Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

Post by pjc50 » Thu, Jan 01, 2026, 1:13 AM UTC

vasco wrote: post #36

armcat wrote: post #4

I thought it was already well understood/researched that it's not the weights that matter, but effectively taking your sets to muscular failure. While one might think "I can do 50 reps with low weights" there is practical aspects to this - you don't wand to spend hours at the gym, and doing heavy weights at 5-7 reps is sufficient as long as you are close or at muscular failure.

> Loads for each set were adjusted to ensure that volitional fatigue was reached within 8–12 and 20–25 repetitions for the HL and LL limbs, respectively I would argue both categories of the study are about low reps. I don't see how the body would tell the difference between 12 and 25 reps. If you said between 5 and 500, like it has to meaningfully take much longer, otherwise why would doing something so similar have…

Post by allan_s » Thu, Jan 01, 2026, 1:15 AM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #23

weinzierl wrote: post #5

If I read this correctly the gist is that it does not matter if you use heavy weights with few reps (common body builder wisdom) or lighter weights with more reps. As long as you always exercise to complete muscle fatigue you'll get the maximum for your genetics (which itself varies a lot).

Can we replicate the process of reaching muscle fatigue/failure to spur muscle growth without the strength training or anabolic steroids? Think GLP-1RAs but for this specific biological pathway. https://www.biopharmadive.com/news/lilly-terminate-obesity-t... https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/medicine-and-dentistry/...

Post by strken » Thu, Jan 01, 2026, 1:19 AM UTC

cyberax wrote: post #33

Torkel wrote: post #10

I.e. No pain, no gain.

This is really terrible advice that just discourages people. You absolutely can get significant improvements without (much) pain. DOMS during the initial stages is going to be the most uncomfortable part. Once you're past it, you don't need to push yourself to a breaking point, just to the point of mild exhaustion. This will provide you enough resistance to gain muscle mass and improve the bone density to healthy lev…

Post by mnky9800n » Thu, Jan 01, 2026, 1:22 AM UTC

vasco wrote: post #36

armcat wrote: post #4

I thought it was already well understood/researched that it's not the weights that matter, but effectively taking your sets to muscular failure. While one might think "I can do 50 reps with low weights" there is practical aspects to this - you don't wand to spend hours at the gym, and doing heavy weights at 5-7 reps is sufficient as long as you are close or at muscular failure.

> Loads for each set were adjusted to ensure that volitional fatigue was reached within 8–12 and 20–25 repetitions for the HL and LL limbs, respectively I would argue both categories of the study are about low reps. I don't see how the body would tell the difference between 12 and 25 reps. If you said between 5 and 500, like it has to meaningfully take much longer, otherwise why would doing something so similar have…

Post by vasco » Thu, Jan 01, 2026, 1:34 AM UTC

pjc50 wrote: post #41

vasco wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Loads for each set were adjusted to ensure that volitional fatigue was reached within 8–12 and 20–25 repetitions for the HL and LL limbs, respectively I would argue both categories of the study are about low reps. I don't see how the body would tell the difference between 12 and 25 reps. If you said between 5 and 500, like it has to meaningfully take much longer, otherwise why would doing something so similar have…

This is spoken like you've never done any reps at all?