat actually helped. When he makes bold statements, he often has a look in his eye that combined with his tone and clipped manner makes him seem like he’s daring you to disagree with him. This time, he came across as a bit less insistently authoritative. Overall, I found the interview decent.

Of course, he still had some classic Kurt zingers. As @luki7788 mentioned, there was the “200 clients” remark, the “we know 6 mg GH causes hyperplasia” line, and a few others that create incredulity.
I continue to disagree with him on GH administration as well as insulin use.

 

[Flocci]

training Dorian-style… one set to failure with intensifiers. And the last decade has pretty much just felt like a holding pattern for me, competing at the same weight, but a little leaner each time. I would challenge anyone to train or eat or utilize supplementation more consistently than I do. I can say, without any ego, that I am doing all of the things. That should have resulted in some additional muscular growth at this point. Even with the worst genetics in the world, Training ones balls off, should not simply result in a continuation of the status quo. I think that I might be one of those people that would benefit from additional volume, so I’m going to use the reverse of this “diagnostic” to determine if I’m being too aggressive with my increasing volume.

ive been there, doing the HIT style training, trying to make it work for me but i just end up out taxing my CNS and the muscles miss out on a lot of potential stimulus, as i have now seen once i pulled back a bit on the effort on each set. I recently switched to keeping 1 rep in reserve on most things until the last workset, and im seeing some of the best progress ive ever had without dragging my ass around from systemic fatigue all day lol.

Its kind of a hit to the ego that wants to go hard and kill itself every workset, but you have to look at thing objectively and do whats best for your situation if you want to get anywhere. Its not just therapy Its worth it when you see the spike in progress, the results and you end up feeling better physically and mentally. Im also able to work out more which is great because i love being in the gym doing the work.

 

[Flocci]

ive been there, doing the HIT style training, trying to make it work for me but i just end up out taxing my CNS and the muscles miss out on a lot of potential stimulus, as i have now seen once i pulled back a bit on the effort on each set. I recently switched to keeping 1 rep in reserve on most things until the last workset, and im seeing some of the best progress ive ever had without dragging my ass around from systemic fatigue all day lol.

Its kind of a hit to the ego that wants to go hard and kill itself every workset, but you have to look at thing objectively and do whats best for your situation if you want to get anywhere. Its not just therapy Its worth it when you see the spike in progress, the results and you end up feeling better physically and mentally. Im also able to work out more which is great because i love being in the gym doing the work.

Its a bit frustrating seeing all the meatheads yelling on about everyone training like pussies, that you arent pushing hard enough, you cant train too hard, when every time youve done that youve regressed and stalled no matter what frequency, volume and exercise selection you use with enough calories, sleep and supplements. Different strokes for different folks.. not everyone is made to be a bodybuilder haha

 

[Aikman56]

Yet to listen but I imagine what he’s saying (he spoke about it on another podcast with vigorous Steve and John Jewett I think) is that the amount of calories above surplus to grow maximally can be a lot less than people may think and the latest studies indicate it’s possible to add muscle upto a 500 calorie deficit.

I believe Justin Harris has said similar in regards to protein consumption

That’s true about protein, just an advocates, pushing carbohydrates like crazy. His goal is to get the body burning as many calories as possible while staying late… He definitely is not a “you can limit your calories to an 500-ish surplus and reach your potential“ guy.

He’s the 180° opposite of that.

 

[Oakley6575]

That’s true about protein, just an advocates, pushing carbohydrates like crazy. His goal is to get the body burning as many calories as possible while staying late… He definitely is not a “you can limit your calories to an 500-ish surplus and reach your potential“ guy.

He’s the 180° opposite of that.

This was my experience with him too.

 

[bjjgear]

Maybe I am dumb but can you explain how you can grow without any training stimulus?

I admit it was a pedantic post, but you can grow fat by eating food and you can put on muscle by blasting some test - both without any training. I was just pointing out that you literally can grow without training or drugs, but I have doubts you can grow either fat or muscle by not eating food. Some guys have made the point you can grow in a deficit but my pedantic point is you will shrink quickly with zero food, which is not the case with zero training and zero drugs.

 

[Flocci]

That’s true about protein, just an advocates, pushing carbohydrates like crazy. His goal is to get the body burning as many calories as possible while staying late… He definitely is not a “you can limit your calories to an 500-ish surplus and reach your potential“ guy.

He’s the 180° opposite of that.

what do you mean exactly?

 

[alfresco]

Maybe I am dumb but can you explain how you can grow without any training stimulus?

Think puberty.

