Getting lean whilst increasing strength

[vince_monaco]

I've been lurking on here for the past few weeks, reading and learning, and have finally got round to joining up

My gymnastics experience is zero, although I do have some prior experience with basic bodyweight exercises (dips, press-ups, leg raises, pull-ups etc) and up until a couple of years ago I'd been weightlifting at least 3 times/week for about 10 years.

There's one question/issue that I've always struggled with though, and I'm hoping someone on here can provide an answer (or at least point me in the right direction): how do you increase in strength whilst getting lean? My weightlifting days consisted of alternate bulking and cutting phases, with mixed results, but I'm assuming that male gymnasts would never do this.

I've read about intermittent fasting and my understanding is that you consume an overall calorie deficit, but are taking on a short-term surplus when most needed such as post-training (someone please correct me if this is wrong) but I'm not sure how this can work as I always thought that the post-exercises recovery lasted well into the next day, maybe even the day after that, meaning that a short-term calorie surplus wouldn't be enough.

[Joshua Naterman]

It's not really about calories quite as much as it is about spreading your protein out through the day.

Without drugs, the human anabolic maximum for protein is something like 1.5g/kg. In other words, at 100kg your body can't actually use more than 150-160g of protein as protein. If you take more you will absorb it all for the most part, but your body will just turn it into sugar. That's stupid because protein is more expensive AND you put extra stress on your kidneys, which can and does lead to premature kidney failure in many retired athletes. It is happening to a number of NFL guys.

10g/hour, preferably of whey, is what you really want for optimal results. Other than that, replace the carbs that you burn (both through your normal metabolism AND through exercise) and you will be fine. At my size, 160-ish g of protein is what I take in, along with about 300-400g of carbs. That's 620 calories from protein and 1200-1600 from carbs. The fat can come from my body fat, which it does, which is why I am consistently getting leaner and stronger and bigger. It really is that simple.

Keep it simple. If your diet follows these numbers and you are eating every 3 hours or more frequently then you are doing it right and you will build muscle and lose fat simultaneously. No drugs needed, no diet pills needed, no magic wands or hocus pocus. Just basic physiology at work.

[vince_monaco]

Yeah that makes sense. Thanks

Based on your explanation I think that in the past I was probably taking on too much of all macronutrients whilst bulking, and probably not enough protein whilst cutting, thus the patchy outcome.

I'll try re-jigging my diet based on what you've said, keep focusing solely on the gymnastics strength exercises and see how I get on.

[Joshua Naterman]

Remember to spread out the protein. You don't have a protein reserve tank so for optimal results you literally want 10g every hour, on the hour. Eating 20g of meat with some whole milk every 2-3 hours is also reasonable and should give a favorable whole-food approach if you prefer that. The type of meat doesn't matter, but if you're eating fatty beef you can skip the milk.

[Quick Start Test Smith]

Josh, how do you get that many grams from carbs? It seems like I would have to eat a TON of lettuce, bell peppers, broccoli, and cabbage to get that many carbs! Any advice?

Also - protein synthesis does not increase after a workout, correct? So regardless of how long you train, as long as you use the metabolic calculations you mentioned before to replace the carbs that you expend during the workout and get 10 grams of whey every single hour, it's good. Right?

I think I have been doing this semi-accidentally for the last week and a half. You mentioned something about 10g P an hour, so I've been doing that for basically all day except for fairly large meals of meat and vegetables here and there (but I don't get anything for a few hours after a large meal because of all the protein from it and the slow digesting). Other than that, I get 10g of whey and a few pieces of lettuce/broccoli every hour, and despite being sick and eating a significant amount of ice cream over the holidays (I wonder if there's a connection lol), I've really maintained my overall fitness fairly well. Definitely a TON better than I would have expected.

[Joshua Naterman]

Josh, how do you get that many grams from carbs? It seems like I would have to eat a TON of lettuce, bell peppers, broccoli, and cabbage to get that many carbs! Any advice?

Also - protein synthesis does not increase after a workout, correct? So regardless of how long you train, as long as you use the metabolic calculations you mentioned before to replace the carbs that you expend during the workout and get 10 grams of whey every single hour, it's good. Right?

