ATTN: mreik, goergen, evo, etc. is this flawed logic on building muscle while cuting?

[realworksuks]

Here's the deal:

I am currently cutting for another month or two.

I try to keep a calorie defecit 3 days, then every fourth day I eat over maintance and refeed/carb up... I usually lift very heavy on that day hoping that I can build some muscle while I am getting the extra calories...

Obviously the amount of muscle I gain will be negligible, but still. Is this flawed logic?

Also, sometimes life gets in the way, and you end up eating way more than what was planned... so on some of those days I calculate that I will be right on maintance. Usually when I calculate that, I decide to lift really heavy and actually ADD MORE FOOD, so that I can build muscle instead of just maintaining because I ate at maintance.

Tell me your thoughts on this please.. I appreciate it.

 

[Chillen]

Here's the deal:

I am currently cutting for another month or two.

I try to keep a calorie defecit 3 days, then every fourth day I eat over maintance and refeed/carb up... I usually lift very heavy on that day hoping that I can build some muscle while I am getting the extra calories...

Obviously the amount of muscle I gain will be negligible, but still. Is this flawed logic?

In its most simplist terms (and leaving some variants out), this is exactly what I did.

Let me start with an example. While I wished I had the pic when I started (It would really put things in proper perspective), but I dont.

When I started I was approximately 190ish pounds. I only have the one I have shown about 6-7 months into dieting and training. In this pic (which I have already shown more than once), I was still holding on to about 15 pounds of unwanted body fat (mostly on the lower ab region), and in this pic I was approximately 180 pounds. Look at the pic closely, I had rather small arms, my shoulders didn't have any mass (and I had no traps), or back (the lats couldnt be seen from the front), my chest while appearing somewhat rounded, lacked any depth and really didnt have much muscle at the time, and the upper two abs were beginning to show.

And, I bring this up to make a point in the event anyone has missed this point in all of the posts I have written on my diet and training approach.

The point is, I have more muscle mass on me at the present time at 161 pounds (overall), and much lower body fat, than I did when I weighed 180 pounds in that 6 to 7 month noob pic. I am bigger.

I was able to lose the fat tissue and put on some muscle at-----the same time.

And, IMO, it due to my diet, first and foremost without question. It provided the fruits of my efforts in the gym. There is no questioning it. I have the results that prove it.

My MT Line was "different" each and everyday according to what I did. My running deficits were not the same, and over time, I learned my body ran in sort of a cycle or trend pattern, and I settled on running varient deficits for about 8 days, and surpluses for the 9th and 10th days, and cycled it over again. I viewed each deficit and MT Line in 24 hour segments, and used my cycleback, cycleforward, and cycleflipback methods when eating within this 24 hour period. When not at home (on a business trip or something), and I couldnt train, I adapted and improvised, but I ALWAYS KEPT MY DIET as I had outlined. When Body Fat got low (as in March 07), and fat loss became stubborn (after some trial and error), I learned I respond rather strongly and earnestly to a carb deprivation (in a positive manner), while increasing protein and fats. I kept my same deficit and surplus cycles (and MT Line variances), and lost the last portion of unwanted fat tissue--while gaining a little muscle mass.

To make this short, IMO, it isnt flawed logic IF ones goal is to lose fat tissue and gain "some" mass at the same time. Which was my goal. However, this can be flawed logic----when referring to another persons fitness goal. Dependent on what this fitness goal is.

Therefore, this approach would not fit everyone dependent on their fitness adgenda. For example a powerlifter. Additionally, I think it is logical for one on the consistant surplus side of the energy equation to be in a more optimal state of muscle growth (of course) with adapting calorie intake to reduce fat accumulation.

I ran fluctuating deficits and weight trained feverishly, constantly, persistantly, and made no friggen cry baby excuses. I didnt run deficits for a LONG periods, because I believe this brings negative metabolic shifts-over time, too long of a periods in catabolism, and far too much stress on the human body, and ALL are negatives to ones goal.

Additionally, I personally believe that weight training doesn't change whether your cutting or bulking (less the possibility change of volume and rest). It is the same and only changes to it depend on your progress, results, and other feedback your body gives in return, from the training your are implementing.



