[Scott Stevenson]

Just wanted to stop in personally and say thanks for the kind words, my friend. 🙂 (Anytime, as you know.)

-Scott

[Scott Stevenson]

James,

You’re asking a massively large question. I have an entire book on body composition estimation. I wrote an article for John Meadows’ site, but can’t post here as it belongs to John.

Firstly, I’d suggest reading the study you’re interested in. Asking about “studies like this” is like walking on a car lot and asking, how much stuff can vehicles like this haul? Depends on the vehicle, i.e., depends on the study.

Typically, this is a matter of body comp estimation, making several underlying assumptions (which vary by method), e.g.
There is a given dentist of fat and fat free mass and archimedes principle (along with estimates of body density derived from a limited number of cadavers)
Skinfolds can be use to create a regression equation to estimate body density and then derive % body fat.
Tissue absorption of X-rays varies by tissue and beam intensity and can thus be used to determine fat, bone and other tissue

…and, using the above, one can parcelling the body in to a different number of components, e.g:
Fat vs. Fat-free mass
Fat, Bone mass and everything else (Lean Non-Bone Mass). FYI, in the research LBM – lean body mass – usually is reserved for THIS measurement, in a three component model.
Fat, Water, mineral and protein (by using DEXA and a measurement of body water)

Water and glycogen are part of the FFM and LBM.

Body nitrogen can be used in a model not mentioned above (as it represents about 16% of protein), but nitrogen retention in the way I think you mean it has nothing to do with body comp, which is a static measurement. Nitrogen retention represents the physiological (dynamic) balance of protein balance over some period of time.

Blood flow and pressure would play a role in biolelectical impeding and infra-red techniques, but these measurement are not (as far as I know) made directly as part of the body comp. estimate. They do vary of course and thus are a potential source of error b/c these kinds of techniques make assumptions about tissue properties without measuring those properties directly on the subject.

Really, to answer your question in any more depth, you’d have to dig into how the estimates are derived or I’d have to spend hours typing out a novella… LOL 🙂 🙂 🙂

(If you ask about a particular study, that’s also a bit more manageable.)

-S

[Scott Stevenson]

Joshua,

I have no idea why that study in and of itself would indicate a “cyclic approach” would be of any benefit. (There was nothing cyclical in the study and I’m not sure what you’re talking about cycling.

Yes, some of that caloric deficit could come from protein if you wanted it to. Dropping the protein would mean greater body fat however going off of that study.

The upper limits of body fat for a bulk are almost never reached physiologically – it’s typically a turning point that happens when someone just feels uncomfortable, needs to diet down for a show, psychologically can’t allow themselves to get any fatter, there are medical issues starting to creep up, or simply has been overeating for so long that is simply makes practical sense to take a break. Even though you wrote out your question twice… No, let me rephrase that instead of simply erasing what I previously wrote. Even though you noted my answer and then asked a question, my answer is still that there is no hard and fast number. (I’m messing with you, BTW… 🙂 🙂 🙂 )

I’m going to try to get you to broaden your perspective here and I’m not going to give you a number.

Yes, if you can’t move, that would be disuse atrophy. Also, my example wouldn’t apply to someone who is wheelchair bound, has had his legs casted or who is living on a space station. There are a multitude of factors that contribute to the extend of the FFM gain with weight gain. The subjects in that study were free living, ambulatory and healthy, normal weight individuals.

In what way is 3.4g/kg a limit given this study? (There are no studies documenting a dose response for protein intake in steroid using athletes that I’m aware of. There are some obscure studies with very high protein intake where I suspect the subjects were using AAS, but it’s not stated specifically in the methodology.)

(Did you actually read the study I cite above – it wasn’t one of Stu Phillips’ studies, actually…)

-S

[Scott Stevenson]

Hey Joshua!

That’s the age old question. Optimally, you start very lean and you weight climbs slowly. Let’s say you average 3lb / month and you get 2 lb FFM (~muscle) and 1 lb fat. That’s 24lb of muscle in a year.

There are at least two points here that are important:
1.) There will be no “optimal” for everyone, as there is so much interindividual differences that this is a silly proposition. Consider a normal bell curve.

Here are some data on body fat percentage from males in the US age 20-39 (see page 12): https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_11/sr11_250.pdf
Mean = 27.4%BF. Bottom 5%-ile = 17.7% Top 5%-ile = 36.9

This is just to show have variable BF% is, which gives us some idea how variable the BF% would be to have an optimal ratio of muscle mass / fat gain would be.

2.) Regardless of optimizing muscle gain, you’ve got to consider where someone is along their progression and the fact that there will be some fat gain to gain new muscle. (This was the point of the math above – so that one recognizes that new muscle mass comes at a cost and one can’t expect it in most cases to come during a prep. It will have to be gained during the off-season, with some acceptance that some might be lost during the prep, too.)