 

[luki7788]

I agree that you can build muscle while in a calorie deficit. Of course, it’s not the best way to build muscle, but if you are using anabolics, it is definitely possible. And it happens very often. So with many things Kurt says I don’t agree, but on this one I do. However, is it optimal? No, it’s not optimal, because it’s not the fastest way to build muscle. You will never be really huge if you use this method. But I think you can look decent. Of course, it depends on what “decent” means to you. But you will not be a heavy bodybuilder or super heavyweight doing it this way.

 

[alfresco]

I agree that you can build muscle while in a calorie deficit. Of course, it’s not the best way to build muscle, but if you are using anabolics, it is definitely possible. And it happens very often. So with many things Kurt says I don’t agree, but on this one I do. However, is it optimal? No, it’s not optimal, because it’s not the fastest way to build muscle. You will never be really huge if you use this method. But I think you can look decent. Of course, it depends on what “decent” means to you. But you will not be a heavy bodybuilder or super heavyweight doing it this way.

Finally . . . , tx.

 

[Big Dave Smith]

I agree that you can build muscle while in a calorie deficit. Of course, it’s not the best way to build muscle, but if you are using anabolics, it is definitely possible. And it happens very often. So with many things Kurt says I don’t agree, but on this one I do. However, is it optimal? No, it’s not optimal, because it’s not the fastest way to build muscle. You will never be really huge if you use this method. But I think you can look decent. Of course, it depends on what “decent” means to you. But you will not be a heavy bodybuilder or super heavyweight doing it this way.

But... everything is within context.

It seems as if people are using an extreme stance on pushing food and they're comparing it to those who eat closer to baseline. The extreme examples of people gaining more muscle by pushing food are likely guys who really have their shit together and are living a 365 day a year bodybuilding lifestyle.

What gets measured gets improved. This is the case for diet, training, and drugs.

Also, the law of diminishing returns.

Most bodybuilders who got huge by pushing food and getting soft were also very accountable at the beginning of their prep phases, giving themselves plenty of time to trickle off body fat to preserve their new muscle. It's likely that if they slowly pushed food, accounted for their macros, and didn't get as fat, they would have likely been just as muscular and needed less time to diet into a show. It's more of a judgment call as to what your realistic baseline is (what holds your weight steady), and the decisions you make on how many additional calories and what macros are needed to progress. Make the changes, see how far you get, make more changes, etc. Ultimately, they will require more calories over time and WIND UP pushing food. THAT'S what we should be recognizing.

So the entire conversation and its context rests upon how well you make decisions. It's not about hardcore eating or shoveling food down. It's about your overall strategy, the week to week/month to month decisions.

So yeah, if your baseline calorie needs are 3000, and you spend your off-season eating 3300-3400 calories, you're not going to grow muscle. But if you turn 3400 into 3600, 3600 into 3800, 3800 into 4000 (and beyond)... all while trying to stay on the leaner side (never losing sight of your abs), you'll absolutely start growing accordingly... and you won't have to spend the first 6-8 weeks of a dieting phase cleaning up a mess.

I made the mistake of pushing food too far back in the DC Training days. I got strong and I got fat. At 40 going on 41, with a more calculated approach, I can still gain muscle at a similar rate. It's not genetics. It's not more drugs. It's just accounting for everything at all times.

 

[Flocci]

I agree that you can build muscle while in a calorie deficit. Of course, it’s not the best way to build muscle, but if you are using anabolics, it is definitely possible. And it happens very often. So with many things Kurt says I don’t agree, but on this one I do. However, is it optimal? No, it’s not optimal, because it’s not the fastest way to build muscle. You will never be really huge if you use this method. But I think you can look decent. Of course, it depends on what “decent” means to you. But you will not be a heavy bodybuilder or super heavyweight doing it this way.

what in your opinion is the amount of surplus one consistently need to maximize muscle gain during a gaining phase of several months? you seem to be doing it well with your clients in that regard, keeping them in good condition while growing.

you hear coaches like kuba cielen and so on suggesting to gain 1lbs a week during growing phases, to me that sounds like a lot of unnecessary fat gain. You dont realistically put on that much muscle unless you are a beginner or new to AAS or coming back from a layoff.

 

[luki7788]

But... everything is within context.

It seems as if people are using an extreme stance on pushing food and they're comparing it to those who eat closer to baseline. The extreme examples of people gaining more muscle by pushing food are likely guys who really have their shit together and are living a 365 day a year bodybuilding lifestyle.

What gets measured gets improved. This is the case for diet, training, and drugs.

Also, the law of diminishing returns.

Most bodybuilders who got huge by pushing food and getting soft were also very accountable at the beginning of their prep phases, giving themselves plenty of time to trickle off body fat to preserve their new muscle. It's likely that if they slowly pushed food, accounted for their macros, and didn't get as fat, they would have likely been just as muscular and needed less time to diet into a show. It's more of a judgment call as to what your realistic baseline is (what holds your weight steady), and the decisions you make on how many additional calories and what macros are needed to progress. Make the changes, see how far you get, make more changes, etc. Ultimately, they will require more calories over time and WIND UP pushing food. THAT'S what we should be recognizing.

