Notifications
Clear all
05/02/2019 12:58 pm
quote:
Not at all. I have been plagued by overtraining three years ago and I could never manage to get over it to this day. I have researched it enough to know it's a systemic condition that is not dependant on letting a mucle "recuperate", which I still have no ideia what you mean with that.
At what point did I say "recuperate" and do you really not understand what I'm trying to say? When you lift weights it breaks down muscle fibers, temporarily leaving you weaker. If that muscle never repairs or "recuperates" it will remain weaker and ultimately smaller.
quote:
Please explain to me why 4 sets twice a week are more taxing than 8-9 sets once per week.
Because everytime you step into a gym and lift with any kind of intensity you're stimulating and demanding a lot from your CNS. Now, if you're advocating 2-3 days per week in the gym then yes, this becomes a moot point. I misunderstood that part.
What I am simply saying is that you can't blanket the entire population and say that everyone should train every bodypart twice a week for optimal growth. That is a gross generalization.
Based on what you're saying why not just train every bodypart 3x/week or 4x/week and just reduce the volume per workout leaving the same overall amount of volume? Do you not agree that at some point this would becom detrimental to progress?
05/02/2019 1:47 pm
HST, and other high frequency workouts are not well thought out for anyone but beginners. Tell me to do even one work set of squats followed by stiff-legged deadlifts 3x per week, and I will tell you where to take it. If you are resonably advanced that means you will be putting 400+ lbs on your spinal coumn 3x a week. NO THANKS!!
In my experience as a trainer, two groups do well on hitting a bodypart more than once a week, beginners, and those with screaming great genetics. Those in-between USUALLY do much better resting more days a week.
Any talk about what the "pro's" do is mental masturbation. They have better genetics and do WAY more gear than 99.9% of everyone.
Iron Addict
05/02/2019 2:20 pm
quote:
[i]Originally posted by puyore
restless, they are going by what they see in real life. and based on that, i would have to agree because plenty of big people advocate 1x per week,
And there are plenty more small people who train that way.
quote:
and not only that, but most of US use that method and like it.
And you've tried training more frequently with a decreased volume as well?
Also, how many on this board are using? Not attacking, just making a point. I think steroids allow folks to train less frequently and still make gains, I think most naturals will do better training somewhat more frequently (twice per week or once every 5 days at the least) with a reduce volume at each session.
quote:
if you could, id like to see the science you keep referring to. and no, im not saying that in an antagonistic way. [/B]
Heres a couple of studies examining the rate of protein synthesis following training. Ask yourself: if synthesis is back to baseline at 24-36 hours, how is training a bodypart every 7 days (156 hours) optimal? From the standpoint of growth, don't you want to stimualte protein synthesis more often?
Lyle
***
Can J Appl Physiol. 1995 Dec;20(4):480-6.
The time course for elevated muscle protein synthesis following heavy resistance
exercise.
MacDougall JD, Gibala MJ, Tarnopolsky MA, MacDonald JR, Interisano SA,
Yarasheski KE.
Department of Kinesiology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario.
It has been shown that muscle protein synthetic rate (MPS) is elevated in humans
by 50% at 4 hrs following a bout of heavy resistance training, and by 109% at 24
hrs following training. This study further examined the time course for elevated
muscle protein synthesis by examining its rate at 36 hrs following a training
session. Six healthy young men performed 12 sets of 6- to 12-RM elbow flexion
exercises with one arm while the opposite arm served as a control. MPS was
calculated from the in vivo rate of incorporation of L-[1,2-13C2] leucine into
biceps brachii of both arms using the primed constant infusion technique over 11
hrs. At an average time of 36 hrs postexercise, MPS in the exercised arm had
returned to within 14% of the control arm value, the difference being
nonsignificant. It is concluded that following a bout of heavy resistance
training, MPS increases rapidly, is more than double at 24 hrs, and thereafter
declines rapidly so that at 36 hrs it has almost returned to baseline.
