Regardless of what supplement manufacturers try to claim, I tend to hold to the belief that it is impossible to gain LBM while in a hypocaloric state(dieting) unless you’re a complete beginner, genetic freak, or on the juice. Seemingly, weight training while dieting serves mainly to send a signal to your body that it needs to keep it’s muscle and burn fat instead and also the exercise obviously helps to burn calories. With that in mind why is it so popular for people to train with hypertrophy in mind when it is unlikely they will experience any?
It has been proven that you can gain strength without a hypertrophic response due to your nervous system(CNS) adapting to the heavy loads. I’m wondering if CNS adaption can occur without a calorie surplus as muscle growth needs. If not then wouldn’t it make sense to train with strength in mind while dieting? If you give up the fact that you will not gain muscle in a diet then you can train for strength and hopefully at the end of the dieting phase you will be stronger. Then because of your higher strength you can begin your mass phase lifting greater weights thus getting a better hypertrophic response than if you had trained for hypertrophy during the diet phase.
I know I've oversimplified things a bit but it seems a legit theory. Also people seem to gauge if they're losing LBM during a diet by the maintenance of strength. "So long as I don't get weaker then I'm not losing muscle". However what if these people were actually losing a bit of muscle but gaining strength from CNS adaption at the same time? Could it be misleading to go by the keep the strength theory?
I know Poliquin advocates higher reps and short rest periods during diet phases to induce more lactic acid buildup which he says raises GH levels. I’m curious how fat loss would occur during a diet while training with low reps and heavier weights with longer rest periods which would build up less lactic acid.