T Nation

Possible To Gain Muscle And Lose Fat?


hey guys u know how people say its impossible to gain muscle and lose fat?? then how come u can do it on the velocity diet??

so IT IS actually possible? what are some tips on how to accomplish it?


Who said it was possible to gain muscle on the v-diet?

It's easiest for newbies, who usually have fat to lose and muscle to easily gain.

If someone also increases activity level while overweight, using the principles of Berardi's g-flux they can gain muscle and lose fat.

One should always be a primary goal, the other should be a side effect or benefit. Whit good planning you can maximize the "side effects" of it though.

Jen Heath describes it really well at the beginning of this article:


Few people gain muscle on the Velocity Diet. Those that do are usually unatrained individuals or those who have been really protein-deficient. But it's not impossible to gain muscle and lose fat at the same time.

A soft, flabby but not truly fat beginner could and most proabably should recompose like this for a good bit if they're training and eating properly. [Other skinny beginners should just flat-out bulk from the beginning adding a little fat along with a lot of muscle from the getgo].

Adding muscle while losing fat becomes increasingly more difficult the more seasoned the trainer is.


You can gain strength on the V-Diet (I did), but that doesn't mean you've necessarily gained muscle.

Here's a very good article on the subject of concurrent fat-loss/muscle-gain:

Losing Fat While Gaining Strength and Muscle: Fact or Fiction?

By Thomas Phillips with Mike Hanley


It depends on what one means by "the same time" and also what sort of rates one is talking about.

If meaning for example might someone gain muscle and lose fat in the same month, absolutely.

In the same week, that's also possible.

If meaning at literally the same moment, fat decreasing at a rate that would add up to say a pound per week or more and muscle actually building contractile protein at the same time at likewise what would add up to a good rate, this may be possible for novices though even for them certainly not as favorable for muscle gain as when consuming calories yielding no fat loss; but it's not possible for advanced trainers under ordinary conditions.

Someone more advanced has reached a state of near-homeostasis, or balance, in the condition where calories match expenditure. So growth is hardly going to occur under less favorable conditions than that; will usually occur only slowly under those conditions, and to occur rapidly requires more favorable conditions.


What would the calorie intake target be if you were to attempt losing fat/adding LBM?

for example I am going to follow Waterburys outline for loosing fat and ganing muslce mass from his book Muscle Recolution, Would I follow an maintaine cal. intake? or would I eat to gain mass and add in decent cardio?


My strength went up on the VD. When I came off and returned to a normal Anabolic Diet style of eating, I lost another 1/2" on my waist but my arm and leg measurements went up. Soooo, could be a rebound anabolism thing going on, but I don't think I gained any muscle on the diet...but didn't lose any either, which is just as good.

I'd suggest concentrating on one thing at a time.


It's IMO probably best when this is the goal to consume an amount yielding fairly constant bodyweight. In other words, it's probably unrealistic or certainly harder to have a goal of gaining 10 lb of muscle while losing 20 lb of fat over a few months versus making it 10 and 10; or if feeling that keeping weight approximately constant is making muscle gain too slow, then entirely drop the idea of losing fat at the same time.

Even in the context of keeping weight approximately constant while changing body composition, it's better to have variation, e.g. some days 500 or even somewhat more above the average, and some equally less. This may work out to actually resulting in days that are only muscle gain and other days that are only fat loss, but the net result over time can be a balance and it does seem more efficient to usually generally have one process or the other going pretty well as opposed to always having either one be pretty sluggish.