Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

[Guest guest]

>

> Hello Everyone,

>

> I recently posted a question about rate of hypertrophy – basically, what are

> the optimal realistic results a person can expect, vs. the endless claims in

> the muscle mags, e.g., " Gain 20-30 pounds of lean muscle mass in six

> weeks!!! " I compared the responses with some other data, and I thought I

> would share it with the group.

>

> *Joe Joleti responded:*

>

> *According to The Colgan **Institute** of **Nutritional Sciences** the human

>

> body can only gain about 1oz of muscle per day or .437493lbs a week

> (almost ½ lb). Furthermore the most muscle mass gained by anyone in a

> year under experiment at the institution was 18.25lbs***

>

> My understanding is that muscle is mostly water (75% to 80%) and protein

> with a small amount of minerals (20% to 25%). When Joe says " 1 oz of muscle

> per day, " I take that to mean total muscle (water and dry tissue). As a

> monthly gain, that suggests that the body can only gain about 1.75 lbs per

> month with the largest actually observed gain totaling 1.52 lbs/month (or

> 18.25 lbs in one year).

>

> * Carruthers responded:*

>

> *Unless you are taking drugs or are a novice 1-2 lbs of muscle (dry

> muscle weight) per month is a realistic gain on average.*

>

> 1 to 2 lbs / month dry muscle weight would be somewhere between 5 and 10

> pounds / month total muscle weight, if dry weight comprises 20% of total

> muscle weight.

>

> *From **Consolazio GF, et al.* Protein metabolism during intensive physical

> training in the young adult. Am J Clin Nutr 1975; 28:29-35 (

> http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/maki1.htm)

>

> *Another study conducted at the Letterman Army Institute of Research in San

> Francisco showed that subjects on a higher protein intake (2.8 g/kg/day),

> coupled with intense strength training, gained a whopping 3.28 kg (7.2 lbs)

> of lean mass. The study was done over a 40-day period and the subjects were

> trained to near exhaustion (2).*

>

> If it makes sense to assume that the increase of 7.2 lbs of " lean mass " is

> essentially an increase in " lean *muscle* mass " (vs. bone and other), then

> we see an increase of (7.2/40 = .18 lbs/day or 5.4 lbs per month).

>

> *From Dragan GI, Vasiliu A, scu E. *Effects of increased supply of

> protein on elite weightlifters. In: Galesloot TE, Tinbergen BJ, eds. Milk

> Proteins. Pudoc, Wageningen, The Netherlands 1985:99-103 (

> http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/maki1.htm)

>

> *Another study of weightlifters over a 3 month period, with the protein

> increased from 2.2g/kg/day to 3.5 g/kg/ day, resulted in a 6% increase in

> muscle mass and a 5% increase in strength (3).*

>

> Using a 200 lb male with 15% body fat as an example, about 170 lbs is lean

> body mass and about 50% of that is muscle mass (85 lbs). (

> http://www.johnberardi.com/articles/supplementation/prosuper.htm)

>

> A 6% increase (.06*85) would be an increase of 5.1 lbs over a 3 month

> period, or 1.7 lbs per month. Using the same proportions to approximate,

> for a 150 lb male, it would be 3.8 lbs over 3 months, or 1.28 lbs per month.

> Say, somewhere around 1.5 lbs per month on average.

>

>

> *So, on a per month basis, we see the following estimates of gain in total

> lean muscle mass (including water and dry tissue):*

>

> From the Colgan Institute: 1.52 to 1.75 lbs / month.

>

> From Dragan GI, Vasiliu A, scu E.: in the general vicinity of 1.5 lbs

> / month

>

> Extrapolating from Carruthers: 5 to 10 lbs / month, if dry weight

> comprises 20% of total muscle weight.

>

> From Consolazio GF, et al.: 5.4 lbs / month

>

> I realize that amount and type of exercise, study participants' level of

> athletic development, nutritional program, rest, etc., etc., all could have

> a lot to do with hypertrophy. Clearly, nothing here suggests that the

> muscle mag claims (e.g., " Gain 20-30 pounds of lean muscle mass in six

> weeks!!! " ) are anything like realistic. But if anyone sees any glaring

> errors in my representation of the data, or if anyone has anything to add, I

> would welcome your comments.

>

> Pitruzzello, Ph.D.

> Chicago, IL

>

[Guest guest]

On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 4:13 PM, Pitruzzello

<tonypit45@...> wrote:

>  Hello Everyone,

>

> I recently posted a question about rate of hypertrophy – basically, what are

> the optimal realistic results a person can expect, vs. the endless claims in

> the muscle mags, e.g., " Gain 20-30 pounds of lean muscle mass in six

> weeks!!! "  I compared the responses with some other data, and I thought I

> would share it with the group.

>

I work with Berardi at Precision Nutrition, which runs a

muscle-gaining Scrawny to Brawny program. It's a one-year program that

focuses on step-by-step habit acquisition and entrainment, like our

other fat-loss program Lean Eating. We run a contest that awards money

to top finishers -- people who dramatically transform their bodies.

Looking at our recent 12-month cohorts, our top finalists put on

between 25-44 lbs in a year. These are ectomorphs who are " lifetime

scrawnies " , so they gain mass relatively slowly -- some made notable

transformations even with relatively less muscle gain, because small

amounts of mass make a big difference on a shorter/skinnier frame.

This is with a highly structured eating and training program, a coach,

and daily check-ins (lessons and habits). All material is

science/research-based as you might expect from JB and PN.

Interestingly, our 6-month program was not as dissimilar as you would

expect -- it doesn't seem to be a linear scale.

Here are finalists from our early, 6-month program:

http://www.precisionnutrition.com/s2b-winners-2010

Here are finalists from our 12-month program that begin in May 2011.

http://www.scrawnytobrawny.com/may-2011-finalists

Krista

Toronto, ON

--------------------

Krista -Dixon, PhD

Lean Eating Program Director

PrecisionNutrition.com

krista@...

[Guest guest]

On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 4:13 PM, Pitruzzello

<tonypit45@...> wrote:

>  Hello Everyone,

>

> I recently posted a question about rate of hypertrophy – basically, what are

> the optimal realistic results a person can expect, vs. the endless claims in

> the muscle mags, e.g., " Gain 20-30 pounds of lean muscle mass in six

> weeks!!! "  I compared the responses with some other data, and I thought I

> would share it with the group.

>

I work with Berardi at Precision Nutrition, which runs a

muscle-gaining Scrawny to Brawny program. It's a one-year program that

focuses on step-by-step habit acquisition and entrainment, like our

other fat-loss program Lean Eating. We run a contest that awards money

to top finishers -- people who dramatically transform their bodies.

Looking at our recent 12-month cohorts, our top finalists put on

between 25-44 lbs in a year. These are ectomorphs who are " lifetime

scrawnies " , so they gain mass relatively slowly -- some made notable

transformations even with relatively less muscle gain, because small

amounts of mass make a big difference on a shorter/skinnier frame.

This is with a highly structured eating and training program, a coach,

and daily check-ins (lessons and habits). All material is

science/research-based as you might expect from JB and PN.

Interestingly, our 6-month program was not as dissimilar as you would

expect -- it doesn't seem to be a linear scale.

Here are finalists from our early, 6-month program:

http://www.precisionnutrition.com/s2b-winners-2010

Here are finalists from our 12-month program that begin in May 2011.

http://www.scrawnytobrawny.com/may-2011-finalists

Krista

Toronto, ON

--------------------

Krista -Dixon, PhD

Lean Eating Program Director

PrecisionNutrition.com

krista@...

[Guest guest]

Krista's reports of 25-44 lbs of muscle gain within a year for life long

ectomorphs.

I will dissent, however, on the notion that 20-30 lbs of muscle gain in as

little as three months are hype. Back from the 1930s into the early 60s many a

trainee reported 20 or more pounds increase in manly muscle over a three month

period by means of specializing in 5 sets of 20 reps of breathing squats, some

adding the Hise shrug. Thrice weekly, consuming nutrient dense whole foods and

the sole protein supplement of that bygone era: milk.

Breathing squats are especially demanding, certainly no fun save for Masochists.

With each set, one breath between reps 1-5, then 2 deep breaths for reps 6-10,

three deep breaths for reps 11-15, and - you guessed it - four deep breaths

between reps 16-20. The immediately onto a picnic bench for sets of 20 reps,

very light weight dumbbell flyes to expand the rib cage for a big chest.

These days I'll defer to the exciting new work coming out of McMaster University

comparing 1 set of 8-10 1 RM to failure vs 3 sets of 8-10 to failure 80% 1 RM vs

3 sets of 30 reps to failure with 30% 1 RM. Adding volume at 80% and 30%

produced essentially equal hypertrophy, both significantly greater than 1 set to

failure (a failed idea).

In my personal experience and that of training others, hitting significant

annual hypertrophy is far more easily facilitated when rep schemes, cadence or

tempo, stage sets, drop sets, using 30-80% 1 RM are all intelligently and

strategically applied to one end: avoiding plateaus, instead sustainable

anabolism.

> >  Hello Everyone,

> >

> > I recently posted a question about rate of hypertrophy – basically, what are

> > the optimal realistic results a person can expect, vs. the endless claims in

> > the muscle mags, e.g., " Gain 20-30 pounds of lean muscle mass in six

> > weeks!!! "  I compared the responses with some other data, and I thought I

> > would share it with the group.

