I spent my entire second year of lifting without bulking and I worked very hard and intelligently otherwise yet I didn't seem to put on any significant amount of muscle. my first year I seem to have put on 10 to 15 pounds of muscle at least. To the degree that people accused me of PEDs. So at least for me as a 38-year-old , my body seems to need a clear surplus at this point in my training. I'll be able to report back a year from now to assess.
I read in an SBS article (YOUR Drug-Free Muscle and Strength Potential: Part 1) that between half and a quarter of adipose tissue is fat free mass. This means you would see an increase in fat free mass in people who bulk, even if they wouldn't be gaining muscle. Wouldn't this bias these studies even more in favor of bulking, or have the researchers already considered this distinction between fat free mass from muscle and adipose tissue?
@@turnippatrol4607 Oh yeah, I checked the article again and I misremembered the range a little. It said adipose tissue is between about 50 and 85% fat mass, so instead of 'a quarter' I should've said 15%.
@@TheGreektrojan Yeah! After the end of the cut, my goal is to transition into a short maintenance phase for like 2-3 weeks, because I dieted for a quite long time. During the maintenance phase I would love to find a good calories intake for maintenance, and then transition into a lean bulk with like 200-300 calories surplus. If someone has some recommendations for a successful lean bulk, I am happy to hear them! Regarding programming, I am going with PPL currently, because I have the time to be in the gym for 6 workouts a week - at least for now. But in a few weeks, I have more work-related stress and therefore, I will most likely switch back to my old upper/lower split and go like 4-5 times per week. Depending on my stress level and regeneration. Iam so thankful for all the high-quality knowledge from channels like Stronger By Science and many others. I have already a PhD in another field, but with more time, I would looove to do research in exercise science. So fascinating!
Good luck I’m about 2-3 months away from finishing my cut and starting my first ever bulk. Been cutting most of the year with some short maintenance phases for fatigue. I’ll have only about 1 year of consistent lifting when I start mine so I plan on eating about 400-500 over maintenance and working out 6 times in an 8 day period with my work schedule. Hoping to bulk for at least 5 months before doing a mini cut to shed the fat and do another 4-6 month bulk.
@@JstBringIt You have basically described my current diet experience. I am cutting since the end of 2023 with a few maintenance phases, and now I am getting closer and closer to my targeted weight. Stay focused and best of luck!
I have a hypothesis that I've yet to see proposed anywhere. We see that maintenance calories operate in a window. The body wants to maintain homeostasis and so it will up regulate or down regulate NEAT as needed, giving us in many cases very large maintenance windows. My hypothesis is that if one were to eat at the upper end of their maintenance window, that should the body need more calories for muscle building, it can easily down regulate NEAT to get the extra calories it needs. Potentially it would down regulate up to the size of that individuals maintenance window since that's roughly the window it operates within already
@@FreshRh1no300 lbs lean+extremely high anabolics. Why would the extreme approaches of enhanced, abnormally sized bodybuilders be applicable to the average human?
@@ck3125cause his hypothesis is stupid. He says the body wants homeostasis, so stay the same. Why would the body lower its maintenance to build muscle. What happens when you eat mantenaince and train hard? You’ll get stronger, not necessarily bigger
01:20:00 this is what I'm leaning towards thinking now: you want to maintain fat mass, but you have to have a surplus in order *not* to lose fat mass while gaining lean mass.
I Wonder when you are Training for a decade or Something Like this, when you are advanced, If a Higher than 200/300 surplus IS maybe better for Maximum muscle growth, because more anabolic Signals and better Recovery which potencial can make you train more. I mean Geoffrey Schofield has gained crazy after He bulked i think ON around 1000kcal surplus, whats your thoughts and experience in this?
