Is bulking a myth?

No, I'm pretty sure that it is a real thing that people do.

File: comp.png (240KB, 519x303px) Image search: [Google]

240KB, 519x303px

No.

>>38502540
yeah pretty much, you'll just get fat af if you're natty.

The idea that you can bully your body into producing more muscle by eating a higher surplus than necessary is a myth. If your goals are aesthetics then a daily surplus of 500 cals is perfectly adequate

>>38502567
this isnt bulking. this is just an overweight powerlifter who never cut.

cutting =/= bulking

>>38502571
the idea that a higher surplus won't provide you with more energy, more glycogen, more work capacity, ability to lift more weight and for more volume is simply idiotic.

Everybody should try to do a stuff your face with delicious af shit bulk at least once

I lifted for serveral years without doing one, was all muh abs n muh vascularity, wish I had tried this earlier. Its awesome. Crushing PRs daily

>>38502576
This is really fucking motivational for my cut.

>>38502769
I bulked to 25% bodyfat, drinking beer everyday, eating pudding and pizzas most days. It was really cool, being able to rep 3pl8 for 10, with my feet on the bench.

But now I must become Abs Man.

>>38502575
but to get the body on the right you need to bulk first

File: 1471236801427.jpg (400KB, 1959x1469px) Image search: [Google]

400KB, 1959x1469px

>>38502869
But when you body stores that energy is fat you are not using it until you are burning that fat, for me bulking seems like a waste of time lazy people do becouuse they want to get away with eating immense amount of food.

>>38502869
sorry
>>38502982
This was for
>>38502592

>>38502982
Yeah when I cut back, I'm definitely never getting above 15% bodyfat again in my life. I'm going to put wall length mirrors in my home gym, so I will constantly be ego reinforced to never get fat and lose that glorious muscle tone, veiny arms etc, I miss so much.

>>38503002
This,
I dont see why anyone wants to look like a fatass half of the year when you can look good all year round

>>38502982
your body stores glucose as glycogen first, see if you won't use it, and only then turns it into fat.

>>38502592
Well if you actually use up all the extra glycogen you get, it won't be a surplus. Or will it, genius?

Protein synthesis and CNS exhaustion tend to be the limiting factors for anyone who isn't a workshy dyel so MORE LIFTING!!!!1 won't do anything past that point (unless you consider fucked up tendons and joints something.)

Even the biggest of guys can't absorb more than 240grams of protein per day, baring roids of course.
>https://examine.com/nutrition/how-much-protein-can-i-eat-in-one-sitting/?PageSpeed=noscript

A 200-500kcal surplus will most definitely result in some additional gains, but 1000 and above is just idiotic unless your at so low a bodyfat that it is fucking up your hormone levels.

Bulking is for fatasfatasses who lack the will power to eat normally

>>38503381
only people who have zero personal experience with a huge surplus deny that it makes you a hell of a lot stronger. Zero. Get outta here.

Yep. Worse than that, it's a troll. The 'bulking' meme was designed to make noobs into unaesthetic fat messes.

All you need to build muscle a little protein and plenty of fruit juice for energy. You can easily gain 1 lb of muscle a week on a calorie deficit using your own fat to make it.

>>38503471
You ruined this bait with 1lb of muscle a week

File: 59458186.jpg (105KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 400x400px

>>38503448
>Get outta here.
Never.

File: fake-diploma-e1290115516150.png (218KB, 595x459px) Image search: [Google]

218KB, 595x459px

>>38503448
Yeah brah1 You tell em bro!

>>38503381
Shhh do you know where you are dumbass?

You can't use facts here. Everything is dumb anecdotal bullshit that is perpetuated with zero evidence.

People /still/ think you should consume gram of protein per lb of body weight. That alone should tell you how misinformed the majority of this board is with regards to nutrition.

File: 1462225660662.jpg (10KB, 236x237px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 236x237px

>>38503381
>more lifting won't do anything
>lifting 10 reps of x won't make you stronger than lifting 8 reps of same x

>>38503903
I dont think that's what he's saying.He's saying if you have stimulated the muscles adequately enough for growth that doing more lifting beyond that point wont change the net amount of growth.

>>38503903
>Can't tell if troll, illiterate or just an idiot.

But I'll bite: lifting past the point of optimal stimulation won't do a goddamn thing except put unnecessary stress on you.

As far as 10 reps making you stronger than 8 reps, go read the sticky. Spoiler: you have to sacrifice intensity for higher rep rangers.

