A New and Unique Training Method is Here

I cannot really comment on where the strange feeling is coming from in ACIT but as time goes by more and more people are reporting "a very unusual sensation in their muscles when doing ACIT". I am not using this observation as proof that ACIT works better than all esle, but it is clear, IMO, that ACIT is doing something different inside the muscle that conventional heavy training, sprinting, negatvie-only training and superslow do not do. Which of these is better we don't know, but I am fairly certain that ACIT is different from all of this. I reques that people just try a set or two of this style and share their observations with us. It doesn't matter whether you like it or not, just tell what you feel and we'll have a much better base to build our discussion upon.

Now Dan, you said:

"Chronic resistance training should then increase synthesis over longer timeframes causing increased translational capacity which would therefore increase the domain size to a point where transcription becomes maximalized and then satellite cells would have to donate there nuclei to support further translational capacity."

Is this the reason it is so much easier to get back to your former muscle size? I.e. once you push growth to a point where satelite cell donation reaches significant levels, you have more raw material to work with the next time around after a layoff?
If so, this would largely explain how people do just a few cycles of steroids and -even after laying them off for good- they are permanently bigger for pretty much the rest of their lives...

Sub7
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]I thought I had made this clear but perhaps not.

My definition of microtrauma is the distortion of the structural components of the sarcomere. So to me microtrauma = remodeling, not damage per se.

Well, this is what I was confused about - you're calling microtrauma as induced by exercise "remodeling" and not damage. I think I need to reread a few posts because you explained earlier how researchers looking for damage got something confused, but to me, what Bryan was saying and what my understanding was is that exercise causes microstrain/damage to muscle fibers (like, the physical act of exercise is causing this physical strain at the level of the muscle fiber as the exercise is occurring). It is this physical strain that causes various stuff to kick off.

To me, remodeling implies what the body does to muscle fibers as a result of stimulation/strain. You know, if a muscle fiber is a house, and the house gets damaged (microtrauma), me the body will remodel the house in order to make it more structurally sound.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]And to the other half of Danron (Ron), I'm curious of your thoughts on this too. If you do feel microtrauma is a prerequisite for growth (but, like above, feel that it's inducable via a variety of means, even with lighter loads), would you then characterize microtrauma as probably a result of "high work per unit time of a given muscle fiber?"

LOL on Danron ; Enron. Don't tell anyone about my oil fields k? ;)

We know for sure that microtrauma/damage etc. does stimulate nuclear donation from satellite cells, but I know Dan has shown me some studies showing,

1) Very long periods of hypertrophy (I think 6 months) with only increased nuclear domains rather than increased numbers
2) It seems other events can also trigger donation besides tension-damage (Dan explained it best just on the previous page) The long term effect are not known, but we do know that occlusive training produces almost zero 'damage' but still induces an equal amount of hypertrophy. At least for the short term.

But, I myself am led to think 'work per time' is really the key player anyway.
Heavy weights = high work per time during a set
I would be willing to bet that many events during tetany, whether it be with a 3RM or 8RM, lead to most of the hypertrophic signaling.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (mikeynov @ Dec. 30 2005,9:54)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]I thought I had made this clear but perhaps not.
My definition of microtrauma is the distortion of the structural components of the sarcomere. So to me microtrauma = remodeling, not damage per se.
Well, this is what I was confused about - you're calling microtrauma as induced by exercise "remodeling" and not damage.  I think I need to reread a few posts because you explained earlier how researchers looking for damage got something confused, but to me, what Bryan was saying and what my understanding was is that exercise causes microstrain/damage to muscle fibers (like, the physical act of exercise is causing this physical strain at the level of the muscle fiber as the exercise is occurring).  It is this physical strain that causes various stuff to kick off.
To me, remodeling implies what the body does to muscle fibers as a result of stimulation/strain.  You know, if a muscle fiber is a house, and the house gets damaged (microtrauma), me the body will remodel the house in order to make it more structurally sound.
To make it an even playing field, read the studies I just emailed to you.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Sub7 @ Dec. 30 2005,9:52)]Now Dan, you said:
"Chronic resistance training should then increase synthesis over longer timeframes causing increased translational capacity which would therefore increase the domain size to a point where transcription becomes maximalized and then satellite cells would have to donate there nuclei to support further translational capacity."
Is this the reason it is so much easier to get back to your former muscle size? I.e. once you push growth to a point where satelite cell donation reaches significant levels, you have more raw material to work with the next time around after a layoff?
If so, this would largely explain how people do just a few cycles of steroids and -even after laying them off for good- they are permanently bigger for pretty much the rest of their lives...
Sub7
In a round-about way yes. Once satellite cells are activated and proliferated three things happen to them, 1.New fibers are formed (pretty rare in humans depending on who you read)2. Nuclei are donated 3. They return to a quiescent state (return to the satellite pool) awaiting further proliferation stimulus.

