Showing posts with label weightlifting. Show all posts
Showing posts with label weightlifting. Show all posts

Thursday, June 25, 2026

Mental Effort And Strength Gains


I’m not sure what they mean by “mental effort,” but what about combining “high mental effort” with high intensity as well (for those fit enough to do it)?

I guess for those not trained, any intensity level will yield some gains, and a higher “mental effort” is better, but it would seem to me that intensity and progression are important for continued gains.

More study is required.

Thursday, December 18, 2025

Ketogenic Diet And Resistance Training

From several years ago, we read this (abstract):

This study investigated the impact of an isocaloric and isonitrogenous ketogenic diet (KD) versus a traditional western diet (WD) on changes in body composition, performance, blood lipids, and hormonal profiles in resistance-trained athletes.
METHODS:
Twenty-five college aged men were divided into a KD or traditional WD from weeks 1-10, with a reintroduction of carbohydrates from weeks 10-11, while participating in a resistance-training program. Body composition, strength, power, and blood lipid profiles were determined at week 0, 10 and 11. A comprehensive metabolic panel and testosterone levels were also measured at weeks 0 and 11.
RESULTS:
Lean body mass (LBM) increased in both KD and WD groups (2.4% and 4.4%, p<0.01) at week 10. However, only the KD group showed an increase in LBM between weeks 10-11 (4.8%, p<0.0001). Finally, fat mass decreased in both the KD group (-2.2 kg ± 1.2 kg) and WD groups (- 1.5 ± 1.6 kg). Strength and power increased to the same extent in the WD and KD conditions from weeks 1-11. No changes in any serum lipid measures occurred from weeks 1-10, however a rapid reintroduction of carbohydrate from weeks 10-11 raised plasma TG levels in the KD group. Total testosterone increased significantly from Weeks 0-11 in the KD diet (118 ng/dl) as compared to the WD (-36 ng/dl) from pre to post while insulin did not change.
CONCLUSIONS:
The KD can be used in combination with resistance training to cause favorable changes in body composition, performance and hormonal profiles in resistance-trained males.

So, for young men on resistance training a ketogenic diet was as good or better than a traditional Western diet for lean body mass gains and hormonal profiles.

Thursday, June 20, 2024

Carbs And Protein For Muscle Recovery

A paper from several years ago supports the traditional wisdom for post-workout muscle recover, abstract:

The objective of the study was to investigate whether co-ingestion of carbohydrate and protein as compared with protein alone augments muscle protein synthesis (MPS) during early exercise recovery. Two months old rats performed 10 repetitions of ladder climbing with 75% of body weight attached to their tails. Placebo (PLA), whey protein (WP), or whey protein plus carbohydrate (CP) was then given to rats by gavage. An additional group of sedentary rats (SED) was used as controls. Blood samples were collected immediately and at either 1 or 2 h after exercise. The flexor hallucis longus muscle was excised at 1 or 2 h post exercise for analysis of MPS and related signaling proteins. MPS was significantly increased by CP compared with PLA (p<0.05), and approached significance compared with WP at 1 h post exercise (p = 0.08). CP yielded a greater phosphorylation of mTOR compared with SED and PLA at 1 h post exercise and SED and WP at 2 h post exercise. CP also increased phosphorylation of p70S6K compared with SED at 1 and 2 h post exercise. 4E-BP1 phosphorylation was inhibited by PLA at 1 h but elevated by WP and CP at 2 h post exercise relative to SED. The phosphorylation of AMPK was elevated by exercise at 1 h post exercise, and this elevated level was sustained only in the WP group at 2 h. The phosphorylation of Akt, GSK3, and eIF2Bε were unchanged by treatments. Plasma insulin was transiently increased by CP at 1 h post exercise. In conclusion, post-exercise CP supplementation increases MPS post exercise relative to PLA and possibly WP, which may have been mediated by greater activation of the mTOR signaling pathway

Carbs and protein post-resistance training therefore proved here superior to protein alone.