I think I have been doing this semi-accidentally for the last week and a half. You mentioned something about 10g P an hour, so I've been doing that for basically all day except for fairly large meals of meat and vegetables here and there (but I don't get anything for a few hours after a large meal because of all the protein from it and the slow digesting). Other than that, I get 10g of whey and a few pieces of lettuce/broccoli every hour, and despite being sick and eating a significant amount of ice cream over the holidays (I wonder if there's a connection lol), I've really maintained my overall fitness fairly well. Definitely a TON better than I would have expected.

There IS an increase IF there is glucose and protein in the blood. That's why the glucose/whey solution is so important... I still don't think the body can handle more than 10.4g per hour, but it might go up a bit for an hour or two. That's actually a pretty long time, but if you do this correctly then it really isn't a problem to put on 3-4 lbs of muscle each month, at minimum.

For the carbs, and this is an important part to not skimp on, I just eat buckwheat for the calories and veggies for the nutrients. It's not possible to eat veggies for all the calories, it's too expensive. Brown rice is ok too, but the buckwheat really is far superior. Mostly because there are 5g of soluble fiber per serving. This significantly smooths out the glucose curve and thus the insulin levels, which makes it easy to stay lean. I have about 34g per meal. I am eating quite often Feels really good. Fasting is still not a problem, very easy. Happens by accident sometimes.

[Rikke Olsen]

Slizz, forgive me if I've missed something in your incredibly many (and thanks for that!) posts, but are you still doing the alternate day diet-thing? One day 30-40% of RMR (and what do you think about doing 20%?) and the other whatever you feel like?

On your low days, do you just cut all the fat, but keep P and C the same?

I get the sense you're one of the GB oracles

[Quick Start Test Smith]

Looks like I am going to be ordering some buckwheat.

[Joshua Naterman]

I occasionally do the alternate day thing, but not right now. You figured it out, I just keep protein and carbs the same, and have zero fat. Nothing to it. When I exercise I replace the % burned from carbs only. The end! Just make sure veggies are a part of those carbs!

[Rikke Olsen]

That is clever! Your philosophies (if I may call them so) reminds me more and more of the Jaminets from Perfect Health Diet. You must have seen them?

And also, is there some kind of guideline as to how many carbs one should have as a baseline (i.e. regardless of exercise)?

And sure thing - veggies are tha bomb! Couldn't, and wouldn't, live without them!

[Joshua Naterman]

That is clever! Your philosophies (if I may call them so) reminds me more and more of the Jaminets from Perfect Health Diet. You must have seen them?

And also, is there some kind of guideline as to how many carbs one should have as a baseline (i.e. regardless of exercise)?

And sure thing - veggies are tha bomb! Couldn't, and wouldn't, live without them!

The who?!

30% of your RMR is baseline.

[Rikke Olsen]

I can't believe you don't know them!

http://www.perfecthealthdiet.com

They are some of the first "paleo"-people to insist low protein, somewhat moderate (at least in paleo circles) carbs and lots of fat, where fat, and not carbs, are what you cut if you want to lose weight. They are both scientists, too.

[Joshua Naterman]

I think my mom just bought this... lol! The cover for the book looks very familiar. She was telling me that the book is basically saying everything I have been telling her she and my dad need to do.

[Rikke Olsen]

Hey, I'm not the only one, then!

They are really nice people (I've only talked to them via their site, though), have made several guest appearances on different podcasts etc. I have their book too, but actually haven't read all of it, let alone studied it. I've just skimmed what I thought was interesting, but I think I'll have a more in-depth look at it.

They advocate intermittent fasting, 4-600 carb calories from starches, about the same amount of animal protein, and the rest should be fats. They highly recommend fermented foods, coconut, bone broths, organ meats etc., etc.

Another great thing about their book is that they actually refer to amazingly many studies, so it's not just something they "seem to know".

I really think you should ask your mom to borrow it from her

[MH87]

^ That actually sounds reasonable, usually when I hear about 'diet books' I cringe but that sounds like its on the right track at least.

[Larry Roseman]

I've read about intermittent fasting and my understanding is that you consume an overall calorie deficit, but are taking on a short-term surplus when most needed such as post-training (someone please correct me if this is wrong) but I'm not sure how this can work as I always thought that the post-exercises recovery lasted well into the next day, maybe even the day after that, meaning that a short-term calorie surplus wouldn't be enough.

