Strength Loss/Fatigue

[RAMROD]

<div>
(Old and Grey @ Dec. 02 2007,11:55)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Ram, my T hit a low of 70 ng/dl when I was about 59. My endochronologist recommended Androgel and I have never looked back. I run about 800 ng/dl now. With my previous levels, there was absolutely nothing I could do significantly increase lean body mass. I have not tried the injection route and probably won't since the gel works fine for me and, I have been told, provides a steadier T reading whereas shots once every week or two provide ups and downs. However, if you don't have good drug insurance coverage, it is expensive. Do not go with generics on this product.</div>
thanks.. glad the andro is working as it should. i have decent drug insurance coverage, so i think ill get my t-levels checked and give it a go.

 

[faz]

DAN
whats happened to the hypertrophy-research forum

 

[dkm1987]

<div>
(omega99 @ Dec. 02 2007,11:30)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE"><div>
(Dan Moore @ Dec. 01 2007,18:24)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">RESULTS:: The stacked training regimen resulted in acute suppression of insulin-like growth factor 1 mRNA abundance (P &lt; 0.05) and Akt phosphorylation (P &lt; 0.05), an effect that persisted 48 h after the final training bout. Conversely, stacked training elicited a coordinated increase in the expression of tumor necrosis factor alpha, inhibitor kappa B kinase alpha/beta activity (P &lt; 0.05), and p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase phosphorylation (P &lt; 0.05) at 3 h after each training bout. In addition, the stacked series of resistance exercise bouts induced an increase in p70 S6 kinase phosphorylation 3 h after bouts x3 and x4, independent of the phosphorylation state of Akt. CONCLUSIONS:: Our results indicate that high resistance training frequency extends the transient activation of inflammatory signaling cascades, concomitant with persistent suppression of key mediators of anabolic responses.</div>
Dan, could you provide your interpretation of this?  My Bio degree is not holding up well  </div>
Too high of a frequency isn't good.

It's these types of &quot;out of the box&quot; studies that will give better insight to what occurs under varying circumstances.

In this case they took 6 groups of rats
The first four groups were killed 3 hours after their last bout
Group 1 did a single session in a day (X1)
Group 2 did two sessions in a day (X2)
Group 3 did three sessions (X3)
Group 4 did four sessions (X4)
Group 5 did four sessions but killed 24 hours after the last bout
Group 6 did four sessions but killed 48 hours after last bout

All did 3 sets of 10 for each session

In a nutshell many markers of the anabolic process were attenuated and many markers of the catabolic process were enhanced with the higher frequency workouts and most of the signalling changes persisted for some time.

A while back Haddad and Adams did something similar, in which they looked at the molecular signalling of key molecules in the hypertrophy chain when 2 training bouts were seperated by 8, 24, 48 hours (search for my posts on summation if interested). What they showed was the 48 hours of recovery between bouts gave the largest positive changes.

 

[dkm1987]

<div>
(RAMROD @ Dec. 02 2007,03:36)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Dan...do you still feel a metabolic BURN set should be done for optimum hypertrophy?</div>
If speaking purely growth, I don't believe so.

 

[omega99]

<div>
(Dan Moore @ Dec. 03 2007,07:22)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">A while back Haddad and Adams did something similar, in which they looked at the molecular signalling of key molecules in the hypertrophy chain when 2 training bouts were seperated by 8, 24, 48 hours (search for my posts on summation if interested). What they showed was the 48 hours of recovery between bouts gave the largest positive changes.</div>
Obviously, the next question is have any studies looked at 48 hours vs. 72 hours or longer?  Since one of the principles of HST is higher relative frequency, it would be good to know any science behind it.  I know this have been discussed/debated in the past so I'll search the archives as well.   And thanks, Dan, for the data interpretation.