View Single Post
 
Old 03-19-2006, 12:58 PM
EricT EricT is offline
Rank: Heavyweight
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 6,314
Default

What I don't understand, Anuj, is that you continually talk about becoming bored but you've mentioned on more than one occasion that you want or like more volume. What can be more boring than doing endless sets on one muscle group? It may not be more boring, but it certainly isn't less.

It's all about results, whether short term or long term. Now, since you spoke of whether people focus only on strength as opposed to switching between hypertrophy and strength, I'm gonna post an article. Not to confuse the issue, but to make it clear that the hypertrophy is NOT ALL CREATED EQUAL. Once you know that, and your know that the WAY YOU TRAIN, impacts the type of hypertrophic gains you get, it may impact the decisions you make in choosing training methods.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Siff
Fallacy: All muscle hypertrophy is essentially the same

The impressively large and muscular physiques of bodybuilders, weightlifters, powerlifters and gymnasts may tend to create the impression that their shape is due to the same sort of muscle hypertrophy. Research by Russian scientists (Nikituk & Samoilov), however, has shown that there are at least two different types of muscle hypertrophy: sarcomere hypertrophy and sarcoplasmic hypertrophy, the first one associated with growth of the contractile components of the muscle fibers (the actin and myosin complex) and the latter with growth of the structures supporting and surrounding the contractile elements (the sarcoplasmic reticulum and sarcoplasm).

Sarcomere hypertrophy, maximally stimulated by Olympic weightlifting style training, results in significant increases in strength, unlike the sarcoplasmic variety, which is markedly increased by bodybuilding style training. The former, therefore, is of greater relevance to the weightlifter or any other athlete who needs functional hypertrophy for improving sporting performance, with the latter form offering minimal sporting benefits, unless sheer bulk is needed for superiority, as is often the case in bodybuilding posing and sumo wrestling. Obviously, then, one would be wary of relying largely on bodybuilding methods as a form of supplementary training for other sports.

Fallacy: Muscle hyperplasia does not occur
Muscle growth may occur as the result of two possible processes: hypertrophy (increase in size of fibers) or hyperplasia (increase in number of fibers). In the case of muscle fibers, the occurrence of hypertrophy in response to strength training is a well-established fact, but there is a considerable debate concerning muscle hyperplasia.

Gonyea has presented evidence of hyperplasia in cats subjected to heavy resistance training, but other researchers have criticised this work, pointing out there may be fiber splitting, but not proliferation of new fibers. Certain Russian research also suggests that increase in muscle mass occurs not only through hypertrophy of muscle fibers, but as a result of an increase in fiber number by means of the splitting of hypertrophied muscle fibers and the development of muscle fibers from muscle “buds” and satellite cells. In addition, it has been suggested that muscle hyperplasia may occur with extremely intense resistance training, but current evidence from human subjects is inconclusive.

According to Antonio, two basic mechanisms may contribute to new muscle fiber formation, namely muscle fiber splitting (minor component) and satellite cell proliferation (major component).

He points out that there is plenty of direct evidence in animal models (rats lifting weights, cats lifting weights, birds wings being stretched by hanging weights) for muscle hyperplasia and indirect evidence (in bodybuilders and other strength athletes) based upon observations that these athletes have much larger overall muscle mass but little or no difference in muscle fiber size. Antonio suspects that muscle fiber hyperplasia might play a major role in humans only in the most muscular athletes (elite bodybuilders, powerlifters, etc.). For the average fitness type, he considers that it probably is not a significant factor in overall skeletal muscle enlargement.

Although the existence of hyperplasia of muscle fiber is uncertain, hyperplasia of structures within the muscle fiber and cell does occur. Nikituk and Samoilov identify two types of subfibral hyperplasia:

- Sarcoplasmic hyperplasia, which involves an increase in the number of sarcoplasmic organelles

- Myofibrillar-mitochondrial hyperplasia, which involves increase in the number of myofibrils and mitochondria.

Increase in muscle diameter is due to enlargement of individual muscle fibers by an increase in the number and size of individual myofibrils (Goldspink), accompanied by an increase in the amount of connective tissue (McDonagh & Davies). Moreover, sarcomere hypertrophy is associated with an increase in the size and number of the sarcomeres which comprise the myofibrils. These are added either in parallel or in series with the existing myofibrils, although only parallel growth contributes significantly to an increased ability to increase muscle tension. Dr. Mel C. Siff, Facts and Fallacies of Fitness, Denver, CO, 2000, pg. 25-26.
For a simple definition, hypertrophy means that things are growing larger, and hyperplasia means that the number of things are increasing. However, the word hypertrophy is generally used for processes that involve both at once.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
or
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


If you act sanctimonious I will just list out your logical fallacies until you get pissed off and spew blasphemous remarks.
Reply With Quote