[quote]SteelyD wrote:
I think some people have a hard time with long term goals and projects and can’t see big picture past their own worlds.[/quote]
Well, that and looking at someone’s current progress and making all kinds of assumptions.
Permabulker? LOL. Because of course you know the goals someone has by staring at them. Bottom line, if it worked…it worked. Fuck the dumb shit.
I know there are a couple of things that affect me differntly than most. and the biggest is the fact is my body hates to go up in weight. It is amazing how well it adapts to excess calories. I get hot. I start to fidget, to much energy and I already stuggle sitting still too long so my activity level does not help. But also just breaking into the low 200’s my body doesnt want to be their. Its fighting every step of the way. But also differnt than some is my goal of being as big and lean as I can. So for me that means i need lots of mass especailly with my damn long skinny frame.
@Steely: i am one those 1 or 0’s you hate me too? 
Just like dave date wrote in his blast or cruise article. Thats how i approach everyting in life. If i like it and really want to acheive i go 200% if i dont its hard for me to do anythign with it. That goes for school/work/hobbies and bulking and cutting. I would rather just pile on calories (because i can with my apetite and physiology) and gain weight. For cutting i would rather do it fast and hard (insert childish joke here).
@All: anyone have or seen studies on weight lifters in a controled calorie enviroment where they were fed excess calories and mass gain was looked at? I am wondering if there have ever been studies like that with active weight lifters who ate 500 above maintence 1000 1500 2000. You get the picture. Obviously fat gain would go up but did lean mass gain go up as well. I would be very interested in that.
Is the slow gain mentality from only anecdoctal evidence?
Course i cant say i have truly bulked yet. I went from 155 Jan '11 to now 200ish but still havent lost my 6pack and barely gained an 1.5 on my waist.
I just like to play devils advocate 
You won’t find studies like that, but we do know that even in obese people, many of them have increased lean body mass and it didn’t happen in the gym.
That is annoying. That would be very interesting
[quote]wannabebig250 wrote:
[quote]digitalairair wrote:
I still read this site from time to time but stopped posting for about 3-4 years and just started posting here again and getting mostly positive reposes during my recent bulk phase.
What did I miss ? [/quote]
just the usual. PX became a vegetarian. the new head guru of the site is this guy roguevampire. Thibadeau gave up lifting and switched to chess. [/quote]
You got me on the first part for 5 seconds until I saw the chess part.
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
@Steely: i am one those 1 or 0’s you hate me too?
[/quote]
I didn’t say I “hate” anyone. In the past 10 years, the word “hate” has been redifined to mean “disagree” which is fucking retarded.
Some of your posts indicate to me that you are not a binary thinker. Approaching something full bore to achieve a goal is not binary. I give you more credit than that.
If you suspect that you are a binary thinker, then you’re likely to hit a lot of roadblocks 
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]wannabebig250 wrote:
because it seems like most of them are already close to their goal weight now. they dont want to add significant amounts to their frame. only 5-10lbs here and there. i get what they mean by gaining while remaining lean, when its only a few more lbs of mass they want, there isnt a point to gain 25lbs, lose their abs, and cut 15 of those pounds for the net goal of 10lbs when they couldve stayed lean throughout the whole process.[/quote]
This is absolutely right, but the problem is that this has now become the dominant advice to EVERYONE no matter what the goals are. I mean, honestly at this point, I am betting there are guys out there finding it damned hard to see all abs and gain much muscle so they give up on any further goals as a result.
Unless the advice is “find what works for you” it is probably wrong for someone.
Mind you, we have guys right here, some way smaller, who still think that anyone who made progress and didn’t stay under 10% is obese.[/quote]
i noticed this mind set alot on the boards lately. i think it comes down to the fact that the noobs are unable to think for themselves. they see so-so who is big and lean already, and think that if THAT guy is big and lean then I have to stay lean while i try and get big. the noobs dont have the…intelligence?..to think for themselves, find out how the human body actually works, and plan their gains on the science behind it. instead they see a guy who is already big and lean say that lean gains are his priority at the moment, and misinterpret it as “everybody has to stay lean while gaining.”