Thursday, May 16, 2024

Different Supplementation For Resistance Exercise

From several years ago, here is a paper on a specific supplementation intake regimen for resistance training. Abstract:


Lowery, RP, Joy, JM, Rathmacher, JA, Baier, SM, Fuller, JC Jr, Shelley, MC II, Jäger, R, Purpura, M, Wilson, SMC, and Wilson, JM. Interaction of beta-hydroxy-beta-methylbutyrate free acid and adenosine triphosphate on muscle mass, strength, and power in resistance trained individuals. J Strength Cond Res 30(7): 1843-1854, 2016-Adenosine-5'-triphosphate (ATP) supplementation helps maintain performance under high fatiguing contractions and with greater fatigue recovery demands also increase. Current evidence suggests that the free acid form of β-hydroxy-β-methylbutyrate (HMB-FA) acts by speeding regenerative capacity of skeletal muscle after high-intensity or prolonged exercise. Therefore, we investigated the effects of 12 weeks of HMB-FA (3 g) and ATP (400 mg) administration on lean body mass (LBM), strength, and power in trained individuals. A 3-phase double-blind, placebo-, and diet-controlled study was conducted. Phases consisted of an 8-week periodized resistance training program (phase 1), followed by a 2-week overreaching cycle (phase 2), and a 2-week taper (phase 3). Lean body mass was increased by a combination of HMB-FA/ATP by 12.7% (p < 0.001). In a similar fashion, strength gains after training were increased in HMB-FA/ATP-supplemented subjects by 23.5% (p < 0.001). Vertical jump and Wingate power were increased in the HMB-FA/ATP-supplemented group compared with the placebo-supplemented group, and the 12-week increases were 21.5 and 23.7%, respectively. During the overreaching cycle, strength and power declined in the placebo group (4.3-5.7%), whereas supplementation with HMB-FA/ATP resulted in continued strength gains (1.3%). In conclusion, HMB-FA and ATP in combination with resistance exercise training enhanced LBM, power, and strength. In addition, HMB-FA plus ATP blunted the typical response to overreaching, resulting in a further increase in strength during that period. It seems that the combination of HMB-FA/ATP could benefit those who continuously train at high levels such as elite athletes or military personnel.

This may be of interest to high-intensity trainees.

Thursday, March 21, 2024

Resistance Training Restores Muscle Sensitivity To Feeding

An interesting paper on exercise, feeding, and muscle; abstract:

Normally, skeletal muscle mass is unchanged, beyond periods of growth, but it begins to decline in the fourth or fifth decade of life. The mass of skeletal muscle is maintained by ingestion of protein-containing meals. With feeding, muscle protein synthesis (MPS) is stimulated and a small suppression of muscle protein breakdown (MPB) occurs, such that protein balance becomes positive (MPS>MPB). As the postprandial period subsides and a transition toward fasting occurs, the balance of muscle protein turnover becomes negative again (MPB>MPS). Thus, during maintenance of skeletal muscle mass, the long-term net result is that MPS is balanced by MPB. Acutely, however, it is of interest to determine what regulates feeding-induced increases in MPS, since it appears that, in a number of scenarios (for example aging, disuse, and wasting diseases), a suppression of MPS in response to feeding is a common finding. In fact, recent findings point to the fact that loss of skeletal muscle mass with disuse and aging is due not chronic changes in MPS or MPB, but to a blunted feeding-induced rise in MPS. Resistance exercise is a potent stimulator of MPS and appears to synergistically enhance the gains stimulated by feeding. As such, resistance exercise is an important countermeasure to disuse atrophy and to age-related declines in skeletal muscle mass. What is less well understood is how the intensity and volume of the resistance exercise stimulus is sufficient to result in rises in MPS. Recent advances in this area are discussed here, with a focus on human in vivo data.

To summarize: feeding, particularly of protein, favors muscle buildup as opposed t breakdown and fasting does the opposite.  Muscle loss with age seems linked to suppressed muscle buildup from feeding and this suppression can be reduced by resistance training.  Therefore, resistance training helps to reduce/prevent age-related muscle loss, possibly through enhancing feeding-related stimulation of muscle protein synthesis.  Hence the importance of resistance training and (protein) feeding (albeit of course not in excess).

Thursday, January 18, 2024

Resistance Training And Muscle Metabolism

Here is a paper from several years ago formally demonstrating what bodybuilders have long put into practice: resistance training affects protein turnover in skeletal muscle so as to result in muscle growth.  Abstract:

PURPOSE:
Acute bouts of resistance exercise and subsequent training alters protein turnover in skeletal muscle. The mechanisms responsible for the changes in basal post-absorptive protein turnover and its impact on muscle hypertrophy following resistance exercise training are unknown. Our goal was to determine whether post-absorptive muscle protein turnover following 12 weeks of resistance exercise training (RET) plays a role in muscle hypertrophy. In addition, we were interested in determining potential molecular mechanisms responsible for altering post-training muscle protein turnover.
METHODS:
Healthy young men (n = 31) participated in supervised whole body progressive RET at 60-80% 1 repetition maximum (1-RM), 3 days/week for 3 months. Pre- and post-training vastus lateralis muscle biopsies and blood samples taken during an infusion of 13C6 and 15N phenylalanine and were used to assess skeletal muscle protein turnover in the post-absorptive state. Lean body mass (LBM), muscle strength (determined by dynamometry), vastus lateralis muscle thickness (MT), myofiber type-specific cross-sectional area (CSA), and mRNA were assessed pre- and post-RET.
RESULTS:
RET increased strength (12-40%), LBM (~5%), MT (~15%) and myofiber CSA (~20%) (p < 0.05). Muscle protein synthesis (MPS) increased 24% while muscle protein breakdown (MPB) decreased 21%, respectively. These changes in protein turnover resulted in an improved net muscle protein balance in the basal state following RET. Further, the change in basal MPS is positively associated (r = 0.555, p = 0.003) with the change in muscle thickness.
CONCLUSION:
Post-absorptive muscle protein turnover is associated with muscle hypertrophy during resistance exercise training.

It is always comforting when science supports popular conception.

Thursday, October 19, 2023

Maintaining Lean Body Mass While "Cutting"

A regimen for maintaining lean body mass while "cutting" for a drug-free physique competition was studied in a female competitor.  Abstract:


To achieve the criterion appearance prior to competing in a physique competition, athletes undergo preparatory regimens involving high-volume intense resistance and aerobic exercise with hypocaloric energy intake. As the popularity of "drug-free" competition increases, more athletes are facing this challenge without the recuperative advantage provided by performance-enhancing drugs. Consequently, the likelihood of loss of lean body and/or bone mass is increased. The purpose of this investigation was to monitor changes in body composition for a 29-year-old self-proclaimed drug-free female figure competitor during a 32-week preparatory regimen comprising high-volume resistance and aerobic exercise with hypocaloric energy intake. We used dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) to evaluate regional fat and bone mineral density. During the initial 22 weeks, the subject reduced energy intake and engaged in resistance (4-5 sessions/week) and aerobic (3 sessions/week) training. During the final 10 weeks, the subject increased exercise frequency to 6 (resistance) and 4 (aerobic) sessions/week while ingesting 1130-1380 kcal/day. During this 10-week period, she consumed a high quantity of protein (~55% of energy intake) and nutritional supplements. During the 32 weeks, body mass and fat mass decreased by 12% and 55%, respectively. Conversely, lean body mass increased by 1.5%, an amount that exceeded the coefficient of variation associated with DXA-derived measurement. Total bone mineral density was unchanged throughout. In summary, in preparation for a figure competition, a self-proclaimed drug-free female achieved the low body-fat percentage required for success in competition without losing lean mass or bone density by following a 32-week preparatory exercise and nutritional regimen.

Thus, consistent with popular conception, a high protein intake was associated with maintenance (actually increase) with decreased body mass and fat mass.  High volume exercise and calorie-cutting were all part of the mix, also consistent with popular practice.


Thursday, April 20, 2023

Mental Stresa And Exercise Recovery

Popular conceptions and anecdotal evidence suggests that chronic mental stress can impair recovery from strenuous exercise, including resistance training. This paper validates that idea with quantitative findings. Abstract:
The primary aim of this study was to determine whether chronic mental stress moderates recovery of muscular function and somatic sensations: perceived energy, fatigue, and soreness, in a 4-day period after a bout of strenuous resistance exercise. Undergraduate resistance training students (n = 31; age, 20.26 ± 1.34 years) completed the Perceived Stress Scale and the Undergraduate Stress Questionnaire, a measure of life event stress. At a later visit, they performed an acute heavy-resistance exercise protocol (10 repetition maximum [RM] leg press test plus 6 sets: 80-100% of 10RM). Maximal isometric force (MIF), perceived energy, fatigue, and soreness were assessed in approximately 24-hour intervals after exercise. Recovery data were analyzed with hierarchical linear modeling growth curve analysis. Life event stress significantly moderated linear (p = 0.027) and squared (p = 0.031) recovery of MIF. This relationship held even when the model was adjusted for fitness, workload, and training experience. Perceived energy (p = 0.038), fatigue (p = 0.040), and soreness (p = 0.027) all were moderated by life stress. Mean perceived stress modulated linear and squared recovery of MIF (p < 0.001) and energy (p = 0.004) but not fatigue or soreness. In all analyses, higher stress was associated with worse recovery. Stress, whether assessed as life event stress or perceived stress, moderated the recovery trajectories of muscular function and somatic sensations in a 96-hour period after strenuous resistance exercise. Therefore, under conditions of inordinate stress, individuals may need to be more mindful about observing an appropriate length of recovery.