If you want RWS, I will look up the posts I have made on my diet approach, and post the links here. I think these posts fit your topic perfectly, and will save me much writing time. I may add some things I may have left out, but if you want them I will post them for you.

Oh!.........One more thaaaaaaaaaang........

ROCK THE HECK ON, buddy!


Best wishes


Chillen

 

[[Focus]]

Is this flawed logic?

I don't think so. As long as you realize that the difference is probably, as you say, negligible, physically. As far as we know currently, your body doesn't really make these decisions on a 24-hour basis. It's considerably longer a term than that. If anything, what you would be doing is just heavy zigzagging. Or, eating as you need. But it probably won't hurt, either. As long as your "regular" eating days aren't dramatically (see: muscle-wasting) low on calories because you're eating 10k per re-feed day. Remember the fat squirrel!!!! Haha.

As for psychologically, I really like the idea of doing a big old feed before and after training. I think the "HULK SMASH!" effect alone makes this worth it. Plus it's a good way to make do with your lifestyle, so as not to be shunned by your hombres. Y'know, be real strict and stingy with calories, but only when no one's around. Sort of an "anti-bulimic" if you will.

 

[Hoss]

I didnt run deficits for a LONG periods, because I believe this brings negative metabolic shifts-over time, too long of a periods in catabolism.
Additionally, I personally believe that weight training doesn't change whether your cutting or bulking (less the possibility change of volume and rest).

It doesn't happen much, but here it is: I agree with Chillen (or at least this part of his post, don't get too excited )

In essence, you're 'carb cycling'. Which imo, although I've only experimented very briefly, is an effective way to cut slower than fast (read that again, it'll make sense eventually). Anyways, will you lose fat? Most likely, because you'll be in a deficit far longer than you'll be in a surplus. Will you gain muscle? Possibly. Will you 'look' like you gained muscle ::::cough, chillen, cough cough:::: of coarse! But even if you don't gain muscle, keeping those hard earned lbs means just as much.

Remember that your carb up day is exactly that. Your fat intake should already be moderate/high (low-end of high), and your protein intake should be high too. So on that 'cheat day' as you worded it in the pm, you won't be doing any cheating. Your carbs will come from whole grains, sweet potatoes (highly recommended), and other complex sources; you'll just be eating a lot more of them.

 

[realworksuks]

As far as we know currently, your body doesn't really make these decisions on a 24-hour basis. It's considerably longer a term than that.

Can anyone comment on how long this time period is? I always looked at things in 24 hour incriments...

I thought most of the muscle repair after a workout happens in the first 24 hours... and that the fat loss pretty much happens overnight or during exercise.

 

[Phate89]

I look at it in a 1 week period.

 

[Dry]

I think that every second your body is changing to burn or store fat / repair & build muscle, but it is not going to be seen over a 1 day period, or sometimes over a 1 week period. I could be wrong, but because weight shifts so drastically between different types of weight (water, waste & fat weight) its hard to put a time table as to when the fat is actually "burned" off your body.

But I'm usually wrong.

 

[Chillen]

Can anyone comment on how long this time period is? I always looked at things in 24 hour incriments...

I thought most of the muscle repair after a workout happens in the first 24 hours... and that the fat loss pretty much happens overnight or during exercise.

Personally I believe the body runs off a "Trend History" (for the most part). I knew from the beginning that by logging what I did in diet and training, and then watching the feedback I was getting in return was the key to success.

Let me give you example. If I go low carb (say sub 20g in carbs), it takes about 7 days before I start to feel the consequences (or symptoms if you will) of the low carbing (non-depletion set)

Prior to starting the low carb, I knew that my carb stores (in my organs were full); I have certain needs each day for carbs, and dependent on training activity, would depend on how fast/slow my body depletes its carb stores and of course use of carbs. Though during the course of the 7 days, my carbs stores (and likewise use of) were depleting, it isnt until it gets extremely low, (and begins to make the "switch"), that I begin to feel the effects. I will go another 7 days after this switch.

When the 14 day period is over (as an example), I will carbUP (and in eat in a calculated surplus). The point I am making is that the "next day" (or first 24 hours) I can feel leaner (and look great), have no water retention, though I consumed a mountain of carbs and calories as compared to the past history.