So the entire conversation and its context rests upon how well you make decisions. It's not about hardcore eating or shoveling food down. It's about your overall strategy, the week to week/month to month decisions.

So yeah, if your baseline calorie needs are 3000, and you spend your off-season eating 3300-3400 calories, you're not going to grow muscle. But if you turn 3400 into 3600, 3600 into 3800, 3800 into 4000 (and beyond)... all while trying to stay on the leaner side (never losing sight of your abs), you'll absolutely start growing accordingly... and you won't have to spend the first 6-8 weeks of a dieting phase cleaning up a mess.

I made the mistake of pushing food too far back in the DC Training days. I got strong and I got fat. At 40 going on 41, with a more calculated approach, I can still gain muscle at a similar rate. It's not genetics. It's not more drugs. It's just accounting for everything at all times.

I agree 100% with everything you said

 

[luki7788]

what in your opinion is the amount of surplus one consistently need to maximize muscle gain during a gaining phase of several months? you seem to be doing it well with your clients in that regard, keeping them in good condition while growing.

you hear coaches like kuba cielen and so on suggesting to gain 1lbs a week during growing phases, to me that sounds like a lot of unnecessary fat gain. You dont realistically put on that much muscle unless you are a beginner or new to AAS or coming back from a layoff.

The truth is – you can’t define it 100%. Your calorie needs change every day. Activity is different every day, stress is different, daily life changes things. So your real “maintenance” is not fixed. That’s why looking for a perfect number makes no sense.
The closest to my own approach is what John Jewett says now. His way of thinking about nutrition and tracking progress – not only weight gain but also training progression – is exactly what I believe in.
0,5kg per week in a growth phase is too much. For an advanced lifter, even half a kilo in 3–4 weeks can already be a good quality gain, because some fat will always come with muscle. Muscles just don’t grow that fast.

So yes, it’s a hard question, but I think most people simply eat too much. Instead of building real muscle, they build “fake size” and like @Big Dave Smith wrote - later they must spend 6–8 weeks cleaning the mess. If they stayed leaner and insulin-sensitive, they could start prep straight away and finish it in 10 weeks, instead of wasting 20.

 

[Breck1044]

I listened to it the other day and enjoyed it. I really like Nyle's podcast and style. I'm going to buy him a better internet connection, though. He always has trouble with the lag, and I know it probably drives him nuts.

 

[nothuman]

But... everything is within context.

It seems as if people are using an extreme stance on pushing food and they're comparing it to those who eat closer to baseline. The extreme examples of people gaining more muscle by pushing food are likely guys who really have their shit together and are living a 365 day a year bodybuilding lifestyle.

What gets measured gets improved. This is the case for diet, training, and drugs.

Also, the law of diminishing returns.

Most bodybuilders who got huge by pushing food and getting soft were also very accountable at the beginning of their prep phases, giving themselves plenty of time to trickle off body fat to preserve their new muscle. It's likely that if they slowly pushed food, accounted for their macros, and didn't get as fat, they would have likely been just as muscular and needed less time to diet into a show. It's more of a judgment call as to what your realistic baseline is (what holds your weight steady), and the decisions you make on how many additional calories and what macros are needed to progress. Make the changes, see how far you get, make more changes, etc. Ultimately, they will require more calories over time and WIND UP pushing food. THAT'S what we should be recognizing.

So the entire conversation and its context rests upon how well you make decisions. It's not about hardcore eating or shoveling food down. It's about your overall strategy, the week to week/month to month decisions.

So yeah, if your baseline calorie needs are 3000, and you spend your off-season eating 3300-3400 calories, you're not going to grow muscle. But if you turn 3400 into 3600, 3600 into 3800, 3800 into 4000 (and beyond)... all while trying to stay on the leaner side (never losing sight of your abs), you'll absolutely start growing accordingly... and you won't have to spend the first 6-8 weeks of a dieting phase cleaning up a mess.

I made the mistake of pushing food too far back in the DC Training days. I got strong and I got fat. At 40 going on 41, with a more calculated approach, I can still gain muscle at a similar rate. It's not genetics. It's not more drugs. It's just accounting for everything at all times.

100% this.

Makes me remember how toxic the advice used to be on forums. Everyone was constantly pushing food, food, food, and more food, as if there was no upper limit to how much you could eat. They were more or less saying drugs don’t work unless you eat 5 million calories a day. I always knew those people were idiots then and now it looks like a consensus, thankfully. It’s pretty obvious that we need a certain amount of food to grow but there are clearly diminishing returns.