Building Muscle Doesn't Require Lifting Heavy Weights, Study Shows

**Hsheer** · 08-14-2010, 05:09 AM

science daily post this study recently.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0811125943.htm

I want your opinions regarding this study, Do you that we can train abs as we did before without using heavy weight ?

**the big 1** · 08-14-2010, 05:21 AM

Originally Posted by Hsheer

science daily post this study recently.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0811125943.htm

I want your opinions regarding this study, Do you that we can train abs as we did before without using heavy weight ?

the study doesnt take into account that once a person has done a workout on a specific muscle with a specific weight, they would then have to increase the weight next time otherwise they wouldnt get the same muscle stimulus...

once you use a certain weight for a certain number of reps over time, you must increase the weight so the muscle has a reason to grow...

sure if a person new to training used a light weight, they would AT FIRST see a significant improvement in the muscles, but over time they would have to increase the weight otherwise the muscle just wouldnt respond by growing...

i hardly think its a study worth looking into as its 1 paragraph long...

sets, reps, time, frequincy of training sessions are finite, which means you can 1000 sets but 1 set could have the same effect...
the only infinite stimulus is weight, which means if you continue to lift heavier the muscle has no choice but to grow...well its something like that, ile pull up the study later if im wrong...

**BigBuck6** · 08-14-2010, 06:59 AM

A muscle is eventually forced to compensate for the increase in resistance by increasing its Cross Sectional Area.

**Hsheer** · 08-14-2010, 08:58 AM

Originally Posted by the big 1

the study doesnt take into account that once a person has done a workout on a specific muscle with a specific weight, they would then have to increase the weight next time otherwise they wouldnt get the same muscle stimulus...

once you use a certain weight for a certain number of reps over time, you must increase the weight so the muscle has a reason to grow...

sure if a person new to training used a light weight, they would AT FIRST see a significant improvement in the muscles, but over time they would have to increase the weight otherwise the muscle just wouldnt respond by growing...

i hardly think its a study worth looking into as its 1 paragraph long...

sets, reps, time, frequincy of training sessions are finite, which means you can 1000 sets but 1 set could have the same effect...
the only infinite stimulus is weight, which means if you continue to lift heavier the muscle has no choice but to grow...well its something like that, ile pull up the study later if im wrong...

Your answer make a lot of sense, I agree with you

**MuscleScience** · 08-14-2010, 10:24 AM

You can stimulate motor unit activation in a couple of different ways. One being with heavier weight which causes an activation of more motor units. Or you can do it with repetitions thus causing more motor units to be activated as more and more motor units fatigue. Both if done properly can produce a nearly identical amount of motor unit activation.

**heyyallsup** · 08-14-2010, 06:04 PM

Originally Posted by the big 1

the study doesnt take into account that once a person has done a workout on a specific muscle with a specific weight, they would then have to increase the weight next time otherwise they wouldnt get the same muscle stimulus...

once you use a certain weight for a certain number of reps over time, you must increase the weight so the muscle has a reason to grow...

sure if a person new to training used a light weight, they would AT FIRST see a significant improvement in the muscles, but over time they would have to increase the weight otherwise the muscle just wouldnt respond by growing...

i hardly think its a study worth looking into as its 1 paragraph long...

sets, reps, time, frequincy of training sessions are finite, which means you can 1000 sets but 1 set could have the same effect...
the only infinite stimulus is weight, which means if you continue to lift heavier the muscle has no choice but to grow...well its something like that, ile pull up the study later if im wrong...

That's the same as progressive adaptation right?

The synopsis of the article is interesting
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%...l.pone.0012033

The issue, as stated above, is weather the study subjects were already athletically trained individuals, or weather this was a first time thing.
One thing that was noted though was that the average BMI = 24.1±0.8 kg/m2. Which is around normal for males 20-22, suggesting that at the very least the subjects were neither obese, nor developed bodybuilders. Other than that follow up studies of this paper would be interesting.

I don't think having "progressively heavier weight" is particularly an issue, at least in this study, because the weight is always determined from the subjects 1RM, which if this study holds true, will go up as time goes on, so the lighter weight will still end up getting progressively heavier.

Excellent find to the OP!

**stevey_6t9** · 08-14-2010, 10:32 PM

Originally Posted by MuscleScience

You can stimulate motor unit activation in a couple of different ways. One being with heavier weight which causes an activation of more motor units. Or you can do it with repetitions thus causing more motor units to be activated as more and more motor units fatigue. Both if done properly can produce a nearly identical amount of motor unit activation.

though activation of muscle fibres doesn't necessarily mean damaging them to an extent to cause hypertrophy right though?

**MuscleScience** · 08-15-2010, 01:40 AM

Originally Posted by stevey_6t9

though activation of muscle fibres doesn't necessarily mean damaging them to an extent to cause hypertrophy right though?

Your right, Time Under Tension is thought to be one of the major contributors to causing microtrauma to the contractile protiens.

**cherrydrpepper** · 08-15-2010, 03:48 AM

Good article. What I got from it was that the best way to make the muscles grow for most people is to reach absolute failure. This is something pros like Lee Priest have been saying for years.

**oldschoolfitness** · 08-15-2010, 07:10 AM

intensity along with failure. i think you still have to increase the stimulus with weight, reps, or both. i don't know any guys out there who bench 150lbs and look like they can bench 450lbs. so you have to get stronger at some point. only study out there you can trust is your (or a good friends) training log.

**heyyallsup** · 08-15-2010, 07:51 AM

Originally Posted by oldschoolfitness

intensity along with failure. i think you still have to increase the stimulus with weight, reps, or both. i don't know any guys out there who bench 150lbs and look like they can bench 450lbs. so you have to get stronger at some point. only study out there you can trust is your (or a good friends) training log.

I don't think having progressively heavier weight is particularly an issue, at least in this study, because the weight is always determined from the subjects 1RM which, if this study holds true, will go up as time goes on so the lighter weight will still end up getting progressively heavier. The study subjects always do 30% of their one rep max, so their one rep max will go up, and thus that 30% weight will also grow.

**baseline_9** · 08-15-2010, 09:13 AM

Weight is only used as a means to an end.

Maximum stimulation is what is required

I would rather lift 50% of the weight and make an exercise twice as hard.

If your not progressive then you will not progress, simple, why woupd the body force an adaptation if it doesnt NEED to.

As you progress weight will need to be increased to cause maximum stimulation in the required rep range.