Publication Types:
Clinical Trial
Randomized Controlled Trial
PMID: 8563679 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
2: J Appl Physiol. 1992 Oct;73(4):1383-8.
Changes in human muscle protein synthesis after resistance exercise.
Chesley A, MacDougall JD, Tarnopolsky MA, Atkinson SA, Smith K.
Department of Physical Education, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario,
Canada.
The purpose of this study was to investigate the magnitude and time course for
changes in muscle protein synthesis (MPS) after a single bout of resistance
exercise. Two groups of six male subjects performed heavy resistance exercise
with the elbow flexors of one arm while the opposite arm served as a control.
MPS from exercised (ex) and control (con) biceps brachii was assessed 4 (group
A) and 24 h (group B) postexercise by the increment in L-[1-13C]leucine
incorporation into muscle biopsy samples. In addition, RNA capacity and RNA
activity were determined to assess whether transcr(KP)tional and/or translational
processes affected MPS. MPS was significantly elevated in biceps of the ex
compared with the con arms of both groups (group A, ex 0.1007 +/- 0.0330 vs. con
0.067 +/- 0.0204%/h; group B ex 0.0944 +/- 0.0363 vs. con 0.0452 +/- 0.0126%/h).
RNA capacity was unchanged in the ex biceps of both groups relative to the con
biceps, whereas RNA activity was significantly elevated in the ex biceps of both
groups (group A, ex 0.19 +/- 0.10 vs. con 0.12 +/- 0.05 micrograms
protein.h-1.microgram-1 total RNA; group B, ex 0.18 +/- 0.06 vs. con 0.08 +/-
0.02 micrograms protein.h-1.microgram-1 total RNA). The results indicate that a
single bout of heavy resistance exercise can increase biceps MPS for up to 24 h
postexercise. In addition, these increases appear to be due to changes in
posttranscr(KP)tional events.
05/02/2019 3:02 pm
There is some scientific data that shows there is little more needed beyond the first effective "working" set. I think the important thing is intensity. Even HST only has you working out 3 x's per week, although it is the full body three times per week, which is the key. These six and seven day splits I think are a nice changeup every now and then, but I think they are overall not as effective, and they are too often littered with set after set of wasted exercise. These bbing mags that show workout routines of the pros present a style of training that would be ineffective for most of us trainers. Even many of the ones that juice. The main princ(KP)les of training apply: Mechanical load, progressive resistance, periodization, rest and recovery, etc. The trick is to develop a balanced approach to building a training routine, and work from compound movements in to isolatory exercises. Switching things up, or periodization, is one of the most important aspects of training. I would never stick with a certain routine for longer than 4-6 weeks sometimes I vary from week to week. Rest intervals can be man(KP)ulated, and number of reps as well. If you incorporate all of these things into building your training program, you will be successful.
The problem is that too many guys go into the gym day to day without a plan, and that goes for diet as well. There is too much emphasis on juice as the MAIN thing, when it should be considered only a tool.
05/02/2019 3:34 pm
restless, they are going by what they see in real life. and based on that, i would have to agree because plenty of big people advocate 1x per week, and not only that, but most of US use that method and like it. if you could, id like to see the science you keep referring to. and no, im not saying that in an antagonistic way.
Listen, I don't take offense when people ask me to back up my claims, unlike some one this board.
Here are a few, and if you bother to search you'll find more at pubmed :
Repeated eccentric exercise bouts do not exacerbate muscle damage and repair.
Nosaka K, Newton M.
Exercise and Sports Science, Graduate School of Integrated Science, Yokohama City University, Yokohama, Japan. [email protected].