Thus, if such stress exists, longer recovery times are required. For optimal gains from exercise regiments, it would therefore be recommended to avoid such stress if possible, which would of course have many other health benefits other than for exercise training.

Thursday, February 16, 2023

High Intensity Exercise And Age

There is the popular misconception that high intensity exercise is for the young, and the aging should just shuffle around a little bit and call it a day.

This paper from several years ago says otherwise.  This doesn't mean an elderly person needs to be doing a "Heavy Duty Mike Mentzer" bodybuilding workout, but there needs to be sufficient stimulus for the exercise to be effective.  Thus, the authors talk about the benefits of "low volume, high-intensity aerobic and/or resistance training" to achieve a variety of health benefits.

Of course, at any age, consult your physician before starting any exercise program, but we see a clear indication that high volume, low intensity does not need to be the way to go for the aging.  High intensity can do a better job.

Thursday, April 21, 2022

Melatonin For Resistance-Training Athletes

Can melatonin have beneficial effects for athletes other than on circadian rhythms?  This paper says yes.  Abstract:

Previous data showed that the administration of high doses of melatonin improved the circadian system in athletes. Here, we investigated in the same experimental paradigm whether the antioxidant properties of melatonin has also beneficial effects against exercise-induced oxidative stress and muscle damage in athletes. Twenty-four athletes were treated with 100 mg.day-1 of melatonin or placebo 30 min before bedtime during four weeks in a randomized double-blind scheme. Exercise intensity was higher during the study that before starting it. Blood samples were collected before and after treatment, and plasma was used for oxygen radical absorption capacity (ORAC), lipid peroxidation (LPO), nitrite plus nitrate (NOx), and advanced oxidation protein products (AOPP) determinations. Glutathione (GSH), glutathione disulphide (GSSG) levels, and glutathione peroxidase (GPx) and reductase (GRd) activities, were measured in erythrocytes. Melatonin intake increased ORAC, reduced LPO and NOx levels, and prevented the increase of AOPP, compared to placebo group. Melatonin was also more efficient than placebo in reducing GSSG.GSH-1 and GPx.GRd-1 ratios. Melatonin, but not placebo, reduced creatine kinase, lactate dehydrogenase, creatinine, and total cholesterol levels. Overall, the data reflect a beneficial effect of melatonin treatment in resistance-training athletes, preventing extra- and intracellular oxidative stress induced by exercise, and yielding further skeletal muscle protection against exercise-induced oxidative damage.

This, melatonin seems to protect skeletal muscle from oxidative stress damage as it prevents extracellular and intracellular oxidative stress. Interestingly, total cholesterol was reduced as well.

Thursday, July 16, 2020

Flexible Daily Undulating Periodization For Powerlifting

Here is a paper about daily undulating periodization (DUP) – defined here – for powerlifting, abstract:
Colquhoun, RJ, Gai, CM, Walters, J, Brannon, AR, Kilpatrick, MW, D'Agostino, DP, and Campbell, WI. Comparison of powerlifting performance in trained men using traditional and flexible daily undulating periodization. J Strength Cond Res 31(2): 283-291, 2017-Daily undulating periodization (DUP) is a growing trend, both in practice and in the scientific literature. A new form of DUP, flexible daily undulating periodization (FDUP), allows for athletes to have some autonomy by choosing the order of their training. The purpose of this study was to compare an FDUP model to a traditional model of DUP on powerlifting performance in resistance-trained men. Twenty-five resistance-trained men were randomly assigned to one of 2 groups: FDUP (N = 14) or DUP (N = 11). All participants possessed a minimum of 6 months of resistance training experience and were required to squat, bench press, and deadlift 125, 100, and 150% of their body mass, respectively. Dependent variables assessed at baseline and after the 9-week training program included bench press 1 repetition maximum (1RM), squat 1RM, deadlift 1RM, powerlifting total, Wilks Coefficient, fat mass, and fat-free mass (FFM). Dependent variables assessed during each individual training session were motivation to train, Session Rating of Perceived Exertion (Session RPE), and satisfaction with training session. After the 9-week training program, no significant differences in intensity or volume were found between groups. Both groups significantly improved bench press 1RM (FDUP: +6.5 kg; DUP: +8.8 kg), squat 1RM (FDUP: +15.6 kg; DUP: +18.0 kg), deadlift 1RM (FDUP: +14.8 kg; DUP: +13.6 kg), powerlifting total (FDUP: +36.8 kg; DUP: +40.4 kg), and Wilks Coefficient (FDUP: +24.8; DUP: +26.0) over the course of study (p = <0.001 for each variable). There was also a significant increase in FFM (FDUP: +0.8 kg; DUP: +0.8 kg) for both groups (p = 0.003). There were no differences in motivation to train, session RPE, or satisfaction with training session measurements between groups (p = 0.369-0.702, respectively). In conclusion, FDUP seems to offer similar resistance training adaptations when compared with a traditional DUP in resistance-trained men.