In a trained individual the domain during a detraining period might not change all that rapidly therefore the reintroduction of training very well could immediately induce a proliferation and differentiation response. Causing a quicker donation response.
 
The thread is veering off-topic and I am partially responsinble but, now that I found so many good people in one place let me ask this:

It appears that there may be some sort of damage as a result of training depending on the training modality and the trainee's condition. We also know that the growth process involves a state not unlike injury followed by an infalamatory response. In line with this, it is also speculated that NSAIDs often used by athletes with chronic injuries can hurt growth.

However, most of the substances that are advertised as healthy are anti-inflamatory in nature and are consumed in large quantities by athletes (olive oil, flax seed oil, vitamin C, most anti-oxidants....) So can these substances actually impede growth? I am more concerned about realistic doses that we can actually eat, not lab doses that translate to 3 glasses of olive oil a day for a 180 lbs athlete.

Thanks to all

Sub7
 
Okay, so occlusion is pretty much preventing the lactic acid leaking out of your muscles and back into the bloodstream. And more or less ACIT is just another way to alter and optimize how you lift the weights no matter what your training program is.

I finally read the website, so sorry to simplify this thread guys!

Should it be done, and if so, would a set of "oh say" preacher curls done ACIT style have less reps than a normal set each with the same load?

-Colby
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (colby2152 @ Dec. 31 2005,2:43)]Okay, so occlusion is pretty much preventing the lactic acid leaking out of your muscles and back into the bloodstream. And more or less ACIT is just another way to alter and optimize how you lift the weights no matter what your training program is.
I finally read the website, so sorry to simplify this thread guys!
Should it be done, and if so, would a set of "oh say" preacher curls done ACIT style have less reps than a normal set each with the same load?
-Colby
As indicated on the site, one will be forced to reduce the weight while using ACIT. So far, I have not met anyone who could get out as many reps with ACIT as they could in a conventional style. So yes, you would either have to reduce the load, or you would only be able to get fewer reps. The amount of weight reduction appears to be around 25-30% but varies greatly, so one will have to experiment...

Hunkar
 
you won't be able to do it with the same load.
just try it and you'll understand. it's a very weird sensation. after a few reps i'll still feel fresh, but my muscle will start to fail. it's like eventhough you're "supposed to"/think you should be able to lift the weight, your muscle just won't do it.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (colby2152 @ Dec. 31 2005,2:43)]Okay, so occlusion is pretty much preventing the lactic acid leaking out of your muscles and back into the bloodstream. And more or less ACIT is just another way to alter and optimize how you lift the weights no matter what your training program is.
Just to be perfectly clear and paraphrase what you said,
occlusion is pretty much preventing the lactic acid leaking out of your muscles and back into the bloodstream. And more or less ACIT is a way to keep your muscles occluded throughout your entire set.
This gets the muscle to act as if it is under greater load than it actually is, which gets the fibers into full tetany sooner.
That's the purpose of ACIT.
 
Okay, that's what I figured. It sounds like it makes sense and would be a useful optimization tool for once gains started to have diminishing returns. Good job Ron.
 