> >

>

> I work with Berardi at Precision Nutrition, which runs a

> muscle-gaining Scrawny to Brawny program. It's a one-year program that

> focuses on step-by-step habit acquisition and entrainment, like our

> other fat-loss program Lean Eating. We run a contest that awards money

> to top finishers -- people who dramatically transform their bodies.

>

> Looking at our recent 12-month cohorts, our top finalists put on

> between 25-44 lbs in a year. These are ectomorphs who are " lifetime

> scrawnies " , so they gain mass relatively slowly -- some made notable

> transformations even with relatively less muscle gain, because small

> amounts of mass make a big difference on a shorter/skinnier frame.

> This is with a highly structured eating and training program, a coach,

> and daily check-ins (lessons and habits). All material is

> science/research-based as you might expect from JB and PN.

>

> Interestingly, our 6-month program was not as dissimilar as you would

> expect -- it doesn't seem to be a linear scale.

>

> Here are finalists from our early, 6-month program:

> http://www.precisionnutrition.com/s2b-winners-2010

>

> Here are finalists from our 12-month program that begin in May 2011.

> http://www.scrawnytobrawny.com/may-2011-finalists

>

> Krista

> Toronto, ON

>

> --------------------

> Krista -Dixon, PhD

> Lean Eating Program Director

> PrecisionNutrition.com

> krista@...

>

[Guest guest]

Krista's reports of 25-44 lbs of muscle gain within a year for life long

ectomorphs.

I will dissent, however, on the notion that 20-30 lbs of muscle gain in as

little as three months are hype. Back from the 1930s into the early 60s many a

trainee reported 20 or more pounds increase in manly muscle over a three month

period by means of specializing in 5 sets of 20 reps of breathing squats, some

adding the Hise shrug. Thrice weekly, consuming nutrient dense whole foods and

the sole protein supplement of that bygone era: milk.

Breathing squats are especially demanding, certainly no fun save for Masochists.

With each set, one breath between reps 1-5, then 2 deep breaths for reps 6-10,

three deep breaths for reps 11-15, and - you guessed it - four deep breaths

between reps 16-20. The immediately onto a picnic bench for sets of 20 reps,

very light weight dumbbell flyes to expand the rib cage for a big chest.

These days I'll defer to the exciting new work coming out of McMaster University

comparing 1 set of 8-10 1 RM to failure vs 3 sets of 8-10 to failure 80% 1 RM vs

3 sets of 30 reps to failure with 30% 1 RM. Adding volume at 80% and 30%

produced essentially equal hypertrophy, both significantly greater than 1 set to

failure (a failed idea).

In my personal experience and that of training others, hitting significant

annual hypertrophy is far more easily facilitated when rep schemes, cadence or

tempo, stage sets, drop sets, using 30-80% 1 RM are all intelligently and

strategically applied to one end: avoiding plateaus, instead sustainable

anabolism.

> >  Hello Everyone,

> >

> > I recently posted a question about rate of hypertrophy – basically, what are

> > the optimal realistic results a person can expect, vs. the endless claims in

> > the muscle mags, e.g., " Gain 20-30 pounds of lean muscle mass in six

> > weeks!!! "  I compared the responses with some other data, and I thought I

> > would share it with the group.

> >

>

> I work with Berardi at Precision Nutrition, which runs a

> muscle-gaining Scrawny to Brawny program. It's a one-year program that

> focuses on step-by-step habit acquisition and entrainment, like our

> other fat-loss program Lean Eating. We run a contest that awards money

> to top finishers -- people who dramatically transform their bodies.

>

> Looking at our recent 12-month cohorts, our top finalists put on

> between 25-44 lbs in a year. These are ectomorphs who are " lifetime

> scrawnies " , so they gain mass relatively slowly -- some made notable

> transformations even with relatively less muscle gain, because small

> amounts of mass make a big difference on a shorter/skinnier frame.

> This is with a highly structured eating and training program, a coach,

> and daily check-ins (lessons and habits). All material is

> science/research-based as you might expect from JB and PN.

>

> Interestingly, our 6-month program was not as dissimilar as you would

> expect -- it doesn't seem to be a linear scale.

>

> Here are finalists from our early, 6-month program:

> http://www.precisionnutrition.com/s2b-winners-2010

>

> Here are finalists from our 12-month program that begin in May 2011.

> http://www.scrawnytobrawny.com/may-2011-finalists

>

> Krista

> Toronto, ON

>

> --------------------

> Krista -Dixon, PhD

> Lean Eating Program Director

> PrecisionNutrition.com

> krista@...

>

[Guest guest]

I'm going to jump in here with one point that I think has bearing on the whole

question: When we measure lean mass, we are not precise. We cannot be. What we

get is some guess based on measurements which varies and can be misleading - and

I recall Mel's comment long ago that the only truly accurate measure was

" autopsy " . Few would desire to have their lean mass evaluated this way during a

growth phase in training, so that's clearly out .

With the known variance in measuring methods (and here I recall Krieger's

good article on measuring that he thoughtfully shared some time ago with this

group), my thinking is that there is a considerable margin of guessing that

makes it possible to overestimate how much lean mass has been gained by an

individual over time. I myself over the years have experienced wildly ranging

measurements by folks who were said to be expert in such things - considering

that the measurement of one's bodyfat subcutaneously or measurements to estimate

a guess at overall bodyfat including a visceral estimate would have bearing on a

presumed gain in lean mass by way of deducting the presumed bodyfat on board...

I also once handed Mel a copy of a book that suggested you could 'squat for 6

weeks and gain 20 pounds of lean hard muscle' and the response was that it was

entertaining but unlikely to be accurate... Thankfully sq never had that effect

on me personally or I'd have required more new wardrobes than I have been

through personally over the years here as a competing powerlifter!

So if we consider that measuring the bodyfat an individual has on board is still

somewhat less effective than we would like, how then can we be sure of lean

gains that would be based on our best guess of the fat to lean ratio of a

person? Would not a " lean muscle gain " not be entirely muscle also, but the

bones themselves responding to the increased loads as well?

Interesting topic, back to reading.

The Phantom

aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

Denver, Colorado, USA

Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

Krista's reports of 25-44 lbs of muscle gain within a year for life long

ectomorphs.

I will dissent, however, on the notion that 20-30 lbs of muscle gain in as

little as three months are hype. Back from the 1930s into the early 60s many a

trainee reported 20 or more pounds increase in manly muscle over a three month

period by means of specializing in 5 sets of 20 reps of breathing squats, some

adding the Hise shrug. Thrice weekly, consuming nutrient dense whole foods and

the sole protein supplement of that bygone era: milk.

Breathing squats are especially demanding, certainly no fun save for Masochists.

With each set, one breath between reps 1-5, then 2 deep breaths for reps 6-10,

three deep breaths for reps 11-15, and - you guessed it - four deep breaths

between reps 16-20. The immediately onto a picnic bench for sets of 20 reps,

very light weight dumbbell flyes to expand the rib cage for a big chest.

These days I'll defer to the exciting new work coming out of McMaster University

comparing 1 set of 8-10 1 RM to failure vs 3 sets of 8-10 to failure 80% 1 RM vs

3 sets of 30 reps to failure with 30% 1 RM. Adding volume at 80% and 30%

produced essentially equal hypertrophy, both significantly greater than 1 set to

failure (a failed idea).

In my personal experience and that of training others, hitting significant

annual hypertrophy is far more easily facilitated when rep schemes, cadence or

tempo, stage sets, drop sets, using 30-80% 1 RM are all intelligently and

strategically applied to one end: avoiding plateaus, instead sustainable

anabolism.

> > Hello Everyone,

> >

> > I recently posted a question about rate of hypertrophy – basically, what

are

> > the optimal realistic results a person can expect, vs. the endless claims in

> > the muscle mags, e.g., " Gain 20-30 pounds of lean muscle mass in six

> > weeks!!! " I compared the responses with some other data, and I thought I

> > would share it with the group.

> >

>

> I work with Berardi at Precision Nutrition, which runs a

> muscle-gaining Scrawny to Brawny program. It's a one-year program that

> focuses on step-by-step habit acquisition and entrainment, like our

> other fat-loss program Lean Eating. We run a contest that awards money

> to top finishers -- people who dramatically transform their bodies.

>

> Looking at our recent 12-month cohorts, our top finalists put on

> between 25-44 lbs in a year. These are ectomorphs who are " lifetime

> scrawnies " , so they gain mass relatively slowly -- some made notable

> transformations even with relatively less muscle gain, because small

> amounts of mass make a big difference on a shorter/skinnier frame.

> This is with a highly structured eating and training program, a coach,

> and daily check-ins (lessons and habits). All material is

> science/research-based as you might expect from JB and PN.

>

> Interestingly, our 6-month program was not as dissimilar as you would

> expect -- it doesn't seem to be a linear scale.

>

> Here are finalists from our early, 6-month program:

> http://www.precisionnutrition.com/s2b-winners-2010

>

> Here are finalists from our 12-month program that begin in May 2011.

> http://www.scrawnytobrawny.com/may-2011-finalists

>

> Krista

> Toronto, ON

>

> --------------------

> Krista -Dixon, PhD

> Lean Eating Program Director

> PrecisionNutrition.com

> krista@...

>

[Guest guest]

Correct me if I am wrong but I think lean muscle gains correspond to strength

increases. Any bodybuilder that gains lean muscle should have strength

increases? Then again, this could be suspect, because I've seen bodybuilders

using steroids that do only high rep and low weight workouts yet have massive

amounts of muscle. I've seen bodybuilders do hundreds of reps on machines with

say 100 lbs. yet still be huge and massive.