Take home message: allowing lifters flexibility in choosing how they arrange their training yields results similar to more structured traditional DUP regimes.



Monday, March 4, 2019

Determinants Of Back Squat Strength

By Passat25 (talk) - Own work (Original text: I (Passat25 (talk)) created this work entirely by myself.), Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=58010663

Not surprisingly, physical rather than psychological variables are greater determinants of barbell back squat strength.  Abstract:

Previous investigations of strength have only focused on biomechanical or psychological determinants, while ignoring the potential interplay and relative contributions of these variables. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relative contributions of biomechanical, anthropometric, and psychological variables to the prediction of maximum parallel barbell back squat strength. Twenty-one college-aged participants (male = 14; female = 7; age = 23 ± 3 years) reported to the laboratory for two visits. The first visit consisted of anthropometric, psychometric, and parallel barbell back squat one-repetition maximum (1RM) testing. On the second visit, participants performed isometric dynamometry testing for the knee, hip, and spinal extensors in a sticking point position-specific manner. Multiple linear regression and correlations were used to investigate the combined and individual relationships between biomechanical, anthropometric, and psychological variables and squat 1RM. Multiple regression revealed only one statistically predictive determinant: fat free mass normalized to height (standardized estimate ± SE = 0.6 ± 0.3; t(16) = 2.28; p = 0.037). Correlation coefficients for individual variables and squat 1RM ranged from r = -0.79-0.83, with biomechanical, anthropometric, experiential, and sex predictors showing the strongest relationships, and psychological variables displaying the weakest relationships. These data suggest that back squat strength in a heterogeneous population is multifactorial and more related to physical rather than psychological variables.

Thursday, October 18, 2018

Resistance Training For COPD

Aerobic exercise seems to be helpful for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Does resistance training also help? Here is a study, abstract:

OBJECTIVE: Emerging research suggests that aerobic-based physical activity may help to promote survival among chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients. However, the extent to which engagement in resistance training on survival among chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients is relatively unknown. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine the independent associations of muscle strengthening activities on all-cause mortality among a national sample of U.S. adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. We hypothesize that muscle strengthening activities will be inversely associated with all-cause mortality.
METHODS: Data from the 2003-2006 NHANES were employed, with follow-up through 2011. Aerobic-based physical activity was objectively measured via accelerometry, muscle strengthening activities engagement was assessed via self-report, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was assessed via physician-diagnosis.
RESULTS: Analysis included 385 adults (20 + yrs) with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, who represent 13.3 million chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients in the USA. The median follow-up period was 78 months (IQR=64-90), with 82 chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients dying during this period. For a two muscle strengthening activity sessions/week increase (consistent with national guidelines), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients had a 29% reduced risk of all-cause mortality (HR=0.71; 95% CI: 0.51-0.99; P = 0.04).
CONCLUSION: Participation in muscle strengthening activities, independent of aerobic-based physical activity and other potential confounders, is associated with greater survival among chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients.

So, yes, it seems like resistance training is helpful. COPD patients, when discussing treatment plans with their physicians, should ask about resistance training if the physician does not bring it up themselves. One possibility is that a combination of aerobic and resistance training is best. Generally speaking, over the past few decades, increasing evidence is accumulating that resistance training is helpful for many aspects of health. I can remember “the old days” in which medical authorities recommended aerobic exercise only, and resistance training was viewed as something for “weird bodybuilders,” but today more informed medical professionals and other experts promote the benefits of resistance training.