[quote]Airtruth wrote:
If all you care about is muscle then yes gaining 50lbs while possibly gaining an extra oz of muscle is fine, but all things being equal, you will not gain 5 more pounds of muscle because you went 5000 calories over maintenance and somebody else went only 2000 over. You will gain the 25lbs more fat though since that’s what the body uses as storage.[/quote]
^^THIS.
I 100% agree with this. Going on an “ALL OUT BULK” (where you are gaining a significant amount of body fat) wont net you a significantly greater MUSCLE GAIN (key word… muscle, not size or mass) than a “Clean Bulk” (dont like that phrase but its applicable)
If you’re eating 500-1,000 calories over your maintenance level (with the correct macros) you’ll gain just as much muscle as someone who is eating 2,000-3,000 calories over maintenance. You wont put on as much “size”, “weight” or “mass” but your muscle gain will be the same IMO.
This is an interesting topic.
Not want to add to the argument, but couple of interesting questions. I thought the video was very entertaining btw.
In the video, FY eats a lot of highly processed foods (eating dirty?) with less than ideal protein sources - a lot of sausages (low quality processed protein) hot dogs, cheese rice, etc from 7-11.
For those the big bulkers, when you eat > 6000 Cals a day, do you find the source of food matters greatly? Obviously if you want to eat a 1,500 Calorie meal, you can eat 3 hot dogs, 1 bowl cheese rice, 1 bowl corn soup (ala the FY 7-11 diet) or maybe 1 large Rotissiere chicken + potatoes or 1 entire KFC bucket.
Obviously you are beyond worrying on macros too much in a huge calorie diet - but did you find the food type matters?
Not necessarily “eating clean” here - there’s a lot of junk food that is high protein low(er) carb that still provides tons of cals, like 1 entire bag frozen nuggets, etc etc.
When I started bumping from 2000 Cals (skinny fat phase) to 3500 Cals in a sudden jump I paid for it in the 1st month. Talking about serious gas, indigestion and a lot of time spent on the porcelain throne. Also, a very very “bloated” feel that just follows you around the whole day and keeps you awake at night. The symptoms fade in the second month or so (or maybe the body just gets used to the cals) but the toilet time and the bloated feeling never really goes away (for me anyway).
I can’t imagine going from 2/3000 up to 6/8000. Was it tough for you guys or did you just have superhuman stomachs lol.
[quote]SteelyD wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
@Steely: i am one those 1 or 0’s you hate me too?
[/quote]
I didn’t say I “hate” anyone. In the past 10 years, the word “hate” has been redifined to mean “disagree” which is fucking retarded.
Some of your posts indicate to me that you are not a binary thinker. Approaching something full bore to achieve a goal is not binary. I give you more credit than that.
If you suspect that you are a binary thinker, then you’re likely to hit a lot of roadblocks ;)[/quote]
Sorry if that came off serious. It was a sacastic joke. It works much better in real life.
I am not a binary thinking. A very overly scientific and rational to the point where most would call me fairly cold and unemotional. Its a gift and curse.
Just the go all out or dont go at all mentality is what I have. Explailned in one of those posts up there.
[quote]gregron wrote:
[quote]Airtruth wrote:
If all you care about is muscle then yes gaining 50lbs while possibly gaining an extra oz of muscle is fine, but all things being equal, you will not gain 5 more pounds of muscle because you went 5000 calories over maintenance and somebody else went only 2000 over. You will gain the 25lbs more fat though since that’s what the body uses as storage.[/quote]
^^THIS.
I 100% agree with this. Going on an “ALL OUT BULK” (where you are gaining a significant amount of body fat) wont net you a significantly greater MUSCLE GAIN (key word… muscle, not size or mass) than a “Clean Bulk” (dont like that phrase but its applicable)
If you’re eating 500-1,000 calories over your maintenance level (with the correct macros) you’ll gain just as much muscle as someone who is eating 2,000-3,000 calories over maintenance. You wont put on as much “size”, “weight” or “mass” but your muscle gain will be the same IMO.