I train as a powerlifter. I'm not training to gain a lot of bulk. I am mostly

training for strength without massive amounts of body weight and bulk increases.

Edwin Freeman, Jr.

Re: Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

I'm going to jump in here with one point that I think has bearing on the whole

question: When we measure lean mass, we are not precise. We cannot be. What we

get is some guess based on measurements which varies and can be misleading - and

I recall Mel's comment long ago that the only truly accurate measure was

" autopsy " . Few would desire to have their lean mass evaluated this way during a

growth phase in training, so that's clearly out .

With the known variance in measuring methods (and here I recall Krieger's

good article on measuring that he thoughtfully shared some time ago with this

group), my thinking is that there is a considerable margin of guessing that

makes it possible to overestimate how much lean mass has been gained by an

individual over time. I myself over the years have experienced wildly ranging

measurements by folks who were said to be expert in such things - considering

that the measurement of one's bodyfat subcutaneously or measurements to estimate

a guess at overall bodyfat including a visceral estimate would have bearing on a

presumed gain in lean mass by way of deducting the presumed bodyfat on board...

I also once handed Mel a copy of a book that suggested you could 'squat for 6

weeks and gain 20 pounds of lean hard muscle' and the response was that it was

entertaining but unlikely to be accurate... Thankfully sq never had that effect

on me personally or I'd have required more new wardrobes than I have been

through personally over the years here as a competing powerlifter!

So if we consider that measuring the bodyfat an individual has on board is still

somewhat less effective than we would like, how then can we be sure of lean

gains that would be based on our best guess of the fat to lean ratio of a

person? Would not a " lean muscle gain " not be entirely muscle also, but the

bones themselves responding to the increased loads as well?

Interesting topic, back to reading.

The Phantom

aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

Denver, Colorado, USA

Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

Krista's reports of 25-44 lbs of muscle gain within a year for life long

ectomorphs.

I will dissent, however, on the notion that 20-30 lbs of muscle gain in as

little as three months are hype. Back from the 1930s into the early 60s many a

trainee reported 20 or more pounds increase in manly muscle over a three month

period by means of specializing in 5 sets of 20 reps of breathing squats, some

adding the Hise shrug. Thrice weekly, consuming nutrient dense whole foods and

the sole protein supplement of that bygone era: milk.

Breathing squats are especially demanding, certainly no fun save for Masochists.

With each set, one breath between reps 1-5, then 2 deep breaths for reps 6-10,

three deep breaths for reps 11-15, and - you guessed it - four deep breaths

between reps 16-20. The immediately onto a picnic bench for sets of 20 reps,

very light weight dumbbell flyes to expand the rib cage for a big chest.

These days I'll defer to the exciting new work coming out of McMaster University

comparing 1 set of 8-10 1 RM to failure vs 3 sets of 8-10 to failure 80% 1 RM vs

3 sets of 30 reps to failure with 30% 1 RM. Adding volume at 80% and 30%

produced essentially equal hypertrophy, both significantly greater than 1 set to

failure (a failed idea).

In my personal experience and that of training others, hitting significant

annual hypertrophy is far more easily facilitated when rep schemes, cadence or

tempo, stage sets, drop sets, using 30-80% 1 RM are all intelligently and

strategically applied to one end: avoiding plateaus, instead sustainable

anabolism.

> > Hello Everyone,

> >

> > I recently posted a question about rate of hypertrophy – basically, what

are

> > the optimal realistic results a person can expect, vs. the endless claims in

> > the muscle mags, e.g., " Gain 20-30 pounds of lean muscle mass in six

> > weeks!!! " I compared the responses with some other data, and I thought I

> > would share it with the group.

> >

>

> I work with Berardi at Precision Nutrition, which runs a

> muscle-gaining Scrawny to Brawny program. It's a one-year program that

> focuses on step-by-step habit acquisition and entrainment, like our

> other fat-loss program Lean Eating. We run a contest that awards money

> to top finishers -- people who dramatically transform their bodies.

>

> Looking at our recent 12-month cohorts, our top finalists put on

> between 25-44 lbs in a year. These are ectomorphs who are " lifetime

> scrawnies " , so they gain mass relatively slowly -- some made notable

> transformations even with relatively less muscle gain, because small

> amounts of mass make a big difference on a shorter/skinnier frame.

> This is with a highly structured eating and training program, a coach,

> and daily check-ins (lessons and habits). All material is

> science/research-based as you might expect from JB and PN.

>

> Interestingly, our 6-month program was not as dissimilar as you would

> expect -- it doesn't seem to be a linear scale.

>

> Here are finalists from our early, 6-month program:

> http://www.precisionnutrition.com/s2b-winners-2010

>

> Here are finalists from our 12-month program that begin in May 2011.

> http://www.scrawnytobrawny.com/may-2011-finalists

>

> Krista

> Toronto, ON

>

> --------------------

> Krista -Dixon, PhD

> Lean Eating Program Director

> PrecisionNutrition.com

> krista@...

>

[Guest guest]

Thank you to every one has contributed to this discussion. I find it very

useful.  I keep hearing individuals stating that the reason they have not lost

as much weight as they would like is because that some of their fat turned into

muscle, this after only a few weeks of exercise.

The skin fold caliper measuring is extremely imprecise and is based on formulae

that make certain assumptions. The measurements can be very imprecise. Too much

pressure on the calipers will give loser skin fold thickness.  Skin fold

thickness does not account for intramuscular or intrabdominal (visceral fat).

 An lastly these measurements do not account for the most abundant element in

the body namely water. The assumption is always that muscle accounts for any

change in fat free mass without accounting for shifts in fluid mass.  

Other than autopsy the real gold standard is underwater weighing but even that

is subject to calculations.

Perhaps the best study for my purposes, since I am generally not dealing with

weight lifter, is the study looking at high school and college athletes post by

one of the earlier posters.  

Ralph Giarnella MD

Southington Ct. USA 

________________________________

From: " deadliftdiva@... " <deadliftdiva@...>

Supertraining

Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2012 11:29 AM

Subject: Re: Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

 

I'm going to jump in here with one point that I think has bearing on the whole

question: When we measure lean mass, we are not precise. We cannot be. What we

get is some guess based on measurements which varies and can be misleading - and

I recall Mel's comment long ago that the only truly accurate measure was

" autopsy " . Few would desire to have their lean mass evaluated this way during a

growth phase in training, so that's clearly out .

With the known variance in measuring methods (and here I recall Krieger's

good article on measuring that he thoughtfully shared some time ago with this

group), my thinking is that there is a considerable margin of guessing that

makes it possible to overestimate how much lean mass has been gained by an

individual over time. I myself over the years have experienced wildly ranging

measurements by folks who were said to be expert in such things - considering

that the measurement of one's bodyfat subcutaneously or measurements to estimate

a guess at overall bodyfat including a visceral estimate would have bearing on a

presumed gain in lean mass by way of deducting the presumed bodyfat on board...

I also once handed Mel a copy of a book that suggested you could 'squat for 6

weeks and gain 20 pounds of lean hard muscle' and the response was that it was

entertaining but unlikely to be accurate... Thankfully sq never had that effect

on me personally or I'd have required more new wardrobes than I have been

through personally over the years here as a competing powerlifter!

So if we consider that measuring the bodyfat an individual has on board is still

somewhat less effective than we would like, how then can we be sure of lean

gains that would be based on our best guess of the fat to lean ratio of a

person? Would not a " lean muscle gain " not be entirely muscle also, but the

bones themselves responding to the increased loads as well?

Interesting topic, back to reading.

The Phantom

aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

Denver, Colorado, USA

Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

Krista's reports of 25-44 lbs of muscle gain within a year for life long

ectomorphs.

I will dissent, however, on the notion that 20-30 lbs of muscle gain in as

little as three months are hype. Back from the 1930s into the early 60s many a

trainee reported 20 or more pounds increase in manly muscle over a three month

period by means of specializing in 5 sets of 20 reps of breathing squats, some

adding the Hise shrug. Thrice weekly, consuming nutrient dense whole foods and

the sole protein supplement of that bygone era: milk.

Breathing squats are especially demanding, certainly no fun save for Masochists.

With each set, one breath between reps 1-5, then 2 deep breaths for reps 6-10,

three deep breaths for reps 11-15, and - you guessed it - four deep breaths

between reps 16-20. The immediately onto a picnic bench for sets of 20 reps,

very light weight dumbbell flyes to expand the rib cage for a big chest.

These days I'll defer to the exciting new work coming out of McMaster University

comparing 1 set of 8-10 1 RM to failure vs 3 sets of 8-10 to failure 80% 1 RM vs

3 sets of 30 reps to failure with 30% 1 RM. Adding volume at 80% and 30%

produced essentially equal hypertrophy, both significantly greater than 1 set to

failure (a failed idea).

In my personal experience and that of training others, hitting significant

annual hypertrophy is far more easily facilitated when rep schemes, cadence or

tempo, stage sets, drop sets, using 30-80% 1 RM are all intelligently and

strategically applied to one end: avoiding plateaus, instead sustainable

anabolism.

> > Hello Everyone,

> >

> > I recently posted a question about rate of hypertrophy – basically, what

are

> > the optimal realistic results a person can expect, vs. the endless claims in

> > the muscle mags, e.g., " Gain 20-30 pounds of lean muscle mass in six

> > weeks!!! " I compared the responses with some other data, and I thought I

> > would share it with the group.

