Professor X wrote:
How could someone get “ripped” unless they were dieting (taking in less calories than their body needed to maintain their weight)? How could someone get fat unless they were NOT dieting (and taking in too many calories)? If you are trying to gain muscle and you put on too much body fat, you are eating too much. How much do you weigh?
I’m not really referring to me. I have no muscles, especially in the upper body (like 12.5 inch arms), but I have a horrible appetite (1500 kcals/day) partly due to some ADD medicine I was taking. I’m getting better, though, by eating even when I feel unhungry. I don’t know if I’m a hardgainer, but if I had to guess, I’d say no considering I am already gaining weight from eating 2000 calories.
I really was just saying this as a question for knowledge sake. Stripped down I guess I was asking if muscle gain is solely dependant on metablolism, or if some people are more inclined to put the food they eat to muscle gain. It seemed obvious at first (yes) but I started thinking about it and it doesn’t seem as obvious now.
Meatwad, who just wants to learn about nutrition
Both of you comments are correct because they are for the most part related. I would classify someone who has “good genes” as someone who has a moderate metabolism meaning they can put on muscle easily while minimizing fat gain. On the other had, I would classify a person with “bad genes” as someone with very slow(more fat storage) or very fast(burns every calorie like it’s going out of style)metabolism. However, that is not set in stone. Just because someone has a moderate metabolism does NOT mean they put on muscle easily, though they would build muscle faster than someone of equal muscle building potential with a faster metabolism, if all other factors were equal. I hope that makes some sense, it’s all mostly hypothetical and very general ideas as far as physiology goes as I understand it.