This is an interesting topic.[/quote]
Has there ever been proof of this or is it word of mouth? I am seriously interested in this. I am not sure we have enough knowledge of human phsiology to come out and state this as fact. There is certinaly the possiblity that some people might have genetics where this is false and maybe even a larger popultion this is false but no one pushes to that becuase people tell thme not to
In my opinion, this is a basic breakdown of how muscle building works…
Your body needs a certain amount of rest to optimally build more muscle.
Your body needs a certain amount of fuel (food) to optimally build more muscle.
Your body needs a certain amount of stimulus (weight lifting/exercise) to optimally build more muscle.
Everyones body is different so that “certain amount” will be different for each person.
Ok so here we go…
Will giving your body more rest than it needs to optimally build muscle make you gain muscle faster? I say no.
Will giving your body more fuel than it needs to optimally build muscle make you gain muscle faster? I say no.
Will giving your body more stimulus than it needs to optimally build muscle make you gain muscle faster? I say no.
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]Airtruth wrote:
[quote]digitalairair wrote:
If I can gain 50 pounds in a year, and half of it is fat, I still have 25 pounds of muscles.
vs. someone who progresses slowly, with the mentality of 1 pound of muscle a month…and stay leaned through out and added about 15 pounds of muscles, I still have more muslces than he does.
And then you say, now you need to cut 25 pounds of fat, and the other guy can just keep going and by gaining more lean muscle mass without having to cut.
Well, if can lose 25 pounds of fat in the next 5 months, then I would probably still end up with more muscles than the other guy. Plus the fact that after you cut and restrict calories, your body would bounce right up and make the next bulking phase that much easier in the first few months.
Kelly Baggett mentioned a study where a person who just does nothing but sit on his couch and eat still gained muscles underneath the fat.
PLus, it’s more fun doing it this wa
I think I’ll keep doing it this way. It’s more fun too because you get to make more exiting videos this way.
[/quote]
If all you care about is muscle then yes gaining 50lbs while possibly gaining an extra oz of muscle is fine, but all things being equal, you will not gain 5 more pounds of muscle because you went 5000 calories over maintenance and somebody else went only 2000 over. You will gain the 25lbs more fat though since that’s what the body uses as storage. This is not that important for an average person who wants a decent build, but if your looking to compete or be optimal lean muscle mass, you’ve put yourself in a deep hole.
Minus steroids fat cells hardly every go away, while creating new fat cells happens all the time. This is far more verified in biology then exactly how many calories you need for muscle. When losing weight, the body extracts the fat from fat cells, but for the most part does not destroy them. It would take extreme starvation to kill them, not calorie deficit but starvation where you lose muscle mass.
On top of that you have to worry about the fat gain around organs which provides a much more blocky appearance, and is causes more unnecessary issues. This is the reason most extreme calorie bulkers can hardly ever come into a show with the conditioning of people that grow into shows. I’m only talking Natty. If your argument was true bulkers would destroy everyone else at natural bodybuilding shows. ALL they would have to do is lose 25lbs of fat since they have this amazing 25lbs of muscle over everybody else.
This is negligible if you you don’t care too much about fat gain and want to look larger for pictures here and there. [/quote]
So would you consider MODOK to have that blocky physique? I would not think so. He is the only one on this site that i can think of that has really leaned out. But he was at 300lbs and a bit soft. But in his old avatar and pics he looked pretty damn good. New fat cells arent going to just start popping up out of no where. You need to be carrying a lot of fat. Think over 20%. Really who is going over 20% that workouts hard 4+ days a week. and lives an active life. I dont see fat cell hyperplasia being a problem unless you push fat gain way past want anyone should[/quote]
I prefer no comment. Haven’t seen his picture in a while, from what I remember he is a great example of what I’m saying fairly ripped but still blockyer then the typical Natty Judges, or even Fitness magazine covers are looking for. Now I know he wasn’t in competition condition but the overall look is still there. This is not bad, like I said if it’s just a random hobby and you don’t care fine, but in terms of OPTIMAL, I don’t see gaining 300lbs for a natural person under 6’ as any benefit. More like a detriment in the long run for a person with desires to compete.