I feel the term intermittent caloric restriction (ICR) is more appropriate, in my case at least.

Personally I don't run a deficit "diet" day immediately following a surplus/weights day - rather just a maintenance recovery or endurance day. I don't eat at a deficit until the second or third day after weights. But I'm only working out with weights or GB 2x week so it's easier to schedule this. Though protein intake is my main concern, I'm also concerned about getting enough calories for the day or two after to support and recoup my energy levels as well as muscular development.

[ChocoGymnast]

The fat can come from my body fat, which it does, which is why I am consistently getting leaner and stronger and bigger. It really is that simple.

Am I to understand that you have virtually no fat in your diet?

[Joshua Naterman]

This was true for a time, mostly due to less than ideal circumstances with my schedule and ability to carry fats with me, but things tend to work best when you have the carbs you need, the protein you need, and the rest of your energy coming from fats. For me, that works out to having 2-3 teaspoons of a grapeseed oil and olive oil blend together with 1 fish oil capsule at each meal. That ends up being 8-10 tablespoons of oil per day, which I have with my veggies. This seems to work the best, since meat is currently not a staple in my diet.

This works well for short periods of time, but your best bet is to stay in near-perfect energy balance throughout the day, maintaining a SMALL deficit for most of the day (never more than 300-400 calories below where you need to be for that part of the day). If you do that you will lose body fat with ease.

For many there really aren't any hard and fast percentages to run by but having 5-6g carbs per kilogram of bodyweight works well for most athletes. Those who participate in longer endurance sports like half marathons and longer will really benefit much more from a 9-10g carbs per kg of bw diet. For me this works out to be 480-540g of carbs per day, giving me about 2000-2200 calories. I have around 160-180g of protein, giving me a max of 720 calories. I need about 4000 per day. As you can see, I still need about 1000 calories from fat. I COULD get them from carbs, but because I don't really need that many carbs there tends to be more of a benefit to consuming the extra calories from fat. Besides, fat is tasty. It's stupid to have a diet you don't enjoy.

[ChocoGymnast]

Gotta say, after reading most of your articles on this subject and making the changes, my work capacity has increased tremendously. I always feel like I can do more, and I'm never burned out after workouts. I was considering having a diet that eliminated almost all fat from my diet, to see if it would lean me out while letting me grow. This is why I asked.

I also tried out your suggestions when it comes to hypertrophy training using bodyweight progressions. My lats thank you.

[Larry Roseman]

This works well for short periods of time, but your best bet is to stay in near-perfect energy balance throughout the day, maintaining a SMALL deficit for most of the day (never more than 300-400 calories below where you need to be for that part of the day). If you do that you will lose body fat with ease.

I've been trying to work intermittent dieting and moderate levels of training

with though having mixed results. On average yes, my deficit has been around 300 calories per day.

Some surplus days, some deficit though. I've had a dexa before and after, as I got a deal on a package and

also I'm lazy to take measurements. The first dexa was right after a diet and I was 171 pounds and 18.4% fat.

Then had vacation and didn't worry about food for a few months. Then started intermittent dieting

2x week around 3 months ago and also moderate training.

According to the second dexa had some fat loss (maybe 200g) mostly hips and stomach but also some lean mass loss(500g) from the right leg and right leg only! Right leg only is weird. All measurements are within the range of error so hard to say. My net bodyfat went up to 18.5% because of the lean loss.

In any event ran across "Advanced Sports Nutrition" by professor Dan Benardot.

(This is Josh's professor). It's a legit link posted by the publisher Human Kinetics.

I'm wondering what his stand on intermittant dieting during training or in general would be?

It sounds like he doesn't like people to run weekly deficits during training periods, regardless of

whether it's small, or only on non-workout days.

Likewise in gaining mass, he seems to be emphaising a surplus over the week,

as seen on http://www.healthline.com/hlbook/nut-pr ... l-activity

The formula he uses for mass game seems strange though. 1.5g protein per desired kg gain may be the

maximum utilizable for anabolism, however half of what's ingested get's shunted to the liver;

I would imagine at least 5g are needed to be ingested, to get that amount of BCAA and glutamine

to the muscles. No?

