Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
Give me one instance...
- Thread starter marvelous54
- Start date
Cardinal Slin
New member
35lbs of muscle - why do people say solid muscle or lean muscle - isn't muscle muscle?????
BTW 35lbs of muscle in a year is just over 1/2 a lb a week - if you just started the gym, are training right, eating right, resting right and not over training, there is absolutely no reason why you could not.
A number of people on these anabolic boards turn to aas because they don't have the dedication or discipline to reach out naturally first.
It is possible.
End of conversation - albeit a conversation you don't want to lose
BTW 35lbs of muscle in a year is just over 1/2 a lb a week - if you just started the gym, are training right, eating right, resting right and not over training, there is absolutely no reason why you could not.
A number of people on these anabolic boards turn to aas because they don't have the dedication or discipline to reach out naturally first.
It is possible.
End of conversation - albeit a conversation you don't want to lose
marvelous54
New member
35lbs of muscle - why do people say solid muscle or lean muscle - isn't muscle muscle?????
BTW 35lbs of muscle in a year is just over 1/2 a lb a week - if you just started the gym, are training right, eating right, resting right and not over training, there is absolutely no reason why you could not.
A number of people on these anabolic boards turn to aas because they don't have the dedication or discipline to reach out naturally first.
It is possible.
End of conversation - albeit a conversation you don't want to lose
Actually I have no problem with losing. The specific person that the debat was about is D1 athlete in his senior season so it's not like he's never trained.
I didn't want to mention that because I wanted to leave it more open to discussion than that.
BTW - we say lean mass becasue some people will put on 25 lbs in a good bulking cycle but they will normally lose 10 or so lbs from bloat and another 5 lbs or so is fat, leaving the leaving them with a gain of 10lbs of lean mass.
02gixxersix
New member
I agree with Marvelous here. It's not impossible, and definitely more likely if someone just started training. However, not many people are going to be able to put on 35lbs of muscle in a year even with sane amount of AAS.
It's very possible, especially for a first time lifter who hasn't been dieting properly. I went from 122 to 155 (33 lean pounds) in a year cause I was basically unconsciously starving myself.
i would have to suggest that it is possible, however.. possible great injury is at risk.. ligaments and tendons would be very stressed with the additional weight, and..
for someone that would have the knowledge and discipline to eat right is not probable..
It's possible for someone to win the lottery too..
for someone that would have the knowledge and discipline to eat right is not probable..
It's possible for someone to win the lottery too..
marvelous54
New member
Very good point.
when in doubt, look to science. its pretty easy to figure out that 99.9% of humans will not be able to replicate the muscle building environment on a daily basis for 365 days and add weight, lean muscle weight, at a consistent upward progress. heres a real basic look at what goes into making muscle. with all the processes going on in the body on a daily, weekly, monthly basis, there is no way the body will simply downregulate all other functions to focus on muscle growth only, and that is what would have to happen to add 35 pounds of muscle in a year.
Muscle Building
How many calories do you think are required to build a pound of muscle? Amazingly, to build a pound of muscle tissue requires over 45,000 calories. How can that be, you ask? After all, a pound of muscle at about 20% protein comes out to be 90 grams of protein. That muscle is also comprised of about 13 grams of lipids, 4 to 5 grams of glycogen, and several millimoles of ATP and creatine phosphate. The rest is water. If you break down that pound of muscle to consume it as calories, it works out to 4 calories per gram of protein and glycogen, plus 9 calories per gram of lipid, plus a few hundred calories for the ATP and creatine phosphate --- so --- we have a total energy value stored in that muscle of 750 calories. “It doesn’t add up,” you say. “If a pound of muscle can only be catabolized to yield 750 calories, how can it be claimed that nearly 50,000 calories went into building that muscle?” The key is in understanding that anabolism and catabolism are not reversibly equivalent.
Protein anabolism has an almost unbelievably high energy cost. Building a pound of muscle is analogous in many ways to building the Great Pyramids of ancient Egypt. Those pyramids were not carved out of rock that was already there, they were assembled from countless smaller rocks hauled into place and lifted into position by literally millions of man hours of energy output. So it is with building a muscle. Muscle protein is synthesized from the assembling of individual amino acids within each of the muscle cells. Every single peptide bond in every one of the protein molecules requires the expenditure of energy. The energy equivalent of three moles of high energy phosphate bonds is required for every mole of peptide bonds.
