bulking and bfl

[Chris]

I've read in the BFL book that if someone wants to gain muscle mass during the challenge, that is their goals are to gain weight rather than lose, then one should have 2 carb portions with his/her first 3 meals...

I don't think this is a good approach, I'll tell you why. It's all about calorie counting and consistency. To gain weight, it requires more calories than your body normally consumes. It takes ~3500 calories above your maintenance level to gain 1 lb... This means you need to EAT!

For me it was very hard to eat as much as I needed. It was an uncomfortable amount of food to consume. Without keeping track of calories and knowing the quantity of food I needed to consume at each meal, then I would have stopped eating when I was full... which wouldn't have put on weight. When it's all said and done, it's pretty close to a double carb portion for the first 3 meals. But only because I'm able to look back on it and make that scenario fit... make sense? My point is, if I was only going by fist-size portions I probably wouldn't have gained a pound. For me, it HAS to be done with calorie counting.

Incidentally, I'm up 5-8 lbs in the roughly 2 months I've been really trying.

[Rhone]

I agree, Chris. The BFL book oversimplifies a great many things; I assume that is done purposely to make the book more accessible for people who aren't interested in how things work and just want to get started. (One might cynically presume that it also made the book much easier and quicker to write, hence more profitable.)

With most things that's okay, since the basic exercise program and dietary guidelines should work fine for most people trying to lose fat. And IMO it's easier to get started with something simple and then make some more complex modifications later, rather than trying to start out complicated from the beginning.

But the afterthought Phillips tossed into BFL about bulking up seems, IMO, not only oversimplified but drastically inadequate.

Just to put some numbers to it... I'm currently aiming for roughly 1800 (give or take a hundred or two) calories per day to lose weight, which is pretty close to what I'd be getting with the BFL fist-sized portion rule (depending on precisely what foods are chosen... it takes a lot more than a fist-sized portion of cottage cheese to match the protein you could get in a fist-sized piece of chicken breast, for example; likewise a fist of blueberries doesn't provide nearly as many carbs as a fist of brown rice or wheat pasta). So, spread over 6 meals, I'm getting roughly 300 calories per meal, and that's putting me at least 500 calories or so below my estimated maintenance level for the day.

So, my carb portion in each of those 300 calorie meals is generally going to be around 100-150 calories; if I double that for 3 meals out of the day, that means I'm getting another 100*3 - 150*3, i.e. 300-450 more calories per day than the level I'm eating at now for weight loss.

That wouldn't even bring my caloric intake up to maintenence level.

IMO if you really want to gain muscle, you might want to seriously consider upping your carbs and healthy fats in all of your meals.

BTW, congrats on the muscle you've gained in the past couple months. I'm curious--do you do any kind of calorie cycling, or do you keep your calories consistently high for an extended period of time?

[Chris]

I do cycle... I'd have to go back and look at my calculations but I think my 3 day cycle is roughly 16, 17, or 18 times my desired body weight depending on the day. I had gained a bit of fat for a while as the weight came on quickly. But then maintaining this 3 day rotation has started the recomposition phase. I forgot to weigh myself this morning.. but I should be just about right at my goal weight of 175. I'd like to stay in the 175-180 range now and just cut my body fat (which unfortunately is up around 18% now).

The exercise/diet plan I'm currently following calls for a carb restriction this month and a three day cycle of 15, 16, 17 x my desired weight. This starts next week.

[Rhone]

So you're taking in a constant calorie surplus and rotating the size of the surplus with the 3-day cycle?

I'm curious if you've tried cycling with some calorie deficit days to avoid hitting plateaus (and maybe burn off the bit of fat you might be getting on the surplus days). Kinda like the free day in BFL, except the other way around.

[Chris]

Well, I don't intentionally take deficit days, but that's not to say that they don't happen. I'm basically at my goal weight now too. So when I say a value x my goal weight, that's not far from where I am now. Over the next 4 weeks I'm going to be cycling lower total calories and changing the sources a bit (more protein, less carbs) to try and chip away some fat gain.

[yakubu]

Originally Posted by Chris

I've read in the BFL book that if someone wants to gain muscle mass during the challenge, that is their goals are to gain weight rather than lose, then one should have 2 carb portions with his/her first 3 meals...

I don't think this is a good approach, I'll tell you why. It's all about calorie counting and consistency. To gain weight, it requires more calories than your body normally consumes. It takes ~3500 calories above your maintenance level to gain 1 lb... This means you need to EAT!

