I see absolutely no reason why the human body isn't capable

How do you burn fat simultaneously while building muscle?

Hit?

Because hormones

Building mass = energy surplus
Burning mass = energy deficit

Pick one

>>40012509
Superposition

>mfw only humans are like this
>mfw kangaroos dont even train arms but are ripped as fuck

was it worth it to have smarter brains anons? ;_;

Bulk = Lift weights while eating way too many calories

Cut = Lift weights and do cardio while eating way too few calories

Gradually Cut and Bulk at the Same Time = Lift weights and do some cardio while eating a sensible diet with a slight surplus of calories

how could you possibly lose mass while simultaneously giving your body surplus calories to gain mass

>>40012550
With tren

>>40012289
>I see absolutely no reason why the human body isn't capable of building/putting on muscle while burning excess bodyfat simultaneously at any given bf%
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_energy

>>40012289

Burning fat is inherently catabolic. Building muscle is inherently anabolic. While skeletal muscles are not principally an energy reserve, there is cross talk between myocyte and adipocyte catabolic and anabolic signaling pathways. IE, when your body figures out it needs to start burning more fat, it's going to make signals which make your muscles fibers resist undergoing atrophy to the degree that they normally would have.

>>40012569

excuse me, hypertrophy, not atrophy

>>40012289
fucking spot on m8. I'm so sick of the liberal, progressive ruling elite placing these arbitrary regulations on our day to day lives. If we wanna get swole and lean, who the fuck are they to stand in the way? I mean we already pay thousands a year in taxes, and now we pay the ultimate price in our aesthetics.

This is why I cannot wait for next Friday when Donald Trump is sworn in as president of my country. You're gonna see some big changes in the first 100 days and I'm betting one of them will be to repeal this "bulk OR cut" legislation that Obama shoved down our throats.

>>40012295
>>40012509
>>40012550
>>40012563
>Being this retarded.
http://www.webmd.com/diet/obesity/features/8-ways-to-burn-calories-and-fight-fat#1

https://youtu.be/MFo_wQq8M3Q?list=PL3fB03J6Xve90GSBysoEBZQBy2063tMZ0&t=83

You can, and you do all the time. It just doesn't maximize it.

You can build muscle on a deficit. If you couldn't then you couldnt heal broken bones on a caloric deficit, but you can.

>>40012583
>b8ing this hard

>>40012581
laughed out loud for the first time today ... thanks anon

>>40012289
The way I see it.
Let's say ur daily calories are 2000 Cals and you eat. Only 1800. You work out and create tissue damage. Which makes the body use "proteins" to build muscle. You calories burned while workout are 300 cals.
So total calorie needed 2000+ 300 : 2300.
So we still need 2300- 1800: 500 .
Body burns fat to fill the 500 that you
Are missing , aka you loose fat. Cuz fat is only energy.
As for muscle, it has to do with amout of protein intake, to refill aminoácids.

>>40012289
Only beginners can do that, and its still a lot slower then building muscle on a calorie surpluss.
The reason they can do it is because they are so poorly adapted to strength and exercise that even jerking off with their other hand would increase the muscle mass in their left arm.

>>40014694
So if you eat protein, the body will use it to repair tissue damage, cuz it can't just let it be damaged, and fill the energy lacking from fat, building is slower, cuz some protein may be broken down for energy use, working out makes more you use more of the protein for building.

>>40012289
IT LITERALLY IS

>>40012550
Because your body can use fat to power your body at certain times while building muscle throughout. They are two separate processes.

>>40012289
It's called nitrogen balance

>>40012550
positive nitrogen balance

>>40014745
on /fit/:
Muscle = stored energy

>>40012569
Okay but what if you're eating tons of protein and taking an ECA stack?

If you're new to training, new to proper dieting, or new to steroids, you can successfully recomp. Otherwise, it's better to eat with one specific goal in mind.

>>40012289
>>40012295
>>40012509
>>40012545
>>40012550
>>40012569
>>40014712
The answer is hormones.
/thread

>>40012289
It can, you should study about a subject called trenobol

Possible, but completely ineffective and retarded to even try.

