Remaining Mysteries (questions I Can't Find Answers To)

NWlifter

NWlifter

Active Member
Thought I'd just pop these in here, I know this forum is super slow now a days but there really is no where else to do this online any more.


When protein synthesis is higher with one protocol over another, just for example a study showing 3sets has higher PS than 1 set, is it...

A) (Is PS variable per fiber) All fibers stimulated variably, so it's higher in all fibers with 3 sets. Such as, 1 set stimulates all fibers somewhat, and 3 sets stimulate all fibers to a higher level.
or
B) (is PS digital per fiber) 3 sets are higher because just 'more' fibers switched PS on. Such as, 1 set kicked PS on for some fibers and 3 sets kicked it on for more fibers.
or
C) Both of those (PS rate can vary per fiber individually, so some more than others, etc. due to recruitment and activation alterations during a set)
 
Last edited:
Hmmm sounds like C), but I don't know for sure. And I'm sure systemic effects would be in play... but I do wonder if it is only select fibers that grow, or because they're all intertwined to a degree that one single fiber growing affects the surrounding ones...

It is worth putting out there anyway and someone will eventually see it!

Maybe if I cough loud enough... *cough cough @Bryan Haycock @Dan Moore cough cough *
 
Last edited:
yeah I always wondered....
I know some fibers can grow while others are not. But I wonder if increases in protein synthesis like they measure in studies is from all fibers having higher, or that it's just more fibers are 'doing it'. ...
Basically, is protein synthesis in a fiber variable or an on off kinda thing...
 
B makes the most sense to me. I can’t necessarily support that through study reference, but A doesn’t quite resonate with what we observe in application.
 
NWlifter said:
Thought I'd just pop these in here, I know this forum is super slow now a days but there really is no where else to do this online any more.


When protein synthesis is higher with one protocol over another, just for example a study showing 3sets has higher PS than 1 set, is it...

A) (Is PS variable per fiber) All fibers stimulated variably, so it's higher in all fibers with 3 sets. Such as, 1 set stimulates all fibers somewhat, and 3 sets stimulate all fibers to a higher level.
or
B) (is PS digital per fiber) 3 sets are higher because just 'more' fibers switched PS on. Such as, 1 set kicked PS on for some fibers and 3 sets kicked it on for more fibers.
or
C) Both of those (PS rate can vary per fiber individually, so some more than others, etc. due to recruitment and activation alterations during a set)
Click to expand...

First, forgive me if you already know some or much of what I am going to say. :)

Remember that protein synthesis is dependent upon more than just the mechanical stimulus from a training bout. The state of any one fiber is primarily dependent upon the availability of amino acids, the sensitivity state of each cell to mechanical stress (integrins, ion channels, and other mechanosensors), paracrine signaling (i.e. growth signals released from one cell and received by another adjoining cell), and a host of other genetic and signaling factors that are not stable, or in other words, that change according to acute changes in the environment of the cell.

Muscle growth is an analog process, it isn't either on or off, it is on, off, and everywhere in between at any given moment. What we see in the mirror and on the scale is the net result of hundreds of different mechanochemical reactions taking place in a watery cell as well as metabolic factors related to diet, sleep, age, and endocrine function.

I guess what I'm saying is it is definitely variable, and not digital. Not only that, but each of these fibers are connected both end-to-end, but also side-by-side to each other, so even if one fiber is actively contracting (shortening or lengthening) it can't do so without disturbing the fibers connected to it whether they are "actively" contraction or not. You can't stretch or shorten any one fiber without mechanically stimulating the fibers next to it. That's why "activation" of individual fibers or fiber bundles does not account for 100% of the stimulus created in muscle as a whole.

Hope that helps and I hope all of you who visit here are well. I know it has been a while since I have had time to get on here, but I think about the board and you frequent visitors often.
 
Bryan Haycock said:
First, forgive me if you already know some or much of what I am going to say. :)

Remember that protein synthesis is dependent upon more than just the mechanical stimulus from a training bout. The state of any one fiber is primarily dependent upon the availability of amino acids, the sensitivity state of each cell to mechanical stress (integrins, ion channels, and other mechanosensors), paracrine signaling (i.e. growth signals released from one cell and received by another adjoining cell), and a host of other genetic and signaling factors that are not stable, or in other words, that change according to acute changes in the environment of the cell.

Muscle growth is an analog process, it isn't either on or off, it is on, off, and everywhere in between at any given moment. What we see in the mirror and on the scale is the net result of hundreds of different mechanochemical reactions taking place in a watery cell as well as metabolic factors related to diet, sleep, age, and endocrine function.

I guess what I'm saying is it is definitely variable, and not digital. Not only that, but each of these fibers are connected both end-to-end, but also side-by-side to each other, so even if one fiber is actively contracting (shortening or lengthening) it can't do so without disturbing the fibers connected to it whether they are "actively" contraction or not. You can't stretch or shorten any one fiber without mechanically stimulating the fibers next to it. That's why "activation" of individual fibers or fiber bundles does not account for 100% of the stimulus created in muscle as a whole.

Hope that helps and I hope all of you who visit here are well. I know it has been a while since I have had time to get on here, but I think about the board and you frequent visitors often.
Click to expand...

Hey Bryan! Very cool to see you post here again, I didn't know if anyone checked this forum any more.
thanks for the great information. That is good to know, I knew PS overall was variable but wasn't sure if it was also variable 'per fiber', but it makes sense as almost everything in the body is analog.
And for sure, PS itself is like a wave, might be up from 2pm to 3:13 PM, then flat, then into PD from 4:02pm - 5:15PM etc. Years ago I started but never really finished an article about the homeostasis model of muscle growth, as that's how it really is. The change in muscle size over some time period, is really a sum of all the various levels of hypertrophy and atrophy over that time period.
I've seen it with myself with training frequency and volume. Like 1 set 3x a week I grow, 1 set 2x a week I grow a little, 1 set once a week and I slowly lose size, so the effects of PD are apparent since the stimulus and post workout PS would be the same, yet PD eats up all the PS increases if it's too long before the next stimulus.
It's really interesting about adjoining fibers receiving stimulus from others working harder and such. I also really find it interesting that even though mechanical tension is the primary stimulus, there are so many co-factors that it needs. Such as how they found cold water / cryo after a workout reduces or blunts PS. Even though the tension factors were met, there is something with inflammation that assists with the PS rises.

My biggest thing now a days is considering things more in the 'stress-tension' category than just tension itself. (since cells adapt to protect from specific stressors, just doing what they are made to do, with no stress, doesn't trigger a need for any 'imnprovements' so to speak).

Hope to see you post more often, especially if you;'ve had any new ideas over all these years since this forum was booming.
Cheers!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top