How much muscle can you put on without going through bulking?

Go on over to crossfit and check out the nutrition guidlines over there. They start with the zone diet then they tweek it from there depending on what your goals are. The zone takes in to account your activity level so you pretty much start at a good calorie intake. crossfit normally talks about raising healthyfat intake along with the zone to maintain or gain bodyweight. Coach Glassman stated he has been able to take women athletes down to 6-7% bodyfat and maintain normal menstral cycles with the zone. It keeps your body functions regulated. In my opinion mens health is toilet paper and your body needs healthy fats for normal everyday processes. the zone advocates a 30% fat intake.
I know your legs are fried but I would suggest working some squats in there some way. I believe there is no point to weightlifting without squats and I've brought my times up to 2 miles down from bringing up my squat from 180 to 286. Maybe 3 sets of 5 twice a week.
Crossfit can help you with your pullups too. I say do pullups and chins. Google crossfit and check it out. Even I you don't want to workout the way they do, it's still the best overall site for anything fitness.
 
not true,unless you eat in surplus there is simply nothing to build muscle with,you dont have to eat a massive surplus like most do when on a bulk, but you do have to have some surplus.

That's a load of s hit and like i said, just most peoples excuse to eat whatever they want and put on a bit of fat without feeling guilty about it, because they are after all "bulking".

To some people, that might be bulking. But bulking is a very unspecific word, imo. To me, bulking just means I'm trying to gain muscle mass.

I think so to.
 
That's a load of s hit and like i said, just most peoples excuse to eat whatever they want and put on a bit of fat without feeling guilty about it, because they are after all "bulking".
so please enlighten us how the body gains more mass without more food:(
if you do it you may get a nobel prize:) but methinks maybe 2nd prize would be more fitting.
 
That is quite interesting, I always thought it was easier to put on muscle while carrying a bit of extra fat because the body isn't so worried about not having enough fat to survive..
I know, I know, it's noe of those stupid arguments that's not based on proceses that actually go on in the bdy.

Do you have any additional information about this? like name of reactions so I can google, or some links, etc.. I'd love to read more.

Hey Karky, anybody can put on muscle, regardless of how much fat they're carrying. I was responding to the question re: testosterone levels.

But you might want to search "aromatase testosterone estradiol".

When a person works out (particularly with heavy weights), testosterone production automatically increases to that stress (you produce a surge of testosterone to push the weight), regardless of how fat you are.

For women, the testosterone increase is negligible (which is why we don't look like men), although the androstenedione levels did increase:

Conversely, extreme endurance activities will have lower testosterone production, particularly in males.

Here's an abstract from an article with respect to aromatase activity in obese people. Basically what it's saying is the fatter you are, the lower the serum testosterone levels:

My understanding re: bulk phases was you don't want to reduce the amount of food you're consuming is because if you don't eat enough carbs, your body actually decreases testosterone production (as a result of the body's "starvation mode" kicking in) and then you don't have the ability to gain the muscle mass you are working so hard to attain. Somebody please correct me if this isn't right ...
 
Last edited:
I've been reading through the forum and saw that those who wanted to get bigger needed to go through a bulking process. How much muscle can a person put on without going through this process? I run track so going through the bulking process will slow me down. I have to stay as lean as possible at all times. Is it even possible to put on muscle without going through the bulking process?

The amount one can gain in muscle can depend on the individual person because there are far too many variables in the equation to to "blanket everyone the same". The sitting general among those factors are how you train, how hard you train (intensity/volume/rest), your diet circumference, and your unique genetic potential, IMO.

Additionally, muscle "tends" to be easily put on when one first begins a weight training program (or new to weight training gains), and then it "can" get progressively more difficult as the body adapts and over comes training stimulation. It seems it becomes more "biologically expensive" as one matures in training.

However, those who follow a solid weight trainin program, those who diet and train for muscle mass, and "understand and correctly apply proven mass gain bodybuilding techniques" (education is a must) can accomplish amazing things in short periods of time.

One can underestimate the extreme efficiency of our "bodily adapting mechanic" we all possess.

For example: A typical person that is a several pounds over weight (and never weight trained before), deficit diets (within their personal approximations) for about 3 weeks, and become disheartened because the scale didnt "go down" as much as they want.

Well, "some" may not be looking at their self with "educated eyes": It is possible being so new to weight training that the body built some muscle in this example 3 week period, and fat loss did in fact occur.......but, the muscle gain offset some of the loss (or they gained good weight and lost fat at-the-same-time). This is one reason "scales" can be bad, and looking in the mirror is better, for example. The body "can be" extraordinarily efficient at the beginning, and one has to remember what the stimulant in the gym can bring to the table (other than just simply burning calories).

Think of it this way: If you are running along an even surface (ones prior history of eating what ever and when ever they want and no weight training), and then suddenly jump off a mountain (watching diet, training 3 to 4 times per week, etc), the body "tends" to hit the ground hard. It's response tends to be rather strong.