If you really want to stay lean just lean bulk from 10%->12% and cut down again

it's possible in 3 cases:
1) if you're a really DYEL noob
2) while using synthetic hormones
3) with help of muscle memory

basically, in most cases, especially in a case of a natty weightlifter with at least intermediate experience, it's not possible. your body just doesn't want to do it

>>40015158
>what is a positive nitrogen balance

>>40012515
Kangaroos can't even code websites for autistic people to post anime pictures in

>>40012545
You're fucking retarded

So basically you guys are trying to tell me that if I eat maintenance and lift heavy I will see literally zero change in body composition?

Fucking kek. You guys are retarded.

>>40015101
>1.5kg bulk cycles

It is possible, /fit/ will tell you otherwise. However, those changes are only noticeable when you are already muscular

>>40015607
No, you will never eat exactly at maintenance. Your progress will suck after noobgains to

>>40015607
You will slowly see a small amount of progress but also fluctuate either way.

YOU HAVE 2 SOURCES OF ENERGY

THE FOOD YOU EAT
THE FAT YOU BURN

YOU USE FAT TO FUEL NORMAL NEEDS, YOU USE THE FOOD TO BUILD MUSCLE

PLAUSIBLE? YES!
HAPPENING EVEN WITH ELITE ATHLETES.

SOURCE: Garthe et al. Effect of Two Different Weight-Loss Rateson Body Composition and Strength and Power-Related Performance in Elite Athletes, 2011.

File: 1472603701407.png (227KB, 468x460px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 468x460px

>>40015595
>mfw I bet they can't even post anime pictures

>>40012289
it is easier to focus on one thing at a time.
I think this is the main reason for the bulk/cut cycle.

But on beginner level it is no problem to lose fat and build mucles simultaneously.
Swimming for example does both things (at beginners level). HIIT probs does both
Calisthenics does both.

>>40016307
Bullshit, dude. Ever since I've switched to CNO cycle, I've never felt better.

>>40012512
>>>40012509
>Superposition

nice try smart ass, but the body is not a linear system.

>>40012509
>Building mass = energy surplus
>Burning mass = energy deficit

this

>>40012588
>You can build muscle on a deficit. If you couldn't then you couldnt heal broken bones on a caloric deficit, but you can.

flawed logic.

even on a caloric deficit, your bones heal, this is true. however your overall bone mass reduces whilst on a caloric deficit.

even without any broken bones... bones as being constantly mineralised and reabsorbed by the body.

conservation of energy holds true ... a caloric surplus leads to gained mass. And a caloric deficit results in losing mass.

>>40012289
You can, all powerlifters etc. do this (the rule is 2 or so years to fill out a weight class)

>>40012289

Bulking is a meme

All the gains you make you burn them out while cutting unless you use drugs

just eat at maintenance with protein and lift

>>40018438
How is that the case?

So you get wasted gains from bulking?

>>40012305
your hormones spike when cutting and drop when bulking tho fuck head.

>>40018588

I forgot, i meant that for more than 2 years lifting natty, the minimal gains you get from a bulk are easily lost in cutting if you are natty, you are too high level maintenance at that point

If you are natty and had been lifting for 2 years, you better just focus on strength and let destiny and nature do it's part, don't try to force gaining mass without strength because you will end just going circles

>>40012509

Mass would be divided into fat mass and muscle mass though. If you ate at a deficit and were losing weight, it's still plausible that fat mass and total body mass could decrease while muscle mass was increasing. You just wouldn't gain so much muscle mass during that period that you remained the same weight or become heavier.

>>40018794
>Mass would be divided into fat mass and muscle mass though. If you ate at a deficit and were losing weight, it's still plausible that fat mass and total body mass could decrease while muscle mass was increasing. You just wouldn't gain so much muscle mass during that period that you remained the same weight or become heavier.

assuming no exogenous hormones, the biological pathways don't make sense for the example you gave.

>>40018823

>using nice terms for something you just know as memes

accept you know jack shit

>>40018438
true

even more so if your goal is to feel good and be healthy rather than making absolutely certain that you "look like you lift"