T Nation

Building Muscle

Is the body more inclined to build muscle at a lower body fat percentage?

what do you think?

the fatter you get the more insulin resistant you become so you’ll add fat easier. As for whether that slows muscle gains I don’t know if it does to any significant degree, but I figure if your calories are going to fat stores then they’re not building muscle.

so yes, I believe your body is more inclined to build a muscle at a lower bodyfat percentage.

[quote]rds63799 wrote:
yes[/quote]
ah, is that from personal experience? i have never been lower bodyfat percentage than 14, so i have nothing to say here.

i edited my post for clarity. One word posts are lazy

[quote]rds63799 wrote:
the fatter you get the more insulin resistant you become so you’ll add fat easier. As for whether that slows muscle gains I don’t know if it does to any significant degree, but I figure if your calories are going to fat stores then they’re not building muscle.

so yes, I believe your body is more inclined to build a muscle at a lower bodyfat percentage.[/quote]

this is true the fatter you are the worse your muscle to fat gain ratio will be if you continue to bulk.

[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:

[quote]rds63799 wrote:
the fatter you get the more insulin resistant you become so you’ll add fat easier. As for whether that slows muscle gains I don’t know if it does to any significant degree, but I figure if your calories are going to fat stores then they’re not building muscle.

so yes, I believe your body is more inclined to build a muscle at a lower bodyfat percentage.[/quote]

this is true the fatter you are the worse your muscle to fat gain ratio will be if you continue to bulk. [/quote]

Bullshit. Prove that the fatter you are the less muscle you gain.

Post pictures kid. The fact that you give advice here is troubling many people.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:

[quote]rds63799 wrote:
the fatter you get the more insulin resistant you become so you’ll add fat easier. As for whether that slows muscle gains I don’t know if it does to any significant degree, but I figure if your calories are going to fat stores then they’re not building muscle.

so yes, I believe your body is more inclined to build a muscle at a lower bodyfat percentage.[/quote]

this is true the fatter you are the worse your muscle to fat gain ratio will be if you continue to bulk. [/quote]

Bullshit. Prove that the fatter you are the less muscle you gain.

Post pictures kid. The fact that you give advice here is troubling many people.[/quote]

i didnt say the fatter you are the less muscle you gain, strong reading skills X. i said the muscle to fat gain ratio gets worse the higher your bodyfat gets.

physique does not equall knowledge but yes i will post pictures at the end of my bulk.

From what I’ve read (and somewhat experienced) there is a goldy-locks zone for this type of situations. Though I think the differences from both ends of the continuum (low bf —> high bf) isn’t anything huge. Many people around here have said that they tend to be better at gaining muscle when they carry a bit more weight on them. I would love to hear Prof. X’s opinion on this considering he seems to be very well versed in endochrinology as well as homeostasis.

I hate to be one of those PubMed guys, but i don’t have access to my schools data base atm (i need to L2 VPN). Here’s an extreme case.

setto222 your link reads " group 1 (control, n = 16) was …"

maybe it is a part of our situation. Any study using such small numbers i choose to call pre-study. I do not blame the people doing them they more than likely do not have access to enough $$ for more subjects. When we add the fact that it is not about human reading the results is not worth my time in my honest opinion. To me after a “preliminairy study/research” it would be nice if founds were available for a real one that results might carry some credibility.

Any writer find studies to prove that 1 set is plenty, that more sets are better, etc…
That is why i appreciate so much the input available in our forums. When the writing is done by someone not paid for, it has some more validity in my opinion. Some paid writers are believable it just takes time to identify them.

All the best !

[quote]BHappy wrote:
setto222 your link reads " group 1 (control, n = 16) was …"

maybe it is a part of our situation. Any study using such small numbers i choose to call pre-study. I do not blame the people doing them they more than likely do not have access to enough $$ for more subjects. When we add the fact that it is not about human reading the results is not worth my time in my honest opinion. To me after a “preliminairy study/research” it would be nice if founds were available for a real one that results might carry some credibility.
Any writer find studies to prove that 1 set is plenty, that more sets are better, etc…
That is why i appreciate so much the input available in our forums. When the writing is done by someone not paid for, it has some more validity in my opinion. Some paid writers are believable it just takes time to identify them.
All the best ![/quote]

Totally glossed over the small sample size! My bad. I would edit my post, but I’ll leave it up there if anybody is interested. All your points are very valid.

No problem. In our field we are not often the subject of studies well founded. Sometimes the time frame is on the short side, sometimes it is including only non trained individuals or the opposite.