> >

>

> I work with Berardi at Precision Nutrition, which runs a

> muscle-gaining Scrawny to Brawny program. It's a one-year program that

> focuses on step-by-step habit acquisition and entrainment, like our

> other fat-loss program Lean Eating. We run a contest that awards money

> to top finishers -- people who dramatically transform their bodies.

>

> Looking at our recent 12-month cohorts, our top finalists put on

> between 25-44 lbs in a year. These are ectomorphs who are " lifetime

> scrawnies " , so they gain mass relatively slowly -- some made notable

> transformations even with relatively less muscle gain, because small

> amounts of mass make a big difference on a shorter/skinnier frame.

> This is with a highly structured eating and training program, a coach,

> and daily check-ins (lessons and habits). All material is

> science/research-based as you might expect from JB and PN.

>

> Interestingly, our 6-month program was not as dissimilar as you would

> expect -- it doesn't seem to be a linear scale.

>

> Here are finalists from our early, 6-month program:

> http://www.precisionnutrition.com/s2b-winners-2010

>

> Here are finalists from our 12-month program that begin in May 2011.

> http://www.scrawnytobrawny.com/may-2011-finalists

>

> Krista

> Toronto, ON

>

> --------------------

> Krista -Dixon, PhD

> Lean Eating Program Director

> PrecisionNutrition.com

> krista@...

>

[Guest guest]

Technically yes, force capacity increases with physiological cross-sectional

area of muscle. But in the cases of people gaining mass/size without the

subsequent increases in strength it is likely to be the result of sarcoplasmic

hypertrophy instead of sarcomere hypertrophy. While I don't doubt that doing

large volumes and lower intensities contributes to sarcoplasmic hypertrophy

through greater metabolic stress, I don't think it's quite that simple. Size

and strength aren't always correlated as there are also a host of other factors

that contribute such as muscle fibre type/composition, neuromuscular and

endocrine changes, maybe even gene expression. The underlying mechanisms are

not fully understood. 

It's certainly an interesting area and I'm always keen to read the responses and

particularly the research links posted in regards to this topic. 

 

Micah .

Melbourne, 

Australia.  

Positive Force Personal Training 

w: positiveforcept.com

e: micah@... 

________________________________

From: " efreem3407@... " <efreem3407@...>

Supertraining

Sent: Friday, 15 June 2012 2:49 AM

Subject: Re: Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

 

Correct me if I am wrong but I think lean muscle gains correspond to strength

increases. Any bodybuilder that gains lean muscle should have strength

increases? Then again, this could be suspect, because I've seen bodybuilders

using steroids that do only high rep and low weight workouts yet have massive

amounts of muscle. I've seen bodybuilders do hundreds of reps on machines with

say 100 lbs. yet still be huge and massive.

I train as a powerlifter. I'm not training to gain a lot of bulk. I am mostly

training for strength without massive amounts of body weight and bulk increases.

Edwin Freeman, Jr.

Re: Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

I'm going to jump in here with one point that I think has bearing on the whole

question: When we measure lean mass, we are not precise. We cannot be. What we

get is some guess based on measurements which varies and can be misleading - and

I recall Mel's comment long ago that the only truly accurate measure was

" autopsy " . Few would desire to have their lean mass evaluated this way during a

growth phase in training, so that's clearly out .

With the known variance in measuring methods (and here I recall Krieger's

good article on measuring that he thoughtfully shared some time ago with this

group), my thinking is that there is a considerable margin of guessing that

makes it possible to overestimate how much lean mass has been gained by an

individual over time. I myself over the years have experienced wildly ranging

measurements by folks who were said to be expert in such things - considering

that the measurement of one's bodyfat subcutaneously or measurements to estimate

a guess at overall bodyfat including a visceral estimate would have bearing on a

presumed gain in lean mass by way of deducting the presumed bodyfat on board...

I also once handed Mel a copy of a book that suggested you could 'squat for 6

weeks and gain 20 pounds of lean hard muscle' and the response was that it was

entertaining but unlikely to be accurate... Thankfully sq never had that effect

on me personally or I'd have required more new wardrobes than I have been

through personally over the years here as a competing powerlifter!

So if we consider that measuring the bodyfat an individual has on board is still

somewhat less effective than we would like, how then can we be sure of lean

gains that would be based on our best guess of the fat to lean ratio of a

person? Would not a " lean muscle gain " not be entirely muscle also, but the

bones themselves responding to the increased loads as well?

Interesting topic, back to reading.

The Phantom

aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

Denver, Colorado, USA

Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

Krista's reports of 25-44 lbs of muscle gain within a year for life long

ectomorphs.

I will dissent, however, on the notion that 20-30 lbs of muscle gain in as

little as three months are hype. Back from the 1930s into the early 60s many a

trainee reported 20 or more pounds increase in manly muscle over a three month

period by means of specializing in 5 sets of 20 reps of breathing squats, some

adding the Hise shrug. Thrice weekly, consuming nutrient dense whole foods and

the sole protein supplement of that bygone era: milk.

Breathing squats are especially demanding, certainly no fun save for Masochists.

With each set, one breath between reps 1-5, then 2 deep breaths for reps 6-10,

three deep breaths for reps 11-15, and - you guessed it - four deep breaths

between reps 16-20. The immediately onto a picnic bench for sets of 20 reps,

very light weight dumbbell flyes to expand the rib cage for a big chest.

These days I'll defer to the exciting new work coming out of McMaster University

comparing 1 set of 8-10 1 RM to failure vs 3 sets of 8-10 to failure 80% 1 RM vs

3 sets of 30 reps to failure with 30% 1 RM. Adding volume at 80% and 30%

produced essentially equal hypertrophy, both significantly greater than 1 set to

failure (a failed idea).

In my personal experience and that of training others, hitting significant

annual hypertrophy is far more easily facilitated when rep schemes, cadence or

tempo, stage sets, drop sets, using 30-80% 1 RM are all intelligently and

strategically applied to one end: avoiding plateaus, instead sustainable

anabolism.

> > Hello Everyone,

> >

> > I recently posted a question about rate of hypertrophy – basically, what

are

> > the optimal realistic results a person can expect, vs. the endless claims in

> > the muscle mags, e.g., " Gain 20-30 pounds of lean muscle mass in six

> > weeks!!! " I compared the responses with some other data, and I thought I

> > would share it with the group.

> >

>

> I work with Berardi at Precision Nutrition, which runs a

> muscle-gaining Scrawny to Brawny program. It's a one-year program that

> focuses on step-by-step habit acquisition and entrainment, like our

> other fat-loss program Lean Eating. We run a contest that awards money

> to top finishers -- people who dramatically transform their bodies.

>

> Looking at our recent 12-month cohorts, our top finalists put on

> between 25-44 lbs in a year. These are ectomorphs who are " lifetime

> scrawnies " , so they gain mass relatively slowly -- some made notable

> transformations even with relatively less muscle gain, because small

> amounts of mass make a big difference on a shorter/skinnier frame.

> This is with a highly structured eating and training program, a coach,

> and daily check-ins (lessons and habits). All material is

> science/research-based as you might expect from JB and PN.

>

> Interestingly, our 6-month program was not as dissimilar as you would

> expect -- it doesn't seem to be a linear scale.

>

> Here are finalists from our early, 6-month program:

> http://www.precisionnutrition.com/s2b-winners-2010

>

> Here are finalists from our 12-month program that begin in May 2011.

> http://www.scrawnytobrawny.com/may-2011-finalists

>

> Krista

> Toronto, ON

>

> --------------------

> Krista -Dixon, PhD

> Lean Eating Program Director

> PrecisionNutrition.com

> krista@...

>

[Guest guest]

It all depends on how one defines strength.  The term strength is an ambiguous

term at best.  Perhaps a better term instead of strength would be power.

 Power defined as force x distance/time.  Power lifters and olympic lifters

are trying to gain the maximum short term power.  Max force x short

distance/minimum time.  Endurance athletes are trying to develop sustained long

term power (less force x greater distance/longer time).   

Maximum power requires firing a maximum number fibers simultaneously

(synchronous)  Endurance power requires  firing groups  small of fibers

asynchronously.  As one group of fibers fatigues another group takes over while

the first recovers.  

In my opinion, the type of work done by body builders is somewhere between that

of power lifters and that of endurance athletes. 

Power athletes are interested in developing maximally type II fibers, endurance

athletes are trying to develop maximally type I fibers and I suspect that body

builds are trying to develop both groups. 

Ralph Giarnella MD

Southington Ct. USA 

________________________________

From: " efreem3407@... " <efreem3407@...>

Supertraining

Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2012 12:49 PM

Subject: Re: Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

 

Correct me if I am wrong but I think lean muscle gains correspond to strength

increases. Any bodybuilder that gains lean muscle should have strength

increases? Then again, this could be suspect, because I've seen bodybuilders

using steroids that do only high rep and low weight workouts yet have massive

amounts of muscle. I've seen bodybuilders do hundreds of reps on machines with

say 100 lbs. yet still be huge and massive.

I train as a powerlifter. I'm not training to gain a lot of bulk. I am mostly

training for strength without massive amounts of body weight and bulk increases.

Edwin Freeman, Jr.

Re: Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

I'm going to jump in here with one point that I think has bearing on the whole

question: When we measure lean mass, we are not precise. We cannot be. What we

get is some guess based on measurements which varies and can be misleading - and

I recall Mel's comment long ago that the only truly accurate measure was

" autopsy " . Few would desire to have their lean mass evaluated this way during a

growth phase in training, so that's clearly out .

