To come to the defense of the Bio professor. His experience may limit his beliefs. There are anectdotals claiming this and claiming that. What I can say is that I believe it is possible given the right individual, and training.
[quote]JLu wrote:
I thought there was some study that found the absolute max amount of muscle (MUSCLE, as in MUSCLE FIBRE, not WEIGHT) was like 0.5 lbs per week?[/quote]
How could some study ever prove what ALL humans will have as a maximum amount of muscle gained in a week? The idea itself makes no sense. They may be able to test a specific group and get a RANGE, but even YOU should doubt there being some study proving a limit like that.
That is like saying they’ve proven that all humans can only absorb 30gr of protein in one sitting.
It depends what you consider “muscle”. If you agree that stored glycogen and water add to muscle, then ya, its certainly possible. If you are thinking of muscle as just an increase in size/# of contractile fibers then no, absolutely impossible.
Dont want to go into the myofibril/sacroplasmic discussion, but basically if you haven’t been eatin very high calories or carbs, you can probably store a lot more than you currently are. For example if you’ve been eating 2000 cals a day and only 200g of carbs, and go up to 4000-5000 kcals and something like 500-700g carbs, you are going to almost immediately gain 10-20lbs. This combined with training can certainly make a weight change of 30lbs in 5 or even 3 months possible.
I recently did this and went from 190 to 210 in about 4-6 weeks.
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
your professor has never heard of I, Bodybuilder I bet[/quote]
Ya, it will probably be a very effective program. No, it probably won’t be the best program or training methodology in history.
And 30 pounds of dry muscle in 5 months is a a very difficult task to accomplish, especially if you’ve already trained seriously for over a year. I’d still say it is possible though. Steroids would significantly help.
I have gained 25 pounds in just under 3 months from 159 to 184. From July to today. As you can see some has been fat but most has been muscle. These are not newb gains either, or muscle memory.
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
your professor has never heard of I, Bodybuilder I bet[/quote]
x2
beginner gains, Poliquin claims, I bodybuilder
[quote]Papa Nick wrote:
I have gained 25 pounds in just under 3 months from 159 to 184. From July to today. As you can see some has been fat but most has been muscle. These are not newb gains either, or muscle memory.[/quote]
How do you know how much fat you have gained if you didn’t do a bf measurement before and after? If you did, let us know your stats and how you got them (calipers, bodpod, full body scan).
No to dis you, but I don’t see how “most has been muscle” judging from the photo alone. But you are definitely making progress and you deserve props for that!
I could see someone with very good to incredible genetics, well rounded lifting programs, and Nutritional Guildance, putting on 30lbs. Would it be dry? Depends on the person I guess. I worked with young athletes and or just motivated teens who have put on good size. Never 30lbs in 5 Months because of lack of Nutritional Support (tell a young kid to eat as much as it takes to put on size and most of em arent prepared)
[quote]Roundhead wrote:
Wrah wrote:
Blaze_108 wrote:
Wrah wrote:
Lets put it this way: 10% bodyfat on a 140 pound, 5"10 guy in a dry condition would be the starting point, “skinny, untrained guy”. Now, 10% bodyfat and 170 pounds in dry condition with the same guy could probably win some bodybuilding shows…
Lol. while the mass would make him look a LOT bigger, no one will win a contest at 5’10 170 if they’re at 10% bf.
Believe it or not, not everyone is 250 pounds on stage…
Indeed, but no one takes the stage at 10% bodyfat.[/quote]
I beg to differ. Here is a photo from the 2006 Kentucky Muscle Classic. I assure you (since I was at 6% bf in this class–but not pictured here) that the second guy from the left is over 10% bf . . . and he’s on stage . . . competing.
I know a guy who was like 6’4’, 155lbs as an 18 yr old at 10%, he’s now 225 at 10% 10 years later. He put on 40lb his first year.
Who cares?
