Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

physoc.onlinelibrary.wiley.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 371 posts

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#331

Post by machomaster »

oarfish wrote: post #305
machomaster wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doing dumbbell raises to failure with 5repmax will bring more pain, discomfort and wear/tear than doing the same exercise with 20repmax.

Why? Most people don't build up to such a stimulus, so its not surprising if its uncomfortable, if all youve ever done is 20 rep sets.

It's not about the stimulus. It's about the fact that some exercises are naturally better done within the lower rep range (5-10), while others work and feel better with the higher rep range (20-30). Some are better in the middle.

With DB side raises, take too high of a weight, and you will feel like you can't do anything productive done (can't even raise to an appropriate height). With lower weights you can get a proper range of motion and can really feel the burn and get the target (sic!) muscle exhausted.

Additionally, too high of a weight doesn't feel good on joints.

Similarly with squats (or deadlifts). Squating with 5-10RM is fine. But 30RM?.. Theoretically it gives the same stimulus as doing 5-10RM, but practically everyone who suggests putting such sets to a program should be medicated and put on a suicide watch. The taxationvon all systems of your body is just so huge (especially the more advanced you are).

Heck, mere squating true (!) 20RM (just one set!) is considered a crazy challenge that most will never do. I have done crazy stuff in my life, but I am not embarrassed to admit that this challenge is beyond me. Simply doing 20RM leg extensions is hard enough for me.

These require the practical experience. Take barbell/dumbbells, try yourself and no more explanations will be needed.

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#332

Post by machomaster »

oarfish wrote: post #311
machomaster wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There has been a lot of "long length training/partials" information/research in the past couple of years. A very useful information, you should research more (or ask more specific questions).

thats a different thing tho. the term "stretch mediated hypertrophy" is used loosely in many places and i think originally refers to really just hypertrophy caused by the stretch. iirc the lengthened partial gains are not thought to be caused by this mechanism.

You are correct. SMH is used incorrectly in most places, but you explained it well.

But after that people started experimenting and researches started publishing a lot of interesting findings. And found a lot of applicable things that are based on the original SMH research and that is partly/fully explaining new findings.

Like is was found that it having only the partial range of motion, training the one when the muscle is lengthened is clearly better than training in a position of a shortened muscle.

Moreover, some research even found that doing such "lengthened partials" is better that doing the full range of motion.

Therefore, people try to utilize more of the lengthened portion of the movements (especially if it is impossible to work the muscle in both the lengthened and shortened positions, so one has to choose anyway), while some go as far as getting rid of the shortened portion altogether.

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#333

Post by vasco »

solumunus wrote: post #252
vasco wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well of course you change the load, but the stimulus is interpreted the same way by the body. I didn't think the question was at that level.

> but the stimulus is interpreted the same way by the body That may be your intuition, but it’s certainly not everyone’s, hence the studies… Many people will intuit heavier weight = more effective.

It's not my intuition, it's just knowledge about processes in nature.

Almost nothing reacts to changes smaller than an order of magnitude to anything. It's one of the best rules of thumb.

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#334

Post by jraines »

oarfish wrote: post #294
jraines wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn’t really affect hypertrophy but it matters because imbalances will get you weird injuries and/or mobility restrictions in the long term.

Not true, no one is symmetrical or fully balanced in strength. outside of extreme cases, so called imbalances arent a problem on a population level, at least as far as we know today.

I guess you live in a different population than me, where all the physical and occupational therapists are out of work

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#335

Post by lend000 »

This is consistent with my experience.

I've had great results, and every workout I do consists of an exercise I can do at least 20 reps of for the first set, sometimes going up to 50. I can still gain strength by increasing the weight slowly week by week but maintaining a high level of reps. I don't think it takes longer at the gym -- just do 2 sets per motion instead of the more common 3-5. The breaks in between sets at the gym are the real time sink. Plus, you get lean muscle with high endurance, and virtually no injuries. Last tip: put your phone/music in a locker while you're at the gym if you want to both improve your workout, save time, and practice being more present.

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#336

Post by Blackthorn »

machomaster wrote: post #328
Blackthorn wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you even responding to? I go to the gym and lift and cardio for my own health, but this is this and that is that. If you want to look like the guys featured in the magazines you need steroids. If you want to make a body transformation like actors do you definitely need steroids.

Looking at the genetically elite people in a magazine, imagining that self can become just as good if only by using steroids, is beyond dumb. Imagine thinking that the only thing stopping self of become a new Michael Jordan is lack of access to dynamite attached to feet (in order to jump higher). The dynamite aspect is not the biggest stupidity, even deciding to compare self to elite athletes is moronic. Use celebrit…

Nobody said "if only by using steroids", everyone knows those people featured had all of steroids, hard work, and genetics. But to stick our heads in the sand about 1/3 of that does no one any favors. I'm not sure if the current climate of more acceptability around discussing it is a great endpoint, given how many young people are taking some pretty nasty steroids before even turning 20, but let's not pretend a reality doesn't exist.

Bodybuilding as a sport now is in probably the worst place it's ever been. You now have "who can take the most drugs" as part of the contest and you're competing with people who aren't afraid to die at 30.

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#337

Post by mf_tomb »

f33d5173 wrote: post #213
mf_tomb wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is par for the course with exercise science. It's mostly fake. No blinding, small sample sizes, researchers with agenda, low duration, low funding etc. The good news is that doing almost anything works.

How would you blind it? This isn't pharmacy where you can hand out sugar pills.

You're right, it's impossible to blind subjects. Researchers can be blinded by having one limb be the control and the other be the test. This design has become more popular recently and it's definitely a small improvement.

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#338

Post by cyberax »

astura wrote: post #228
cyberax wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I think propensity for Delayed Onset Muscle Soreness (DOMS) must be genetic or something because I've never been able to get "past it," even after many years.

Have you tried avoiding eccentric exercises? The ones that require you to stretch? Try to do more of the "push-style" exercises.

Also, I highly recommend getting a physiotherapy-educated trainer for at least several sessions. They know _exactly_ how to make people hurt after exercises :)

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#339

Post by xarope »

MegaDeKay wrote: post #312
hombre_fatal wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that were true, then protein powder would be satiating (it's not) and potatoes wouldn't be the most satiating food. This is just more bro-science chained onto bro-science.

Agree 100%. But lemme tell ya, "protein fluff" make from 150g skim milk, 10g protein powder, and 3g Xanthan gum whipped into a still meringue by a stand mixer is the most satiating thing I've ever eaten and it isn't even close. It is like the meringue doesn't collapse back down right away in your stomach so it is like eating (tasty) closed cell foam. I used to make it from a full cup of milk but had trouble finishing…

I do two scoops of greek yoghurt and a scoop of protein, and that's like eating ice cream :-P

Re: Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy

#340

Post by mcswell »

AstroBen wrote: post #34

> Healthy, recreationally active but untrained young males Yeah this is why. Anything you do as an untrained person is going to get you newbie gains. It's just really easy to improve initially. Doesn't mean it'll work after the first 6 months

I think you missed the point. The point was that doing lots of lighter lifts or doing a few heavy lifts, you get the same improvement. While it's possible this wouldn't be true for non-newbies, it seems unlikely.
Post reply on HN