I think it will vary a lot between lifters. How much they move besides their hypertrophy training(NEAT), how good and how much amount of sleep, how much training volume and how stress management goes. GVS has a good fatigue tolerance, I’d say above average lifter, due to his training style, and training history, so he can deplete more glycogen than others during his workouts. Also his glycogen deposits might get a bit bigger than the average lifter due to those adaptations he promotes, also he likes intensity techniques and training beyond concentric failure. So my guess is that he can hammer extra calories without getting extra unnecessary fat. Every lifter shall address a weekly check(weight changes and maybe some pictures) to stay on track. This might be as the training volume talks, science is the base, but we have to test ourselves for the nuance, and the nuance for us might be a big difference
Specifically bulking studies in trained older men. Note that even people in their 90s can make newbie gains. I am 60 and was considering to go into a bulk from 180 to 190 lbs as an intermediate. I'm somewhat concerned it will be simply a yo-yo diet. That is, I'll go up to 190 and make gains in both muscle mass and strength, but once I cut back to 180, I'll then lose all the gains I made. This would be less healthy.
@@georgesarreas5509 Yes, older people would likely be more willing to particate in a hypertrophy study than younger people. People over 50 tend to be more concerned with maintaining or gaining muscle and strength for health and longevity. To maintain health in old age it must be a lifestyle, rather than a goal to get jacked as fast as possible. Ironically, in this mindset, older people have all the time in the world to experiment with different exercise protocols to improve their health. For example, switching between a focus on strength or cardio. Once a person reaches strength goals, many like to switch to meet cardio goals, like a VO2 max > 50; then back again.
While I appreciate Gregs return, I have to say that I'm not a fan of these half-episodes. To Gregs point at ~ 1:17:30 - I don't think it is fat gain or loss. See for example the extreme obease populations with easy recomping. I rather think it is true or perceived (by the brain) energy availability. Which will be influenced by energy intake as well as body fat stores.
52:20 Not really a big fan of that meta-analysis that is frequently cited now because when you dig into the data you see that a large part of the studies (that make up the meta-analysis) involved subjects that were elderly, obese women. And then an additional significant number of studies involved elderly men. I'm not saying the data isn't helpful, but not sure that it's relevant for young men. We have to believe that testosterone is a primary driver of hypertrophy (even in a deficit) and that element was missing in a vast number of the subjects that made up that meta-analysis. I'm not recommending 500-calorie deficits for hypertrophy but primarily because it negatively affects hormone production which indirectly inhibits hypertrophy, not because hypertrophy itself is directly limited by energy intake. So if you can work the hormone angle better with your deficits, you might be able to ameliorate the negative effects. We do have a study with an extreme deficit (2,000 calorie deficit per day) where subjects were administered testosterone and they experienced high levels of hypertrophy, which seems to support the idea that hypertrophy is not limited by energy intake, but rather by hormones being suboptimal.
At maintaince or potentially a small surplus. Lean towards a small surplus (100-300 calories a day) if you're especially lean, ie below 13ish% bodyfat.
Very timely video. I'm a mid-intermediate lifter and have experimented with recomping this summer around 15% bodyfat. Recomping as in eating at maintaincence or small deficit most days. I feel that my muscle gain hasn't changed much compared to a moderate surplus, but I'm chuffed that I've been able to: - Maintain a leaner physique (previously at 17-19% BF) - Can make gains longer without having to do a mini cut every few months - When I do want to get leaner, I simply focus on having a small deficit more often than eating at maintainence. I know if I'm not losing weight, I'm likely putting on appreciable amounts of muscle as time goes on. Having done it all from a crash cut to a dreamer bulk, I feel like for natural intermediate+ lifters, eating at maintainence a few bodyfat percentages above your lower intervention point is an anabolic enough enviorment to make the vast majority of your potential gains. And like Milo said, if you consider the time you'd be cutting (albeit pretty quick) compared to a moderate surplus, it really is a wash when it comes to what's more optimal.
Why have sumo wrestlers so much muscle ( yeah a lot of this lbm is water bloodvolume etc, people who say say are the most muscular individuals dont get this) is it maybe the case that when you bulking very lomg the high bodfat, even as a advanced natty you can get a new point of Hypertrophy that you cant get otherwise?
