View RSS Feed

MuscleScience

Post A Exercise Related Question.

Rate this Entry
by , 06-01-2008 at 07:13 PM (6899 Views)
If you have an exercise physiology question whether it ranges from training to diet. Post it here, I love reading and helping those with anything based on human body.

Disclaimer: I will not answer questions on the use of AAS.

Note if I do not get back to you in a timely manner on the blog, please post in my Q&A thread or PM me.

Updated 03-23-2009 at 04:54 PM by MuscleScience

Categories
Uncategorized

Comments

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
  1. B.E.N.'s Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    I'll go 1st then!

    You are always giving us facts backed with research and scientific basis as opposed to opinion. And we have all seen the DC (doggcrapp) v. STS (Ronnie Rowland) debate on here.

    Break down set and rep ranges for us based on hypertrophy results and strength gains. Pros/Cons and maybe a hypothesis for bodybuilders.

    I know, kind of a broad question for exercise physiology but a highly debated one with many 'rumors' circulated.
  2. MuscleScience's Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    B.E.N.

    Thanks for your question and I have believe you me had this same discussion more than a time or two.

    To start this is a hotly debated topic right now, not just to bodybuilders but also for the scientific community. According to the NSCA's own text book on strength and conditioning. Essentials of Strength Training and Conditioning Second edition.
    They recommend a rep range of 6-12 reps and 3-6 sets for hypertrophy, for strength the recommend a rep range of less than 6 reps for 2-6 sets. This is pretty much the standard as of right now. However a paper came out by Carpinelli et. al in 2004 that reviewed over a 150 studies an came up with some conclusions that fly in the face of what is held as truth.

    The author of the paper has this to say about current exercise recommendations.

    ". An objective evaluation of the resistance-training studies shows that these claims are primarily unsubstantiated. In fact, the preponderance of resistance-training studies suggest that simple, low-volume, time-efficient, resistance training is just as effective for increasing muscular strength, hypertrophy, power, and endurance—regardless of training experience—as are the complex, high-volume, time-consuming protocols that are recommended in the Position Stand. This document examines the basis for many of the claims in the Position Stand and provides an objective review of the resistance training literature."

    The author of the paper was specifically talking about the ACSM's stand on resistance exercise which is similar in theory to that of the NSCA's.

    To conclude what the paper says and to what my own personal knowledge of the subject matter is. It seems that there is no set protocol to follow for any specific type of training based on the empirical data to date. I leave with the authors final conclusions.


    RECOMMENDATIONS

    What is really known about the science of resistance training is contrary to the opinions expressed in the Position Stand. That is, the preponderance of research strongly suggests that gains in muscular strength, hypertrophy, power, and endurance are the result of the following simple guidelines:

    • Select a mode of exercise that feels comfortable throughout the range of motion. There is very little evidence to support the superiority of free weights or machines for increasing muscular strength, hypertrophy, power, or endurance.

    • Choose a repetition duration that will ensure the maintenance of consistent form throughout the set. One study showed a greater strength benefit from a shorter duration (2s/4s) and one study showed better strength gains as a result of a longer duration (10s/4s), but no study using conventional exercise equipment reports any significant difference in muscular hypertrophy, power, or endurance as a result of manipulating repetition duration.

    • Choose a range of repetitions between three and 15 (e.g., 3-5, 6-8, 8-10, etc.). There is very little evidence to suggest that a specific range of repetitions (e.g., 3-5 versus 8-10) or time-under-load (e.g., 30s versus 90s) significantly impacts the increase in muscular strength, hypertrophy, power, or endurance.

    • Perform one set of each exercise. The preponderance of resistance-training studies shows no difference in the gains in muscular strength, hypertrophy, power, or endurance as a result of performing a greater number of sets.

    • After performing a combination of concentric and eccentric muscle actions, terminate each exercise at the point where the concentric phase of the exercise is becoming difficult, if not impossible, while maintaining good form. There is very little evidence to suggest that going beyond this level of intensity (e.g., supramaximal or accentuated eccentric muscle actions) will further enhance muscular strength, hypertrophy, power, or endurance.

    • Allow enough time between exercises to perform the next exercise in proper form. There is very little evidence to suggest that different rest periods between sets or exercises will significantly affect the gains in muscular strength, hypertrophy, power, or endurance.

    • Depending on individual recovery and response, choose a frequency of 2-3 times/week to stimulate each targeted muscle group. One session a week has been shown to be just as effective as 2-3 times/week for some muscle groups. There is very little evidence to suggest that training a muscle more than 2-3 times/week or that split routines will produce greater gains in muscular strength, hypertrophy, power, or endurance.
    Updated 06-02-2008 at 09:53 PM by MuscleScience
  3. MuscleScience's Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    Also I have the paper in electronic form that I can send to who ever is interested in it.