With the known variance in measuring methods (and here I recall Krieger's

good article on measuring that he thoughtfully shared some time ago with this

group), my thinking is that there is a considerable margin of guessing that

makes it possible to overestimate how much lean mass has been gained by an

individual over time. I myself over the years have experienced wildly ranging

measurements by folks who were said to be expert in such things - considering

that the measurement of one's bodyfat subcutaneously or measurements to estimate

a guess at overall bodyfat including a visceral estimate would have bearing on a

presumed gain in lean mass by way of deducting the presumed bodyfat on board...

I also once handed Mel a copy of a book that suggested you could 'squat for 6

weeks and gain 20 pounds of lean hard muscle' and the response was that it was

entertaining but unlikely to be accurate... Thankfully sq never had that effect

on me personally or I'd have required more new wardrobes than I have been

through personally over the years here as a competing powerlifter!

So if we consider that measuring the bodyfat an individual has on board is still

somewhat less effective than we would like, how then can we be sure of lean

gains that would be based on our best guess of the fat to lean ratio of a

person? Would not a " lean muscle gain " not be entirely muscle also, but the

bones themselves responding to the increased loads as well?

Interesting topic, back to reading.

The Phantom

aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

Denver, Colorado, USA

Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

Krista's reports of 25-44 lbs of muscle gain within a year for life long

ectomorphs.

I will dissent, however, on the notion that 20-30 lbs of muscle gain in as

little as three months are hype. Back from the 1930s into the early 60s many a

trainee reported 20 or more pounds increase in manly muscle over a three month

period by means of specializing in 5 sets of 20 reps of breathing squats, some

adding the Hise shrug. Thrice weekly, consuming nutrient dense whole foods and

the sole protein supplement of that bygone era: milk.

Breathing squats are especially demanding, certainly no fun save for Masochists.

With each set, one breath between reps 1-5, then 2 deep breaths for reps 6-10,

three deep breaths for reps 11-15, and - you guessed it - four deep breaths

between reps 16-20. The immediately onto a picnic bench for sets of 20 reps,

very light weight dumbbell flyes to expand the rib cage for a big chest.

These days I'll defer to the exciting new work coming out of McMaster University

comparing 1 set of 8-10 1 RM to failure vs 3 sets of 8-10 to failure 80% 1 RM vs

3 sets of 30 reps to failure with 30% 1 RM. Adding volume at 80% and 30%

produced essentially equal hypertrophy, both significantly greater than 1 set to

failure (a failed idea).

In my personal experience and that of training others, hitting significant

annual hypertrophy is far more easily facilitated when rep schemes, cadence or

tempo, stage sets, drop sets, using 30-80% 1 RM are all intelligently and

strategically applied to one end: avoiding plateaus, instead sustainable

anabolism.

> > Hello Everyone,

> >

> > I recently posted a question about rate of hypertrophy – basically, what

are

> > the optimal realistic results a person can expect, vs. the endless claims in

> > the muscle mags, e.g., " Gain 20-30 pounds of lean muscle mass in six

> > weeks!!! " I compared the responses with some other data, and I thought I

> > would share it with the group.

> >

>

> I work with Berardi at Precision Nutrition, which runs a

> muscle-gaining Scrawny to Brawny program. It's a one-year program that

> focuses on step-by-step habit acquisition and entrainment, like our

> other fat-loss program Lean Eating. We run a contest that awards money

> to top finishers -- people who dramatically transform their bodies.

>

> Looking at our recent 12-month cohorts, our top finalists put on

> between 25-44 lbs in a year. These are ectomorphs who are " lifetime

> scrawnies " , so they gain mass relatively slowly -- some made notable

> transformations even with relatively less muscle gain, because small

> amounts of mass make a big difference on a shorter/skinnier frame.

> This is with a highly structured eating and training program, a coach,

> and daily check-ins (lessons and habits). All material is

> science/research-based as you might expect from JB and PN.

>

> Interestingly, our 6-month program was not as dissimilar as you would

> expect -- it doesn't seem to be a linear scale.

>

> Here are finalists from our early, 6-month program:

> http://www.precisionnutrition.com/s2b-winners-2010

>

> Here are finalists from our 12-month program that begin in May 2011.

> http://www.scrawnytobrawny.com/may-2011-finalists

>

> Krista

> Toronto, ON

>

> --------------------

> Krista -Dixon, PhD

> Lean Eating Program Director

> PrecisionNutrition.com

> krista@...

>

[Guest guest]

Edwin Freeman wrote:

> Then again, this could be suspect, because I've seen bodybuilders using

steroids that do only high rep and low

> weight workouts yet have massive amounts of muscle. I've seen bodybuilders do

hundreds of reps on machines

> with say 100 lbs. yet still be huge and massive.

Sorry, probably going to get this wrong, but wouldn't the size most

likely be due to an abundance of mitochondrial mass? As opposed to

what would be considered muscle fiber? Mitochondria are part of the

cell, so they buff the cell up. Is the cell part of the chain that

makes the muscle fiber? I probably need to read more.

Ralph Giarnella wrote:

> And lastly these measurements do not account for the most abundant element in

the body namely water.

> The assumption is always that muscle accounts for any change in fat free mass

without accounting for shifts

> in fluid mass.

Regarding weight gain from increased exercise levels, I recall reading

in a book titled " Nutrient Timing " that the increased demand on the

cardiovascular system resulted in an increase in water retention, the

body's goal being to increase blood volume to meet increased O2

demand. IIRC, this could be a significant volume, resulting in a

fairly large weight gain (large as in 4-8 pounds).

- Lockhart

Hilo, HI

[Guest guest]

I would like to jump in here and give my differing opinion on rate of

hypertrophy.  I think there is no standard rate.  I think it is highly

variable and I think it has a lot more to do with a person's genes than the

loading pattern they use.  I think if you work hard enough, you simply provide

a stimulus. How that stimulus manifests itself, is determined by what is encoded

in your genes.  

Regards

Sharah

Sydney Australia

________________________________

From: " efreem3407@... " <efreem3407@...>

Supertraining

Sent: Friday, 15 June 2012 2:49 AM

Subject: Re: Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

 

Correct me if I am wrong but I think lean muscle gains correspond to strength

increases. Any bodybuilder that gains lean muscle should have strength

increases? Then again, this could be suspect, because I've seen bodybuilders

using steroids that do only high rep and low weight workouts yet have massive

amounts of muscle. I've seen bodybuilders do hundreds of reps on machines with

say 100 lbs. yet still be huge and massive.

I train as a powerlifter. I'm not training to gain a lot of bulk. I am mostly

training for strength without massive amounts of body weight and bulk increases.

Edwin Freeman, Jr.

Re: Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

I'm going to jump in here with one point that I think has bearing on the whole

question: When we measure lean mass, we are not precise. We cannot be. What we

get is some guess based on measurements which varies and can be misleading - and

I recall Mel's comment long ago that the only truly accurate measure was

" autopsy " . Few would desire to have their lean mass evaluated this way during a

growth phase in training, so that's clearly out .

With the known variance in measuring methods (and here I recall Krieger's

good article on measuring that he thoughtfully shared some time ago with this

group), my thinking is that there is a considerable margin of guessing that

makes it possible to overestimate how much lean mass has been gained by an

individual over time. I myself over the years have experienced wildly ranging

measurements by folks who were said to be expert in such things - considering

that the measurement of one's bodyfat subcutaneously or measurements to estimate

a guess at overall bodyfat including a visceral estimate would have bearing on a

presumed gain in lean mass by way of deducting the presumed bodyfat on board...

I also once handed Mel a copy of a book that suggested you could 'squat for 6

weeks and gain 20 pounds of lean hard muscle' and the response was that it was

entertaining but unlikely to be accurate... Thankfully sq never had that effect

on me personally or I'd have required more new wardrobes than I have been

through personally over the years here as a competing powerlifter!

So if we consider that measuring the bodyfat an individual has on board is still

somewhat less effective than we would like, how then can we be sure of lean

gains that would be based on our best guess of the fat to lean ratio of a

person? Would not a " lean muscle gain " not be entirely muscle also, but the

bones themselves responding to the increased loads as well?

Interesting topic, back to reading.

The Phantom

aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

Denver, Colorado, USA

Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

Krista's reports of 25-44 lbs of muscle gain within a year for life long

ectomorphs.

I will dissent, however, on the notion that 20-30 lbs of muscle gain in as

little as three months are hype. Back from the 1930s into the early 60s many a

trainee reported 20 or more pounds increase in manly muscle over a three month

period by means of specializing in 5 sets of 20 reps of breathing squats, some

adding the Hise shrug. Thrice weekly, consuming nutrient dense whole foods and

the sole protein supplement of that bygone era: milk.

Breathing squats are especially demanding, certainly no fun save for Masochists.

With each set, one breath between reps 1-5, then 2 deep breaths for reps 6-10,

three deep breaths for reps 11-15, and - you guessed it - four deep breaths

between reps 16-20. The immediately onto a picnic bench for sets of 20 reps,

very light weight dumbbell flyes to expand the rib cage for a big chest.

These days I'll defer to the exciting new work coming out of McMaster University

comparing 1 set of 8-10 1 RM to failure vs 3 sets of 8-10 to failure 80% 1 RM vs

3 sets of 30 reps to failure with 30% 1 RM. Adding volume at 80% and 30%

produced essentially equal hypertrophy, both significantly greater than 1 set to

failure (a failed idea).

In my personal experience and that of training others, hitting significant

annual hypertrophy is far more easily facilitated when rep schemes, cadence or

tempo, stage sets, drop sets, using 30-80% 1 RM are all intelligently and

strategically applied to one end: avoiding plateaus, instead sustainable

anabolism.

