edit: i'll email you at andrew@factful.io
>> You see, it’s basically impossible to gain muscle and lose fat at the same time. To lose weight, you need to burn more calories than you take in. You need to have a net calorie deficit.
>> To build muscle, you need to eat more calories than you burn. You need to have a net calorie surplus.
Not true, can be done, you can find examples on the internet.
There is no need for a caloric surplus to build muscles. Muscles are build from amino acids, not "calories". The body "eats up" muscles LAST: it will go through your fat first.
And if you are fat then you have "excess calories" in your fat: where do you think those go? Evaporate in thin air?
Eg look up Bryan Johnson: he built a lot of muscle while consuming 2k calories, which is 25% deficit for a guy of his height and weight and he still build muscles.
Looking at muscle gain as "calorie surplus" is ridiculus. Look up frutarians: they eat shitload calories from fruits but are totaly skinny, no muscle mass at all.
Muscles are built by having high testosterone. If you have low T it won't matter how much protein or "calories" you eat: you just won't built muscle easily.
>Not true, can be done, you can find examples on the internet.
>There is no need for a caloric surplus to build muscles. Muscles are build from amino acids, not "calories". The body "eats up" muscles LAST: it will go through your fat first.
Per the latest science, discussed at length in this podcast, and despite any anecdata, this is false. You cannot synthesize muscle without adequate protein (aprox. 1gr per lbs of bodyweight) and a caloric surplus unless anabolic steroids are used. If you have sources for your claim of body recomposition other than ancedata please do provide it.