1. And... we're back. You'll notice that all of your images are back as well, as are our beloved emoticons, including the infamous :foo: We have also worked with our server folks and developers to fix the issues that were slowing down the site.

    There is still work to be done - the images in existing sigs are not yet linked, for example, and we are working on a way to get the images to load faster - which will improve the performance of the site, especially on the pages with a ton of images, and we will continue to work diligently on that and keep you updated.

    Cheers,

    Fok on behalf of the entire Styleforum team
    Dismiss Notice

Random health and exercise thoughts

Discussion in 'Health & Body' started by Eason, Dec 20, 2009.

Tags:
  1. HgaleK

    HgaleK Senior member

    Messages:
    4,972
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2009
    Location:
    NY
    I'm an amateur.
    Okay. I saw a Big Punisher on another forum and was wondering.
    Pork tenderloin.
     
  2. Scrumhalf

    Scrumhalf Senior member

    Messages:
    1,179
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2007
    Location:
    Portland OR
    I have many goals, involving bodyweight benchmarks as well as speed and endurance on land and in water. Basically, think Navy SEAL fitness and endurance. Having extra muscular weight does nothing for my goals. Being lean and strong is everything.
     
  3. Rikkar501

    Rikkar501 Senior member

    Messages:
    488
    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2009
    I have many goals, involving bodyweight benchmarks as well as speed and endurance on land and in water. Basically, think Navy SEAL fitness and endurance. Having extra muscular weight does nothing for my goals. Being lean and strong is everything.

    Ok, gotcha. But isn't there a limiting factor to strength with no hypertrophy? Your strength will peak and unless you add muscle mass your strength won't increase or increase very slowly. I'm interested to hear your thoughts on this as I'm sure you have done more through research on the topic than I have.
     
  4. hendrix

    hendrix Senior member

    Messages:
    9,452
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2009
    Ok, gotcha. But isn't there a limiting factor to strength with no hypertrophy? Your strength will peak and unless you add muscle mass your strength won't increase or increase very slowly. I'm interested to hear your thoughts on this as I'm sure you have done more through research on the topic than I have.

    I've heard some stuff about low rep stuff actually increase CNS strength rather than muslce (increase axon firing rate maybe?) but this sounds like complete bullshit from the basic physiology i know.

    maybe possible to increase cellular density of actin and myosin a couple of %?

    but probably only real change is lower body fat.
     
  5. Cary Grant

    Cary Grant Senior member

    Messages:
    9,672
    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2008
    Location:
    Knee deep in curds
    Certainly- hypothethically, more muscle mass trained to optimal strength would be "stronger" than optimally trained lesser muscle mass.

    But you can readily see examples in any gym to show that few people are optimally trained for strength. Additionally, percentage of slow versus fast-twitch muscle really matters.
    Thus why the little guy at my gym that, while muscular for his size, is not a beast by any stretch, yet he can at about 150 squat north of 400 for reps while one of the guys with the most mass can't do 400 as a 1RM.
     
  6. mondayc

    mondayc Senior member

    Messages:
    319
    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2008
    I hate how a 1-degree fever can make me feel so shitty.
     
  7. Rikkar501

    Rikkar501 Senior member

    Messages:
    488
    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2009
    I've heard some stuff about low rep stuff actually increase CNS strength rather than muslce (increase axon firing rate maybe?) but this sounds like complete bullshit from the basic physiology i know. maybe possible to increase cellular density of actin and myosin a couple of %? but probably only real change is lower body fat.
    No bullshit [​IMG]! Training explosively at lower reps does train the CNS as well as causing hypertrophy in the fast twitch muscle fibers. There isn't enough time under tension for the slow twitch fibers to hypertrophy, hence the increase in strength and not size.
    Certainly- hypothethically, more muscle mass trained to optimal strength would be "stronger" than optimally trained lesser muscle mass. But you can readily see examples in any gym to show that few people are optimally trained for strength. Additionally, percentage of slow versus fast-twitch muscle really matters. Thus why the little guy at my gym that, while muscular for his size, is not a beast by any stretch, yet he can at about 150 squat north of 400 for reps while one of the guys with the most mass can't do 400 as a 1RM.
    True, most gym rats aren't training to their full strength potential. But if one is training for purely strength there has to come a time when their muscles are trained to the maximum force creation point possible and in order to be stronger an increase in muscle mass is required. Unless that point is your one and only goal and you are satisfied with your level of strength, but in all reality who ever gets to that point and is satisfied? Your gym routine then becomes simply maintenance and that's boring as hell.
     