Monday, September 3, 2018

Protein And Fat Free mass in Female Resistance Training

In a group of female athletes undergoing resistance training, a high protein diet improved fat free mass gain but was not required for gains in strength.  This is an interesting finding that may or may not be generally applicable to all resistance trainers.  It can make sense if one presumes maximal hypertrophy requires significant extra protein, but that the neural and muscular adaptions required for strength do not.  However, more study is required to determine how applicable this is for, e.g., the advance trainee, including men.  Abstract:

Aspiring female physique athletes are often encouraged to ingest relatively high levels of dietary protein in conjunction with their resistance-training programs. However, there is little to no research investigating higher vs. lower protein intakes in this population. This study examined the influence of a high vs. low protein diet in conjunction with an 8-week resistance training program in this population. Seventeen females (21.2±2.1 years; 165.1±5.1 cm; 61±6.1 kg) were randomly assigned to a high protein diet (HP: 2.5g/kg/day; n=8) or a low protein diet (LP: 0.9g/kg/day, n=9) and were assessed for body composition and maximal strength prior to and after the 8-week protein intake and exercise intervention. Fat-free mass (FFM) increased significantly more in the HP group as compared to the LP group (p=0.009), going from 47.1 ± 4.5kg to 49.2 ± 5.4kg (+2.1kg) and from 48.1 ± 2.7kg to 48.7 ± 2 (+0.6kg) in the HP and LP groups, respectively. Fat mass significantly decreased over time in the HP group (14.1 ± 3.6kg to 13.0 ± 3.3kg; p<0.01) but no change was observed in the LP group (13.2 ± 3.7kg to 12.5 ± 3.0kg). While maximal strength significantly increased in both groups, there were no differences in strength improvements between the two groups. In aspiring female physique athletes, a higher protein diet is superior to a lower protein diet in terms of increasing FFM in conjunction with a resistance training program.

Friday, June 22, 2018

Muscle Damage Not Required For Muscle Growth In Resistance Training?

Muscle growth die to resistance may not be dependent on muscle damage (and subsequent repair of that damage) induced by training. If true, this is contrary to the paradigm of bodybuilding.  Abstract:

Resistance training (RT)-induced skeletal muscle hypertrophy is a highly intricate process. Despite substantial advances, we are far from understanding exactly how muscle hypertrophy develops during RT. The aim of the present review is to discuss new insights related to the role of skeletal muscle damage and muscle protein synthesis (MPS) in mediating RT-induced hypertrophy. Specifically, the thesis that in the early phase of RT (≤ 4 previous RT sessions) increases in muscle cross-sectional area are mostly attributable to muscle damage-induced muscle swelling; then (after ~ 10 sessions), a modest magnitude of muscle hypertrophy ensues; but only during a latter phase of RT (after ~ 18 sessions) is true muscle hypertrophy observed. We argue that the initial increases in MPS post-RT are likely directed to muscle repair and remodelling due to damage, and do not correlate with eventual muscle hypertrophy induced by several RT weeks. Increases in MPS post-RT session only contribute to muscle hypertrophy after a progressive attenuation of muscle damage, and even more significantly when damage is minimal. Furthermore, RT protocols that do not promote significant muscle damage still induce similar muscle hypertrophy and strength gains compared to conditions that do promote initial muscle damage. Thus, we conclude that muscle damage is not the process that mediates or potentiates RT-induced muscle hypertrophy.

Friday, June 1, 2018

Resistance Training Set Volumes And The Muscular Response

Using more than three sets on resistance exercises was found to not be better than less than three sets for upper body muscle hypertrophy (growth) in untrained subjects; the jury is still put for trained subjects.

Also, in the untrained, three sets are better (strength and muscle mass) than one for the legs, but not the upper body.

And here we see different “dose response” curves for untrained, recreational trainers (nonathletes), and actual athletes, with respect to muscle strength, which I not the same as hypertrophy; abstract:

There has been a proliferation in recent scholarly discussion regarding the scientific validity of single vs. multiple sets of resistance training (dose) to optimize muscular strength development (response). Recent meta-analytical research indicates that there exist distinct muscular adaptations, and dose-response relationships, that correspond to certain populations. It seems that training status influences the requisite doses as well as the potential magnitude of response. Specifically, for individuals seeking to experience muscular strength development beyond that of general health, an increase in resistance-training dosage must accompany increases in training experience. The purpose of this document is to analyze and apply the findings of 2 meta-analytical investigations that identified dose-response relationships for 3 populations: previously untrained, recreationally trained, and athlete; and thereby reveal distinct, quantified, dose-response trends for each population segment. Two meta-analytical investigations, consisting of 177 studies and 1,803 effect sizes (ES) were examined to extract the dose-response continuums for intensity, frequency, volume of training, and the resultant strength increases, specific to each population. ES data demonstrate unique dose-response relationships per population. For untrained individuals, maximal strength gains are elicited at a mean training intensity of 60% of 1 repetition maximum (1RM), 3 days per week, and with a mean training volume of 4 sets per muscle group. Recreationally trained nonathletes exhibit maximal strength gains with a mean training intensity of 80% of 1RM, 2 days per week, and a mean volume of 4 sets. For athlete populations, maximal strength gains are elicited at a mean training intensity of 85% of 1RM, 2 days per week, and with a mean training volume of 8 sets per muscle group. These meta-analyses demonstrate that the effort-to-benefit ratio is different for untrained, recreationally trained, and athlete populations; thus, emphasizing the necessity of appropriate exercise prescription to optimize training effect. Exercise professionals may apply these dose-response trends to prescribe appropriate, goal-oriented training programs.