They have fat free mass. Adipose tissue is like 1/3d fat free mass. So the "fatter" you are the more fat free mass you have sort of weird language thing
If someone works put their entire body with high volume in a single workout, would they need more protein than 0.7-0.82g/lb? For example, if someone wanted to only do only 2 sessions per week because they hate driving to the gym but worked out their ENTIRE body using a TON of sets. Let's assume all sets are high intensity and not junk volume even though the session is long. It would make sense to me that a session like that would produce create more potential protein synthesis, unless there is some sort of biological limiter on how much protein synthesis can occur at once.
I bet the problem is you can only do so many high quality, hypertrophic sets per session/ day. Can't see protein requirements differing on workout days, carbs and cals would be bigger considerations i bet. Anecdotally I feel like I have better body composition when closer to .9 to 1g per lb, could be imagining it though
This was one of the premises of the recent study that did the round a while back (comparing 25g vs 100g of tagged milk protein) and they found elevated levels of MPS with the 100g group higher and for a much longer period. They did a full body workout before ingesting 0, 25, or 100g. The study was called "The anabolic response to protein ingestion during recovery from exercise has no upper limit in magnitude and duration in vivo in humans" in the journal Cell Reports Medicine.
I spent my entire second year of lifting without bulking and I worked very hard and intelligently otherwise yet I didn't seem to put on any significant amount of muscle. my first year I seem to have put on 10 to 15 pounds of muscle at least. To the degree that people accused me of PEDs.
So at least for me as a 38-year-old , my body seems to need a clear surplus at this point in my training. I'll be able to report back a year from now to assess.
What bodyfat level were you at? Close to your lower intervention point at all?
@@cole_p_warren About 13-15% body fat
Milo and Pak did great, and I am also very happy to have Greg back
I love listening to greg
I read in an SBS article (YOUR Drug-Free Muscle and Strength Potential: Part 1) that between half and a quarter of adipose tissue is fat free mass. This means you would see an increase in fat free mass in people who bulk, even if they wouldn't be gaining muscle. Wouldn't this bias these studies even more in favor of bulking, or have the researchers already considered this distinction between fat free mass from muscle and adipose tissue?
I haven't seen percentages that high, but I see your point. I've seen 15-20% of adipose being lean tissue, but in any case it's a good point
@@turnippatrol4607 Oh yeah, I checked the article again and I misremembered the range a little. It said adipose tissue is between about 50 and 85% fat mass, so instead of 'a quarter' I should've said 15%.
Fat free mass is not necessary muscle mass.
@@Blurred1-h9f yes, that's what I'm saying
What a timing. I am nearly at the end of my cut and I am really looking forward to make some serious gains. ❤
Ditto. The answer I'm assuming is a 'lean bulk' but I'm glad to hear the nuance.
@@TheGreektrojan Yeah! After the end of the cut, my goal is to transition into a short maintenance phase for like 2-3 weeks, because I dieted for a quite long time. During the maintenance phase I would love to find a good calories intake for maintenance, and then transition into a lean bulk with like 200-300 calories surplus. If someone has some recommendations for a successful lean bulk, I am happy to hear them!
Regarding programming, I am going with PPL currently, because I have the time to be in the gym for 6 workouts a week - at least for now. But in a few weeks, I have more work-related stress and therefore, I will most likely switch back to my old upper/lower split and go like 4-5 times per week. Depending on my stress level and regeneration.
Iam so thankful for all the high-quality knowledge from channels like Stronger By Science and many others. I have already a PhD in another field, but with more time, I would looove to do research in exercise science. So fascinating!
Good luck I’m about 2-3 months away from finishing my cut and starting my first ever bulk.
Been cutting most of the year with some short maintenance phases for fatigue.
I’ll have only about 1 year of consistent lifting when I start mine so I plan on eating about 400-500 over maintenance and working out 6 times in an 8 day period with my work schedule.
Hoping to bulk for at least 5 months before doing a mini cut to shed the fat and do another 4-6 month bulk.
@@JstBringIt You have basically described my current diet experience. I am cutting since the end of 2023 with a few maintenance phases, and now I am getting closer and closer to my targeted weight. Stay focused and best of luck!