For me it was very hard to eat as much as I needed. It was an uncomfortable amount of food to consume. Without keeping track of calories and knowing the quantity of food I needed to consume at each meal, then I would have stopped eating when I was full... which wouldn't have put on weight. When it's all said and done, it's pretty close to a double carb portion for the first 3 meals. But only because I'm able to look back on it and make that scenario fit... make sense? My point is, if I was only going by fist-size portions I probably wouldn't have gained a pound. For me, it HAS to be done with calorie counting.

Incidentally, I'm up 5-8 lbs in the roughly 2 months I've been really trying.

try maximuscles progain. it contains 30g protein and 60g carbs per serving. it must be seriously hard work eating all of those extra carbs. its far easier to drink them and that is wot u can do when u use progain

[bigthunder]

Maybe I'm wrong, but isn't carbs for energy and protein is the building block for muscle. So wouldn't make sense to up your protein consumption if you want to pack on the muscle?

[yakubu]

Originally Posted by bigthunder

Maybe I'm wrong, but isn't carbs for energy and protein is the building block for muscle. So wouldn't make sense to up your protein consumption if you want to pack on the muscle?

not really. there is a recommend amount of protein u need per day to build muscle (1g per pund of body weight). now if u have more protein that u need it will make a difference but the fact is there comes a point were it doesn't matter how much extra protein u consume it has no effect. u can still have just enuf and that will get the same results .

carbs are for energy yes but also for calories. to pack on muscle u need to consume more calories that u need and increasing carbs is the perfect way to do this

[bigthunder]

what can i say, being 400 lbs, gaining weight has never been a problem for me

[Rhone]

Originally Posted by bigthunder

Maybe I'm wrong, but isn't carbs for energy and protein is the building block for muscle. So wouldn't make sense to up your protein consumption if you want to pack on the muscle?

Sort of, but it's not that simple because there are a couple other variables involved.

First of all there's a bit of an upper limit to how much protein your body can make use of as "building blocks" within a certain time frame, and extra protein beyond that is likely to just be burned for energy. I think a basic BFL diet gets pretty close to that upper limit, and perhaps even passes is it, and that's despite that the fact that the basic BFL diet is also designed to give you a bit of a caloric deficit, since the primary purpose is losing weight.

The other big variable is that operating at a caloric deficit vs. operating at a caloric surplus provokes two pretty opposite hormonal responses in the body. A caloric deficit (especially combined with exercise) provokes a hormonal response focused on breaking down tissue to give you enough energy to make up for what you're not getting from food. The tissue that it breaks down for energy is both fat and muscle. Also, at a caloric deficit, the proteins from your food have a higher likelihood of also being burned for energy rather than being used to build up muscle tissue.

If you're severely restricting calories and only doing cardio, this is bad because you're going to lose a lot of muscle tissue along with fat, and you'll end up weaker and with a lower BMR. If you're strength training and getting decent nutrition, then your body will devote some resources to rebuilding muscle tissue when you rest, but since you're at a caloric deficit then your body will probably only bring your muscle mass back to what it was pre-workout and not add to it beyond that. Of course, if your caloric deficit is too big, then you can still lose muscle mass despite the strength training... which is why you shouldn't try to lose much more than 2lbs per week.

A huge caloric surplus, on the other hand, stimulates a hormonal environment that will cause your body to use its energy for building up tissue. Again, this means both muscle and fat! If you're sedentary, your body will lean more towards converting other macronutrients into lipids and stuffing them into adipose tissue (aka fat); if you've been strength training, then your body will lean more towards synthesizing proteins in muscle tissue. But chances are both of those things will be happening to some extent.

Now, hypothetically, let's say that you have been eating a basic BFL diet and have lost all the fat that you want to lose, and now you want to focus on building muscle. What do you do? Well, you're already getting enough protein--you already have the building blocks. What you've been lacking is the huge energy surplus required to tell your body to use those building blocks instead of burning a large portion of them as a secondary source of energy.

So, what do you do? Yeah, you got it--pile on the carbs (and some healthy fats)!

Now, if I was talking to someone who was already eating 3500 calories per day but only 50g of protein, then I'd be telling that person that they need more protein. But this is a BFL forum, so for most of us the protein part of the puzzle is already there.

[Rhone]

It occurred to me today that I should clarify something--you don't need to purposely avoid increasing your protein intake when you're bulking up. The overall point is that (if you're starting from a BFL diet where you're already getting sufficient protein but insufficient calories for bulking up) drastically increasing your overall calorie intake is more important than protein. Carbs are a little bit more efficient, energy-wise, and fats pack a lot more calories in a small space, but that doesn't mean you can't have more protein too.

If the easiest thing for you to add to your turkey burger to make it into a bulk-up meal is a second turkey burger, go for it! (And have that slice of cheese you might have avoided while trying to lose weight.)