Recovery time between sets: not that important according to this study.


Wednesday, May 30, 2018

Training Data: Morning Or Afternoon?

In general resistance training goes better in the afternoon than in the morning, although this morning deficit can be overcome by regular morning training.  Comparisons between control, morning, and afternoon resistance training groups show more or less similar responses in both morning and afternoon groups, but certain aspects of skeletal muscle cell signaling may differ. In my own experience, but performance seems better in the afternoon, but I still often to morning training when time allows for the sake of convenience, and it works well also; as the paper says, you can become adapted to either over time.  Abstract:

It has been clearly established that maximal force and power is lower in the morning compared to noon or afternoon hours. This morning neuromuscular deficit can be diminished by regularly training in the morning hours. However, there is limited and contradictory information upon hypertrophic adaptations to time-of-day-specific resistance training. Moreover, no cellular or molecular mechanisms related to muscle hypertrophy adaptation have been studied with this respect. Therefore, the present study examined effects of the time-of-day-specific resistance training on muscle hypertrophy, phosphorylation of selected proteins, hormonal concentrations and neuromuscular performance. Twenty five previously untrained males were randomly divided into a morning group (n = 11, age 23 ± 2 yrs), afternoon group (n = 7, 24 ± 4 yrs) and control group (n = 7, 24 ± 3 yrs). Both the morning and afternoon group underwent hypertrophy-type of resistance training with 22 training sessions over an 11-week period performed between 07:30-08:30 h and 16:00-17:00 h, respectively. Isometric MVC was tested before and immediately after an acute loading exclusively during their training times before and after the training period. Before acute loadings, resting blood samples were drawn and analysed for plasma testosterone and cortisol. At each testing occasion, muscle biopsies from m. vastus lateralis were obtained before and 60 min after the acute loading. Muscle specimens were analysed for muscle fibre cross-sectional areas (CSA) and for phosphorylated p70S6K, rpS6, p38MAPK, Erk1/2, and eEF2. In addition, the right quadriceps femoris was scanned with MRI before and after the training period. The control group underwent the same testing, except for MRI, between 11:00 h and 13:00 h but did not train. Voluntary muscle strength increased significantly in both the morning and afternoon training group by 16.9% and 15.2 %, respectively. Also muscle hypertrophy occurred by 8.8% and 11.9% (MRI, p < 0.001) and at muscle fibre CSA level by 21% and 18% (p < 0.01) in the morning and afternoon group, respectively. No significant changes were found in controls within these parameters. Both pre- and post-training acute loadings induced a significant (p < 0.001) reduction in muscle strength in all groups, not affected by time of day or training. The post-loading phosphorylation of p70S6Thr421/Ser424 increased independent of the time of day in the pre-training condition, whereas it was significantly increased in the morning group only after the training period (p < 0.05). Phosphorylation of rpS6 and p38MAPK increased acutely both before and after training in a time-of-day independent manner (p < 0.05 at all occasions). Phosphorylation of p70S6Thr389, eEF2 and Erk1/2 did not change at any time point. No statistically significant correlations were found between changes in muscle fibre CSA, MRI and cell signalling data. Resting testosterone was not statistically different among groups at any time point. Resting cortisol declined significantly from pre- to post-training in all three groups (p < 0.05). In conclusion, similar levels of muscle strength and hypertrophy could be achieved regardless of time of the day in previously untrained men. However, at the level of skeletal muscle signalling, the extent of adaptation in some parameters may be time of day dependent.

Friday, April 6, 2018

How Much Protein Can The Body Use In A Single Meal For Muscle-Building?