I have a hypothesis that I've yet to see proposed anywhere. We see that maintenance calories operate in a window. The body wants to maintain homeostasis and so it will up regulate or down regulate NEAT as needed, giving us in many cases very large maintenance windows. My hypothesis is that if one were to eat at the upper end of their maintenance window, that should the body need more calories for muscle building, it can easily down regulate NEAT to get the extra calories it needs. Potentially it would down regulate up to the size of that individuals maintenance window since that's roughly the window it operates within already
So why do ifbb pro’s need upwards of 5000 kcal? Why did Jordan peters work his way up to 9000 kcal everyday?
@@FreshRh1no300 lbs lean+extremely high anabolics. Why would the extreme approaches of enhanced, abnormally sized bodybuilders be applicable to the average human?
@@ck3125cause his hypothesis is stupid. He says the body wants homeostasis, so stay the same. Why would the body lower its maintenance to build muscle. What happens when you eat mantenaince and train hard? You’ll get stronger, not necessarily bigger
Nice, released just before my workout.
01:20:00 this is what I'm leaning towards thinking now: you want to maintain fat mass, but you have to have a surplus in order *not* to lose fat mass while gaining lean mass.
11:30 i grew up in a small house... he could be onto something here. Unfortunately i cant redo my childhood
I remember the 40 lb bulk I did over 3 months…it was tragically epic. No regrets, but fuck I was fat.
Talking about bulking while doing a (mini)cut episode. I saw what you sneaky devils did!
For the algorithm
I Wonder when you are Training for a decade or Something Like this, when you are advanced, If a Higher than 200/300 surplus IS maybe better for Maximum muscle growth, because more anabolic Signals and better Recovery which potencial can make you train more. I mean Geoffrey Schofield has gained crazy after He bulked i think ON around 1000kcal surplus, whats your thoughts and experience in this?
I think it will vary a lot between lifters. How much they move besides their hypertrophy training(NEAT), how good and how much amount of sleep, how much training volume and how stress management goes. GVS has a good fatigue tolerance, I’d say above average lifter, due to his training style, and training history, so he can deplete more glycogen than others during his workouts. Also his glycogen deposits might get a bit bigger than the average lifter due to those adaptations he promotes, also he likes intensity techniques and training beyond concentric failure. So my guess is that he can hammer extra calories without getting extra unnecessary fat. Every lifter shall address a weekly check(weight changes and maybe some pictures) to stay on track. This might be as the training volume talks, science is the base, but we have to test ourselves for the nuance, and the nuance for us might be a big difference
Oh boy. I hate bulking. Crossing my fingers you don’t have to.
Are there ever going to be science hypertrophy studies, done on trained men in the 40s to 50s ? Thanks.
How many of these men would participate? I'm 30 and I don't think I will trade off my own training to be part of a study :).
Specifically bulking studies in trained older men. Note that even people in their 90s can make newbie gains. I am 60 and was considering to go into a bulk from 180 to 190 lbs as an intermediate. I'm somewhat concerned it will be simply a yo-yo diet. That is, I'll go up to 190 and make gains in both muscle mass and strength, but once I cut back to 180, I'll then lose all the gains I made. This would be less healthy.
@@georgesarreas5509 Yes, older people would likely be more willing to particate in a hypertrophy study than younger people. People over 50 tend to be more concerned with maintaining or gaining muscle and strength for health and longevity. To maintain health in old age it must be a lifestyle, rather than a goal to get jacked as fast as possible. Ironically, in this mindset, older people have all the time in the world to experiment with different exercise protocols to improve their health. For example, switching between a focus on strength or cardio. Once a person reaches strength goals, many like to switch to meet cardio goals, like a VO2 max > 50; then back again.
While I appreciate Gregs return, I have to say that I'm not a fan of these half-episodes.
To Gregs point at ~ 1:17:30 - I don't think it is fat gain or loss. See for example the extreme obease populations with easy recomping. I rather think it is true or perceived (by the brain) energy availability. Which will be influenced by energy intake as well as body fat stores.
great
52:20 Not really a big fan of that meta-analysis that is frequently cited now because when you dig into the data you see that a large part of the studies (that make up the meta-analysis) involved subjects that were elderly, obese women. And then an additional significant number of studies involved elderly men. I'm not saying the data isn't helpful, but not sure that it's relevant for young men. We have to believe that testosterone is a primary driver of hypertrophy (even in a deficit) and that element was missing in a vast number of the subjects that made up that meta-analysis.