[Joshua Naterman]

His stance on intermittent dieting would be don't. It doesn't work with more active people at all, and it is suboptimal at best for those that get results with it. You will never be what you could be, in other words, due to inherent lean mass loss. As you have discovered.

The deficit issue refers to any moment in the day, not a per day thing. Stop thinking in 24 hour, or 4 hour, or any particular increment of time. You need to be within 300-400 calories of energy neutral status (perfect balance) at all times. This is the real reason why snacking works so well when used properly. You prevent excessive debt or surplus.

Dr. Benardot doesn't really look at weekly deficits or surpluses because they do not correlate at all to gains, according to virtually 100% of published, peer-reviewed research. What matters is being at a small (<400 calorie) surplus throughout the day for gaining mass or a small (<400 calorie) deficit for adipose mass loss. If this is accomplished, you will see excellent results without any supplements. This is the part virtually no one adheres to.

[Larry Roseman]

His stance on intermittent dieting would be don't. It doesn't work with more active people at all, and it is suboptimal at best for those that get results with it. You will never be what you could be, in other words, due to inherent lean mass loss. As you have discovered.

The deficit issue refers to any moment in the day, not a per day thing. Stop thinking in 24 hour, or 4 hour, or any particular increment of time. You need to be within 300-400 calories of energy neutral status (perfect balance) at all times. This is the real reason why snacking works so well when used properly. You prevent excessive debt or surplus.

Dr. Benardot doesn't really look at weekly deficits or surpluses because they do not correlate at all to gains, according to virtually 100% of published, peer-reviewed research. What matters is being at a small (<400 calorie) surplus throughout the day for gaining mass or a small (<400 calorie) deficit for adipose mass loss. If this is accomplished, you will see excellent results without any supplements. This is the part virtually no one adheres to.

Very interesting!

It's strange that if I lost lean mass it call came out of my right leg though. I do think it could be something

with the way my body was aligned differently, but no matter. Let's say it was muscle mass (and not water) for the time being, and I want to get it back.

He says ...

"In fact, additional total calories are required to support a larger muscle mass, and protein should constitute the same relative proportion of the extra calories consumed." refering to carrying ths small daily surplus you refer to.

Then he goes on to say ...

"For instance, if a 75-kilogram (165 pound) man wishes to increase his muscle mass by 3 kilograms (6.6 pounds), he would need to consume approximately 1.5 additional grams of protein for each kilogram of muscle mass desired. This amounts to only 4.5 grams of additional protein to support the larger muscle mass. By contrast, 30 grams per kilogram of additional carbohydrate, or 90 grams of additional carbohydrate in total, is required to support the larger muscle mass."

So it amounts to 4.5 grams of protein + 90 grams of carbs surplus per day, or almost 400 calories as you say.

However, that's a 1:20 ratio between protein and carbs. If it's supposed to be eaten at the same ratio as normal it would be 1:4 or something like that. So to me either the protein is too low, or the carbs are too high in the surplus calories . No?

Secondly, eating 1.5g extra protein per day per kilo desired, about half reach the muscles. Let's say that even 1g reaches the muscle, and is all used for growth. Muscle is about 20% protein, so a kilo of it needs around 200g of protein. It would take 200 days for 1 kilo at that excess intake of 1.5g/day. At the same time, over that time 6000 excess grams of carbs, or 24000 calories or about 3 kilos of fat potentially could be added. The rate of growth is truly slow in this model.

To wit, does adding 5 grams of muscle really require 360 calories (72/gram)? It may but the high estimate I've seen for a pound of muscle is 2400 additional carb calories, or about 5 per calories per gram, not 72.

Is he taking into account the muscle damage, rebuilding and protein acretion that goes on after resistance training,

or just accounting for protein synthesis intake due to increased dietary protein? I'm not sure that eating protein

without training can build muscle, though it can improve protein balance.

So it's not adding up to me. It may just be a typo. But perhaps I'm missing something. Any thoughts?