There is controversy about how much protein can be properly utilized by the body per meal for purposes of muscle building.  There is a school of thought that says that, essentially, anything over 20-25 grams per meal will be wasted; on the other hand, bodybuilding tradition advocated considerably higher per meal intakes (leading to much higher per day intakes compared to the typical recommendations).  A study examines the question and comes down on the side supporting the higher levels of protein intake; they write: “The preponderance of data indicate that while consumption of higher protein doses (> 20 g) results in greater AA oxidation, this is not the fate for all the additional ingested AAs as some are utilized for tissue-building purposes. Based on the current evidence, we conclude that to maximize anabolism one should consume protein at a target intake of 0.4 g/kg/meal across a minimum of four meals in order to reach a minimum of 1.6 g/kg/day. Using the upper daily intake of 2.2 g/kg/day reported in the literature spread out over the same four meals would necessitate a maximum of 0.55 g/kg/meal.”  Abstract:

Controversy exists about the maximum amount of protein that can be utilized for lean tissue-building purposes in a single meal for those involved in regimented resistance training. It has been proposed that muscle protein synthesis is maximized in young adults with an intake of ~ 20-25 g of a high-quality protein; anything above this amount is believed to be oxidized for energy or transaminated to form urea and other organic acids. However, these findings are specific to the provision of fast-digesting proteins without the addition of other macronutrients. Consumption of slower-acting protein sources, particularly when consumed in combination with other macronutrients, would delay absorption and thus conceivably enhance the utilization of the constituent amino acids. The purpose of this paper was twofold: 1) to objectively review the literature in an effort to determine an upper anabolic threshold for per-meal protein intake; 2) draw relevant conclusions based on the current data so as to elucidate guidelines for per-meal daily protein distribution to optimize lean tissue accretion. Both acute and long-term studies on the topic were evaluated and their findings placed into context with respect to per-meal utilization of protein and the associated implications to distribution of protein feedings across the course of a day. The preponderance of data indicate that while consumption of higher protein doses (> 20 g) results in greater AA oxidation, this is not the fate for all the additional ingested AAs as some are utilized for tissue-building purposes. Based on the current evidence, we conclude that to maximize anabolism one should consume protein at a target intake of 0.4 g/kg/meal across a minimum of four meals in order to reach a minimum of 1.6 g/kg/day. Using the upper daily intake of 2.2 g/kg/day reported in the literature spread out over the same four meals would necessitate a maximum of 0.55 g/kg/meal.

This conclusion is supported by this other study, which also advocates higher per meal protein intakes.

Please note that this advice – from these studies and not from this blog – deals with effects on muscle building and not overall health.  Whether or not additional protein intake is good for you is something that you need to determine in conjunction with your physician, nutritionist, etc.  For example, people with kidney problems or some digestive disorders probably should not be consuming this much protein, and then there is the issue of how much saturated fat is being consumed, if animal proteins are utilized.

So what is best for muscle building and what is best for overall health are not the same thing.

Monday, February 19, 2018

Perchance To Dream…But Not When Lifting

Muscle strength in lifting, particularly heavy compound movements, is impaired by lack of sufficient sleep; thus: 

Inadequate sleep impairs maximal muscle strength in compound movements when performed without specific interventions designed to increase motivation. Strategies to assist groups facing inadequate sleep to effectively perform resistance training may include supplementing their motivation by training in groups or ingesting caffeine; or training prior to prolonged periods of wakefulness.

If the situation is unavoidable, then do what you can, but the optimal thing is to just get enough sleep (easier said than done in many cases, I know….).

Tuesday, January 23, 2018

Exercise Sequence And Fitness

Strength, in this case lower body strength, is maximized by first training for strength followed by training for endurance (rather than the other way around) – which makes sense. For aerobic fitness, training order doesn’t matter, so the net conclusion one can make is to train for strength and then endurance when scheduling sequential training sessions. Abstract:

We conducted a systematic literature review and meta-analysis to assess the chronic effects of the sequence of concurrent strength and endurance training on selected important physiological and performance parameters, namely lower body 1 repetition maximum (1RM) and maximal aerobic capacity (VO2max/peak). Based on predetermined eligibility criteria, chronic effect trials, comparing strength-endurance (SE) with endurance-strength (ES) training sequence in the same session were included. Data on effect sizes, sample size and SD as well other related study characteristics were extracted. The effect sizes were pooled using, Fixed or Random effect models as per level of heterogeneity between studies and a further sensitivity analyses was carried out using Inverse Variance Heterogeneity (IVHet) models to adjust for potential bias due to heterogeneity. Lower body 1RM was significantly higher when strength training preceded endurance with a pooled mean change of 3.96 kg (95%CI: 0.81 to 7.10 kg). However, the training sequence had no impact on aerobic capacity with a pooled mean difference of 0.39 ml.kg.min-1 (95%CI: -1.03 to 1.81 ml.kg.min-1). Sequencing strength training prior to endurance in concurrent training appears to be beneficial for lower body strength adaptations, while the improvement of aerobic capacity is not affected by training order.