> > Hello Everyone,

> >

> > I recently posted a question about rate of hypertrophy – basically, what

are

> > the optimal realistic results a person can expect, vs. the endless claims in

> > the muscle mags, e.g., " Gain 20-30 pounds of lean muscle mass in six

> > weeks!!! " I compared the responses with some other data, and I thought I

> > would share it with the group.

> >

>

> I work with Berardi at Precision Nutrition, which runs a

> muscle-gaining Scrawny to Brawny program. It's a one-year program that

> focuses on step-by-step habit acquisition and entrainment, like our

> other fat-loss program Lean Eating. We run a contest that awards money

> to top finishers -- people who dramatically transform their bodies.

>

> Looking at our recent 12-month cohorts, our top finalists put on

> between 25-44 lbs in a year. These are ectomorphs who are " lifetime

> scrawnies " , so they gain mass relatively slowly -- some made notable

> transformations even with relatively less muscle gain, because small

> amounts of mass make a big difference on a shorter/skinnier frame.

> This is with a highly structured eating and training program, a coach,

> and daily check-ins (lessons and habits). All material is

> science/research-based as you might expect from JB and PN.

>

> Interestingly, our 6-month program was not as dissimilar as you would

> expect -- it doesn't seem to be a linear scale.

>

> Here are finalists from our early, 6-month program:

> http://www.precisionnutrition.com/s2b-winners-2010

>

> Here are finalists from our 12-month program that begin in May 2011.

> http://www.scrawnytobrawny.com/may-2011-finalists

>

> Krista

> Toronto, ON

>

> --------------------

> Krista -Dixon, PhD

> Lean Eating Program Director

> PrecisionNutrition.com

> krista@...

>

[Guest guest]

There are different type of strength. Power is a sub class of strength.

Also, there's relatively no power in powerlifting. The true power athletes are

Olympic lifters, who have registered some of, if not, the highest power output

forces on record.

Kenny Croxdale, CSCS

Rio Rancho, NM

Re: Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

I'm going to jump in here with one point that I think has bearing on the whole

question: When we measure lean mass, we are not precise. We cannot be. What we

get is some guess based on measurements which varies and can be misleading - and

I recall Mel's comment long ago that the only truly accurate measure was

" autopsy " . Few would desire to have their lean mass evaluated this way during a

growth phase in training, so that's clearly out .

With the known variance in measuring methods (and here I recall Krieger's

good article on measuring that he thoughtfully shared some time ago with this

group), my thinking is that there is a considerable margin of guessing that

makes it possible to overestimate how much lean mass has been gained by an

individual over time. I myself over the years have experienced wildly ranging

measurements by folks who were said to be expert in such things - considering

that the measurement of one's bodyfat subcutaneously or measurements to estimate

a guess at overall bodyfat including a visceral estimate would have bearing on a

presumed gain in lean mass by way of deducting the presumed bodyfat on board...

I also once handed Mel a copy of a book that suggested you could 'squat for 6

weeks and gain 20 pounds of lean hard muscle' and the response was that it was

entertaining but unlikely to be accurate... Thankfully sq never had that effect

on me personally or I'd have required more new wardrobes than I have been

through personally over the years here as a competing powerlifter!

So if we consider that measuring the bodyfat an individual has on board is still

somewhat less effective than we would like, how then can we be sure of lean

gains that would be based on our best guess of the fat to lean ratio of a

person? Would not a " lean muscle gain " not be entirely muscle also, but the

bones themselves responding to the increased loads as well?

Interesting topic, back to reading.

The Phantom

aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

Denver, Colorado, USA

Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

Krista's reports of 25-44 lbs of muscle gain within a year for life long

ectomorphs.

I will dissent, however, on the notion that 20-30 lbs of muscle gain in as

little as three months are hype. Back from the 1930s into the early 60s many a

trainee reported 20 or more pounds increase in manly muscle over a three month

period by means of specializing in 5 sets of 20 reps of breathing squats, some

adding the Hise shrug. Thrice weekly, consuming nutrient dense whole foods and

the sole protein supplement of that bygone era: milk.

Breathing squats are especially demanding, certainly no fun save for Masochists.

With each set, one breath between reps 1-5, then 2 deep breaths for reps 6-10,

three deep breaths for reps 11-15, and - you guessed it - four deep breaths

between reps 16-20. The immediately onto a picnic bench for sets of 20 reps,

very light weight dumbbell flyes to expand the rib cage for a big chest.

These days I'll defer to the exciting new work coming out of McMaster University

comparing 1 set of 8-10 1 RM to failure vs 3 sets of 8-10 to failure 80% 1 RM vs

3 sets of 30 reps to failure with 30% 1 RM. Adding volume at 80% and 30%

produced essentially equal hypertrophy, both significantly greater than 1 set to

failure (a failed idea).

In my personal experience and that of training others, hitting significant

annual hypertrophy is far more easily facilitated when rep schemes, cadence or

tempo, stage sets, drop sets, using 30-80% 1 RM are all intelligently and

strategically applied to one end: avoiding plateaus, instead sustainable

anabolism.

> > Hello Everyone,

> >

> > I recently posted a question about rate of hypertrophy – basically, what

are

> > the optimal realistic results a person can expect, vs. the endless claims in

> > the muscle mags, e.g., " Gain 20-30 pounds of lean muscle mass in six

> > weeks!!! " I compared the responses with some other data, and I thought I

> > would share it with the group.

> >

>

> I work with Berardi at Precision Nutrition, which runs a

> muscle-gaining Scrawny to Brawny program. It's a one-year program that

> focuses on step-by-step habit acquisition and entrainment, like our

> other fat-loss program Lean Eating. We run a contest that awards money

> to top finishers -- people who dramatically transform their bodies.

>

> Looking at our recent 12-month cohorts, our top finalists put on

> between 25-44 lbs in a year. These are ectomorphs who are " lifetime

> scrawnies " , so they gain mass relatively slowly -- some made notable

> transformations even with relatively less muscle gain, because small

> amounts of mass make a big difference on a shorter/skinnier frame.

> This is with a highly structured eating and training program, a coach,

> and daily check-ins (lessons and habits). All material is

> science/research-based as you might expect from JB and PN.

>

> Interestingly, our 6-month program was not as dissimilar as you would

> expect -- it doesn't seem to be a linear scale.

>

> Here are finalists from our early, 6-month program:

> http://www.precisionnutrition.com/s2b-winners-2010

>

> Here are finalists from our 12-month program that begin in May 2011.

> http://www.scrawnytobrawny.com/may-2011-finalists

>

> Krista

> Toronto, ON

>

> --------------------

> Krista -Dixon, PhD

> Lean Eating Program Director

> PrecisionNutrition.com

> krista@...

>

[Guest guest]

To clarify the relationship between force and power in muscles, please take

a look at the right-hand-side chart in the following article section in

Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscle_contraction#Force-length_and_force-velocity_\

relationships

(P.S. I'm the author of the chart)

Giovanni Ciriani - West Hartford, CT - USA

On Sat, Jun 16, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Ralph Giarnella <ragiarn@...> wrote:

> **

>

>

> It all depends on how one defines strength. The term strength is an

> ambiguous term at best. Perhaps a better term instead of strength would be

> power. Power defined as force x distance/time. Power lifters and olympic

> lifters are trying to gain the maximum short term power. Max force x short

> distance/minimum time. Endurance athletes are trying to develop sustained

> long term power (less force x greater distance/longer time).

>

> Maximum power requires firing a maximum number fibers simultaneously

> (synchronous) Endurance power requires firing groups small of fibers

> asynchronously. As one group of fibers fatigues another group takes over

> while the first recovers.

>

> In my opinion, the type of work done by body builders is somewhere between

> that of power lifters and that of endurance athletes.

>

> Power athletes are interested in developing maximally type II fibers,

> endurance athletes are trying to develop maximally type I fibers and I

> suspect that body builds are trying to develop both groups.

>

>

> Ralph Giarnella MD

> Southington Ct. USA

>

> ________________________________

> From: " efreem3407@... " <efreem3407@...>

> Supertraining

> Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2012 12:49 PM

>

> Subject: Re: Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

>

>

>

> Correct me if I am wrong but I think lean muscle gains correspond to

> strength increases. Any bodybuilder that gains lean muscle should have

> strength increases? Then again, this could be suspect, because I've seen

> bodybuilders using steroids that do only high rep and low weight workouts

> yet have massive amounts of muscle. I've seen bodybuilders do hundreds of

> reps on machines with say 100 lbs. yet still be huge and massive.

>

> I train as a powerlifter. I'm not training to gain a lot of bulk. I am

> mostly training for strength without massive amounts of body weight and

> bulk increases.

>

> Edwin Freeman, Jr.

>

> Re: Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

>

> I'm going to jump in here with one point that I think has bearing on the

> whole

> question: When we measure lean mass, we are not precise. We cannot be.

> What we

> get is some guess based on measurements which varies and can be misleading

> - and

> I recall Mel's comment long ago that the only truly accurate measure was

> " autopsy " . Few would desire to have their lean mass evaluated this way

> during a

> growth phase in training, so that's clearly out .

>

> With the known variance in measuring methods (and here I recall

> Krieger's

> good article on measuring that he thoughtfully shared some time ago with

> this

> group), my thinking is that there is a considerable margin of guessing

> that

> makes it possible to overestimate how much lean mass has been gained by an

> individual over time. I myself over the years have experienced wildly

> ranging

> measurements by folks who were said to be expert in such things -

> considering

> that the measurement of one's bodyfat subcutaneously or measurements to

> estimate

> a guess at overall bodyfat including a visceral estimate would have

> bearing on a

> presumed gain in lean mass by way of deducting the presumed bodyfat on

> board...

