PDA

View Full Version : Bogus Information?



bkoman
05-28-2011, 08:51 PM
So I was just watching a video that popped up while I was researching routines for complexes, which had a guy who was speaking about weight lifting and bodybuilding. Normally i'll stray away from such things, because I feel like they are all lies and just want money pushing their new routines/supplements. But I decided to watch because he had some information that I know is correct. He was talking about how diet is just as important as your routine is. Then he went on to the 3 mistakes of weightlifting and one of them was bulking first then cutting. He said if youre already slightly overweight and decide to go on a bulk that it would end up with you gaining MORE fat in the long run that would be permanent.....? How is that possible? I do understand that in a bulk YES you do gain more fat than you previously had, but the intent is to also gain muscle and to obviously go on a cut afterwards to expose the new muscle and get rid of the fat. He said it was called "fat hyperplasia", in which you supposedly force your current fat cells to expand further because you are "bulking" resulting in the permanent fat retention....

Is it me or does this just sound rediculous?

I know better to believe in this garbage (which im hoping it is), but I just wanted to know what your thoughts were.

JacobH
05-28-2011, 09:21 PM
This is garbage. MAYBE it would make it somewhat more difficult to cut the fat. But this just isn't logical to me.

Alex.V
05-28-2011, 10:29 PM
It's garbage. But then again, so is eating so much that you get fat.

Fat doesn't lift weight, fat doesn't turn into muscle. Don't get fat.

Behemoth
05-29-2011, 11:58 AM
Hyperplasia is not garbage....

And whether or not it influences ones setpoint is certainly debatable.

Dan Fanelli
05-29-2011, 01:48 PM
What he is saying is garbage. Adult humans dont increase their number of fat cells very easily. But there is SOME truth to cutting before bulking, its just not a black and white issue.

Behemoth
05-29-2011, 01:56 PM
What he is saying is garbage. Adult humans dont increase their number of fat cells very easily. But there is SOME truth to cutting before bulking, its just not a black and white issue.

Whether or not it happens "very easily" is open to interpretation. But it can most certainly occur outside of childhood.

JacobH
05-29-2011, 04:57 PM
I've heard of Hyperplasia, but my understanding was contrary to what the TC was saying.

This part: "He said if youre already slightly overweight and decide to go on a bulk that it would end up with you gaining MORE fat in the long run that would be permanent"

I just didn't think it worked like that. If you have a small amount of fat to begin with, and then add some fat on a bulk, why would some of that be made permanent? I'm assuming there are many variables at play like how high your BF% is before the cut/bulk and how extreme/rapid your fat gain is during the bulk.
I'm not trying to argue here as I know you guys are much more knowledgable than me. I am just curious as to how this works.

ajweins
05-29-2011, 05:09 PM
I don't have any studies on hand to support this, but from what I have been taught in grad school was that fat cell hyperplasia only really occurs in obese populations. Otherwise, your fat cell number remains fairly fixed except in extreme populations. However, maybe new research has disproved this, as textbooks seem to be a good 5-10 years behind the current research.

RichMcGuire
05-29-2011, 06:34 PM
So starting a bulk already fat, knowing that a bulk adds additional fat, you dont think these people can create new fat cells through hyperplasia? Why not? I think it would depend mostly on how fat you start a bulk and your genetics - but I cant see how anyone would think having more fat cells would make things easier in the long run.

To anyone who says its not easy to happen or it is easy, where are you getting your information and research on fat cell hyperplasia?

JacobH
05-29-2011, 07:07 PM
Personally I wasn't saying either. And I think it's fairly obvious that adding more fat during a bulk to previously existing fat will make cutting it that much more difficult. What I was wondering is: just because you have a small amount of fat (not talking about obese people, or even "fat" people) why would adding a bit more during a bulk result in permanent fat? That is what the TC stated. And it doesn't really make sense to me.

Dan Fanelli
05-29-2011, 07:44 PM
The reason its not "very easy" to do for most people, is that their fat cells can hold a lot. As others above mentioned though, those that are already obese and very obese have less room in their fat cells for additional storage. So at some point the body will have to create more fat cells.

There are reasons to cut before you bulk, and in many cases that is the way to go. But there are also many cases where this wouldn't be the way to go, as are there times when you dont want to "bulk" or "cut" at all.

