rascal14
Well-known member
It’s just noobs who don’t understand the principles of thermodynamics. Whether you eat chicken veggies and rice or Burger King exclusively, if you are in the exact same surplus in the exact same person you will accrue bodyfat at the exact same rate (after accounting for hormonal implications from food selection, the thermic rate of the food, fiber, etc).
However, the person preparing home-cooked food is going to be much more methodical and almost certainly consuming more nutrient-dense or at least less processed/crap food like sugar and vegetable seed oils, while the dirty bulker is just eating whatever to ensure a surplus and with almost absolute certainty overeating to the point of excess.
Dirty bulking is just weight gain for the sake of it - that can have application in strength athletics, but I don’t see how getting unnecessarily fatter will make you a better bodybuilder![]()
Not sure if he meant clean vs lean, but when I see someone say “lean bulk” I think, slight surplus 200 calories or so. In that context I think dirty bulk means 500+ surplus.
In the context of “clean bulk” vs “dirty bulk”, they’re just a meaningless buzz word to me.
I do understand the thought behind clean vs dirty, eating 4,000 calories in chicken and rice can be brutal, but I don’t consider a home made hamburger or tacos to be “dirty” like a lot of people probably would. To your exact point, calories are calories to a major extent and as long as you are accurately counting, it won’t matter for 95% of people whether those come from chicken, rice, and mixed nuts/olive oil (only “clean” fats I can think of lol) or 85/15 beef with a tortilla and cheese.
I could be different than most, but depending on context is how I kind of determine what I think a person means when saying dirty bulk.