>>38503995
>you have to sacrifice intensity for higher rep rangers.

if you are eating the same amount of food, yes, if you're eating much more food, no you fucking don't.

>>38504036
That isn't how the neuromuscular system works, m8. Your maximum force production potential on a surplus is the same as it is on a deficit. You can't rep out your IRM just because you've eaten a thousand extra calories today.

>>38504054
listen you stupid fuck, your muscles use energy (glucose turned into ATP) to lift, if you have a lot of energy available you'll be able to produce more ATP to push beyond those 8 reps and possibly get 2 extra reps. This is a simple fact.

>>38503381
>https://examine.com/nutrition/how-much-protein-can-i-eat-in-one-sitting/?PageSpeed=noscript
>the body slows down digestion until it has absorbed most of the protein in your gut.
>it can only absorb protein as long as it has amino acid transporters, which limits protein absorption to 120-240g per day.
is this why I get bloated and constipated when I eat too much protein? does my body halt digestion to absorb it but can't once it's out of that PEPT-1 shit?

>>38503023
Well you may look good. But you'll never be as stronk as a person on a bulk who's increasing their gains

>>38502540
Bulking is for people on steroids from the 70's.
If you're not on steroids you want to lean bulk. Yo-yoing with your weight is extremely unheathly.

>>38504112
>lifting for strength

>>38504082
>Implying ATP reserves are the limiting factor of muscle stimulation, let alone growth.
>Implying ATP reserves grow linearly with excess calories consumed.
>Implying keeping your ATP reserves topped off and maybe supplementing with some creatine for faster ATP conversion is incompatible with a small surplus or even recomp.

>>38504082
Great grade 10 understanding of basic human biology. Next time, take a step back and realize you're not the subject matter expert because you graduated high school.

>>38504082
You ALMOST understand this. Go and finish the fucking chapter - go the extra 3 steps instead of just pissing in the sink you silly nigger.

>>38504143
>>Implying ATP reserves are the limiting factor of muscle stimulation, let alone growth.
It is a lot of the time, you can literally test my claim yourself before talking shit.

If your 10RM was something almost built-in, unaffectable by how many calories you ate, how hydrated you're at a given time and how much glucogen you have on your blood or how much glycogen you have stored in your muscles and liver, then creatine, which has an IMMEDIATE effect on 10RM must be something magical.

go eat at a 1000kcal surplus for a week and then come back to tell your 10RM bench hasn't gone up significantly.

>>38504213
Nigger, if you have to eat +1000kcal above TDEE to have sufficient glycogen, ATP, creatine and water(?) to reach maximum stimulation - then you're eating and training in the most retarded fashion possible. You can get all that and still be at a net deficit. Eating something sweet before training, taking some creatine and maybe stimulants make a bit of difference - but you can do all that without being on a big surplus.

A lot of studies have demolished bro-science gospel in the last decade. That whole "eat a pound of protein per day" bullshit is on the way out, "you need to consume half a farms yearly output in food to get maximum gains" is also on the way out.

If you program smartly and eat well, you can very efficiently get to the point where those two aren't the limiting factor on gains. Now roids change the whole tune - of course - but we're talking natty, I assume.

File: 1469532359483.jpg (82KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 960x960px

>>38504333
Yeah, its amazing that people forget about the human body is limited to biological barriers.

Bulking is a result of people believing that muscles grow in place of fat. Also it gives them the perception of being stronger, but thats only due to you weighing more. If you were bulking to just strengthen the muscles you already had, on a maintenance + you can strength train (med weight very high reps) the muscle you currently have which will increase the muscle control and flexion, the muscle will also feel more dense. People just think growing muscle (10lbs at least over max 1 rep) is the best way to "look" good. But that just makes you bulky and really not all entirely that strong. Its sad When you can see someone with much smaller muscle groups but they had been strengthend can lift alot more than you.

>>38504542
>But that just makes you bulky and really not all entirely that strong. Its sad When you can see someone with much smaller muscle groups but they had been strengthend can lift alot more than you.
I agree with >>38504333 too, but what the fuck are you on about? are you seriously making the 'toning' argument?

Everything is a fucken myth on this website because it's full of contrarians.

Do what works for your body, everyone's body is different, if eating at a higher surplus gets you big muscles then do it, if eating at maintenance gets you swoll af, then do that.

>>38502575
u bulk then cut then bulk then cut then bulk then cut.

there's a reason why dudes say "it took me 5 years to get this way" -- all those bulk/cut cycles