    A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ACSM POSITION STAND ON RESISTANCE TRAINING: INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT RECOMMENDED TRAINING PROTOCOLS. Ralph N. Carpinelli, Robert M. Otto, Richard A. Winett. JEPonline 2004;7(3):1-60.
    Updated 06-02-2008 at 09:54 PM by MuscleScience
  4. B.E.N.'s Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    May have, but you always have good, factual info. As opposed to articles from Muscle & Fitness!

    Tough to find when search with Google sometimes.
  5. MuscleScience's Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    You can try Google scholar, highwire.org, pubmed. I get most of my physiology stuff from highwire.org out of Stanford U. However I have to go through my Alum Mater's library to get most of my full articles since they have access to a lot of exercise related journals that do not show up on some other data bases.
  6. B.E.N.'s Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    Here is another lingering question. I posted a thread about this in the workout section but no one answered or could answer I guess.

    We all know cortisol levels are highest in the morning and that cortisol is a bad thing but few people know that testosterone (natural) levels are highest in the morning too.

    The ratio of test to cortisol is known as T:C ratio and when this is highest should supposedly be the best time to workout. When this T:C ratio is highest it the highly debated issue in various studies.

    What do you know about this topic?
  7. Lemonada8's Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    OoOo i got a ?

    what is your thoughts when on a cycle (test prop 100mg ed) how does this effect your shoulder labruim if one does alot of throwing? do you risk tearing it? should one do more rotator cuff workouts? throw more while oncycle? what are your thoughts?
  8. MuscleScience's Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    Nice question,

    normally in the exercise realm T:C ratio is used as a marker for overtraining syndrome in athletes as such that is what I have most experience with as far as the literature.

    As far as morning levels of hormones from what I understand of the subject and the literature you have two anabolic hormones (T and HGH) verses one Catabolic (C) at there highest concentrations of the day. There seems to be a difference in the interplay between the binding globulins of T and C, which are SHBG and CBG respectively. IGF-1 may have an effect on how cortisol binds to its receptor intracellularly also T could also have a similar effect though I have read very little on this subject. What does seem to be clear is that C has its greatest effect on adipocytes and increasing fat deposition, based on individuals with Cushing's disease.

    As far as exercise recommendations and what is a better time of day. There is no supporting evidence that training early in the morning has a greater effect on hypertrophy than other times in the day. In fact it is recommended that the best time seems to be mid to late afternoon because of were the metabolic rate is at and other factors in there.

    I hope this somewhat answered your question.
  9. MuscleScience's Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    Lemonada8,

    I am not sure how it would effect the labrum... As far as what to do that is a personal choice someone would have to make on there own.
  10. B.E.N.'s Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    Bro...can you please post something (with all your fancy studies lol) here and then maybe copy it over in the workout forum?

    I have seen 3 posts today about 'how can I get bigger/critique my workout...but I don't lift legs.' This kind of irritates me for some reason.

    Perhaps if it was understood that exercising these large muscle groups (legs = squats & back = deads) actually INCREASE natural test levels people would be more inclined to take the Vets advice.

    I probably don't get much cred since I don't have 1.7M posts around here.
    Updated 06-06-2008 at 11:17 AM by B.E.N.
  11. Lemonada8's Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    ok, so you dont see any added stress that would be placed on the shoulder due to the strengthing of the muscles, and the added stress on the rotator cuff?
  12. MuscleScience's Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    B.E.N.


    Technically it isnt that the muscles of the legs that elicit more hormone release (HGH, T, C) it is the actual amount of muscle that is stimulated that facilitates the release of more anabolic hormones. It just so happens that a large percentage of muscle mass is in the legs. By working the legs logically one will stimulate more muscle mass, thus more anabolic hormones. There is a number that a lab worked out that said that x amount of muscle mass stimulated will case X amount of hormone release. I can not think of the number off hand of what that is. I am not totally sure that it is a widely accepted number as i have not seen it in as a test in many of the protocols for athletic performance. But I do know that studies exist showing large amounts of anabolic hormones in serum after vigorous leg workouts.
  13. MuscleScience's Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    Lemonada8,


    If there is already a shoulder issue I do not see AAS usage as helping to repair it or prevent further injury. Now could it increase the injury because of increase contractile strength of the muscle. I would say that its a logic conclusion. After all the force from the muscle has to be transfered through a lot of structure before it impulses the ball.
  14. Big's Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    I have a question in regards to flexing and posing. I don't compete, so this is hypothetical for me to an extent, but I know that bodybuilders often practice posing and flexing for extended periods of time. I wonder if flexing on the days following a workout affects the recovery of the muscle group? Say I work biceps and back today, then have extended sessions of flexing and posing on the next few days, will this have any negative effects on recovery?
  15. MuscleScience's Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    BIG,

