Quote:
8)You can't build muscle on a sub-maintenance calorie intake diet.
It may be a little harder, and it may require a little bit more know-how and a little bit more conscientious effort, but it can be done. The fact is, the obese state in humans and animals is not universally correlated with absolute levels of caloric intake and neither is the accrual of lean body mass. The ability to realize changes in lean/fat ratios is regulated by components of the automatic nervous system working in concert with several endocrine hormones; this is called nutrient partitioning.
MET-Rx is one such nutrient re-partitioning agent, and several companies are trying to duplicate its successes.
9)You can't grow if you only work each body part once a week.
If you work out -- work out intensely-- then it can take 5-10 days for the muscles to heal.
|
Disagree. #8 is going to make a lot of newbs pull their hair out. "It will be a little harder?" Try a lot harder!.. I agree that you WILL gain..Yup, no question -> At the staggering rate of 4 pounds a year!..But hey, no bodyfat right?!
Met-rx?! Guess we know the origin of the article! Go Wieder!
#9 is actually very true. You CAN grow doing one bodypart per week. Lots of success stories, including my own back when I was doing that (many moons ago). However, I've read that it can take a muscle an ENTIRE MONTH to FULLY heal!! So why the fuck would you wait between 5-10 days? The only indicator he talks about is soreness..Which we all know you can train a muscle while it's sore. Another Wieder principle.
Riding the supercompensation wave (waiting 7-10 days between bodyparts) is a complete guessing game. Additionally, most programs that adhere to this wave advocate training to failure, which studies have shown that stopping a few reps shy of failure and beyond failure have the same effects on muscle hypertrophy..The only difference is that beyond failure drains the CNS whereas leaving a few reps in the tank allows for greater frequency..Which then equates to a longer period of elevated protein synthesis.
Here's a quote from Matt Reynolds and John Smith:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by AnimalMass
The Supercompensation Theory has been, in the bodybuilding community, the most widely accepted school of thought. However, people are beginning to see it as a bit too simplistic (the strength and conditioning and athletic movements have never accepted this practice). The theory itself is based on the fact that training depletes certain substances (like glycogen, and slowing protein synthesis). Training is seen as catabolic, draining the body of its necessary nutrients and fun stuff. So to grow, according to the theory, the body must then be rested for the appropriate/ optimal amount of time, AND, it (the body) must be supplied with all the nutrients it lost. If both of these things are done correctly, then theoretically your body will increase protein synthesis and store more nutrients than it originally had! (i.e. – your muscles will be bigger!)
So obviously the most important part of this theory is TIMING! (Specifically concerning the rest period). But that's where the problem comes in. "If the rest period was too short, then the individual would not be completely recovered and as such the training would deplete the substance even more, which over a period of time would result in overtraining and a loss of performance. If the rest interval were too long then the training would lose its stimulus property, and the individual would recover completely and lose the window of opportunity to provide the stimulus again. If the interval is optimal then improvements surely follow" (AF).
"So, given the one factor theory (Supercompensation), which looks at physical ability as, of course, one factor, you are left with the problem of timing workouts to correspond to the supercompensation wave... anything sooner or later will lead to a useless workout"(JS).
Another issue concerning the Supercompensation/ Single Factor Theory is that of FAILURE. Almost every program that utilizes this type of training advocates the use of muscle/ CNS failure, and then fully rest, and then beat the crap out of your muscles again, then rest, etc (I'm referring to the "work one bodypart per day, six days per week" program as well as HIT, popularized by Mike Mentzer). The issue is that it has now been proven that total failure is not necessarily needed for optimal growth. It has been shown that leaving a rep or two in the tank can and will yield the same results AND therefore a shorter rest period will be needed and less accumulation of fatigue will still be present by the time the next training session rolls around.
|
Quote:
19)Instinctive training is the best way to promote gains.
If bodybuilders followed their instincts, they'd go home and pop open a Beer. Instinctive training is a wonderful catch-phrase, and it might even work for drug-assisted athletes since the very act of opening up a Bud would probably induce muscular growth in them.
|
Paging Dr. Sleeper..I seem to recall the "Use your instincts" thread bashing us for using different "scientific" protocol..If I went by "feel", I'd be pulling my pud in the gym bathroom exercising my favorite muscle.
Quote:
30)Someone with a well-built body must be knowledgeable about fitness and physique development.
Despite popular belief, just because some guy has 20" arms or 32" thighs, that does not automatically credential him as a bodybuilding expert. Unfortunately, in a society where looks count for so much, well-built lifters are often regarded as bodybuilding scientists. The unfortunate fact is, many well-built athletes, even pro bodybuilders, have no idea how they got where they are.
|
"Hey guys, I just squatted 900 lbs in the smith machine and I got a question... Do you guys prefer lifting in the morning or night?"