>

> I also once handed Mel a copy of a book that suggested you could 'squat

> for 6

> weeks and gain 20 pounds of lean hard muscle' and the response was that it

> was

> entertaining but unlikely to be accurate... Thankfully sq never had that

> effect

> on me personally or I'd have required more new wardrobes than I have been

> through personally over the years here as a competing powerlifter!

>

> So if we consider that measuring the bodyfat an individual has on board is

> still

> somewhat less effective than we would like, how then can we be sure of

> lean

> gains that would be based on our best guess of the fat to lean ratio of a

> person? Would not a " lean muscle gain " not be entirely muscle also, but

> the

> bones themselves responding to the increased loads as well?

>

> Interesting topic, back to reading.

>

> The Phantom

> aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

> Denver, Colorado, USA

>

> Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

>

> Krista's reports of 25-44 lbs of muscle gain within a year for life long

> ectomorphs.

>

> I will dissent, however, on the notion that 20-30 lbs of muscle gain in as

> little as three months are hype. Back from the 1930s into the early 60s

> many a

> trainee reported 20 or more pounds increase in manly muscle over a three

> month

> period by means of specializing in 5 sets of 20 reps of breathing squats,

> some

> adding the Hise shrug. Thrice weekly, consuming nutrient dense whole foods

> and

> the sole protein supplement of that bygone era: milk.

>

> Breathing squats are especially demanding, certainly no fun save for

> Masochists.

> With each set, one breath between reps 1-5, then 2 deep breaths for reps

> 6-10,

> three deep breaths for reps 11-15, and - you guessed it - four deep

> breaths

> between reps 16-20. The immediately onto a picnic bench for sets of 20

> reps,

> very light weight dumbbell flyes to expand the rib cage for a big chest.

>

> These days I'll defer to the exciting new work coming out of McMaster

> University

> comparing 1 set of 8-10 1 RM to failure vs 3 sets of 8-10 to failure 80% 1

> RM vs

> 3 sets of 30 reps to failure with 30% 1 RM. Adding volume at 80% and 30%

> produced essentially equal hypertrophy, both significantly greater than 1

> set to

> failure (a failed idea).

>

> In my personal experience and that of training others, hitting significant

> annual hypertrophy is far more easily facilitated when rep schemes,

> cadence or

> tempo, stage sets, drop sets, using 30-80% 1 RM are all intelligently and

> strategically applied to one end: avoiding plateaus, instead sustainable

> anabolism.

>

>

> > > Hello Everyone,

> > >

> > > I recently posted a question about rate of hypertrophy – basically,

> what are

>

> > > the optimal realistic results a person can expect, vs. the endless

> claims in

>

> > > the muscle mags, e.g., " Gain 20-30 pounds of lean muscle mass in six

> > > weeks!!! " I compared the responses with some other data, and I thought

> I

> > > would share it with the group.

> > >

> >

> > I work with Berardi at Precision Nutrition, which runs a

> > muscle-gaining Scrawny to Brawny program. It's a one-year program that

> > focuses on step-by-step habit acquisition and entrainment, like our

> > other fat-loss program Lean Eating. We run a contest that awards money

> > to top finishers -- people who dramatically transform their bodies.

> >

> > Looking at our recent 12-month cohorts, our top finalists put on

> > between 25-44 lbs in a year. These are ectomorphs who are " lifetime

> > scrawnies " , so they gain mass relatively slowly -- some made notable

> > transformations even with relatively less muscle gain, because small

> > amounts of mass make a big difference on a shorter/skinnier frame.

> > This is with a highly structured eating and training program, a coach,

> > and daily check-ins (lessons and habits). All material is

> > science/research-based as you might expect from JB and PN.

> >

> > Interestingly, our 6-month program was not as dissimilar as you would

> > expect -- it doesn't seem to be a linear scale.

> >

> > Here are finalists from our early, 6-month program:

> > http://www.precisionnutrition.com/s2b-winners-2010

> >

> > Here are finalists from our 12-month program that begin in May 2011.

> > http://www.scrawnytobrawny.com/may-2011-finalists

> >

> > Krista

> > Toronto, ON

> >

> > --------------------

> > Krista -Dixon, PhD

> > Lean Eating Program Director

> > PrecisionNutrition.com

> > krista@...

> >

>

>

[Guest guest]

Lockhart wrote:

*****************************

Sorry, probably going to get this wrong, but wouldn't the size most

likely be due to an abundance of mitochondrial mass? As opposed to

what would be considered muscle fiber? Mitochondria are part of the

cell, so they buff the cell up. Is the cell part of the chain that

makes the muscle fiber? I probably need to read more.

************************

The type of work done will determine whether there is an increase in muscle

fiber or mitochondrial mass.  Each muscle cell has a limit to how big it gets.

 There are three major components in consideration are the protoplasm,

mitochondria and muscle fibers.  The mitochondria produce energy aerobically,

the muscle fibers of course produce force and the protoplasm is the " soup " in

which multiple elements, minerals, glycogen reside.   

  

Anaerobic work, such as that done in most powerlifting sports, does not require

a lot of mitochondria since most of the work is done anaerobically and there is

probably not as much need for large glycogen stores since the work is done in

short spurts with recovery between sets.  The type II muscle cells are

characterized by the paucity of mitochondria a superabundance of muscle fibers

whereas the Type I muscle fibers are characterized by high mitochondrial density

and glycogen storage and marked decrease in muscle fibers (compared to TypeII.)

The Type II muscle fibers can be broken down, into Type IIa and Type IIb,(there

are other subsets but for simplicity I would leave them out of the discussion).

  Type IIb contain a minimal amount of mitochondria, just enough to maintain

some aerobic metabolism during rest. The Type IIa contain significantly more

mitochondria and less muscle fibers than does TypeIIb. 

Endurance type training causes conversion of Type IIb to Type IIa.  It is

probably for this reason that many traditional power lifting athletes try to

avoid aerobic work for fear of converting too many of their Type IIb fibers to

Type IIa.

Ralph Giarnella MD

Southington Ct. USA 

________________________________

From: Lockhart <scout3801@...>

Supertraining

Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2012 3:01 PM

Subject: Re: Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

 

Edwin Freeman wrote:

> Then again, this could be suspect, because I've seen bodybuilders using

steroids that do only high rep and low

> weight workouts yet have massive amounts of muscle. I've seen bodybuilders do

hundreds of reps on machines

> with say 100 lbs. yet still be huge and massive.

Sorry, probably going to get this wrong, but wouldn't the size most

likely be due to an abundance of mitochondrial mass? As opposed to

what would be considered muscle fiber? Mitochondria are part of the

cell, so they buff the cell up. Is the cell part of the chain that

makes the muscle fiber? I probably need to read more.

Ralph Giarnella wrote:

> And lastly these measurements do not account for the most abundant element in

the body namely water.

> The assumption is always that muscle accounts for any change in fat free mass

without accounting for shifts

> in fluid mass.

Regarding weight gain from increased exercise levels, I recall reading

in a book titled " Nutrient Timing " that the increased demand on the

cardiovascular system resulted in an increase in water retention, the

body's goal being to increase blood volume to meet increased O2

demand. IIRC, this could be a significant volume, resulting in a

fairly large weight gain (large as in 4-8 pounds).

- Lockhart

Hilo, HI

[Guest guest]

Power is a sub class of strength? Kenny, please use the definition given by

Ralph, lest we turn this conversations into a meaningless jumble of

comments, for lack of proper nomenclature.

Giovanni Ciriani - West Hartford, CT - USA

On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 8:40 AM, <KennyCrox@...> wrote:

> **

>

>

>

> There are different type of strength. Power is a sub class of strength.

>

> Also, there's relatively no power in powerlifting. The true power athletes

> are Olympic lifters, who have registered some of, if not, the highest power

> output forces on record.

>

> Kenny Croxdale, CSCS

> Rio Rancho, NM

>

> Re: Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

>

> I'm going to jump in here with one point that I think has bearing on the

> whole

> question: When we measure lean mass, we are not precise. We cannot be.

> What we

> get is some guess based on measurements which varies and can be misleading

> - and

> I recall Mel's comment long ago that the only truly accurate measure was

> " autopsy " . Few would desire to have their lean mass evaluated this way

> during a

> growth phase in training, so that's clearly out .

>

> With the known variance in measuring methods (and here I recall

> Krieger's

> good article on measuring that he thoughtfully shared some time ago with

> this

> group), my thinking is that there is a considerable margin of guessing

> that

> makes it possible to overestimate how much lean mass has been gained by an

> individual over time. I myself over the years have experienced wildly

> ranging

> measurements by folks who were said to be expert in such things -

> considering

> that the measurement of one's bodyfat subcutaneously or measurements to

> estimate

> a guess at overall bodyfat including a visceral estimate would have

> bearing on a

> presumed gain in lean mass by way of deducting the presumed bodyfat on

> board...

>

> I also once handed Mel a copy of a book that suggested you could 'squat

> for 6

> weeks and gain 20 pounds of lean hard muscle' and the response was that it

> was

> entertaining but unlikely to be accurate... Thankfully sq never had that

> effect

> on me personally or I'd have required more new wardrobes than I have been

> through personally over the years here as a competing powerlifter!