However, on the 2nd day after (or 48 hours), I do gain some water (sometimes I can gain about 4 pounds). At this "state" in time, my body is much more "tolerant" to a surplus of carbs and calories. When one looks at this in just simple logic, one knows what is going on. For 14 days, I was in a carb depleted state and using protein and ketones for fuel (for the 7 days). On the 15th day spanning 12 plus hours, I carbed up (ate slightly more than I needed), ate in a surplus that was carefully calculated.

The first day (or first 24 hours), my body soaked up all the available carbs and restocked its organ stores. On the second day, my carbs are more in line with being normal, and the water retention appears. In short, it takes about 48 hours before I begin to feel the carbUP effects of a trend history of low carbing and fluctuating deficits. And, nearly all of it is simply water retention.

Another example:

When deficit dieting (only), and leaving the carbs approximately normal, I tend to get the "simuliar" effects, but this time its only a deficit trend history. If I deficit diet (flucuating calories....he, he, not flex), and then increase calories the 9 and 10th days, I tend not to gain any real weight (maybe a pound, but nothing noticable, really). What this tells me, is that my body has gotten used to the deficit trend, and when the induction of the extra calories were consumed, it was much more tolerant than it would have otherwise (say if I was eating in a surplus and not watching calories "necessarily").

Personally, I believe that metabolic shifts occur over a trend history (which can be different from one person to the next) and cannot be turned up or down in 24 hours, but over a period of time. Just like weight training, the body adapts to the calories one consumes over a period of time, IMO, though there are some limitations.

This is one reason many dieters can stagnate. They run a deficit "trend" (only) at the beginning that created good fat loss, and after a period of time within this trend history, the body adapts and adjusts. Fat tissue loss slows and in some cases can even stop.

When a person wants to lose fat tissue, and is just beginning, they can be in a "primed state" for fat loss, because of their trend history prior to beginning, IMO (dependent on what this was).

Prior to begining their fat loss quest, they ate in surpluses (for sake of arguement), and then suddenly they begin to eat in deficits (as well as exercise), and "all of this" is a "shock" to the body, and the body tends to respond favoribly in this sort of environment. What we have here is a change in "trend": The body was cruising along biologically dealing with what the person was doing, and all of sudden the person "gets stoned", and starts cutting calories and excercising, and the body simply says: "WTF!" Its sort of running along a flat surface, and then suddenly, jumping off a cliff. Obviously we have persons with different disorders, and what not, and we cannot blanket everyone, but in most general terms, the above statements are true

One can keep reducing the deficit (NOT WISE), but this can lead to other undesirable bodily feed back one does not want, one can only reduce calories so far.

This is one reason among many, I believe manipulating calories (and its associated nutrients), manipulating exercise (training) among those calories manipulated, as the "primary and most powerful metabolic tools" one can use, once they learn how their body responds to certain things, and become personally educated in their own personal science and educated in its use.

Its simple logic really. If you eat over what you need in a "trend history" of time, one gains weight. If you eat under what you need in a "trend history" of time, you lose weight (keep things equal). The body adjusts both ways dependent on the trend time in each.

Quite simply, I just keep body guessing: I do not stay in a deficit very long, maintain very long, or in a surplus very long. But I do all three on regular intervals. How I manipulate these three, depends on the goal at the time.

I never hit a wall during my fat loss-until body fat became low, and what I term as my "body's preferred weight" (or natural weight). I prevented my body adjusting to the calories I was consuming (when wanting to lose fat tissue), by zig-zagging the calories AND manipulating calories burned in exercise.

Basically, zig-zagging calories (with manipulating exercise), "attempts to create a trend history" of catabolic state and a history of a anabolic state, and attempting to prevent the body from making "negative" metabolic adjustments.

It can be appropriately "opinioned" that this isnt optimal muscle growth (anabolic) because of the catabolic period (or the deficit calorie period, but it can be used to fight unwanted or unnecessary fat tissue gain). And, I would agree with this opinion, but this type of approach agreed with my goal and bodily responses.

As we know anabolic can create fat tissue and muscle growth, while catabolic one can lose fat tissue and muscle.