And yes fat cell do pop out out, no it’s not out of nowhere. If you are 200lbs and 20% then that’s 40lb of fat. If a natural person goes to 300, assuming he stays at 20% which is highly unlikely thats 60lbs of fat. Yes Cells were added. 20 extra lbs of fat, and all kinds of new cells. I doubt even he would go back up to 300. 99% of extreme bulkers would not go up to the weight they originally did if they had to do it all over again. Specially competitors.
[quote]NotaQuitta wrote:
Not want to add to the argument, but couple of interesting questions. I thought the video was very entertaining btw.
In the video, FY eats a lot of highly processed foods (eating dirty?) with less than ideal protein sources - a lot of sausages (low quality processed protein) hot dogs, cheese rice, etc from 7-11.
For those the big bulkers, when you eat > 6000 Cals a day, do you find the source of food matters greatly? Obviously if you want to eat a 1,500 Calorie meal, you can eat 3 hot dogs, 1 bowl cheese rice, 1 bowl corn soup (ala the FY 7-11 diet) or maybe 1 large Rotissiere chicken + potatoes or 1 entire KFC bucket.
Obviously you are beyond worrying on macros too much in a huge calorie diet - but did you find the food type matters?
Not necessarily “eating clean” here - there’s a lot of junk food that is high protein low(er) carb that still provides tons of cals, like 1 entire bag frozen nuggets, etc etc.
When I started bumping from 2000 Cals (skinny fat phase) to 3500 Cals in a sudden jump I paid for it in the 1st month. Talking about serious gas, indigestion and a lot of time spent on the porcelain throne. Also, a very very “bloated” feel that just follows you around the whole day and keeps you awake at night. The symptoms fade in the second month or so (or maybe the body just gets used to the cals) but the toilet time and the bloated feeling never really goes away (for me anyway).
I can’t imagine going from 2/3000 up to 6/8000. Was it tough for you guys or did you just have superhuman stomachs lol.
Can only speak for my self here. Will quoate fast and come back in fill in when work slows down
for health yes it matters. For physique probably not unless you want to get into the very small details of certian foods eleciting differnt genes turning on and off and how much that actually affects the system.
Never had that problem
3)I would almost say less as long as you get decent portion of calories form good foods because you are consuming so much food you are getting in a lot of vitamins and minerals more so than when you were low cals. Food volume is much higher. If you are consuming foods with less than optimal micro nutreints then i would just keep it the same maybe slilght increase
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
Has there ever been proof of this or is it word of mouth? I am seriously interested in this.
[/quote]
I think that the “proof” is from word of mouth. People who have successfully used this method with their own physiques and have seen results are the “proof” that it works. I doubt there has been or ever will be a scientific study on this topic.
I didn’t state that as fact… I said it was my opinion (“IMO”)
Holy shit this has got boring fast, 12 pages of bullshit bickering fml.
[quote]gregron wrote:
In my opinion, this is a basic breakdown of how muscle building works…
Your body needs a certain amount of rest to optimally build more muscle.
Your body needs a certain amount of fuel (food) to optimally build more muscle.
Your body needs a certain amount of stimulus (weight lifting/exercise) to optimally build more muscle.
Everyones body is different so that “certain amount” will be different for each person.
Ok so here we go…
Will giving your body more rest than it needs to optimally build muscle make you gain muscle faster? I say no.
Will giving your body more fuel than it needs to optimally build muscle make you gain muscle faster? I say no.
Will giving your body more stimulus than it needs to optimally build muscle make you gain muscle faster? I say no.
[/quote]
It’s obvious to anyone but permabulkers. Calorie intake has a point of diminishing returns. This is absolutely well known to everyone, from scientific literature to bodybuilding articles.
‘BUT I GAINED SO MUCH MASS ON MY ALL OUT BULK’
Yes, you gained as much muscle as if you add eaten right, and then a whole bunch of fat.
These guys look like absolute slobs but justify it with ‘mass’.
I mean, how can you even call this bodybuilding? If you look like a turd, and end up 80lbs away from stage condition?
This reminds me of Mac in Always Sunny, which lampooned this phenomenon perfectly.
‘It’s called bulking. I’m cultivating mass.’ - Mac