Body By Science

M

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!
 
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.
 
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.
 
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?
 
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!
 
Maelstrom said:
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.
Click to expand...

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
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
Maelstrom said:
Ok. I should have thrown a few more details in to the mix. I'm not planning on doing it during my cut.

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

Didn't expect to cause a drama!
Click to expand...

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.
 
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?
 
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.
 
I have the BBS book, personally know Dr McGuff and knew Mentzer, had business dealings with him. I also ran a Nautilus club in the 80s. Point is, I know a whole lot about BBS and HIT :)

Some things to point out about the book, the follow on Q&A manual, McGuff's youtube lectures, etc:
1. BBS workouts are usually on machines, zero rest between exercises, 3 to 8 exercises of most all compounds
2. each set is taken to complete failure and beyond sometimes (static holds, drop sets, etc), tension time of 60 to 90 seconds
3. If you are not lying on the carpet after your last exercise, you did not work out hard enough (a la Tabata)
4. Since intensity is pegged at 100% every workout, volume and frequency are both minimal
5. The crowd BBS is geared to are middle age and older adults that are not athletes as well as people who actually tried traditional routines and got no results
6. If you have the genetics, you can and should do higher volume and frequency if your goal is to maximize results
7. BBS is a whole lot better than being sedentary.
8. The number 1 reason people do not stick with an exercise program is time commitment. Like the Tabata protocol for HIIT, BBS tries to give a person max benefit for min time

Given my day job in the software industry, I only train family and friends. If a person is starting from zero, or an athlete in season (ie grossly overtrained already) I will have them do a BBS workout for 6 months or so. Novice effect means they will gain on any reasonable routine. Compliance is key. Once they see some results, and get the bug, I put them on HST to maximize their results.

HTH
Dean
 
Amen to that O&G.

If one is trying to optimize results, the HST principles get us there. For others who want to minimize time and get max bang for their buck, HIT type routines do a great job. They are far from optimum, but they are way better than the person not exercising at all. That is the main point I want people to take away. If you have been hounding your mom / best friend / Uncle Edgar who just got diagnosed with Type 2 Diabetes to PLEASE DO SOMETHING, BBS is a great program to put them on.

It is absolutely not an ideal routine for strength athletes. There is a whole chapter on this topic in the follow up Q&A manual.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top