I'm not against bulking/cutting. However, some guys continue to look the same because they aren't pushing themselves. And, some of it is genetics. I mean, the great body builders are genetically gifted.

I think bulking/cutting is a good approach for some because it allows you to be singled mindedly focused on your goal.

But, I think you can continue to burn fat and build muscle by eating well, but making sure that you have a great enough intake of protein.

I think you can, actually.

So, being my off day I decided to do some spring cleaning around the house, and then rocked my drums on the hardest songs I can for an hour. Burned up some energy and I'm fasting today until dinner. A Monster Lo-Ball is all I've had today outside of water and a diet soda (Pepsi Max FTMFW).

I've pretty much already decided not to be this fanatical about the whole thing. It's time to start transitioning into normal everyday life and just enjoy the ride. But I'm obsessed with getting under 300. And I'm right around the corner from kicking the ****in' door in.

come to kansas and run in the 105 degree heat this summer.

Again, though, if the calories are being USED, then they're not excess calories. The argument here is that it is not mandatory that one gain fat with muscle, because the excess energy that is stored as fat has nothing at all to do with the muscle building process. Eating twice the calories you burn just to try and put on 1 pound of muscle per week (which is nearly impossible to do naturally, even for a new lifter) is absolutely absurd and not based in any kind of scientific fact.

Great news, man. Not being fanatical about, but still staying committed is a monumental task. I struggle with this all the time. I know that I push myself too hard on occasion, and still get caught up in protein paranoia or freaking out if I have to move a workout around.

Well, obsession is a tool if it's harnessed correctly. :)

If a person is 140 pounds and there goal is to be a lean 180. How do they get there?

Lift hard, lift often, eat sufficient protein and get sufficient nutritional support. There is NO scientific evidence that says they must also gain fat in this process.

they can eat at maintance to gain this 40 pounds?

That depends on how you define "maintenance." BMR? No. Your body will adapt to whatever caloric levels you give it. If you eat like a 140 lbs guy, you will be a 140 lbs guy. If you eat like a 180 lbs guy, you'll get to 180 lbs (although, it may not all be muscle). The difference in BMR between a 140 lbs guy and a 180 lbs guy isn't that huge, though.

As I've said all along in this entire thread, eating as many calories as you burn is not a "bulk," at least not in the standard bodybuilding definition of a bulk. If you are burning those calories whether through exercise or muscle building, they won't be stored as fat, and are therefore NOT excess calories. Bulking, at least in bodybuilding terms, is synonymous with cutting. That is what I have a problem with. No one should be eating so much that they gain fat while they gain muscle. It's counter-productive and there is no scientific evidence that fat gain is necessary for muscle gain. People get so caught up in that bulk up and cut down cycle that they fool themselves into thinking that it's necessary. A steady, sensible lifting and nutrition program will put on as much muscle without binging for months and then starving yourself for months to get the excess weight off.

The problem is that NO ONE can tell you exactly how many calories it takes to build muscle. No one. Nobody knows. Do you go by the caloric content of one pound of muscle, which is about 600 calories? If not, then how can you measure the energy required to build muscle? We can't do that right now. A very large component of muscle is water. How does that affect how much protein and energy is required to build muscle? No one knows.

Not to mention that "calories" and protein aren't the sole components of muscle building. If they were, then one could simply continue eating and eating and eating while they lift and build an unlimited amount of muscle. We know that this does not happen. There is a limit to how much muscle one can naturally build, and there is most CERTAINLY a limit to how much muscle one can put one naturally per week/month. I've seen some claims of anywhere from 1 to 5 lbs of muscle per week. That's just ranging from highly improbable to absolutely impossible. So, what determines the limit? It's obviously not calories.

In your example of a 140 lbs guy wanting to be 180 lbs, I would say that it would be virtually impossible for that person to maintain the same body fat percentage and gain 40 lbs of muscle naturally (provided we're not talking about someone that's still in their peak growth years). 40 lbs of muscle is a LOT. Most people have no idea just how much that is. Imagine 40 lbs of chicken breast placed all over your body. That is how much we're talking about. Highly improbable. Maybe they've got an extremely odd body type that is nearly all fat with the most minimal amount of muscle possible to support life, but that's hardly common.

We know that a pound of muscle burns anywhere from 4 to 8 (and 8 is being extremely generous) calories per day. Muscle is constantly being broken down and rebuilt, and someone eating as many calories as they burn can maintain this muscle mass. And remember, it's always being broken down and rebuilt while they are on their lifting program, even if they work out simply to maintain that muscle. So, the calories that the pound of muscle burns in one day also factors in the caloric cost of rebuilding that muscle. How does that impact the calories necessary to build muscle? Why would it take an astronomically larger amount of calories to build a little more muscle each day than it does to break down and rebuild the muscle the body already has? I don't know. There's certainly no scientific evidence that it does. But again, no one knows exactly how much it takes.

So, what scientific evidence do we have that excess calories (ie more than you burn) are necessary for muscle building? Remember: I'm not talking about the calories necessary to build the muscle. I'm talking about eating so many calories that you gain fat along with muscle. THAT is what I am defining as excess.

It's my opinion and experience that what shocks your body into growth is NOT the calories you eat. It's how you train. Training is what determines muscle. You can lose muscle simply by not using it, even if you are eating sufficient protein and calories to maintain this muscle. Anyone who's ever broken a bone and needed a cast for a long time knows this. The muscles atrophy. The body simply doesn't hang on to tissue that isn't necessary. But, stimulate that tissue to grow, and the body will grow it.

Cliff's Notes: If you want to be 180 lbs and lean, eat the calories that a 180 lbs lean guy would eat (making allowances for excess calories burned through excess exercise). Your body will adapt. 180 lbs lean guys don't have BMRs of 3500 calories. I know this, because I'm a lean guy in that range.

I think the key here is that whether you want to gain weight or lose it, then you eat at the BMR for the weight you want. If you want to be 185, you eat to be 185. Calculate the BMR based on your exercise and go from there.

Killer workout tonight. I still fall off too quickly on consecutive pullup sets, but oh well. The rest was awesome.

been gone all day and will be tomorrow to. I promise I won't let your huge post go unnoticed silock

It's okay. I don't mind. I often type novels for no reason, so this wouldn't be any different, really LMAO