  8. Scrumhalf

    Scrumhalf Senior member

    Messages:
    1,179
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2007
    Location:
    Portland OR
    Ok, gotcha. But isn't there a limiting factor to strength with no hypertrophy? Your strength will peak and unless you add muscle mass your strength won't increase or increase very slowly. I'm interested to hear your thoughts on this as I'm sure you have done more through research on the topic than I have.

    Agreed. There will be a point when my strength will go up only if I add muscle mass. However, I think I have a lot more strength to develop with my current build (130lbs, about 10% BF). Ideally, I would like to be about 145lbs at sub 10%. Think Floyd Mayweather's physique. I think that's attainable in 2-3 years for me by making steady progress. Anything more than that is either unrealistic, or detrimental for my frame - I am 5'6" with Indian ancestry, so not exactly a big boned physique that would enable me to "wear" extra pounds in a useful way.

    Also, I am vegetarian and will be 44 years old in September, so while I consider these "limitations" as mere excuses as far as training is concerned, one has to be realistic as well in what can be achieved given the tools I have at my disposal, but pushing 110% and getting as far as possible with what I have is all the fun... [​IMG]
     
  9. Cary Grant

    Cary Grant Senior member

    Messages:
    9,672
    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2008
    Location:
    Knee deep in curds

    True, most gym rats aren't training to their full strength potential. But if one is training for purely strength there has to come a time when their muscles are trained to the maximum force creation point possible and in order to be stronger an increase in muscle mass is required. Unless that point is your one and only goal and you are satisfied with your level of strength, but in all reality who ever gets to that point and is satisfied? Your gym routine then becomes simply maintenance and that's boring as hell.


    I guess I can't say... I'm far from reaching that "end point" [​IMG]
    I'll bet that that point is actually an infinite point away for anybody but that it is perceived as plateauing much sooner.
     
  10. hendrix

    hendrix Senior member

    Messages:
    9,452
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2009
    No bullshit [​IMG]! Training explosively at lower reps does train the CNS as well as causing hypertrophy in the fast twitch muscle fibers. There isn't enough time under tension for the slow twitch fibers to hypertrophy, hence the increase in strength and not size.

    nah i know about fast twitch muscle fibers, but since hypertrophy occurs there's some gain in size there, and the hypertrophy of the fast twitch muscle fibers explains the gain in strength.

    what i'm talking about is people saying that the low rep stuff causes the CNS to somehow get "stronger", without gain in the actual muscle fibers, slow or fast twitch.

    the idea seems a bit strange to me.
     
  11. Pennglock

    Pennglock Senior member

    Messages:
    3,244
    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2006

    what i'm talking about is people saying that the low rep stuff causes the CNS to somehow get "stronger", without gain in the actual muscle fibers, slow or fast twitch.


    When I see stuff like a 180lb guy powercleaning 374lbs, I start to think there is something to the idea. See below:

    IMPORTANT NOTICE: No media files are hosted on these forums. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website. We can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. If the video does not play, wait a minute or try again later. I AGREE

    TIP: to embed Youtube clips, put only the encoded part of the Youtube URL, e.g. eBGIQ7ZuuiU between the tags.
     
  12. Cary Grant

    Cary Grant Senior member

    Messages:
    9,672
    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2008
    Location:
    Knee deep in curds
    Or little Maura here who is 5ft and around 105. Squatting 250... and is closing in on the national record of benching 214 at her weigh class. Having seen her in person, in street clothes you'd have no idea... she doesn't carry that much visible mass.

    IMPORTANT NOTICE: No media files are hosted on these forums. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website. We can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. If the video does not play, wait a minute or try again later. I AGREE

    TIP: to embed Youtube clips, put only the encoded part of the Youtube URL, e.g. eBGIQ7ZuuiU between the tags.

    http://www.bodybuildingweekly.com/ha...nch-me-in.html
     
  13. hendrix

    hendrix Senior member

    Messages:
    9,452
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2009
    When I see stuff like a 180lb guy powercleaning 374lbs, I start to think there is something to the idea. See below:

    IMPORTANT NOTICE: No media files are hosted on these forums. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website. We can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. If the video does not play, wait a minute or try again later. I AGREE

    TIP: to embed Youtube clips, put only the encoded part of the Youtube URL, e.g. eBGIQ7ZuuiU between the tags.


    Or little Maura here who is 5ft and around 105. Squatting 250... and is closing in on the national record of benching 214 at her weigh class. Having seen her in person, in street clothes you'd have no idea... she doesn't carry that much visible mass.

    IMPORTANT NOTICE: No media files are hosted on these forums. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website. We can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. If the video does not play, wait a minute or try again later. I AGREE

    TIP: to embed Youtube clips, put only the encoded part of the Youtube URL, e.g. eBGIQ7ZuuiU between the tags.

    http://www.bodybuildingweekly.com/ha...nch-me-in.html


    Yeah i know what you mean. those guys are amazing.


    The thing is, from what i know of physiology it seems impossible. An axon firing on a muscle fiber causes depolarisation and contraction. As far as i know it's an "all or nothing" thing; either depolarisation occurs and the muscle fiber contracts, or the muscle fiber doesn't depolarise and there's no contraction.

    the amount of force is dependent upon the number of muscle fibers contracted. Your brain doesn't say "contract at half strength" and the muscle fibers contract at half strength; your brain just recruits fewer muscle fibers to contract.
     
  14. Rikkar501

    Rikkar501 Senior member

    Messages:
    488
    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2009
    nah i know about fast twitch muscle fibers, but since hypertrophy occurs there's some gain in size there, and the hypertrophy of the fast twitch muscle fibers explains the gain in strength.

    what i'm talking about is people saying that the low rep stuff causes the CNS to somehow get "stronger", without gain in the actual muscle fibers, slow or fast twitch.

    the idea seems a bit strange to me.


    I don't think it's a case of the CNS getting stronger; I think that through specifically training the CNS it becomes more efficient at recruiting a larger number of fast twitch fibers. Your second post is almost saying that: as the CNS becomes more efficient it is able create a stronger contraction with more muscle fibers which leads to increased force output. I'm sure those athletes are very fast twitch dominate, due to genetics.
     
  15. hendrix

    hendrix Senior member

    Messages:
    9,452
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2009
    I don't think it's a case of the CNS getting stronger; I think that through specifically training the CNS it becomes more efficient at recruiting a larger number of fast twitch fibers. Your second post is almost saying that: as the CNS becomes more efficient it is able create a stronger contraction with more muscle fibers which leads to increased force output. I'm sure those athletes are very fast twitch dominate, due to genetics.

    but this occurs during muscle training anyway and i think it's what's responsible for the initial major increase that noobs get when they first join the gym.

    If it was the case, then most people would reach a plateau after not very long, since you can't recruit more muscle fibers than you actually have.

    It must be by a different mechanism. Either that or the CNS thing is just bro science. I'd like to see what a physiologist has to say about it.
     
  16. why

    why Senior member

    Messages:
    9,735
    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2007
    the amount of force is dependent upon the number of muscle fibers contracted. Your brain doesn't say "contract at half strength" and the muscle fibers contract at half strength; your brain just recruits fewer muscle fibers to contract.

    Yeah, that's the point of 'CNS training'.
     
  17. Scrumhalf

    Scrumhalf Senior member

    Messages:
    1,179
    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2007
    Location:
    Portland OR
    The thing to remember is that strength without hypertrophy is a slow process. It is not like the gains you can get by adding 10 or 20 lbs of muscle.
     
  18. hendrix

    hendrix Senior member

    Messages:
    9,452
    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2009
    Yeah, that's the point of 'CNS training'.
    could you explain? i'm not quite sure what you're saying
     
  19. why

    why Senior member

    Messages:
    9,735
    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2007
    could you explain? i'm not quite sure what you're saying

    Having muscle and being capable of utilizing muscle are not the same. 'CNS training' is a way of training the nervous system to synchronize muscle fiber contraction to create a greater immediate force. If you think only muscle size matters since the CNS should always be able capable of utilizing all muscle fibers, perhaps you should spend time in a rehab clinic. Or, if you've ever tried to lift heavy weights while under the effects of depressants, then you have first-hand knowledge of this (don't actually test this).
     
  20. Cary Grant

    Cary Grant Senior member

    Messages:
    9,672
    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2008
    Location:
    Knee deep in curds
    Prepping the next few days proteins...

    Free range chicken and grasslands bison

    [​IMG]
     

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by