| | |
10-13-2006, 12:23 AM
| #3 (permalink) |
| Rank: New Member Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 24
|  Hi, Thanks a lot, Eric. I 've heard that the mucle fibers finish and fat occupies the space & therefore size remains the same. Is it True. Also after starting training again, do the neural adaptations recover first or the muscle grows in size. Arthur |
|  |
|
10-13-2006, 06:26 AM
| #4 (permalink) |
| Moderator Rank: Heavyweight Experience: 7-10 Years  Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 5,835
Country: 
Gender:  |  It's not as simple as all that reallly. My post was just to provide a simple explanation. I'm not sure what you mean be muscle occupying the spaces but one adaptations doesn't really take place exclusively of the other and it also depends on intensity. None of this really matters too much in terms of what we need to know in the gym. I don't think it's possible to put exact numbers on this but it's something like 1-2 months: mostly neural adaptations and then after that a mixture of muscle growth and nerural adaptations. At some point adaptations will be most all musclular. This could be off and it is not to be taken as some kind exact rule. Just from personal experience I can tell you that I have lost plenty of strength with little or no loss in muscle mass in the past. I always have a pretty low bf% and I can assure you that fat did not fill in anything  unless you count my lower belly. Also I would point out that what a lot of people mistake for flab is actually muslce that has lost it's "tone" with maybe some overlying subcutaneous fat. This loss of "tone" goes hand in hand with that loss of neural gains that I spoke of. But who loses muscle and who doesn't in any particular time frame depends on the person. Also the type of hypertrophy predominating I supposed could play a role. If you're intersested in this type of thing I think there is some extra reading I could track down later. |
| | |
|
| |
|
10-15-2006, 11:49 AM
| #6 (permalink) |
| Moderator Rank: Heavyweight Experience: 7-10 Years Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 5,835
Country:
Gender: | Of course it's not troubling me! There some stuff somewhere so let me track it down and get back to you. When I say this stuff is not necessary to what we need to know in the gym that doesn't mean I think it's a waste to be interested in it. It's just that people learn about this stuff and they fall into that trap of trying to "adapt" their training in order to exploit some physiological detail many times that just leads to overanalyses. It's like trying to analyse how you breath. There are certain simple rules and certain things that work but to me the more you try to exploit the details the less effective your training becomes. |
| | |
|
| |
|
10-15-2006, 12:04 PM
| #7 (permalink) |
| Moderator Rank: Heavyweight Experience: 7-10 Years Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 5,835
Country:
Gender: | There was a article I had on the specific subject above but I still can't find it. I thought I saved it but maybe not. I'll keep looking. Here is some more reading on these pages: http://www.rohan.sdsu.edu/dept/coachsci/csa/vol81/table.htm http://www.hypertrophy-research.com Did find a paper I had which was a good overview but was mostly focused on aging and strength. It did confirm what I was saying about initial strength losses being neural. I.E. a decline in maximum neural activity during the firts 2 to 4 weeks of "detraining". That doesn't mean there won't necessarily be muscle loss but that most of the loss of strength is neural in nature during that time. Of course I'm talking about detraining and not immobilization such as getting your arm in a cast. That will cause very rapid atrophy. Last edited by EricT; 10-15-2006 at 12:40 PM. |
| | |
|
| |
Linear Mode