There were times, for example, I set up a 3,200 calorie consumption period (considering my weight and size, this is a lot), after I set a trend history of deficit for 7 days, and a small surplus trend history of 3 days. I increased cardio frequency, weight training frequency, volume, and intensity, (to bring up the calorie need), and still maintained a small deficit. In this we have two "drastically" different trends, both facilitating fat tissue loss, but increasing food intake at the same time.


Additionally, when I did get sore (DOMS), I felt the mild effects in about 18 hours, and its full effects in about 24 hours, and it usually went away in a full 72 hours (which includes the first 24 hours). Of course the severity can depend on the volume and intensity of ones training on how long the effects are felt. This personally told me something as well.


Best wishes,


Chillen

 

[Hoss]

Can anyone comment on how long this time period is? I always looked at things in 24 hour incriments...

I thought most of the muscle repair after a workout happens in the first 24 hours... and that the fat loss pretty much happens overnight or during exercise.

For all applicable purposes, it's about as long as it takes to digest and excrete a meal.

 

[Chillen]

I located an old post of mine, that I had written several months back that outlined (actually briefly, lol) my diet approach, and if you read it correctly, you will see WHY, I didnt whither up to a stick while attempting to lose my fat tissue AND build some muscle at the same time.

I was rather serious about things.

=========================================================
I wanted to take the time to reveal the bottom line of my diet after trial and error, and the various techniques that I used along the way. I tried to write this with simplicity in mind. The purpose is not to provoke a fierce debate.

While I understand that being this technical and meticulous isn’t for everyone, it may be possible that there may be some information I am giving that may benefit another forum member. And, this is the primary purpose.

This approach has worked for me, is working for me, and subsequent opinions contrary to this approach likewise doesn’t matter.

After educating myself on the basic requirements of tissue loss and tissue gain, I quickly learned there were many opinions and opinions on these opinions, and one could easily get confused on where to start and which basic circumference of information to use for ones goal. But there tended to be some dust that settled on simple basics.

I also looked at several different methods of caloric Maintenance formulas. (like NROL, Benedict, and the basic multiplier, and they still didn't really satisfy WHAT I WANTED--more specific--detailed)

I sat myself down, and wrote down every possible dietary weakness and strengths I possessed. I literally tore myself apart being honest. I developed a “On Limits Food List” and an “Off Limits Food List”. I evaluated my living environment and work environment, its associated effects and causes, and what would applicably have negative and positive effects on my goal, and set reaction in place)

I developed a list of bad food items that could be made to be more healthy that I liked (for example: Oatmeal cookies, and Peanut Butter Cookies, and replaced the ingredients in these to the more healthy alternative—like Splenda for the replacement of white refined sugar, and whole wheat flour instead of white bleached flour, and so on and so forth).

I developed a CLEAR strategy in dealing with my weaknesses (and changing ingredients in sweet items-like the aforementioned- is one example as it assisted with the “I want something sweet—DAMN IT!” type of situation).

There was NOTHING I wasn’t prepared for, Mentally, if my body began to resist or crave certain things as I progressed forward. This was key, and an entirely different writing. (and one I would do if asked, because the system I have in place could work for another person)


Therefore, I decided to make a Excel Spread Sheet for my diet calorie and activity tracker. The First Tab was the equation set from the Benedict Formula, and the accompanying activity multiplier (s). I plugged in my age, gender, weight, height, and approximated activity set, and this produced a approximated Maintenance Line according to the Benedict Formula. This was really just a look back reference page (and man in the end--it IS WAY OFF)

What I didn’t like about this formula, is its general broad and blanketed scope it gave for each day, with having knowledge that each day can be drastically different from one day to the next.

One could move and/or change the multiplier for a given day, but this too, I thought had the same broad effect. I could have used other MT opinions (like NROL, and others, but they too suffer from---what I wanted…a more narrowed and more specific caloric calculation to me. I am not arguing that they don’t work—they do, and have been proven to work, and I post these to assist others, it’s just that it wasn’t for me—exactly anyway)

Therefore, I sought to educate myself on the approximated calorie expenditure based on certain activities being performed that was based on the variances of: Age, height, weight, and gender.

