Body By Science

Discussion in 'Hypertrophy-Specific Training (HST)' started by Maelstrom, Apr 12, 2018.

  1. Maelstrom

    Maelstrom New Member

    Hi Guys,

    I've successfully gotten my way through 5 HST cycles over the last year and I'm really happy with the results. I'm probably, actually, make that definitely ready for a cut, as I got a bit carried away with the bulking phase.

    A friend passed me a copy of body by science, and I'm intrigued. Is it just lazy man's training-ie you only have to do 10 minutes a week for your perfect body, or is there something to it.

    There's elements that I feel actually align with HST, or should I say, I see how HST actually kind of aligns with some of the ideas in the book. I was basically wondering what anyone who's read the book thinks?

    From what I can gather, the authors claim that the fast twitch fibres that are activated right at the threshold of effort (not exactly, but I can't express it any better) require at least a week to recover, and they aim to activate the different fibre types to a similar degree throughout the single set that's performed.

    I figure that the HST system does something similar, as you're only really hammering yourself at max intensity one workout per fortnight, and possibly the rest of the fibre types (that the author states have quicker recovery times) are receiving stimilus more frequently.

    Although it's predominantly a strength program I have to say I'm tempted to give it a run for 8 weeks and see what happens, but I thought I'd seek out the wisdom of the HST community first!
     
  2. Old and Grey

    Old and Grey Super Moderator Staff Member

    10 minutes per week??? Let me know how that works out for you. :cool:
     
    Sci likes this.
  3. Sci

    Sci Well-Known Member

    That is a bad idea for a cutting program. You need to do heavy weights and at least twice a week for enough stimulus to maintain as much lean mass as possible while you shed weight.
    It takes me 10 minutes just to do my split squats. How many exercises and muscles can you possibly work in 10 minutes? Maybe two exercises?

    This guy sounds even more extreme than that nut Mike Mentzer, who recommended like 45 minutes of total lifting per week or less. 1 set per exercise, once a week or even less!
    Nobody does it any more, because it doesn’t work very well....
    Unless you are on anabolics or an extremely strong, advanced lifter that needs low volume and long recovery times.
     
    Old and Grey likes this.
  4. Old and Grey

    Old and Grey Super Moderator Staff Member

    I remember at one time that Mr. Arrogance, Mentzer, was recommending one set of DB curls for 2 reps at a total and complete failure weight once per 10 days. He tried to make up for it with drugs but died a lonely broken man in his 40's. So did his brother. Another death on Weider's hit list.
     
  5. adpowah

    adpowah Active Member

    10mins a week?!

    What exactly is this guy's reasoning that while all high level athletes are spending numerous hours every single day eating, training, practicing and recovering that he thinks you can get material results with 10min a week?
     
  6. Maelstrom

    Maelstrom New Member

    Ok. I should have thrown a few more details in to the mix. I'm not planning on doing it during my cut. I'll continue HST for at least a few more cycles, perhaps indefinitely, as I'm very happy with it.

    I just wanted to know what people thought about the book and the science it presents. That was all.

    Obviously there's a lot to the ideas behind his program, but he doesn't sound like an outrageous fraud. I think a large target of his training is the elderly or post 50's clientele.

    Didn't expect to cause a drama!
     
  7. mickc1965

    mickc1965 Well-Known Member

    I am over 50 and cannot imagine how on earth 10 minutes a week could give me a perfect body, will look into it and pass on my opinion FWIW
     
  8. Maelstrom

    Maelstrom New Member

    I'm not evangelizing here. I was just curious if anyone had read it, and what their thoughts were. I can picture that when I slow down or if something happens in my life that means I can't carve out the 3-4 sessions a week, maybe I might give it a try.

    I'll be touring later this year with my band and I thought maybe it'd be worth a shot then for the 6 weeks on the road when I won't have access to any consistent gym equipment. But I might just take a long SD and see if I can improvise a body weight version of hst and take a weighted vest with me.

    If anyone manages to look in to it with some depth, I'd really love to hear their thoughts on it.
     
  9. adpowah

    adpowah Active Member

    I wouldn't worry about causing drama, its good for some spirited discussion.

    From my point of view the claims seem impossible for anyone looking to get past their genetic minimum. I am sure someone who does nothing going to 10mins a week of intense effort will create an effect, however for anyone regularly active I just don't see any level of intensity at only 10mins a week affecting any change.
     
  10. Sci

    Sci Well-Known Member

    I wasted a lot of rime following Low volume HIT and “Heavy Duty” stuff. Wish i had moved on to more effective, higher volume programs earlier.
    anecdotally, All the biggest dudes spend a lot of time at the gym. Naturals and aided both. Total weekly volume, as well as volume per bout is important for growth.
     
  11. Bryan Haycock

    Bryan Haycock Administrator Staff Member

    I knew what you mean Maelstrom. It was funny watching people get fired up about it though!

    Not that I've read the article you are referring to, but I would imagine the idea of 10 minutes (or very little time) comes from research on short bouts of high intensity exercise and physiological changes. Those physiological changes did not involve body composition changes in those studies...they are all cardiovascular changes.
     
  12. Maelstrom

    Maelstrom New Member

    I think the main premise of the book is running=bad strength training=good.

    I found some of the overlap interesting. His main thesis is that if you go to failure in a way that depletes/stresses all the different muscle fibre types, whilst the slow twitch fibres will recover enough to train again in a few days, the fast twitch can take up to a week or more to recover enough to utilise in a maximum exertion effort. In a way I see it as another interpretation of the science that seems to also confirm the HST methodology.

    My limited understanding of HST when I think it through would indicate that you're only really smashing the fast twitch muscles once a fortnight, and thus hitting the fibre types after their recovery window. So the every 36-48 hours the majority of the fibres types would be ready for more stimulus, and thus the reason for the percentages of maximum, in order to hit those fibre groups without burning out the fast twitch.

    Does that make sense to anyone? Or am I having another blond moment?
     
  13. Totentanz

    Totentanz Super Moderator Staff Member

    Well, part of the premise of HST is that muscles don't need to be rested for days in order to recover. And the science backs this up. Your muscles will continue to recover even if you continue to load them on subsequent days. I could dig up the references Bryan used to back this up way back when if you really need them.
    Strength recovery isn't necessarily the best way to judge muscle recovery, since strength is based on more than just the muscle itself but also the central nervous system, which recovers a bit differently than the muscle.
     
    Bulldog likes this.

Share This Page