However, what most dont realize, is that one ends "back up on level ground" again (the body's attempt at homeostasis-or staying the same, or striking a balance) and one MUST because of "continual adaption" (fall off the cliff again), to solicite additional muscle improvement. This is why "progression and intensity" (volume, rest) are so important, not to mention knowing your caloric intake (and making adjustments as your weight changes).

Remember the training provides the stimulation, but the DIET can ruin potential growth as well as cause it. Like abs are made in the kitchen.....so are muscles, IMO. And, some miss this important point.

Another example: If you want a plant to grow, you must constantly keep it in what I will term as the "right habitat" to prosper.

You have to have the right size pot to allow the roots to grow, and you have to water it.

If you keep its soil rich with quality fertilizer day after day. What do you expect?

A healthy, strong, and thriving plant.

It is from this soil of high-quality fertilizer, where the plant gets the nutrients, and make it grow. The higher the quality, the better growth and health you can expect from the plant. The more "consistently" you have that fertilizer available to the plant, the better the results.

Much to learn. Must open eyes. Nutrition...ROCKS.

Oh......another note :): If you train for an hour (for example), it is what you do within the other 23 hours that can affect the quality of one's muscle growth. The training provides the stimulation, the other 23 provide the growth, and what you do or don't do in that period determines.......the outcome......THINK ABOUT IT.


One more....damn I can't shut the heck up! :) :

When you lift with the goal of muscle gain, you know (or should know) that it is absolutely imperative that you exhaust the muscles. To do this you go to "fatigue or failure", you don't leave anything in the tank at the end of a set. Maximum intensity!!!!!! OH! This is my opinion, thanks! :)

It is through this type of lifting that you signal to the body that you need more muscle. The body interprets this as a threat to its survival "and when provided the opportunity", it responds by increasing strength levels and muscle mass. In turn, you respond by increasing resistance, always pushing for more (progressive overload).


Educate yourself. Apply this education to yourself. Train hard and progressivley, and adapt to the feed back your body gives you (correctly), and the muscle will come.


Best wishes,


Chillen
 
Last edited:
I've been reading through the forum and saw that those who wanted to get bigger needed to go through a bulking process. How much muscle can a person put on without going through this process? I run track so going through the bulking process will slow me down. I have to stay as lean as possible at all times. Is it even possible to put on muscle without going through the bulking process?

What exactly? If you ran 100 m for example your nutrition does not need a lot of carbs since they are not necessary for the sprint but it does need creatine supplementation for quick Pcr replenishment.
 
What exactly? If you ran 100 m for example your nutrition does not need a lot of carbs since they are not necessary for the sprint but it does need creatine supplementation for quick Pcr replenishment.

It's not all black and white like that, the energy systems overlap, but you use mostly the ATPPCr during short intense bousts of exercise.
However, what about replenishing during resting periods between sets? I would think glycogen would be used there.. but I'm not 100% sure as I don't know the process (hope someone else does, though)

not to mention that most people won't be able to run 100 meters flat out without seriously going into anaerobic glycolysis towards the end.

If you need less carbs when you do short intense exercise is an interesting question though, makes me think.

I made an alternate thread for further discussion: http://training.fitness.com/weight-training/less-carbohydrate-atppcr-energy-system-35978.html

I hope people chime in.
 
Last edited:
I'm not talking about 200, 400, 800m Karky, i'm talking specifically about 100m, given as an example. You do need carbohydrates but not as much as you probably think that you do.
Hope this will answer your questions
 
The training he does is highly glycotic. Eating a majority of your carbs after training wouldn't hurt. I agree with streamline. You don't have to gorge yourself with whatever's in the kitchen. You can slowly up your calories and reevaluate every couple weeks or every month. Make sure you get your quality foods. Try to get lots of different raw veggies in there.
 
so please enlighten us how the body gains more mass without more food:(
if you do it you may get a nobel prize:) but methinks maybe 2nd prize would be more fitting.

Just eat clean and lift correctly and consistantly. There's no secret and this whole bulking and cutting thing i feel is just an online myth that's gone too far. I'll take that prize now.
 
Just eat clean and lift correctly and consistantly. There's no secret and this whole bulking and cutting thing i feel is just an online myth that's gone too far. I'll take that prize now.

you said it was possible to put on muscle without bulking ie eating in exess cals,so are you saying that eating exess cals to gain muscle is a online myth:rolleyes:
saying eat clean and train correctly doesnt answer my question,HOW DO YOU GAIN ANY TYPE OF MASS WITHOUT SOME EXESS CALS.
pick up your 2nd prize from the library,and a book on hypertrophy.
 
I know what i said and i already answered your question. Now it's up to you to comprehend what that means. Your ill informed responses are a clear cut example of what I'm talking about with the whole cutting and bulking garbage. Don't question me again.
 
Back
Top