Bodybuilding.net - Bodybuilding Forum - View Single Post

Iron · 03-21-2007, 12:41 PM

Ah, Eric3237, my arch-nemesis! So.. we meet again! Bwa-ha-ha! or something like that..

First the science thing..

There's only two ways to give an answer. 1. Objective scientific studies, or 2. Subjective anecdotal opionions.

With the studies you can show what actually unquestioningly happened as X when Z was done.

With opionions you have what?? Just that; someones opinion. What's that worth?

Joe says when he did workout A he gained a lot of muscle. Jack says workout B is the bomb. John swears by workout C. To me that's worthless. That's why you have all these different opinions and no consensus. Invariably and inevitably the last guy in the thread who doesn't want to fight says something like, "We're all different I guess." and of course this favorite of mine, "You have to find what works for you." So basically you have no answer. Then soon enough the question comes up again and we go back around the same pointless circle.

Science attempts to say, look, let's recreate the scenario and we'll all watch and see what happens. Why is that useless?? And if it's of little value as you purport than why is your opinion or anyone elses of any better value?? Why are we to believe an opinion and push the studies to the side?

I really think it's because people don't want to change their way of thinking and admit they've been wrong for all these years and that their own reasoning is flawed.

Yeah studies can be contradictory but they're never worthless.With every study you acknowledge the new info and incorporate it in your thinking. It may or may not change conventional thinking but on the other hand all legitimate studies are to be respected as at least part of the puzzle leading to a new truth. That's how scientific progress is made.

A study doesn't have to duplicate exactly your particular scenario to have value. When we first tried pennicillin on rats it cured them. From that we have a pretty good idea that it will work in humans. If a particular workout works on a particular group there's a reasonable assumption that it may work on other humans.

If a study doesn't recreate what you want exactly or doesn't tell us what we want to hear or seems contradictory to conventional thinking the first thing you hear over and over is, "Science can't explain everything or all those studies are different, you can't trust them." That gives the user an excuse to think well if one's wrong then they're all wrong and ignore them all. That's being lazy. The correct way is to acknowledge the new info and incorporate it in your thinking. It may not be the whole answer but it is part of the voyage to finding the whole truth.

I assure you that every step of medical progress came from studies put together and built on. All medications were created that way. All medical procedures also. Believe me the first guy who operated on the brain was relying on what studies showed him would happened and not on anyone's opinion of what they though would happen when they first sliced into a brain.

What I don't understand with your way of thinking is that you assume they're worthless. Or at least of less value than your opinion.
Instead of discounting every study why not say, "Let's see how this new info fits into our thinking???

Now that I've got you straightened out on that.. ;)
Back to the question.--

Why do a full body workout and rest longer than 48 hours? Might as well split it. You do full body so you can hit each body part every 48 hours.

What I meant about the intensity thing is that it may be difficult to to full intensity full body workouts 3X week. If that's the case then some generic way of cycling your intensity may be neccesary. Something maybe like on Monday do chest hard and legs lite then reverse it. You can work up towards more intensity in more workouts as you go as a way to progress.

Intensity is not an absolute necessity to strength gains although it can play a role BTW.

Your muscles are ready to be worked every 48 hours regardless of the intensity(according to studies of trained individuals-you assumed wrongly this study used un-trained ones). If you feel like you can't then the limiting factor is an over-worked CNS, not the muscles. They rebound quickly. Even being sore doesn't mean the muscle's are not ready to be reworked.

This quote from the HST websight says it best:

The downside of taking a week of rest every time you load a muscle is that many of the acute responses to training like increased protein synthesis, prostaglandins, IGF-1 levels, and mRNA levels all return to normal in about 36 hours. So, you spend 2 days growing and half a week in a semi-anticatabolic state returning to normal (some people call this recovery), when research shows us that recovery can take place unabated even if a the muscle is loaded again in 48 hours. So true anabolism from loading only lasts 2 days at best once the load is removed. The rest of the time you are simply balancing nitrogen retention without adding to it.