RichMcGuire
05-29-2011, 07:53 PM
I see a lot of conjecture but no real supported evidence of hyperplasia happening at a fixed rate of cell growth, happening easily, being hard, or how big fat cells must become before they do hyperplasia. I don't want the "paleo-like-should be's"

Fat cell hyperplasia and set-points have interested me for a long time so I am always interested in seeing new research with it.

RichMcGuire
05-29-2011, 07:55 PM
Personally I wasn't saying either. And I think it's fairly obvious that adding more fat during a bulk to previously existing fat will make cutting it that much more difficult. What I was wondering is: just because you have a small amount of fat (not talking about obese people, or even "fat" people) why would adding a bit more during a bulk result in permanent fat? That is what the TC stated. And it doesn't really make sense to me.

Whats a small amount of fat? Small amount sounds like 10% to me. If that were the case, I doubt youd have to worry. If a small amount to you is like 20%, then I would change my opinion.

JacobH
05-29-2011, 08:53 PM
Whats a small amount of fat? Small amount sounds like 10% to me. If that were the case, I doubt youd have to worry. If a small amount to you is like 20%, then I would change my opinion.

Well I was thinking more in the average range. Like a little visible stomach chub maybe 15% or so. The way TC made it sound though was even small amounts. Thanks for the feedback.

bkoman
05-29-2011, 09:09 PM
Well I was thinking more in the average range. Like a little visible stomach chub maybe 15% or so. The way TC made it sound though was even small amounts. Thanks for the feedback.

Ya, the person in the video that he used as an example looked like they were in the 15%-20% fat range. Thats why I found it to be concerning because I fit into that range. Also, im glad to hear from people and their reactions. I was doing a lot of research and some people state that the ammount of fat cells an individual has is pre-determined before adulthood, and others say that it can change depending on genetics. I guess we'll have to wait and see how my cut goes.

JacobH
05-29-2011, 09:37 PM
Well good luck man. And I wouldn't worry about it too much. :thumbup:

Alex.V
05-29-2011, 11:20 PM
Hyperplasia is not garbage....



No, it isn't. But the full claim was.

4g64fiero
05-29-2011, 11:34 PM
If you get hyperplasia from a bulk, you have some serious fucking issues. :bertstare:

Typical bulking, regardless of starting point, isnt going to be enough added mass to set this off. I dont even know why there is an argument here? Is everyone assuming the bulkee is going to add 50 pounds in 3 months? Isnt the norm to add about 20 pounds then cut like 15?

Anyways, I generally disagree with the sentiment expressed in the context of the op's original explanation.

If you are over 20% bf, cut.

RichMcGuire
05-30-2011, 02:21 PM
If you get hyperplasia from a bulk, you have some serious fucking issues. :bertstare:

the norm to add about 20 pounds then cut like 15? .

Uhm, no. The norm is to add 20-30 lbs and pretend only a couple lbs was fat and the rest was muscle.

Also, when does hyperplasia occur? I'm guessing it would be pretty hard to monitor the amound of fat cells you have.

Alex.V
05-30-2011, 07:53 PM
Uhm, no. The norm is to add 20-30 lbs and pretend only a couple lbs was fat and the rest was muscle.



lol. Exactly. when in reality, 4-5 of those are muscle, and the rest is... what's the internet term? Hyperplasic adipocity.

4g64fiero
05-30-2011, 08:03 PM
lol. Exactly. when in reality, 4-5 of those are muscle, and the rest is... what's the internet term? Hyperplasic adipocity.

In all fairness, there isnt alot of easily available information that explains that the average trainee will only put on about 25% of the weight gained as muscle. I had to figure that out for myself, even then that seems like alot.

Alex.V
05-31-2011, 01:17 PM
In all fairness, there isnt alot of easily available information that explains that the average trainee will only put on about 25% of the weight gained as muscle. I had to figure that out for myself, even then that seems like alot.

Agreed. That's why I and others reserve our harsh words for those DISPENSING the advice, not those asking for it.

Generally, if you read a piece of advice on the internet, assume it's wrong until proven otherwise. This applies especially to "conventional wisdom".

RichMcGuire
05-31-2011, 02:01 PM
Generally, if you read a piece of advice on the internet, assume it's wrong until proven otherwise. This applies especially to "conventional wisdom".

Yes, this is signature worthy.