The activity segments were broken down in this manner: 1. Work, 2. Off Work, 3. Workout day(with or without cardio) with Work, 4. Workout-Rest(with or without cardio)with Work, 5. Workout day(with or without cardio)with an Off-Work day, 6. Workout-Rest(with or without cardio)with Off-Work day, 7. Wake hours on Work days (not including work hours), and Wake hours on Off-Work days, and 8. Sleep hours. Dependent on the day, then, I would apply the applicable variances that were applicable for a given day.

Examples: A Work Day with a Workout(without cardio): Work hours (8), Sleep hours (8), Awake hours (8-1=7), Workout (1). In the hourly sense the day is completely covered more thoroughly and independently according to personal activities.

I then made another spreadsheet listing the variable activities and the applicable variances in hours in use for that particular day. I then made this connect to another spreadsheet that I configured to use daily, weekly, and monthly, and would copy and move a blank one forward for a subsequent month.

The next task was attempting to approximate the calories according to the variances I configured for myself each day. I studied the approximation science of how many calories were burned dependent upon the activity performed, and since there were going to be applicable fluctuations in any one determined activity segment, I decided to come to terms on a “medium” and would apply the variance, if applicable. (for example, working 10 hours instead of 8, or maybe work was more demanding than normal, etc).

I basically have a desk job, but I can tend to be on my feet for extended period of time dependent upon the problems and situation. Looking this sort of activity up (sitting at a desk with a PC, tends to give an approximated hourly caloric expenditure of 120c per hour, so I mediated the difference to 150 per hour(and sometimes this needs adjusted)

Sleep hours: Looking this sort of activity up tends to range between 60c to 80c per hour. (If I get less sleep, I subtract the hours and make up the caloric difference, if I get more than 8, I add hours, and adjust caloric figures)

Awake Hours: This can be 8 (8-1) or 16(16-1) hours dependant if I am off-work, working, and Workout variances. Like work, this can have MANY caloric expenditure variances. But, like work I can be on my feet a lot and not be. Therefore, I settled with the same 120c per hour (and had since narrowed this a bit higher)

Workout: One hour. I tend to vary this as well. It depends in rest between sets, whether I am lifting heavy (low reps), or higher (6 to10, or 8 to 12), etc. This can range from 250c to 450c (and higher), if it lasts 45 min, I simply don’t call it one hour, I adjust accordingly.

Cardio: Depends on whether it’s 20m, 30m, 40m, 45m, 50m, or 60m, along with projected intensity level (I am terribly honest—there is no other way). I do an upright recumbent stationary bike (with back rest). I don’t do these like a normal person either. I hoist 45lb plates over my head with both arms hold them in the air for extended periods, then I will grab two 10lb plates and thrust them forward in a pumping fashion, etc. I don’t mess around. Admittingly, I don’t like running. So the bike fits and allows me to do what I have to do to get the job done at the time. And, if there are any double, triple, and quadruple cardio sessions in one day, I of course, make caloric adjustments (which is already in excel-mathematically).

We now have each day particularly broken down according to what I am doing, and can be adjusted accordingly when obvious differences and/or variances occur in a particular day. With some refinements, and the fact I had to change caloric approximations because of weight changes, I have my expenditure pretty much narrowed down to a personal science, and my weight loss was indeed matching my projections in excel.

Each days Maintenance Line is tailored to a specific day by specifically what I am doing that day, and this MT line is subject to the 24 hour dietary cycle.

The 24 hour diet cycle clock.

For example: 7AM to 7AM (24 hours) would be one dietary hourly cycle where ALL caloric consumption would occur and be counted for that day. I didn’t adjust this clock cycle around work. Rather I would sometimes adjust this cycle according to the scheduled workout, AND whether work effected its schedule or not. At first there were no adjustments that were necessary even WITH work effecting the timing of the workouts.

But, as I lost weight and my body fat was dropping and getting relatively low, I had to make dietary 24 hour cycle clock adjustments. I always tended to look at my diet caloric totals first if a problem developed and projections were off. I thought this may be an indication of a bodily adjustment and/or refinement and/or adaption to the caloric content the body was being given in accordance to activity stimulation.