————

This is the study with the overfeeding. (It was not a high protein feeding study – that was study where they simply added protein. See below.) Note that fat free mass (not muscle mass) was measured in the Bouchard et al. studies, but it’s likely that a good bit of the FFM was muscle.

1. Bouchard C, Tremblay A, Despres JP, et al. The response to long-term overfeeding in identical twins. N Engl J Med. 1990;322(21):1477-1482.
We undertook this study to determine whether there are differences in the responses of different persons to long-term overfeeding and to assess the possibility that genotypes are involved in such differences. After a two-week base-line period, 12 pairs of young adult male monozygotic twins were overfed by 4.2 MJ (1000 kcal) per day, 6 days a week, for a total of 84 days during a 100-day period. The total excess amount each man consumed was 353 MJ (84,000 kcal). During overfeeding, individual changes in body composition and topography of fat deposition varied considerably. The mean weight gain was 8.1 kg, but the range was 4.3 to 13.3 kg. The similarity within each pair in the response to overfeeding was significant (P less than 0.05) with respect to body weight, percentage of fat, fat mass, and estimated subcutaneous fat, with about three times more variance among pairs than within pairs (r approximately 0.5). After adjustment for the gains in fat mass, the within-pair similarity was particularly evident with respect to the changes in regional fat distribution and amount of abdominal visceral fat (P less than 0.01), with about six times as much variance among pairs as within pairs (r approximately 0.7). We conclude that the most likely explanation for the intrapair similarity in the adaptation to long-term overfeeding and for the variations in weight gain and fat distribution among the pairs of twins is that genetic factors are involved. These may govern the tendency to store energy as either fat or lean tissue and the various determinants of the resting expenditure of energy.

1. Antonio J, Ellerbroek A, Silver T, et al. A high protein diet (3.4 g/kg/d) combined with a heavy resistance training program improves body composition in healthy trained men and women – a follow-up investigation. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition. 2015;12(1):39.
Abstract
Background: The consumption of a high protein diet (>4 g/kg/d) in trained men and women who did not alter
their exercise program has been previously shown to have no significant effect on body composition. Thus, the
purpose of this investigation was to determine if a high protein diet in conjunction with a periodized heavy resistance
training program would affect indices of body composition, performance and health.
Methods: Forty-eight healthy resistance-trained men and women completed this study (mean ± SD; Normal Protein
group [NP n = 17, four female and 13 male]: 24.8 ± 6.9 yr; 174.0 ± 9.5 cm height; 74.7 ± 9.6 kg body weight; 2.4 ± 1.7 yr
of training; High Protein group [HP n = 31, seven female and 24 male]: 22.9 ± 3.1 yr; 172.3 ± 7.7 cm; 74.3 ± 12.4 kg;
4.9 ± 4.1 yr of training). Moreover, all subjects participated in a split-routine, periodized heavy resistance-training
program. Training and daily diet logs were kept by each subject. Subjects in the NP and HP groups were instructed to
consume their baseline (~2 g/kg/d) and >3 g/kg/d of dietary protein, respectively.
Results: Subjects in the NP and HP groups consumed 2.3 and 3.4 g/kg/day of dietary protein during the treatment
period. The NP group consumed significantly (p < 0.05) more protein during the treatment period compared to their
baseline intake. The HP group consumed more (p < 0.05) total energy and protein during the treatment
period compared to their baseline intake. Furthermore, the HP group consumed significantly more (p < 0.05)
total calories and protein compared to the NP group. There were significant time by group (p ≤ 0.05) changes
in body weight (change: +1.3 ± 1.3 kg NP, −0.1 ± 2.5 HP), fat mass (change: −0.3 ± 2.2 kg NP, −1.7 ± 2.3 HP),
and % body fat (change: −0.7 ± 2.8 NP, −2.4 ± 2.9 HP). The NP group gained significantly more body weight
than the HP group; however, the HP group experienced a greater decrease in fat mass and % body fat.
There was a significant time effect for FFM; however, there was a non-significant time by group effect for
FFM (change: +1.5 ± 1.8 NP, +1.5 ± 2.2 HP). Furthermore, a significant time effect (p ≤ 0.05) was seen in both
groups vis a vis improvements in maximal strength (i.e., 1-RM squat and bench) vertical jump and pull-ups;
however, there were no significant time by group effects (p ≥ 0.05) for all exercise performance measures.
Additionally, there were no changes in any of the blood parameters (i.e., basic metabolic panel).
Conclusion: Consuming a high protein diet (3.4 g/kg/d) in conjunction with a heavy resistance-training program
may confer benefits with regards to body composition. Furthermore, there is no evidence that consuming a
high protein diet has any deleterious effects.
Keywords: Protein, Diet, Body Composition, Nutrition, Body Fat

——–

How does one gain muscle mass with overfeeding and no exercise stimulus?… A chronic anabolic environment as well as a heavier body to carry about in space. (Think about the calves of many very large people…) In these Bouchard studies, too – there was massive variability in the body mass changes with overfeeding (as well as when one creates a deficit with exercise).