I'm not recommending 500-calorie deficits for hypertrophy but primarily because it negatively affects hormone production which indirectly inhibits hypertrophy, not because hypertrophy itself is directly limited by energy intake. So if you can work the hormone angle better with your deficits, you might be able to ameliorate the negative effects.
We do have a study with an extreme deficit (2,000 calorie deficit per day) where subjects were administered testosterone and they experienced high levels of hypertrophy, which seems to support the idea that hypertrophy is not limited by energy intake, but rather by hormones being suboptimal.
Thank you. Thats exactly why I've had a major issue with everyone using this study as evidence for larger deficits being catabolic
I havent understand, whats the optimal surplus in advanced lifters?
According to their nutrition app MacroFactor, it’s around a 100-150kcal surplus. Pretty small
At maintaince or potentially a small surplus. Lean towards a small surplus (100-300 calories a day) if you're especially lean, ie below 13ish% bodyfat.
@@cole_p_warrenno
Plethora.
Very timely video. I'm a mid-intermediate lifter and have experimented with recomping this summer around 15% bodyfat. Recomping as in eating at maintaincence or small deficit most days.
I feel that my muscle gain hasn't changed much compared to a moderate surplus, but I'm chuffed that I've been able to:
- Maintain a leaner physique (previously at 17-19% BF)
- Can make gains longer without having to do a mini cut every few months
- When I do want to get leaner, I simply focus on having a small deficit more often than eating at maintainence. I know if I'm not losing weight, I'm likely putting on appreciable amounts of muscle as time goes on.
Having done it all from a crash cut to a dreamer bulk, I feel like for natural intermediate+ lifters, eating at maintainence a few bodyfat percentages above your lower intervention point is an anabolic enough enviorment to make the vast majority of your potential gains.
And like Milo said, if you consider the time you'd be cutting (albeit pretty quick) compared to a moderate surplus, it really is a wash when it comes to what's more optimal.
Why have sumo wrestlers so much muscle ( yeah a lot of this lbm is water bloodvolume etc, people who say say are the most muscular individuals dont get this) is it maybe the case that when you bulking very lomg the high bodfat, even as a advanced natty you can get a new point of Hypertrophy that you cant get otherwise?
They have fat free mass. Adipose tissue is like 1/3d fat free mass. So the "fatter" you are the more fat free mass you have sort of weird language thing
Is Greg filming this in a public washroom? edit: nevermind, it's an acoustic panel
If someone works put their entire body with high volume in a single workout, would they need more protein than 0.7-0.82g/lb?
For example, if someone wanted to only do only 2 sessions per week because they hate driving to the gym but worked out their ENTIRE body using a TON of sets. Let's assume all sets are high intensity and not junk volume even though the session is long. It would make sense to me that a session like that would produce create more potential protein synthesis, unless there is some sort of biological limiter on how much protein synthesis can occur at once.
I bet the problem is you can only do so many high quality, hypertrophic sets per session/ day. Can't see protein requirements differing on workout days, carbs and cals would be bigger considerations i bet. Anecdotally I feel like I have better body composition when closer to .9 to 1g per lb, could be imagining it though
This was one of the premises of the recent study that did the round a while back (comparing 25g vs 100g of tagged milk protein) and they found elevated levels of MPS with the 100g group higher and for a much longer period. They did a full body workout before ingesting 0, 25, or 100g.
The study was called "The anabolic response to protein ingestion during recovery from exercise has no upper limit in magnitude and duration in vivo in humans" in the journal Cell Reports Medicine.
What is Doctor-not a real doctor-Pak vaping? Don’t real doctors, i.e., Doctors of Philosophy, know this is inadvisable?
It's a nicotine vape that I've been using on the podcast versus the usual nicotine gum you may have seen myself or Greg chew on previous episodes.
@@Dr__Pak I, too, am an chronic user of nicotine, so know it is all in jest.
Try some swedish snus ;)
Zzzzzz😴
This is long episode erasure