This study examined whether performing repeated bouts of eccentric exercise 2 and 4 days after an initial damaging bout would exacerbate muscle damage. One arm performed 3 sets of 10 eccentric actions of the elbow flexors (ECC1) using a dumbbell set at 50% of the maximal isometric force at 90 degrees (SINGLE). Two weeks later the same exercise was performed by the opposite arm with the exception that subsequent bouts were performed 2 (ECC2) and 4 (ECC3) days after ECC1 (REPEATED). In the REPEATED condition, maximal isometric force (MIF) decreased to the same level immediately after ECC1-3, and the decreases in range of motion (ROM) and increases in upper arm circumference immediately postexercise were similar among the bouts. However, no significant differences in changes in MIF, ROM, muscle soreness, and plasma creatine kinase activity were evident between the SINGLE and REPEATED conditions when excluding the changes immediately after ECC2 and ECC3. These results suggest that ECC2 and ECC3 did not exacerbate muscle damage or affect the recovery process.
Exercise, protein metabolism, and muscle growth.
T(KP)ton KD, Wolfe RR.
Metabolism Division, Department of Surgery, University of Texas Medial Branch-Galveston, Galveston, TX 77550-2720, USA.
Exercise has a profound effect on muscle growth, which can occur only if muscle protein synthesis exceeds muscle protein breakdown; there must be a positive muscle protein balance. Resistance exercise improves muscle protein balance, but, in the absence of food intake, the balance remains negative (i.e., catabolic). The response of muscle protein metabolism to a resistance exercise bout lasts for 24-48 hours; thus, the interaction between protein metabolism and any meals consumed in this period will determine the impact of the diet on muscle hypertrophy. Amino acid availability is an important regulator of muscle protein metabolism. The interaction of postexercise metabolic processes and increased amino acid availability maximizes the stimulation of muscle protein synthesis and results in even greater muscle anabolism than when dietary amino acids are not present. Hormones, especially insulin and testosterone, have important roles as regulators of muscle protein synthesis and muscle hypertrophy. Following exercise, insulin has only a permissive role on muscle protein synthesis, but it appears to inhibit the increase in muscle protein breakdown. Ingestion of only small amounts of amino acids, combined with carbohydrates, can transiently increase muscle protein anabolism, but it has yet to be determined if these transient responses translate into an appreciable increase in muscle mass over a prolonged training period.
Myofibrillar disruption following acute concentric and eccentric resistance exercise in strength-trained men.
Gibala MJ, Interisano SA, Tarnopolsky MA, Roy BD, MacDonald JR, Yarasheski KE, MacDougall JD.
Department of Kinesiology (Neurology and Neurological Rehabilitation), McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada. [email protected]
We have previously quantified the extent of myofibrillar disruption which occurs following an acute bout of resistance exercise in untrained men, however the response of well-trained subjects is not known. We therefore recruited six strength-trained men, who ceased training for 5 days and then performed 8 sets of 8 uni-lateral repetitions, using a load equivalent to 80% of their concentric (Con) 1-repetition maximum. One arm performed only Con actions by lifting the weight and the other arm performed only eccentric actions (Ecc) by lowering it. Needle biopsy samples were obtained from biceps brachii of each arm approximately 21 h following exercise, and at baseline (i.e., after 5 days without training), and subsequently analyzed using electron microscopy to quantify myofibrillar disruption. A greater (P < or = 0.05) proportion of disrupted fibres was found in the Ecc arm (45 +/- 11%) compared with baseline values (4 +/- 2%), whereas fibre disruption in the Con arm (27 +/- 4%) was not different (P > 0.05) from baseline values. The proportion of disrupted fibres and the magnitude of disruption (quantified by sarcomere counting) was considerably less severe than previously observed in untrained subjects after an identical exercise bout. Mixed muscle protein synthesis, assessed from approximately 21-29 h post-exercise, was not different between the Con- and Ecc-exercised arms. We conclude that the Ecc phase of resistance exercise is most disruptive to skeletal muscle and that training attenuates the severity of this effect. Moreover, it appears that fibre disruption induced by habitual weightlifting exercise is essentially repaired after 5 days of inactivity in trained men.
