BodyRecomposition Support Forums  

Go Back   BodyRecomposition Support Forums > General information > General diet questions
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Unread 06-20-2017, 04:13 PM
R4z0r_Edge R4z0r_Edge is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 13
Question Bodyfat Percentage and Calorie Partitioning

Hey, I have a question regarding a paragraph in the Ultimate Diet 2.0.

Basically, I’m wondering if someone who is naturally lean (say around 10-12%BF), bulked up to around 15%, then decided they wanted to bulk further. However, they were advised that if they first cut down to 10% or below, this would allow them to bulk more efficiently.

Essentially the logic was a lower bodyfat percentage would mean more muscle gained per kg of weight gain in the bulk. In the Ultimate Diet 2, you state:

“So what else controls the P-ratio? As it turns out, the primary predictor of P-ratio during over and underfeeding is body fat percentage. The more body fat you carry, the more fat you tend to lose when you diet (meaning less muscle loss) and the leaner you are, the less fat you tend to lose (meaning more muscle loss).
The same goes in reverse: naturally lean (but not folks who have dieted down) individuals tend to gain more muscle and less fat when they overfeed and fatter individuals tend to gain more fat and less muscle when they overfeed.”

The sentence "(but not folks who have dieted down)" seems to imply that if you self-manipulate bodyfat percentage then somehow this doesn’t work?

Would you be able to clarify if self-manipulated bodyfat percentage has an effect on the muscle/fat gain ratio?

Thanks!
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Unread 06-20-2017, 04:33 PM
lylemcdonald lylemcdonald is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 902
Default

Not exactly.

It's more this: someone who is naturally at 12% vs. someone who has dieted down from 18 to 12% are in very different metabolic states as the act of dieting itself in the second situation will change the physiology to be aimed more at fat gain. The first will not and I doubt that 12% to 10% would be an enormous effect.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Unread 06-21-2017, 11:01 AM
w1cked w1cked is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,449
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lylemcdonald View Post
Not exactly.

It's more this: someone who is naturally at 12% vs. someone who has dieted down from 18 to 12% are in very different metabolic states as the act of dieting itself in the second situation will change the physiology to be aimed more at fat gain. The first will not and I doubt that 12% to 10% would be an enormous effect.
Is there a point of diminishing returns for leanness and p ratio? Eg we can safely say someone at 10% will put on more muscle than fat in a gaining phase. Is 8% better? Etc
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Unread 06-21-2017, 11:30 AM
PhysiologyIsPhun PhysiologyIsPhun is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 226
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by w1cked View Post
Is there a point of diminishing returns for leanness and p ratio? Eg we can safely say someone at 10% will put on more muscle than fat in a gaining phase. Is 8% better? Etc
When you start to think 8% vs 10%, that's a matter of a lb or two so I really doubt there would be much difference. I think the 10% recommendation is mainly because dieting below that hurts performance and lends itself to muscle loss. So maybe you would gain slightly more muscle when coming back up from 8%, but you would also lose significantly more than that dieting down to 8%.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Unread 06-21-2017, 01:10 PM
w1cked w1cked is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,449
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PhysiologyIsPhun View Post
When you start to think 8% vs 10%, that's a matter of a lb or two so I really doubt there would be much difference. I think the 10% recommendation is mainly because dieting below that hurts performance and lends itself to muscle loss. So maybe you would gain slightly more muscle when coming back up from 8%, but you would also lose significantly more than that dieting down to 8%.
Makes sense. Thank you.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Unread 06-21-2017, 03:35 PM
R4z0r_Edge R4z0r_Edge is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 13
Default

So what you're saying is that if someone's goal is purely to build muscle, there is no point in cutting from 15% to 10% to have a more efficient bulk - they'll be able to build muscle just as effectively within a 15-20% range (for example)?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Unread 06-24-2017, 02:15 PM
R4z0r_Edge R4z0r_Edge is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 13
Default

bump
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Unread 06-24-2017, 02:21 PM
BigPecsPeter BigPecsPeter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 2,208
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by R4z0r_Edge View Post
So what you're saying is that if someone's goal is purely to build muscle, there is no point in cutting from 15% to 10% to have a more efficient bulk - they'll be able to build muscle just as effectively within a 15-20% range (for example)?
I don't think that's quite what anybody said at all.

But it won't kill you. And you can gain very well from 15% to 20%
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Unread 06-24-2017, 04:19 PM
BEATMEOUTTAME's Avatar
BEATMEOUTTAME BEATMEOUTTAME is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 347
Default

Supposedly you will not partition the calories quite as efficiently once you're over 15% but I'm not sure how drastic that difference is.

As someone who has started my bulk too early several times though I would diet further first. You'll end up 25% quickly if you start above 15%
__________________
My Wild Ride to A great body in my 30s.

http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showthread.php?t=23215

Thank you Lyle. This website is a game changer once you understand the mechanisms behind fat loss/muscle gain.

Spun my wheels for years prior to finding this site.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Unread 06-24-2017, 10:49 PM
BigPecsPeter BigPecsPeter is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 2,208
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BEATMEOUTTAME View Post
Supposedly you will not partition the calories quite as efficiently once you're over 15% but I'm not sure how drastic that difference is.

As someone who has started my bulk too early several times though I would diet further first. You'll end up 25% quickly if you start above 15%
People always say this: "you'll end up 25% quickly". I really think this depends on quite how aggressively you go at it. A sensible plan will give you many months worth of decent growth long before you hit the blubber zone
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.