Give Hunkar the credit :)
He perfected this, I just helped him with some of the muscle pressure/ occlusion stuff
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Dood @ Jan. 01 2006,7:50)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] (colby2152 @ Dec. 31 2005,2:43)]Okay, so occlusion is pretty much preventing the lactic acid leaking out of your muscles and back into the bloodstream.  And more or less ACIT is just another way to alter and optimize how you lift the weights no matter what your training program is.
Just to be perfectly clear and paraphrase what you said,
occlusion is pretty much preventing the lactic acid leaking out of your muscles and back into the bloodstream.  And more or less ACIT is a way to keep your muscles occluded throughout your entire set.
This gets the muscle to act as if it is under greater load than it actually is, which gets the fibers into full tetany sooner.
That's the purpose of ACIT.
I was more swayed that occlusion is about creating a low oxygen environment, which consequently causes lactic acid buildup (amongst many other intracellular effects).
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Jester @ Dec. 31 2005,10:39)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Dood @ Jan. 01 2006,7:50)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] (colby2152 @ Dec. 31 2005,2:43)]Okay, so occlusion is pretty much preventing the lactic acid leaking out of your muscles and back into the bloodstream. And more or less ACIT is just another way to alter and optimize how you lift the weights no matter what your training program is.
Just to be perfectly clear and paraphrase what you said,
occlusion is pretty much preventing the lactic acid leaking out of your muscles and back into the bloodstream. And more or less ACIT is a way to keep your muscles occluded throughout your entire set.
This gets the muscle to act as if it is under greater load than it actually is, which gets the fibers into full tetany sooner.
That's the purpose of ACIT.
I was more swayed that occlusion is about creating a low oxygen environment, which consequently causes lactic acid buildup (amongst many other intracellular effects).
Right, but the end result of the low oxygen environment and lactic acid buildup is the muslce goes into fused tetany earlier in a set. So instead of ony getting fused tetany in the last 3 or so reps of a set, you get fused tetany almost from the beginning reps, using lighter weight.
Here's a quote from Ron that explains it pretty well:

"At low firing frequencies, muscle fibers pulse, there is a definate point of zero tension between the pulses. At higher frequencies, the pulses come closer together so that the fiber is just dropping tension when the next pulse happens bringing it back up. This is 'unfused tetanus'. When rate coding reaches even higher levels, usually above 30-35 hz, 'fused tetanus' occurs, this is when the pulses are coming so fast the fiber never relaxes. This is the point where a fiber can display it's maximum tension. The sum of the pulses is great than the peak of each pulse.

How this happens is with each action potential, calcium is released into the cell causing contraction, but is also being pumped back out, for relaxation. As the pulses increase in speed, calcium is 'incoming' faster than it can be pumped back out 'outgoing'. At fused tetanus, the cell is flooded with calcium since it's being pumped in so much faster than it can possibly be removed....we are seeing that it's the high activity of the fibers (aka tetanic contractions) leading to ATP losses (energetic theory via mTOR) that are a strong stimulus for hypertrophy. "
 
dkm1987 said:
http://www.hypertrophy-specific.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif[/img]5]
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]I thought I had made this clear but perhaps not.
My definition of microtrauma is the distortion of the structural components of the sarcomere. So to me microtrauma = remodeling, not damage per se.

Well, I may need the implications spelled out, because it seems to me the studies you sent implied two things:

1) Early measures of inflammation/damage may have been off target because the procedure to extract/examine muscle tissue may have been the very source of that inflammation/damage.

2) DOMS may not be a result of damage, but rather a sign of actual remodeling.

Not sure how either addresses what I was asking, though
sad.gif


Looking in the eccentrics section of the HST FAQ right now, Bryan emphasizes the role eccentrics play in microtrauma to muscle fibers, critical to the leaking of growth factors to get satellite cells to differentiate and donate their nuclei.

Also, in the past, Bryan has gone on record as saying that eccentrics were the main component of hypertrophy in the trained, and that concentrics alone wouldn't really cause anybody but noobs (with "fresher" muscle tissue) to grow significantly.

Altogether, it seems to me that the classic model HST has presented is this:

The rate limiting step in hypertrophy over any lengthy (years) period of time is the activation of satellite cells and donation of their nuclei to upregulate the size potential of individual muscle fibers.

The key to this process is to cause mechanical strain to muscle fibers, largely facilitated by eccentric action in the trained, which makes the above actually occur.