[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:

[quote]rds63799 wrote:
the fatter you get the more insulin resistant you become so you’ll add fat easier. As for whether that slows muscle gains I don’t know if it does to any significant degree, but I figure if your calories are going to fat stores then they’re not building muscle.

so yes, I believe your body is more inclined to build a muscle at a lower bodyfat percentage.[/quote]

this is true the fatter you are the worse your muscle to fat gain ratio will be if you continue to bulk. [/quote]

Bullshit. Prove that the fatter you are the less muscle you gain.

Post pictures kid. The fact that you give advice here is troubling many people.[/quote]

i didnt say the fatter you are the less muscle you gain, strong reading skills X. i said the muscle to fat gain ratio gets worse the higher your bodyfat gets.

physique does not equall knowledge but yes i will post pictures at the end of my bulk.[/quote]

physique=experience=knowledge

[quote]Andrewdwatters1 wrote:

[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:

[quote]rds63799 wrote:
the fatter you get the more insulin resistant you become so you’ll add fat easier. As for whether that slows muscle gains I don’t know if it does to any significant degree, but I figure if your calories are going to fat stores then they’re not building muscle.

so yes, I believe your body is more inclined to build a muscle at a lower bodyfat percentage.[/quote]

this is true the fatter you are the worse your muscle to fat gain ratio will be if you continue to bulk. [/quote]

Bullshit. Prove that the fatter you are the less muscle you gain.

Post pictures kid. The fact that you give advice here is troubling many people.[/quote]

i didnt say the fatter you are the less muscle you gain, strong reading skills X. i said the muscle to fat gain ratio gets worse the higher your bodyfat gets.

physique does not equall knowledge but yes i will post pictures at the end of my bulk.[/quote]

physique=experience=knowledge[/quote]

to a degree yes. but there are many well built physiques by people who dont really know much about nutrtion or masic training methods.

just because somebody is big does not make them more knowledgebale than someone smaller. alan argorn, lyle mcdonald, ian mccarthy. all dont have great physiques (although ian is improving but but no far more about muscle building, nutrition and exercise physiology than alot of well built guys here.

[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:

to a degree yes. but there are many well built physiques by people who dont really know much about nutrtion or masic training methods.

just because somebody is big does not make them more knowledgebale than someone smaller. alan argorn, lyle mcdonald, ian mccarthy. all dont have great physiques (although ian is improving but but no far more about muscle building, nutrition and exercise physiology than alot of well built guys here.[/quote]

that’s why he’s still just a fat weakling after several years, because he’s more knowledgeable about bodybuilding than people who build muscle

sounds legit

[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:

i didnt say the fatter you are the less muscle you gain, strong reading skills X. i said the muscle to fat gain ratio gets worse the higher your bodyfat gets.

physique does not equall knowledge but yes i will post pictures at the end of my bulk.[/quote]

nice useless statement. so you are saying that if you gain 5 lbs of fat, that the muscle/fat ratio of your body will be worse than if you hadn’t gained the 5 lbs

thanks for the math lesson

[quote]fr0gger666 wrote:

[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:

[quote]Andrewdwatters1 wrote:

[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:

[quote]rds63799 wrote:
the fatter you get the more insulin resistant you become so you’ll add fat easier. As for whether that slows muscle gains I don’t know if it does to any significant degree, but I figure if your calories are going to fat stores then they’re not building muscle.

so yes, I believe your body is more inclined to build a muscle at a lower bodyfat percentage.[/quote]

this is true the fatter you are the worse your muscle to fat gain ratio will be if you continue to bulk. [/quote]

Bullshit. Prove that the fatter you are the less muscle you gain.

Post pictures kid. The fact that you give advice here is troubling many people.[/quote]

i didnt say the fatter you are the less muscle you gain, strong reading skills X. i said the muscle to fat gain ratio gets worse the higher your bodyfat gets.

physique does not equall knowledge but yes i will post pictures at the end of my bulk.[/quote]

physique=experience=knowledge[/quote]

to a degree yes. but there are many well built physiques by people who dont really know much about nutrtion or masic training methods.

just because somebody is big does not make them more knowledgebale than someone smaller. alan argorn, lyle mcdonald, ian mccarthy. all dont have great physiques (although ian is improving but but no far more about muscle building, nutrition and exercise physiology than alot of well built guys here.[/quote]

that’s why he’s still just a fat weakling after several years, because he’s more knowledgeable about bodybuilding than people who build muscle

sounds legit

[/quote]

look on his NBB facebook page he is no longer fat and weak.