I studied some more, and then implemented the: CycleBack, CycleForward, and CycleFlipBack techniques, which are basically caloric manipulations in a 24hour dietary cycle. The results from implanting these manipulations (in accordance to my personal goal) were above astounding.

When I begin to explain these manipulations, I want you to keep in mind the very meticulous and specific caloric projections that were tailored to myself in accordance and/or in sync with what I was doing a particular day.
One can do things with this 24 hour cycle period in providing more short term calories, and change up the clock, while at the same time, not letting the body get accustomed to a certain 24 hour cycle of eating patterns.

For example: (This can be adjusted to suite different personal situations, the hours provided are only an example to give you an idea on how it works)

Say for the first week your 24 cycle clock is: 7AM to 7AM (work is 11P to 7A), you could eat at 3AM (which is 4 hours earlier), and technically your over your limit at that time, but let’s say you train at 8AM (or something like that), for this period you have just provided a small surplus; however, the next day, you could switch back to the 7A to 7A. Which erases (if your meticulous) the previous 4 hours the day before, and one could ramp up an exercise, say cardio, and cause a deficit(though exercise) instead of a balance.

I call this Cycle Back. The 24 hour clock can be anytime adjusted to your daily routine. This cycle back can assist with craving yearnings without the guilt of thinking your over eating. It feeds you and your mentality at the same time. One just has to adjust the next day as a consequence, but it’s something in place to assist with hunger when needed and assist the body in not adjusting to you. In addition, it can provide some extra calories for your workout coming up.

Within the Cycle Back, you can also decide to leave the surplus, of say +300 or so, to allow the body to think it ate too much, and then adjust the CycleBack to 3A to 3A (which is good to do with long term dieters---once in a while)

I use the cycle back most of the time to give the appearance of extra calories, to provide more energy--at the time for weight training, but in the end of things........the next day, it cancels out and I bring a deficit through exercise. But not all the time.

There is another technique I use called: Cycle Forward. Let’s use the same 24 hour cycle clock, 7A to 7A, and I ate at 3A, I will push the caloric content at 3a as eating at 7a, and just push it forward, and count it within the same clock. If working 11p to 7a, and a scheduled Workout was at 8a, this would be ideal to allow time for digestion, and have extra calories BEFORE workout. I then would eat after workout as well.

This is the tougher side of the equation, though, but this can used to assist cravings, but at the same time, you have to space out the meals a bit more intelligently, as you consumed some of the calories prior to the clock starting, but still counting in the same clock, so there is a consequence.

Both of these cycle types I constantly used when I lost my weight, and it worked for me and there is no doubt about it.

The CycleFlipBack, is just intentionally moving the hours 3 to 4 hours earlier than the cycle before it. For example: using the same 7a to 7a example, I would eat at 3a about 4 hours earlier than when the 24 hour diet cycle actually ended. Next day keep it at 3a to 3a, next day after this, move it back another 4 hours, keep it the same, and then flipback again. What you have taking place here is a small surplus, deficit, small surplus, deficit, and so on. This messes with the body pretty good, ya think? In all this, I know what the surplus in caloric content is, and with the deficit, and whether any of the days cancel out. I believe this is smart—when advancing in goals and when weight loss plateau’s develop, to have something in place to TRY to combat problems. And, the diet is one major player in the equation, and needs careful consideration in my opinion.

I ate frequently, but inconsistently (just not at the same times, I mean). I implemented the 95-5 approach to my diet. This means that if I allow a RARE cheat item 5% of the time (and put this in the caloric projection, and then sometimes--allow an overage (think the caloric manipulations), then this 5% is not goanna erase the 95% that is correct. This is not possible.

But this only works if you are in fact 95% correct and faithful, LOL. And, one has to consider that most of the time I was 100%---faithful--for months, and the 5% rarely came about, and if did, I was prepared, and would allow it, without hurting my goal path. One has to allow breathing room, and cant have the belt wrapped to tight. One has to breath. And if one does, maybe 100% isnt so hard to achieve. If you can understand what I am trying to say.

This is just a brief synopsis. I hope this helps someone in some way. This was my intention on writing this.


Best regards,


Chillen