Muscle tissue responds, then, by increasing in (potential) size and increasing in resistance to mechanical strain. So, over time, you have to have a higher threshold stimulus to keep inducing that strain, which implies greater mechanical loads being lifted/lowered.

Now, that's the classic model we've been dealt around here.

Just reiterating this all to make sure we're on the same page.

As per the model above, saying "microtrauma" = remodeling makes no sense to me, even with the studies you sent me. Microtraum, as far as I know, is literally damage of muscle fibers as induced by exercise, most notably eccentric action. Remodeling results from that microtrauma/damage.

DOMS, then, may simply be an indicator of remodeling, then, and not damage. And while earlier studies relating DOMS to damage/inflammation may be off base due to methodological errors, I'm not sure how that changes any of the above.
 
P.S. Just reiterating my understanding up until considering new stuff/research like the Kaatsu/occlusion studies.

P.P.S. Has Bryan ever discussed the implications of the occlusion research?
 
1.)
It appears to me that in "Evidence for myofibril remodeling as opposed to myofibril damage in human muscles with DOMS: an ultrastructural and immunoelectron microscopic study" Yu's conclusion is that the ultrastructural myofibrillar alterations
that occur after unaccustomed eccentric exercise, when looking at the protein composition of the alterations, as estimated by immunohistochemistry and immunoelectron microscopy, he proposes that the alterations reflect myofibril remodeling rather than myofibril damage.

2.)Also, since he didn't study to see if remodeling occurs without DOMS this can't quite be assumed yet.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (NWlifter @ Dec. 31 2005,10:15)]Give Hunkar the credit :)
He perfected this, I just helped him with some of the muscle pressure/ occlusion stuff
blush.gif
Captain (nickname for Ron), me = (Blush)^2006
blush.gif


Needless to say, Ron's contributions have been tremendous. I probably spent a great deal more time playing around with different ways of trying to replicate occlusion, but without Ron's scientific input, it would have been more similar to a caveman trying to make fire; sure you can make one by accident but chances are very slim indeed. Actually, let me share with you the background of ACIT in a historic post (insert drums and fireworks here, a few ladies in bikinis won't hurt either).

ACIT: A MAD JOURNEY IN THE ACIDIC OCEAN...

I have been training for almost exactly 15 years now and, since very early on, I felt that I got better results when I "went for the burn". This took on many different forms over the years, ranging from forced reps to drop sets to ending sets with static holds. Then over 3 years ago, I had a phone consultation with Dr. Doug McGuff (http://www.ultimate-exercise.com/) and he mentioned the occlusion studies to me for the first time. He mentioned that these techniques I was employing were perhaps creating an acidic environment inside the muscle, and that was probably one of the reasons they were working for me. He suggested that I read the Kaatsu studies, which I promptly reviewed.

The next year was spent trying to replicate occlusion by a variety of crazy techniques. The first idea was to raise the limb above the head so blood would not flow there so effectively. I tried stuff like doing cable biceps curls as high above my head as possible and other bizarre stuff but got nowhere. Keep in mind that there is no way I can accurately -and without external assistance- measure blood pressure while doing all this, so I am relying on the burn as a guide. Then it occurred to me that the exact opposite, i.e. lowering the limb as much as possible, creates a better burn. So I went from doing overhead curls to concentration curls, which did give a little better burn. Next step was combining the lowering of the limb with pressure around the major arteries by contorting yourself. In concentration curls for example, imagine curling with your right biceps but turning your upper body towards the right arm so that your right biceps is pressed against your right chest. Another way of doing this is resting your right elbow not on the inside of your right thigh as you normally would but on the outside of your left thigh. This produces an even better burn by making blood flow less efficient.