Now, consider that muscle proteins consist of peptide chains used to build light myosin, heavy myosin, actin, and collagen. The average molecular weight of these various proteins is about 200,000, yielding about 2000 peptide bonds per molecule. Since each of those peptide bonds requires degradation of 3 phosphate bonds, and each high energy phosphate bond of ATP or GTP yields about 8000 calories per mole, we can estimate the energy cost of making one mole of protein at about 3 X 8000 X 2000 = 48,000,000 calories per mole of protein. This works out to be about 220 calories per gram of protein. Now, multiplying this 220 calories per gram times the 90 grams of protein in a pound of muscle we come up with something close to 20,000 calories of ATP and GTP to synthesize the protein in one pound of muscle.
However, the reality of the situation is a little more complex. The efficiency of energy transfer in the production of ATP from glucose is only about 44%. This means that to supply the muscle building process with the extra 20,000 calories of ATP and GTP, you must consume a total of more than 45,000 extra food calories. When we add in the calories stored in the lipids and glycogen and ATP and creatine phosphate of the muscle, plus the calories to synthesize those substances, we get a grand total of approximately 47,000 calories.
Muscle Building
How many calories do you think are required to build a pound of muscle? Amazingly, to build a pound of muscle tissue requires over 45,000 calories. How can that be, you ask? After all, a pound of muscle at about 20% protein comes out to be 90 grams of protein. That muscle is also comprised of about 13 grams of lipids, 4 to 5 grams of glycogen, and several millimoles of ATP and creatine phosphate. The rest is water. If you break down that pound of muscle to consume it as calories, it works out to 4 calories per gram of protein and glycogen, plus 9 calories per gram of lipid, plus a few hundred calories for the ATP and creatine phosphate --- so --- we have a total energy value stored in that muscle of 750 calories. “It doesn’t add up,” you say. “If a pound of muscle can only be catabolized to yield 750 calories, how can it be claimed that nearly 50,000 calories went into building that muscle?” The key is in understanding that anabolism and catabolism are not reversibly equivalent.
Protein anabolism has an almost unbelievably high energy cost. Building a pound of muscle is analogous in many ways to building the Great Pyramids of ancient Egypt. Those pyramids were not carved out of rock that was already there, they were assembled from countless smaller rocks hauled into place and lifted into position by literally millions of man hours of energy output. So it is with building a muscle. Muscle protein is synthesized from the assembling of individual amino acids within each of the muscle cells. Every single peptide bond in every one of the protein molecules requires the expenditure of energy. The energy equivalent of three moles of high energy phosphate bonds is required for every mole of peptide bonds.
Now, consider that muscle proteins consist of peptide chains used to build light myosin, heavy myosin, actin, and collagen. The average molecular weight of these various proteins is about 200,000, yielding about 2000 peptide bonds per molecule. Since each of those peptide bonds requires degradation of 3 phosphate bonds, and each high energy phosphate bond of ATP or GTP yields about 8000 calories per mole, we can estimate the energy cost of making one mole of protein at about 3 X 8000 X 2000 = 48,000,000 calories per mole of protein. This works out to be about 220 calories per gram of protein. Now, multiplying this 220 calories per gram times the 90 grams of protein in a pound of muscle we come up with something close to 20,000 calories of ATP and GTP to synthesize the protein in one pound of muscle.
However, the reality of the situation is a little more complex. The efficiency of energy transfer in the production of ATP from glucose is only about 44%. This means that to supply the muscle building process with the extra 20,000 calories of ATP and GTP, you must consume a total of more than 45,000 extra food calories. When we add in the calories stored in the lipids and glycogen and ATP and creatine phosphate of the muscle, plus the calories to synthesize those substances, we get a grand total of approximately 47,000 calories.
Cardinal Slin
New member
So basically everyone on here who said they did it, or knows someone who has done it is a plain and simple liar LOL
I don't think he's calling anyone a liar but there is a truth when it comes to this kind of thing: Almost everyone underestimates the amount of bodyfat they have and overestimates the amount of lean tissue they have. You may be one of the few people that can accurately and objectively state this about yourself but most people can't - tim tim and others are just playing the odds and so am I. I don't know if 35 pounds of actual lean tissue in a year is impossible (never say impossible) but it is highly unlikely.