-S

[Scott Stevenson]

William,

Coincidence or omen?… 🙂 🙂 🙂

No, that’s a TREMENDOUS gain in muscle mass in a year. It’s entirely possible and has been done, but I used that large difference mainly to make the math more intelligible, and because that would mean a leap from the top of the lightheavies to the heavyweight class, which is a move that a lot of guys like to / want to make.

The law of diminishing returns applies here as far as off-season gains, not to mention a slew of other things (supplementation, genetics, lifestyle, training style, willingness to gain the body fat, etc.).

-S

[Scott Stevenson]

Biil,

That’s not really true (IMO) that you HAVE to get “out of shape.” That will differ considerably across individuals. You can use strength in the gym and even a body comp estimate to get an idea of muscle mass. If you want to go from a 198lb to a 220lb (in shape) competitor, then you’ll need to get that muscle mass by gaining weight, which will most likely mean some increased body fat.

Some simple numbers, just for the sake of example.

If the previous off-season weight was 225 at 12%, let’s day, then this means this person had 198lb of FFM at this off-season max weight and lost a little a bit of size (~8lb FFM) along he way (assuming 4% on stage, which is ~190lb FFM on stage). To be 220lb at 4%, this means about 211lb of FFM on stage. Off-season, then, he (or she!) would probably need to get to about 220 or so FFM (~22lb of FFM gained, which is a LOT!!!), assuming about 10lb of FFM lost during the diet.

So to get that 220lb of FFM, he would probably have to get to some BF% HIGHER than what he had before off-season (unless he were adding super supplements for the first time or simply had JP or Corinne as his trainer… 🙂 🙂 🙂 ). To, let’s say he needs to get to 15% BF, which woudl mean about 259lb off-season weight. This would be an increase of off-season weight of >30lb, to get 21lb of stage weight. He went from 12% BF on year to 15% the next year, but was >30lb larger. 15% is by perhaps “out of shape” by bodybuilding standards and he’s be holding about 38lb of fat at that weight vs. 27lb of fat the previous year. Definitely more body fat 11lb, but a lot more muscle mass, too.

Studies with overfeed (Bouchard et al.) show that ON AVERAGE, WITHOUT training about ⅓ of the mass from simply overeating is FFM, so this ratio of gaining 11lb of body fat vs. 22lb of body fat means ⅔ FFM gain (muscle) vs. ⅓ fat gain, brought on by training PLUS eating enough food. Not bad, really, assuming it’s mostly kept by taking enough time to slowly chip away from the fat pre-contest. 🙂

-Scott

[Scott Stevenson]

Some people like to use a loaded backpack, but there’s no need for that hassle.

Use a loaded EZ curl bar across your anterior pelvis. Just strap up (if you do), drop down and slide your legs under the bar to get it in place and then put your feet in place. (You may need to set the bar a little higher as well as the bench so that you are not bottoming out with the load.)

You can also roll the bar over your legs or put it there and then reach up to the bar and go

Of course he bar is higher off the ground using 20kg plates on each side. If you gym has some rubberized Oly plates, then you’ll be able to use those to easily get under the bar. You can also just stack some plates or something on eather side of you to get some more clearance.

Before I figured out the EZ curl bar option, we (Dave H and I) were using a single 20kg (45lb) place, with the indented side up, with a DB placed on top of that. This keep the DB from rolling off decently well, and forces you to be controlled with your form. (Put the DB closes to your stomach and aligned so that if it rolls towards you, it’ll just run up against your abs. That got to be a pain to drag the 100lb DB over and take it on and off throughout and RP (DC training) set, so the EZ curl bar become the #1 option. 🙂

-S

[Scott Stevenson]

Actually, you don’t even need a ticket to see JP at BP. Just standing outside the building you will easily catch a glimpse of him through the windows and hear him stomping barefoot through the expo like an albino King Kong.

-S

[Scott Stevenson]

Daniel,

You get a free subscription to my site when you buy the book. Below is what I send to folks often when they ask about most things.

Specifically, if you re-read the section on MR’s on page 94, it explains how to choose exercises, rotate exercises, etc. At the bottom of p. 20, there is discussion on the merits of variety in exercises (daily undulating periodization, etc.). The blue hyperlinked references will take you to studies to support this. (Is that kind kind of literature you’re looking for?)