05/02/2019 4:31 pm
At what point did I say "recuperate" and do you really not understand what I'm trying to say? When you lift weights it breaks down muscle fibers, temporarily leaving you weaker. If that muscle never repairs or "recuperates" it will remain weaker and ultimately smaller.
Read study number two (I think) I posted. Muscle doesn't need to be left alone to "recuperate". That concept was an erroneous conclusion bodybuilders made because they couldn't understand neural fatigue.
Because everytime you step into a gym and lift with any kind of intensity you're stimulating and demanding a lot from your CNS. Now, if you're advocating 2-3 days per week in the gym then yes, this becomes a moot point. I misunderstood that part.
You and everyone else.....
quote:
Originally posted by GettinSwole What I am simply saying is that you can't blanket the entire population and say that everyone should train every bodypart twice a week for optimal growth. That is a gross generalization.
Based on what you're saying why not just train every bodypart 3x/week or 4x/week and just reduce the volume per workout leaving the same overall amount of volume? Do you not agree that at some point this would becom detrimental to progress?
If protein synthesis remains elevated for 48 hours, then that's the ideal time frame to train again. Pretty simple.
05/02/2019 5:06 pm
HST, and other high frequency workouts are not well thought out for anyone but beginners. Tell me to do even one work set of squats followed by stiff-legged deadlifts 3x per week, and I will tell you where to take it. If you are resonably advanced that means you will be putting 400+ lbs on your spinal coumn 3x a week. NO THANKS!!
ummmm, maybe if you read a bit on it you'd know that that is one of the things people are usually not advised to do on HST.
Any talk about what the "pro's" do is mental masturbation. They have better genetics and do WAY more gear than 99.9% of everyone.Iron Addict
Exactly. The curious things is that "the pros" are being used to support your side of the argument.
05/02/2019 5:51 pm
And GettingSwole, can you present me some evidence supporting that "localized overtraining" concept?
05/02/2019 6:26 pm
And GettingSwole, can you present me some evidence supporting that "localized overtraining" concept?
localized overtraining?
05/02/2019 7:22 pm
localized overtraining?
Yes, the one mentioned in that article you posted. I assume you agree that it exists, since you used the article in this discussion.
06/02/2019 7:56 am
Yes, the one mentioned in that article you posted. I assume you agree that it exists, since you used the article in this discussion.
There is a point where too much training causes dimishining returns on one specific muscle. I don't have any studies off hand to back it up.
Train biceps everyday for a week and you'll see what I mean.
06/02/2019 8:40 am
There is a point where too much training causes dimishining returns on one specific muscle. I don't have any studies off hand to back it up.Train biceps everyday for a week and you'll see what I mean.
There certainly has to be a limit for the workload a muscle can endure but I seriously doubt the kind of daily volume we're talking about here will get you anwhere near that point.
06/02/2019 9:17 am
There certainly has to be a limit for the workload a muscle can endure but I seriously doubt the kind of daily volume we're talking about here will get you anwhere near that point.
What kind of daily volume are we talking here? If that's the case then why don't we just train total body everyday? Who even needs rest?
06/02/2019 10:06 am
What kind of daily volume are we talking here? If that's the case then why don't we just train total body everyday? Who even needs rest?
Why would one train a muscle everyday if the exercise induced protein synthesis increase lasts around 48 hours?
And again, how come two routines with the exact same overall volume and intensity will have different impacts on systemic recovery?
Why will 3 sets 3 times per week be any more stressing to the neural system than 9 sets once per week? Why don't you address my questions and why do you insist in confusing frequency with volume?
06/02/2019 10:51 am
I think its beacause youre training more than than one bodypart, twice a week and your whole body cant recuperate that quickly.
On a side note I am sorry for the comment about your spelling and such.
French probably , huh?
struggle---and shine on
Just because there is a goalie, doesnt mean you can't score.
Satisfaction is the death of desire.
Practice makes perfect; and I love 2 practice!!
-Dan Gable