[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:

look on his NBB facebook page he is no longer fat and weak. [/quote]

lol?

it’s good to know the people here giving advice are getting all their info from fat kids who are DB pressing 30 lbs

gotta get that TUT bro

[quote]fr0gger666 wrote:

[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:

to a degree yes. but there are many well built physiques by people who dont really know much about nutrtion or masic training methods.

just because somebody is big does not make them more knowledgebale than someone smaller. alan argorn, lyle mcdonald, ian mccarthy. all dont have great physiques (although ian is improving but but no far more about muscle building, nutrition and exercise physiology than alot of well built guys here.[/quote]

that’s why he’s still just a fat weakling after several years, because he’s more knowledgeable about bodybuilding than people who build muscle

sounds legit

[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:

i didnt say the fatter you are the less muscle you gain, strong reading skills X. i said the muscle to fat gain ratio gets worse the higher your bodyfat gets.

physique does not equall knowledge but yes i will post pictures at the end of my bulk.[/quote]

nice useless statement. so you are saying that if you gain 5 lbs of fat, that the muscle/fat ratio of your body will be worse than if you hadn’t gained the 5 lbs

thanks for the math lesson
[/quote]

no you all need to fucking learn how to read. im not gonna repeat my self again read my post. the fatter you are the worse the muscle to fat gain ratio becomes if you continue to bulk.

regarding ian mccarthy im guessing he has a better physique than you anyway and 10x the knowledge, im not going to discuss this anymore with retards who believe because someone is not huge it means they are not knowledgable.

[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:

no you all need to fucking learn how to read. im not gonna repeat my self again read my post. the fatter you are the worse the muscle to fat gain ratio becomes if you continue to bulk.

regarding ian mccarthy im guessing he has a better physique than you anyway and 10x the knowledge, im not going to discuss this anymore with retards who believe because someone is not huge it means they are not knowledgable.[/quote]

yeah, muscle/fat becomes a lower number if you increase fat, ok

if someone isn’t huge after several years of training with all their “knowledge”, then they have <0 credibility. sorry but making youtube videos in front of a bookshelf doesn’t make you knowledgeable.

[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:

[quote]fr0gger666 wrote:

[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:

to a degree yes. but there are many well built physiques by people who dont really know much about nutrtion or masic training methods.

just because somebody is big does not make them more knowledgebale than someone smaller. alan argorn, lyle mcdonald, ian mccarthy. all dont have great physiques (although ian is improving but but no far more about muscle building, nutrition and exercise physiology than alot of well built guys here.[/quote]

that’s why he’s still just a fat weakling after several years, because he’s more knowledgeable about bodybuilding than people who build muscle

sounds legit

[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:

i didnt say the fatter you are the less muscle you gain, strong reading skills X. i said the muscle to fat gain ratio gets worse the higher your bodyfat gets.

physique does not equall knowledge but yes i will post pictures at the end of my bulk.[/quote]

nice useless statement. so you are saying that if you gain 5 lbs of fat, that the muscle/fat ratio of your body will be worse than if you hadn’t gained the 5 lbs

thanks for the math lesson
[/quote]

no you all need to fucking learn how to read. im not gonna repeat my self again read my post. the fatter you are the worse the muscle to fat gain ratio becomes if you continue to bulk.

regarding ian mccarthy im guessing he has a better physique than you anyway and 10x the knowledge, im not going to discuss this anymore with retards who believe because someone is not huge it means they are not knowledgable.[/quote]

Have officially lost any and all respect for you. You seriously disrespect a Guy like X who has been around for years. Either way why wait to post pics at the end of your bulk if you have something worth showing and have so much knowledge you should be a freak so lets see what you got pics of the physique and your Max lifts I would be very interested in seeing.

I have to agree with Ryan. A great physique doesn’t always mean a knowledgeable person, but i guess that all depends on your perception of a great physique. Example: Ryan Reynolds, great physique (in my opinions) probably knows shit all about training. He probably just follows instructions. But many of you probably think he is skinny or under weight. So I guess it’s a beauty is in the eye of the beholder type deal…but i digress.

The main thing i want to post about is the shots taken at people like McDonald and other “gurus” in the field. I dont think their ability should be measured by their own personal achievements but rather the achievements of the people that they coach/train/teach. Just because somebody doesn’t practice what they preach is no reason to discredit their body of knowledge. Many cardio-thoracic surgeons save lives every day and get a cheese burger on the way home, it doesn’t diminish their ability to contribute to the field.