    Flexing in the mirror is a form of working the muscle. When you flex for example the biceps, the triceps have to contract as well to keep the arm from moving. I could not say how much it would effect recovery but I really see it as no difference than doing another set of bi's the next day after an arm workout.
  16. Dobie-BOY's Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    My knees have been hurting. It began a few months ago. I kept getting stronger and so I kept adding weight. The pain is present now even if I bend down carrrying no weight at all. I can go heavy on the leg press without any additional pain IF I warm up very gradually and add weight very gradually. Should I do the leg press heavy even though there is slight pain or not? I have just been doing real high rep sets of like 30-40 reps. Do you think the very high rep sets will aid in maintaining mass and strength while I wait for my knee to get better?
  17. tadpoleboyy's Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    "Fast twitch" muscle vs. "slow twitch" muscle. I have read that there are a few different types actually. Perhaps you can explain these in a bit more detail, I am about to graduate with a degree in biology so lay it on. Maybe some questions to help catalyze conversation:

    What types of muscle are there?What is the basic difference in these types of muscle?
    What type of training(with weights) fosters growth and each of these?
    Any significant weight/strength/size comparisons for these muscles types?
    What might be a good routine for just fast twitch? Or slow twitch? A equal combination of both?
  18. MuscleScience's Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    tadpoleboyy,


    Great question, my undergrad was in biology and is a great degree to have.

    There are three basic muscle types in the body. Smooth Muscle, Cardiac Muscle and Skeletal Muscle. In this conversation we are going to talk about Skeletal Muscle just for everyone's clarification that may be reading this.

    Within Skeletal Muscle (SM) there are different subtypes of fibers. For the purpose of this discussion we will talk about the three most accepted subtypes. Slow Twitch, Fast Twitch type IIA and Type IIB. I must point out that some researchers have possibly identified addition subtypes which I will only briefly mention as not to confuse everyone because it is not completely agreed upon by all authors the last time I checked.

    Type I (slow twitch):

    Type I slow twitch muscle fibers (ST) are fibers that express high levels of aerobic enzymes relative to other types and are very dense in mitochondria. The muscles themselves have a very high capillary density to bring in additional blood supplies. ST fibers are resistant to fatiguing and can contract and stay contracted repeatedly without fatiguing to a point. The main energy pathway of ST fibers is that of aerobic means, due to the increased expression of aerobic enzymes. These fibers can produce energy under anaerobic conditions but do not have the capacity to do so verses other types of muscle fibers. These muscle fiber types are generally used in everyday activities and are for long duration lower intensity exercises such as walking or jogging.

    Fast Twitch Fibers Two Types:

    Type IIb Fast Glycolytic (FG):

    FG fibers are a type of fast twitch fiber that produces energy almost exclusively via anaerobic means. (without oxygen) They fatigue very rapidly and produce a very fast and forceful contraction relative to that of ST fibers. They are very low in mitochondrial density and have low capillary density along with decreased expression of aerobic enzymes relative to that of ST fibers. These fibers are mainly involved in very short and forceful contractions such as jumping or throwing a baseball. These fibers can best be trained by plyometric exercises as well as relatively heavy weight lifting.

    Type II A Fast Twitch Oxidative Glycolytic (FOG):

    FOG muscle fibers are a kind of hybrid fiber type between FG fibers and ST fibers. They display characteristics of both fiber types in that they can use both aerobic and anaerobic means to produce energy. FOG fibers can contract fast and forcefully just like FG fibers do but they also have built in fatigue resistant properties that ST fibers have. This is achieved by having more mitochondria and aerobic enzymes along with a higher capillary density in the muscle compared to FG fibers. These fibers are postulated to have the ability with training to morph into either ST or FG fibers. Meaning that with specific training such as in long distance running, that a FOG fiber can adapt and mimic to an extent the properties of ST fibers. These fibers will start to act more like a ST fiber than that of a normal Fast Twitch type of fiber and vice verse.

    Additional Fiber Types:

    In 2003 a paper authored by Spangenburg and Booth, proposed that there was an additional fast twitch fiber type called Type IIx. This is described as a fiber type between that of Type IIa and type IIb. Just to confuse everyone Type IIx use to be a alternate nomenclature for Type IIb fibers. The reason I bring it up at all is that depending on the text book and author this fiber type may or may not appear or be taught. Although Spangenburg and Booth are not the only ones to describe this potential new fiber type, their paper is the most commonly cited one in the literature. Just in case anyone is doing research at home or has learned it different in exercise physiology class.

    References:

    Essentials of Strength Training & Conditioning by Thomas R. Baechle, S Roger W. Earle,. Second Edition
    Human Kinetics (2000)

    Molecular regulation of individual skeletal muscle fibre types
    E. E. Spangenburg and F. W. Booth (2003)
    Acta Physiologica Scandinavica
    Volume 178 Issue 4, Pages 413 - 424
  19. mhafez's Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    i've just started my first bulking diet, may i post it for your comment?
  20. QuieTSToRM33's Avatar
    • |
    • permalink
    I just recently started having lower back pain ... mostly on my right side ... it gets to the point where it's unbearable at times to continue any type of physical activity.

    Could it be that my hips are misaligned ? ... possible herniated disc ? ... maybe just weak core/back muscles ?

    Thanks
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast