Muscle Hypertrophy

[Fausto]

Vince

I have started a small amount of disecting:

“In the good old days when your grandfathers were lifting weights it was thought that the way to build muscle was to break them down. Seems that was close to the truth. It has taken 50 years and we still don't know exactly what is going on in muscle fibres.”

Not so Vince: check this out:

Quote[/b] ]“18. Hyperplasia - formation of new muscle fibres, yes - it is possible?

Note: There is still an ongoing debate in the scientific community of whether hyperplasia occurs in humans. The evidence that it does happen, is heavily criticized by others. We encourage people to do form their own opinions based on the available research.

Quoting from Kelly (Kelley 1996), "The results of this investigation are similar to a recent narrative review that concluded that muscle fibre hyperplasia, 1) consistently occurs as a result of chronic stretch, 2) rarely occurs with overload in the form of compensatory hypertrophy, and 3) has produced mixed results when overload in the form of exercise is employed."

You will hear the term "compensatory hypertrophy" used in stretch overload studies. What this means is that the stretch overload is progressively applied, rather than all at once (i.e. chronic stretch).

What this tells us is that fibre splitting is dependant on the degree of strain (strain = load + microtrauma) experienced by the fibres as a factor of time. In compensatory hypertrophy models, the tissue is allowed to adapt to a lighter load before a more severe load is applied.

With chronic stretch the max load is applied all at once and isn’t changed throughout the observation period.
Intermittent stretch is similar to chronic stretch in that the max load is applied all at once, however, it is intermittently” applied. So it is applied then it is removed, and then reapplied, etc. This has tended to result in hypertrophy without fibre splitting.

It used to be thought that muscle fibres would only split after they have hypertrophied, almost as a result of the hypertrophy itself. But a recent study which I just read the other day but can’t seem to find at the moment, demonstrated fibre splitting can occur before fibre hypertrophy.

“So, why isn't the budget to study muscular hypertrophy larger?”

Vince – a good question, I’ll give you 10/10 for that, but not being American cannot give you the correct answer, I am sure that Bryan wonders the very same thing, but maybe HIV, Bird-flu, SARS and other research projects are given priority.

We got to get our Governator

to add this to the budget then we can move to California and start on it!
I promise I’ll help, if it is on the budget !!!!

“Why, in 2004, do bodybuilders get arrested instead of being helped to build great physiques?”

Hell, I guess they cannot read, when some of the stuff they are taking is banned, which means they are not getting it legally and therefore are contravening the law.

We are not going to touch on the fact that banned substances are so because people misuse them and they are generally dangerous.

So, all in all, they are “cheating”, basically have been for a few years (since the 80’s or so), making the sport a ugly scene, all because judges and panels have allowed it I guess.

If it were not so, we would see some big sorry @$$ guys walking around with a whole lot of muscle but having nothing else to show for it, instead people have allowed these “monkeys” to damage a beautiful sport so that they can promote a whole range of new money making drugs, some of which are good for nothing!

Here's maybe the reason why even Dave Drapper agrees that in a BB contest, the only difference amongst all the "bloated kegs" is their faces.

“When matters become political good sense often goes out the window. I wonder if Arnold has the capacity to do anything significant for hypertrophy? I doubt he would touch this with a 10 foot pole!”

Again, I agree with you, I see you are after all an agreeable person, I think once you get into politics you have lost sense of anything else you may have pursued before, unless of course it suits you or the government you serve, else you out on the next election. He may have done so in the very recent past but I doubt he will do it now.

“Where is that definitive text on hypertrophy?”

I will keep looking till I find something that may awake your higher interest.

“DOMS is often dismissed but I wonder if it is related to necrosis of cells and that this phenomenon leads to hypertrophy, given ideal conditions. Namely, that adequate nutrition is available and no interference with growth occurs.”


DOMS is not everything, Vince. Albeit a good part of BB and rightly so, I'll call it an indicator of some microtrauma!!!!

Quote[/b] ]21. DOMS, or Delayed Onset Muscle Soreness
Getting sore from training is like sweating from training. It often accompanies training but can't effectively be used as a measure of the effectiveness of the workout. They are related, but not "correlated".

This does not stop people from using DOMS as their measure of the effectiveness of the workout. This is not a bad thing! Nor is looking for sweat a bad thing to do when trying to tell if you're working hard enough.

The problem comes when people change their workouts inappropriately based on signs of soreness. An effective workout doesn't necessarily lead to soreness.

The effectiveness of a workout depends on what type of workout is imposed on tissue that is at a certain level of conditioning (i.e. resistant to damage).

I personally like to maintain a very slight level of soreness at all times. The kind of soreness that most people might describe as simple stiffness.

The DOMS that is felt the day after, or even not until 2 days after, is most likely a result of an inflammatory response.

Prostaglandins are released in the tissue which hyper-sensitize the nerves. This is not the only reason but most research seems to agree that this is the most likely mechanism.

Microtrauma can occur with or without this type of soreness. At the same time, a certain degree of growth can also occur with or without microtrauma depending on how you define microtrauma. It isn't necessary to have major microtrauma. We only need to disrupt the membranes enough to get satellite cells activated and fusing with existing fibers.

Without this step, the fiber may enlarge slightly, but it cannot grow significantly because of a fixed nuclear to sarcoplasmic ratio. Unless new nuclei are added from satellite cells, the volume of the fiber will not increase beyond rather small increments.

So my point is that although DOMS, microtrauma, and hypertrophy are all related, they are not entirely dependant on one another.

However, a low level of DOMS is a good indicator of what kind of stimulus you created for the tissue and usually indicates that you are in the process of growth if you can maintain an adequate stimulus over time. I like to be a little sore throughout the entire cycle. When my training is too infrequent and/or my increments are too small, the soreness usually goes away and gains "seem" (this is subjective) to be slower. Then again, I have made good gains at times with little or no soreness...

Well, I just cannot go on...need to keep working!

Ciao

 

[BoSox]

the study of hypertrophy is miles down the list of research priorites, as it should be.

 

[imported_dkm1987]

Granted there are other higher priorities but in the grand scheme hypertrophy should and does have a higher ranking than most believe. The fact of the aged living longer but still suffering the frailty onset of decreased muscle mass is one concern that hypertrophy study is examining, another is the muscle wasting diseases including AIDS, lastly with the advent of prolonged spaceflight and it's impact on muscle tissue change the hypertrophy studies will prove invaluable.

To minimalize the research by touting their insignificance is wrong.

 

[Vince Basile]

The plain truth is that hypertrophy is not a subject that has any currency in universities. There is an academic bias against bodybuilding. Thus, funding will go to strength studies because findings will be relevant to sports. There is no relevance for hypertrophy for its own sake. It is the attitudes of academics that need to be shaken. That shake could be done politically and Arnold is in a good position to do just that. However, Arnold is not an academic but a politician. Imagine a German speaking, muscle-headed movie star being elected governor of California! That is a miracle. Arnold will turn against bodybuilding if it suits his tenure. He already did that recently and resigned his position with Flex magazine.

My point is that science could up up with heaps of information about training that might make drugs unnecessary. That is my dream. The whole world thinks you need drugs to get really big. That is hogwash. Science has to change that belief but they need to do research to do this. At the moment there is no reason whatever that they do any such research.

Dan and others can comb through the research and come up with heaps of interesting findings that contribute to our understanding of hypertrophy. I await the complete model of hypertrophy from science. The way science is proceeding I estimate that information will appear in about 50 years, if ever.

It is nice to use scientific studies as the yardstick to measure information. However, if there are few studies on maximum hypertrophy then what? Extrapolation? Estimation? Guesswork?

What I do is search for the method to sustain my muscular growth. Whatever science discovers it had better agree with my findings. Otherwise it will have to explain my results.

There continue to be some who dismiss DOMS. For myself there is no perceptible growth without DOMS. However, I insist that one actually stimulate muscles to grow to generate DOMS. You have to do something that works and not just anything to get DOMS. For me it is 5 or more sets done to failure with a maximum resistance using an effective exercise. If you exclude any of these factors growth will unlikely occur. When you wake up swollen and sore you know you are growing. Is that growth mere swelling? It is inevitable that inflammation occurs as a concomitant to growth. Well, rapid growth, anyway. If you are growing slowly then you won't have the faintest idea what is responsible for that growth.

 

[Aaron_F]

How come vince goes from forum to forum, argues then dissapears when confronted. only to come back 6months later with the same arguement?

 

[Fausto]

I wonder Aaron, I really wonder!

I picked parts of the article I picked up in another site, written up by a french character, with the tidbits in english.

I then downloaded it and am in the process of slowly dissecting it.

I can see it was not a bad idea and that Vince does not take it personally which is good for us all.

It will end up making us better students of the bodybuilding art and the science behind it

Vince - I am going to download your response and manufacture mine with the time I have to spare while at work.
I think we can all learn from each other, even though I think that Vince is rather hopeful about getting a satisfying answer from any of us, however if he hangs around we are all hoping to convert him someday  LOL  

 

[robefc]

Quote[/b] (Vince Basile @ Aug. 04 2005,5:17)]If you are growing slowly then you won't have the faintest idea what is responsible for that growth.

So if I continually grow at a slow and sustainable rate over time whilst working out with hst and maintaining a good diet...I'll be completely clueless as to what is causing it?!

Oh well, ignorance is bliss

 

[Vince Basile]

The reason I leave some forums is because some use personal attacks instead of debating the issues. That has already happened in this forum. The moderators should not tolerate those attacks. When they do the whole place becomes the less for it.

The other reason is that the moderators stop discussions by closing a thread. That is fine but it goes against the essence of the philosophy of science. Science demands that openness be maintained in discussions. It is always possible that current theories might have to be abandoned in the future. Likewise, current unpopular theories might come to be accepted. Progress in science is made by criticism. Without criticism you have a closed enterprise.

Rob, that is a fair point. Of course HST (whatever that is) will be partly responsible for your gains. However, as you advance up the hypertrophy size ladder you will come to plateaus and then you might have to do different things to keep progressing. Or you can do what most do, give up and assert that they need drugs and/or they do not have the genetics.

 

[Aaron_F]

Quote[/b] (Vince Basile @ Aug. 04 2005,11:42)]Without criticism you have a closed enterprise..

the excellent thing about your discussions over the internet are that you have a ton of criticism, and you have a closed enterprise

like this

 

[Fausto]

Quote[/b] ]Or you can do what most do, give up and assert that they need drugs and/or they do not have the genetics.

This was going to be my next point, I think genetics determine where each one ofus is capable of getting to, otherwise you would just grow on and on without cessation, that is obviously not possible.

Many of us on this site are interested in looking the best we can within our genetic capabilities, those who are dwelling into AAS's do so for their own reasoning, but I'd question the motives there.

Vince, you have been a body builder and of note I believe, so why would you want to pursue a body that you naturally can't build? Does not make sense does it, (mind you I not saying you are) this is what many guys are trying to do today, is to enhance their gains with a palaphernalia of pharmacological additions.

I'd say, trying to push genetics...ending up looking like bloated kegs, big oh yes, but form, shape....no siree, more like an overgrown gorilla.

 

[imported_dkm1987]

Quote[/b] (Vince Basile @ Aug. 04 2005,4:42)]The other reason is that the moderators stop discussions by closing a thread.

Vince, this isn't true and you know it. The one thread that was closed here was due to it's length (30+ pages) and allowing it to stay open wouldn't have changed anything that was already presented nor would it present anything new. Not to mention the overwhelming response of the members to close it. Also to be fair there were many of us who initially wished it to remain open which was obliged for a time (until the members got tired of the never-ending story). So before you go blaming your sporadic disapearances on the moderators and the board, at least be honest, especially when saying this to newer HST'rs who weren't here.

 

[Fausto]

Dan & Aaron

Let us not beat good old Vince over the head.

I believe we can all learn from this discussion, this is why I called the great controversy.

No it is not the book by Ellen G. White, it is a different controversy.

Its the hypertrophy-controversy

Hell, I am getting good at this, at this rate I'll end up writing conundrums

 

[BoSox]

once again Vince, nothing new here from you.

the thread was closed because Bryan, as patient as he is, is still too nice to tell you to go to hell, so he closed the threads and prayed that you'd just crawl away.

 

[Heavy Duty dude]

Ok Vince, HST doesn't work, not enough volume.. What about DoggCrap? You say that people don't grow from doggcrap either?

 

[Vince Basile]

Quote[/b] ]Vince, this isn't true and you know it. The one thread that was closed here was due to it's length (30+ pages) and allowing it to stay open wouldn't have changed anything that was already presented nor would it present anything new. Not to mention the overwhelming response of the members to close it. Also to be fair there were many of us who initially wished it to remain open which was obliged for a time (until the members got tired of the never-ending story). So before you go blaming your sporadic disapearances on the moderators and the board, at least be honest, especially when saying this to newer HST'rs who weren't here.

I wonder if you are fair dinkum, Dan, about what you post here? You are precise when dealing with the studies but make personal decisions regarding what others may want to discuss.

Yours is but one opinion on this forum, although, admittedly, a very considered one. I find it rather unfair for moderators to participate and then comment on the contributions of others. You are making a judgement saying that nothing new would eventuate or that nothing would change. The reason the thread was some 30 pages was because there was continued interest from several people. No one is forced to read threads or contribute but the whole idea of a discussion board is to let people debate things. So what if it goes on and on? As long as participants are interested and are sincere that should be all that matters.

If the discussion concerns a new idea then of course there will be many who do not wish to entertain that thought. Thus, consensus is not always an indicator of validity and correctness. Or was there a concern that too many people were reading that thread?

If you as moderators choose to make past bodybuilding champions who are also educated gym owners unwelcome on your forum I really don't know what to say. I realize that Bryan is trying his best to make his enterprise a viable operation. I would have thought that critics are a good test of any method and why couldn't Bryan and others easily counter any arguments against the HST theory?

There are some who post downright insulting things to me. Over and over. They might even be cheered on by their cybermates. However, I would prefer an intellectual response instead of empty insults.

 

[imported_dkm1987]

Still skirting issues there Vince, I only wished to point out that your other statement wasn't factual. I didn't degrade you or anyone else, nor am I here posting a response to what was said other than pointing out to all who where not here at the time, that the real reason that one thread was finally closed was purely on bequest of the members. If anyone doesn't believe me (do a search and find the thread and see for yourself) and if any of you wish to discuss the philosophies of body building with Vince go right ahead, no skin off my back. Some of you may even learn something? Vince all I asked of you was to be honest about your statements and not distort the truth about what was said or done.

I'm done

Dan

 

[BoSox]

for any newbies around, Dan is correct. We had a 30+ page argument with Vince saying the same thing over and over again and everyone else showing him why he was wrong/telling him to shut up.

Looks like he wants to do it again. Go ahead Vince, tell us about maximal hypertrophy in bodybuilders, ignoring drug use, and then preach about your special system of warming up and then doing lots of sets (wow).

 

[Vince Basile]

If Bryan and Dan decide that it is best for their board to close a thread then that is an operational decision we can accept. All I desire is that discussions continue to be open and not limited by moderators and consensus. If no one replies to me then how can the discussion last for 30 pages?

In the long thread referred to I was not debating with myself. Various people enterred that debate and that is what sustained it. I am stating here, Dan and Bryan, that I was diminished by the way that thread was closed and the amount of personal attacks that it contained. If you want to look at the facts then go and dissect that.

That thread was sustained for the very same reason all these discussion boards exist. People continue to have questions because they need information. Then need information because they are confused or they need help in obtaining gains from all that training. Look at the questions on this site. The same old things over and over. Do I complain? No, I don't have to participate in threads I find uninteresting. However, the same courtesy should be shown to everyone who posts with sincerity and there should be no belittlement of individuals. On the other hand I believe we are entitled to refute ideas, opinions and theories we think are false.

Let me ask Dan a personal question. Have you read "Conjectures and Refutations" by Karl Popper? You could read his "Objective Knowledge" for similar information. Those who have studied the philosophy of science wouldn't be arguing against keeping discussions open.

To Bosox and others. There is much to learn about hypertrophy theories and applications. I certainly do not claim to be a know-it-all. I remain a student of hypertrophy and I thought the idea here was to help each other find the truth. I try to help others by relating what I have found by experimenting on my own muscles. If others have different experiences then I would like to hear about them.

If you people do not want others to debate hypertrophy theory then I guess it is totally pointless contributing here.

 

[Joe G]

Quote[/b] ]I await the complete model of hypertrophy from science. The way science is proceeding I estimate that information will appear in about 50 years, if ever.

Quote[/b] ]However, if there are few studies on maximum hypertrophy then what? Extrapolation? Estimation? Guesswork?

So Vince proclaims that he awaits the complete model of hypertrophy from science and that extrapolation estimation and guesswork are uselss. But meanwhile...

Quote[/b] ]When you wake up swollen and sore you know you are growing.

That was really scientific and insightful Vince. I think your right I should wait until im 80 years old to utilize any scientific studies and for now just go on the notion that if I wake up sore I am growing.

Joe G

 

[imported_dkm1987]

Quote[/b] (Vince Basile @ Aug. 04 2005,7:19)]Let me ask Dan a personal question. Have you read "Conjectures and Refutations" by Karl Popper?

No, Vince I haven't.

Now please do not try and drag me into this discussion as I only wished to convey what I had said earlier.

Good luck Vince and I hope all your dreams come true.

Good luck guys and have fun discussing philosophy.

Fausto I didn't bang anyone over the head and neither did Aaron. He only asked a question and I only pointed out the truth.

Now as a moderator, no insulting, keep it civil please.