[quote]Roundhead wrote:
Wrah wrote:
Blaze_108 wrote:
Wrah wrote:
Lets put it this way: 10% bodyfat on a 140 pound, 5"10 guy in a dry condition would be the starting point, “skinny, untrained guy”. Now, 10% bodyfat and 170 pounds in dry condition with the same guy could probably win some bodybuilding shows…
Lol. while the mass would make him look a LOT bigger, no one will win a contest at 5’10 170 if they’re at 10% bf.
Believe it or not, not everyone is 250 pounds on stage…
Indeed, but no one takes the stage at 10% bodyfat.[/quote]
Haha, you’d be surprised.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
That is like saying they’ve proven that all humans can only absorb 30gr of protein in one sitting.[/quote]
wait, what? Maybe I’ll tie 2 bikes together in order to digest 60g, yeah that’s it
[quote]Papa Nick wrote:
I have gained 25 pounds in just under 3 months from 159 to 184. From July to today. As you can see some has been fat but most has been muscle. These are not newb gains either, or muscle memory.[/quote]
If they’re not newb gains and it’s not muscle memory then what was it? It has to be one or the other because your first picture isn’t a picture of a highly trained individual…no offense.
Good gains though.
[quote]Papa Nick wrote:
I have gained 25 pounds in just under 3 months from 159 to 184. From July to today. As you can see some has been fat but most has been muscle. These are not newb gains either, or muscle memory.[/quote]
So, you gained maybe 15 lbs of muscle in 3 months - or perhaps only 10 - since you do not have an accurate assessment of your bodyfat.
Great job of course, but that’s not 34 lbs w/no fat gain at all, like that guy is claiming.
[quote]davidcox1 wrote:
Roundhead wrote:
Wrah wrote:
Blaze_108 wrote:
Wrah wrote:
Lets put it this way: 10% bodyfat on a 140 pound, 5"10 guy in a dry condition would be the starting point, “skinny, untrained guy”. Now, 10% bodyfat and 170 pounds in dry condition with the same guy could probably win some bodybuilding shows…
Lol. while the mass would make him look a LOT bigger, no one will win a contest at 5’10 170 if they’re at 10% bf.
Believe it or not, not everyone is 250 pounds on stage…
Indeed, but no one takes the stage at 10% bodyfat.
I beg to differ. Here is a photo from the 2006 Kentucky Muscle Classic. I assure you (since I was at 6% bf in this class–but not pictured here) that the second guy from the left is over 10% bf . . . and he’s on stage . . . competing.
[/quote]
The original comment was about WINNING a contest at 10% body fat.
There are always guys on stages at local comps who make you shake your head and that guy on the left isn’t even close to being some of the worst I’ve seen. At least he looks built. I’ve seen some who look like they don’t even lift weights AND didn’t diet at all. Some here would actually call those people “bodybuilders” simply because they competed.
[quote]3IdSpetsnaz wrote:
30 LBs Muscle Mass Gain In 5 Months? Realistic, or unrealistic. It seemed to me this about what a non-pl’er would put on after 5 months of dedicated training in pling (lots of squatting) at the gym I used to go to.
I was talking to my bio proffessor who is a big health nut, and he said that is only possible with steroids. I disagree, I think 30 lbs of Muscle Mass in 3 months would be roids, 30lbs in 5 months would be impressive, but not impossible for someone of a young age and of a relatively undeveloped physique.[/quote]
What is a “health nut”?
I see a lot of “health nuts” at work that think eating a cup of yogurt for a meal is healthy, and they sure as shit don’t know jack about building muscle.
[quote]Davinci.v2 wrote:
Papa Nick wrote:
I have gained 25 pounds in just under 3 months from 159 to 184. From July to today. As you can see some has been fat but most has been muscle. These are not newb gains either, or muscle memory.
If they’re not newb gains and it’s not muscle memory then what was it? It has to be one or the other because your first picture isn’t a picture of a highly trained individual…no offense.[/quote]
I agree I do not look highly trained, nd they very well may be newb gains. But I considered my newb gains to be when I went from 130 to 155, although this was awhile ago.