File :-(, x, )
Fat loss and muscle gain Anonymous
Hi /fit/.

I've been having an ongoing debate with afew friends of mine about the science behind gaining muscle and loseing fat.
I was hopeing that someone here could clear something up for me.

Can you build muscle and lose fat AT THE SAME TIME?

Or are we all going to have to go through bulking and cutting phases foerever?
>> Anonymous
>>23047
yeah if you fuel your muscles, they burn up fat. Muscle burns more calories per pound than other body mass. As long as you are packing on only lean weight it should be pretty simple
>> Anonymous
If you eat like mad, you gain fat and muscle, then you have to shed the fat, also shedding some muscle. Or you can eat properly, and gain mostly just muscle, but maybe not as much as you could if you ate more. Just cut out the chips, soda and beer, and you'll gain with minimum fat.
>> Catabolic and Anabolic sates Anonymous
What about the anabolic state (building) and catabolic state (loseing). Surely you can not be in both states at once....

Does this not make it impossible to grow and shrink at the same time?
>> Anonymous
>>23068
Why not? Ever been in a hyper and tired state at the same time?
>> Anonymous
>>23068
schrodinger would disagree.
>> Anonymous
>>23068

Not only CAN you be in both states at the same time, you are ALWAYS in both states at the same time. Your metabolism is continually breaking down things and making new things. That is how living things work. There is no such thing as a discrete "catabolic" and "anabolic" state, and anyone who tells you there is is either 1) lying to try to sell you something, or 2) dumb.
>> Anonymous
>>23097
This is true. However, you will predominantly be in one or the other.

And OP: while it IS possible to gain muscle and lose fat at the same time, it's very hard to do and simply is not as efficient as either concentrating on bulking or cutting.
>> Hymn !i/klqpUJoU
>>23047
It's a sticky conundrum which often leads to failure due to lack of will power. You see, you have to eat much more calories/protien to build muscle. If you don't use up every bit of calories you intake, it turns into fat. So, if you eat a whole lot, and forget to exercise, its counter productive to the weight loss.

Most exercise plans do it in two meshed steps, basically it goes from "total weight loss" to "partial weight loss, partial priming muscles (basically exercising without changing your diet)" to "total weight gain/muscle building"

If you can't make it past the total weight loss portion, its probable that you don't have the determination to gain muscle, which imo is more difficult and strenuous.
>> Anonymous
You can build both muscle and fat at the same time, but you usually can only do both effectively when you're out of shape and just starting to lose fat and build muscle. Otherwise, you'll always be doing more of one than the other.
>> Anonymous
>>23115

>predominantly be in one or the other

No. You'll be in both, to the exact same extent. Unless you have discovered the secrets of photosynthesis, the only energy source for anabolic processes is catabolic processes. You don't get one without the other.
>> Anonymous
"If you don't use up every bit of calories you intake, it turns into fat"

Thats not true.
>> Hymn !i/klqpUJoU
>>23163
You know what I mean though. The body starts storing the extra energy as fat, its just what our bodies do.
>> Anonymous
>>23160
So what happens if you were to have a severely imbalanced energy intake?

Let's say you burn off 2000 calories in a day, but you took in 3500. Would not the anabolic process of storing the fat be much greater than your catabolic process of rebuilding tissue and generating ATP?
>> Anonymous
>>23175
Edit: rebuilding tissue isn't catabolic. My bad.
>> Anonymous
>>23175

Not really sure what you're asking here. If you intake 3500 calories, you're going to USE all 3500 calories. Save a smallish amount that may be lost to excretion, the entire amount will be used. If your daily metabolism requires 2000 calories in that period, the remaining 1500 would be "stored" as any of a variety of high-energy content molecules, including fats, starches, and proteins.
>> Anonymous
>>23188
Exactly. Isn't storing excess calories as fat an anabolic process?
>> Anonymous
wait a minute....

don't you need to be in an anabolic state to 'put on' muscle? (energy in > energy out)

thats why they have anabolic steroids...

loseing fat happens in a catabolic state (energy in < energy out)

how does that work?
>> BrodoFaggins
>>23047
Built muscles require energy to sustain themselves, and as a result, start burning the fat around them. This also raises your overall metabolism. So, yes.
>> Anonymous
>>23191

Yes? I'm not sure why you ask that. Here's the energy balance, to make myself clearer:

Catabolism: 3500 calories from food
Anabolism: 2000 calories of doing things + 1500 calories of storage

If you really wanted to be picky, you could split out the 2000 calories of doing things into parts dealing with energy transfers and parts dealing with molecular anabolism, but that's really neither here nor there. Just like before, there's a fudge factor for energy lost to excretion, as well as for energy taken from storage for various complicated reasons.