———–

http://drscottstevenson.com/forum/portal.php

After you’ve finished the complete registration process on the forum (including responding to the activation email sent to confirm your email addy), just PM me there on the message board itself (not here) and I’ll upgrade you to subscriber. Then you’ll see that there are hundreds of answered FT-related questions and several very good logs (I suggest Altamir’s and Dens228’s journals).

Frankly, there really is hardly anything about setting up the training that isn’t answered in the book or there on the board.

90+% of the time, re-reading from page 87 onward in the book (how to do the different Set types) will address training-related questions. )

If you can’t find an answer, simply post a new thread. 🙂

———

•••HOW TO REGISTER ON THE BOARD:

It’s pretty self-explanatory:

Simply click on the link below (or follow this one: http://drscottstevenson.com/forum/index.php ) and then click to the left where it says register (or login with facebook).

Carry out that procedure that, including responding to the activation email sent to the addy you register with.

After your account is fully activated, then send me (“Scott Stevenson”) a private message on the board and I’ll upgrade you to full subscriber.

[Scott Stevenson]

Stephen,

A few thoughts for you here.

I’d not switch up the MR’s for a Pump set, just yet. Naturally, you’re free to do as you choose, but in doing this, you’ll not get to see how the frequency “accumulates” over the course of several weeks and you’re no longer on the same page with those folks who have done FT per the Overview sheets. (Plus, calves are pretty resilient. 🙂 )

This may be a cultural semantic issue, but I’m not sure what you mean by, “the intensity of the muscle rounds was hard, but didn’t feel I was doing the sets regularly enough.” (What do you mean by regularly?…”

I’m a proponent of at least a set or two of “warm-ups” on a new exercise, simply for neurological and biomechanical reasons (renew the feel of the exercise, to set up the machine properly, etc.) This could be a total of even just 5 reps or so (a couple quick sets of 3 and 2 reps en route to your working weight). This is also a matter of safety,too. I was out of town at a gym a few months ago using a standing squat machine. As I warmed up, I could see the frame of the machine was bending oddly, so I told the staff at the front desk. This had JUST started happening. If I’d been a regular member there, and was returning to that exercise, loading it up simply based on previous working weights, sans a warm-up, I’d have probably irreparably bent the machine and/or injured myself.

Also, especially on your first go at these exercises for MR’s, you’ll need to feel out the weight you’re going to use. Each workout, I’d suggest doing this, so you can use your internal sense of how strong you are in addition to the log book. This underlies the principle of auto regulation, where you’re picking exercises, order of exercises and LOAD increases, as well. If you sit down on a machine and it feels really light, you’d know that you can bump the load up that day, for instance.

-S

[Scott Stevenson]

Paul,

You’re very welcome!!! Good luck, stay safe, but keep kicking ass!!! 🙂

-S

[Scott Stevenson]

I’ll add this…

If your weight’s not climbing overall (d/t muscle mass accrual, of course), then you’re doing to severely limit arm growth. You CAN bring up weak muscle groups, but that’s going to happen best (perhaps only) if you’re creating an overall anabolic scenario evidenced by growth everywhere. 🙂

-S

[Scott Stevenson]

I like to think the book’s a good resource in general, so it could be worth a buy.

Frankly, these are issues with every kind of program you’d come up with, b/c your injury is there regardless.

In following FT to a “T” (pun intended), you’d really only run into issues with the (heavy) “Loading sets”, but even these might be something you could work around if you set your rep ranges at the top of the generally recommended range (6-12), i.e., but making sure you’re in the 10-12 rep range.

You can use a hip squat belt (Ironmind.com) to do barbell, smith, DB hip squats, as well as lap squats that won’t load your spine from the top down. Also, you can actually do unilateral Loading Sets (Lunges, step ups, split squats, etc. ) and this might keep the loads at a safe level for you.

As far as back training, doing BB, smith and DB rows on an inclined / flat bench (face down) where y ou finish the movement with a bit of an arch can activate the spinal erectors when doing rowing movements, but not load the spine in the way that doing these exercises standing up would. (You’d have to see how those work for you.)

The system is dynamic, too, so for “Back” you might include a hyperextension (if those are something you can do) as part of you Pump sets or Muscle Rounds (the other two set types other than Loading sets). Reverse hypers would be an option, too. (These were actually invented for the purpose of dealing with load back issues.) Doing hypers where you’re holding a load (DB) in the contracted position (DB’s pulled up to your hips as if at the end of a DB Row) will activate the lats isometrically while you do dynamic low back / posterior chain work. Two birds with one stone and minimal compressive forces (d/t gravity – muscle contraction will still great pressures there) on your lower spine. 🙂

-Scott