[Joshua Naterman]

Yes, you are not considering the fact that a considerable amount of protein broken down in the body is regenerated without dietary aid and that is not being factored into your calculations... You are also trying to apply algebra to a nonlinear system which is problematic because protein is constructed from carbs as well as dietary protein. You can't assume things the way you are thinking about it... even advanced bodybuilders are in neutral nitrogen balance at 1.2-1.3g/kg of bw. The extra, were they to be taking 1.5g/kg, is enough for about 20% more muscle mass than they are carrying according to their nitrogen balance. Now, that's all by the numbers. I can tell you for certain, based on first hand experience, that this works and works every bit as well as even the wildest overconsumption of protein and calories I have ever tried and does so without putting on all the extra fat mass.

Those protein numbers are also pre-assuming that:

A) you are dealing with a fairly highly trained athlete

B) this hypothetical athlete has his/her protein and calories optimally distributed through the day

C) this hypothetical athlete has already fully adapted to their current protein and calorie intake levels.

The vast majority of competitive athletes don't even fit this bill, and virtually no one who is trying to see physical results from their workouts does so... which means that they are nowhere near the nitrogen balance that they think they are at based on their overall numbers and so are not going to see the kinds of results you would expect to see.

I'm not sure about the 20:1 carbs to protein ratio, but it does take a lot more extra energy to build than to maintain. I will have to ask about this particular point because it's a good question!

However, if you stop trying to be super specific (which never works out, it is way more stress than it is worth) and just focus on maintaining a 100-400 calorie surplus during your waking hours you will get big, strong, and stay lean. It will essentially be your choice of when to simply stop running a surplus and just run steady to maintain. Either that or you'll reach your genetic maximum potential for muscle mass, which won't be for quite a long time unless you're already pretty huge.

[Larry Roseman]

Excellent ... I haven't tried running a constant small surplus yet, except for a few days a week. It may be my next approach.

Though I am far from having all the conditions for it to work ideally, I'm willing to give it a go.

Typically we have a medium breakfast, a small lunch and a large dinner, and snacks. Ideally they'd all be medium.

Cutting down the dinner size is the hardest part. It's also hard to balance calories within a few hundred

eating a varied, largely unmeasured diet. It's all ball park estimates, unlike when you're eating a identical

meals of known composition and quantity.

Also, lately I am doing substantial endurance and strength training (gymnastic and weight), and tennis (about 5 days a week) so don't want to run a deficit, no. If I did a deficit I'd just do limited strength training to create stimulus to avoid loss (hopefully), and mild low intensity cardio if any.

Agree it's better to not over-analyse, though yes I'd be curious in how that 20:1 ratio comes about, if you can' find out.

There is a lot going on in this body of ours of course, and isolating processes can be misleading I do agree.

Thanks much

[Joshua Naterman]

Excellent ... I haven't tried running a constant small surplus yet, except for a few days a week. It may be my next approach.

Though I am far from having all the conditions for it to work ideally, I'm willing to give it a go.

Typically we have a medium breakfast, a small lunch and a large dinner, and snacks. Ideally they'd all be medium.

Cutting down the dinner size is the hardest part. It's also hard to balance calories within a few hundred

eating a varied, largely unmeasured diet. It's all ball park estimates, unlike when you're eating a identical

meals of known composition and quantity.

Also, lately I am doing substantial endurance and strength training (gymnastic and weight), and tennis (about 5 days a week) so don't want to run a deficit, no. If I did a deficit I'd just do limited strength training to create stimulus to avoid loss (hopefully), and mild low intensity cardio if any.

Agree it's better to not over-analyse, though yes I'd be curious in how that 20:1 ratio comes about, if you can' find out.

There is a lot going on in this body of ours of course, and isolating processes can be misleading I do agree.

Thanks much

Yea, I know how real life is lol! I'd say the single most important thing to do is make sure those snacks have complete proteins and carbs, and aside from that make sure you eat enough to make up for that training once you're done! You have 800 calories, at max, for one meal and the working out can create a huge deficit in a hurry.

Benardot has a service called nutritiming. http://nutritiming.com/

Check that, it's cheap and will help you figure all this out with much less headache. No, I'm not on commission lol!

It specifically references artistic and rhythmic gymnasts.

As for references, enjoy this one: http://nutritiming.com/docs/Energy_Deficits_and_Body_Comp_MSSE.pdf