Now this was all burning a bit better than regular reps, but having also done sprints, I knew that no form of weight training was burning my legs the way uphill sprints were. So, I had a looong way to go to achieve the same kind of acidity. After another 3 months of experimenting, I realized that there was only one way of getting the same kind of burn that I was getting from the very fast, non-stop contractions produced by sprinting: the same kinds of very fast, non-stop contractions...
So I settled on what I described to Ron as "quick reps": I would do one set of 8-10 reps on the leg presses in conventional manner, then I would strip enough weight to be able to do another 10 reps and then I would reduce the weight again to do another 10 reps. Then I would jump of the machine and do the middle 10-15 inches of squats with just my own bodyweight as quickly as I possibly could. I mean really really fast... Also, I am keeping the quads under constant tension here. I would continue doing this until I would collapse to the floor. The burn this produces is out of this world and must be experienced to be believed. ACIT does NOT produce this kind of burning sensation, nothing comes even close (including ACIT). BTW, the reason I was first doing a regular set is that when moving fast you cannot hanle a lot of weight even if you are fresh. SO I did not want to completely give up the ability to use heavy weights...

One interesting aspect here is that you can literally feel some kind of "fire" being trapped inside your muscles and burning your muscles. Then when you stop moving, you can feel this fire traveling through your veins. If anyone had a surgery and was given an IV anesthesia, you know what it feels like to feel something going through your own veins. Outright spooky and proof that intense contractions really do occlude the muscle as it is only when you stop contracting that the "fire" starts traveling through your veins. Also, this suggests that even relatively light loads may be enough to occlude the muscles, as long as the load used is close to the maximum that can be handled at that fatigue level. Bodyweight squats are not heavy for a guy like me (I weigh around 172 pounds). But by the time I move to bodyweight squats, my legs are so tired that I can only squat my own weight, so I am trying as hard as possible.

After doing this for a while, two reasons made me add an additional quirk. First, I started thinking: "I am increasing acidity inside the muscle, but I am placing very light loads on the muscle while it is exposed to acidity. Do I not have to force a high load on it to take advantage of the acidic environment that I am creating?" Also, work commitments were getting pretty time-consuming. Plus, I knew from earlier experience that I could train each muscle very infrequently and still force growth. In earlier experiments, I had worked each muscle as little as once every 3 weeks and still gained size (provided that the workouts were brutal). So I thought: "OK, my sets are already very long and they are killing me but to make sure I take maximum advantage of the acidic milieu that I am creating, I can afford to extend them a bit more and reduce the training frequency to once / 3 weeks per muscle as I used to do before".

So in the end, here is what my leg training looked like. Set 1: Leg press 8-10 reps to failure, drop weight to do 10 more reps to failure, followed by "quick reps" using bodyweight squats until the legs absolutely gave up. Set 2: Exact same thing as set 1, immediately followed by 10 regular reps on the leg press with 10 second rest between each rep. Why 10 second rest between each rep? Due to the very scientific reason that otherwise I could not do any leg presses, I was just spent. Those two sets were all the quad training (I also trained claves) I did, but it was disgusting. I was barely able to move for the next 24 hours. The equivalent was done for other muscle groups. I would the same thing for biceps with barbell curls and finish with very quick reps by using 5 lbs dumbbells but moving them very fast throughout the middle ROM of the curling motion. Then I would do 10 reps, rest pause style again, with barbell curls...

Doing this for every muscle group once every 3 weeks, I grew muscle. I am absolutely certain of that as this is around the time I had the hydrostatic bodyfat analysis done. So, next time someone tells me they are doing HIT and training only once a week (which is what I did since I had divided the body into 3 workouts and was training once every week, i.e. each muscle once every 3 weeks) I don't question the validity of their training. However, I do not think that this is the optimal way to train...

At that point I started talking to Ron and little by little I started to experiment with other ways of achieving the same effect. The goal was to find a more humane and less brutal method. At first, I tried tying a band around the arms and legs, but very soon, I realized that this was a bad idea. It is impossible to apply the right amount of pressure and the skin gets very uncomfortably hot. Besides, you cannot do this to deltoids, chest or back muscles anyway. In legs, it is possible in theory but almost impossible for me in practice. The shape and size of the quads changes during movements such as squats and leg presses and the band either comes off or breaks or slips as you are descending. In any event, I soon tossed the idea and started to experiment with the much simpler but healthier and more effective method of jus contracting the muscles and limiting ROM during exercises. After another lengthy period of experimentation with that, the result is ACIT.

Thank you very much for reading and once again, a million thanks to Captain Ron for his help during this crazy journey...

Hunkar
 
Back
Top