>

> So if we consider that measuring the bodyfat an individual has on board is

> still

> somewhat less effective than we would like, how then can we be sure of

> lean

> gains that would be based on our best guess of the fat to lean ratio of a

> person? Would not a " lean muscle gain " not be entirely muscle also, but

> the

> bones themselves responding to the increased loads as well?

>

> Interesting topic, back to reading.

>

> The Phantom

> aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

> Denver, Colorado, USA

>

> Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

>

> Krista's reports of 25-44 lbs of muscle gain within a year for life long

> ectomorphs.

>

> I will dissent, however, on the notion that 20-30 lbs of muscle gain in as

> little as three months are hype. Back from the 1930s into the early 60s

> many a

> trainee reported 20 or more pounds increase in manly muscle over a three

> month

> period by means of specializing in 5 sets of 20 reps of breathing squats,

> some

> adding the Hise shrug. Thrice weekly, consuming nutrient dense whole foods

> and

> the sole protein supplement of that bygone era: milk.

>

> Breathing squats are especially demanding, certainly no fun save for

> Masochists.

> With each set, one breath between reps 1-5, then 2 deep breaths for reps

> 6-10,

> three deep breaths for reps 11-15, and - you guessed it - four deep

> breaths

> between reps 16-20. The immediately onto a picnic bench for sets of 20

> reps,

> very light weight dumbbell flyes to expand the rib cage for a big chest.

>

> These days I'll defer to the exciting new work coming out of McMaster

> University

> comparing 1 set of 8-10 1 RM to failure vs 3 sets of 8-10 to failure 80% 1

> RM vs

> 3 sets of 30 reps to failure with 30% 1 RM. Adding volume at 80% and 30%

> produced essentially equal hypertrophy, both significantly greater than 1

> set to

> failure (a failed idea).

>

> In my personal experience and that of training others, hitting significant

> annual hypertrophy is far more easily facilitated when rep schemes,

> cadence or

> tempo, stage sets, drop sets, using 30-80% 1 RM are all intelligently and

> strategically applied to one end: avoiding plateaus, instead sustainable

> anabolism.

>

>

> > > Hello Everyone,

> > >

> > > I recently posted a question about rate of hypertrophy – basically,

> what are

>

> > > the optimal realistic results a person can expect, vs. the endless

> claims in

>

> > > the muscle mags, e.g., " Gain 20-30 pounds of lean muscle mass in six

> > > weeks!!! " I compared the responses with some other data, and I thought

> I

> > > would share it with the group.

> > >

> >

> > I work with Berardi at Precision Nutrition, which runs a

> > muscle-gaining Scrawny to Brawny program. It's a one-year program that

> > focuses on step-by-step habit acquisition and entrainment, like our

> > other fat-loss program Lean Eating. We run a contest that awards money

> > to top finishers -- people who dramatically transform their bodies.

> >

> > Looking at our recent 12-month cohorts, our top finalists put on

> > between 25-44 lbs in a year. These are ectomorphs who are " lifetime

> > scrawnies " , so they gain mass relatively slowly -- some made notable

> > transformations even with relatively less muscle gain, because small

> > amounts of mass make a big difference on a shorter/skinnier frame.

> > This is with a highly structured eating and training program, a coach,

> > and daily check-ins (lessons and habits). All material is

> > science/research-based as you might expect from JB and PN.

> >

> > Interestingly, our 6-month program was not as dissimilar as you would

> > expect -- it doesn't seem to be a linear scale.

> >

> > Here are finalists from our early, 6-month program:

> > http://www.precisionnutrition.com/s2b-winners-2010

> >

> > Here are finalists from our 12-month program that begin in May 2011.

> > http://www.scrawnytobrawny.com/may-2011-finalists

> >

> > Krista

> > Toronto, ON

> >

> > --------------------

> > Krista -Dixon, PhD

> > Lean Eating Program Director

> > PrecisionNutrition.com

> > krista@...

> >

>

>

[Guest guest]

Kenny Crox wrote:

There are different type of strength. Power is a sub class of strength.

 Also, there's relatively no power in powerlifting

********************

Perhaps you can clarify those two statements.  How do you measure strength?

  

I would define it as the ability to apply force to move a mass over a distance

in period  of time. 

Both Olympic lifters and Power lifters move a mass a certain distance in a given

period of time.  In both cases the power  can be calculated.  You can then

compare who produces more power.    

Ralph Giarnella MD

Southington Ct. USA 

________________________________

From: " KennyCrox@... " <KennyCrox@...>

Supertraining

Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2012 8:40 AM

Subject: Re: Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

 

There are different type of strength. Power is a sub class of strength.

.. The true power athletes are Olympic lifters, who have registered some of, if

not, the highest power output forces on record.

Kenny Croxdale, CSCS

Rio Rancho, NM

Re: Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

I'm going to jump in here with one point that I think has bearing on the whole

question: When we measure lean mass, we are not precise. We cannot be. What we

get is some guess based on measurements which varies and can be misleading - and

I recall Mel's comment long ago that the only truly accurate measure was

" autopsy " . Few would desire to have their lean mass evaluated this way during a

growth phase in training, so that's clearly out .

With the known variance in measuring methods (and here I recall Krieger's

good article on measuring that he thoughtfully shared some time ago with this

group), my thinking is that there is a considerable margin of guessing that

makes it possible to overestimate how much lean mass has been gained by an

individual over time. I myself over the years have experienced wildly ranging

measurements by folks who were said to be expert in such things - considering

that the measurement of one's bodyfat subcutaneously or measurements to estimate

a guess at overall bodyfat including a visceral estimate would have bearing on a

presumed gain in lean mass by way of deducting the presumed bodyfat on board...

I also once handed Mel a copy of a book that suggested you could 'squat for 6

weeks and gain 20 pounds of lean hard muscle' and the response was that it was

entertaining but unlikely to be accurate... Thankfully sq never had that effect

on me personally or I'd have required more new wardrobes than I have been

through personally over the years here as a competing powerlifter!

So if we consider that measuring the bodyfat an individual has on board is still

somewhat less effective than we would like, how then can we be sure of lean

gains that would be based on our best guess of the fat to lean ratio of a

person? Would not a " lean muscle gain " not be entirely muscle also, but the

bones themselves responding to the increased loads as well?

Interesting topic, back to reading.

The Phantom

aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

Denver, Colorado, USA

Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

Krista's reports of 25-44 lbs of muscle gain within a year for life long

ectomorphs.

I will dissent, however, on the notion that 20-30 lbs of muscle gain in as

little as three months are hype. Back from the 1930s into the early 60s many a

trainee reported 20 or more pounds increase in manly muscle over a three month

period by means of specializing in 5 sets of 20 reps of breathing squats, some

adding the Hise shrug. Thrice weekly, consuming nutrient dense whole foods and

the sole protein supplement of that bygone era: milk.

Breathing squats are especially demanding, certainly no fun save for Masochists.

With each set, one breath between reps 1-5, then 2 deep breaths for reps 6-10,

three deep breaths for reps 11-15, and - you guessed it - four deep breaths

between reps 16-20. The immediately onto a picnic bench for sets of 20 reps,

very light weight dumbbell flyes to expand the rib cage for a big chest.

These days I'll defer to the exciting new work coming out of McMaster University

comparing 1 set of 8-10 1 RM to failure vs 3 sets of 8-10 to failure 80% 1 RM vs

3 sets of 30 reps to failure with 30% 1 RM. Adding volume at 80% and 30%

produced essentially equal hypertrophy, both significantly greater than 1 set to

failure (a failed idea).

In my personal experience and that of training others, hitting significant

annual hypertrophy is far more easily facilitated when rep schemes, cadence or

tempo, stage sets, drop sets, using 30-80% 1 RM are all intelligently and

strategically applied to one end: avoiding plateaus, instead sustainable

anabolism.

> > Hello Everyone,

> >

> > I recently posted a question about rate of hypertrophy – basically, what

are

> > the optimal realistic results a person can expect, vs. the endless claims in

> > the muscle mags, e.g., " Gain 20-30 pounds of lean muscle mass in six

> > weeks!!! " I compared the responses with some other data, and I thought I

> > would share it with the group.

> >

>

> I work with Berardi at Precision Nutrition, which runs a

> muscle-gaining Scrawny to Brawny program. It's a one-year program that

> focuses on step-by-step habit acquisition and entrainment, like our

> other fat-loss program Lean Eating. We run a contest that awards money

> to top finishers -- people who dramatically transform their bodies.

>

> Looking at our recent 12-month cohorts, our top finalists put on

> between 25-44 lbs in a year. These are ectomorphs who are " lifetime

> scrawnies " , so they gain mass relatively slowly -- some made notable

> transformations even with relatively less muscle gain, because small

> amounts of mass make a big difference on a shorter/skinnier frame.

> This is with a highly structured eating and training program, a coach,

> and daily check-ins (lessons and habits). All material is

> science/research-based as you might expect from JB and PN.

>

> Interestingly, our 6-month program was not as dissimilar as you would

> expect -- it doesn't seem to be a linear scale.

>

> Here are finalists from our early, 6-month program:

> http://www.precisionnutrition.com/s2b-winners-2010

>

> Here are finalists from our 12-month program that begin in May 2011.

> http://www.scrawnytobrawny.com/may-2011-finalists

>

> Krista

> Toronto, ON

>

> --------------------

> Krista -Dixon, PhD

> Lean Eating Program Director

> PrecisionNutrition.com

> krista@...

>

[Guest guest]

Yes, that what I said. Ralph has already derailed it.

Kenny Croxdale

Rio Rancho, NM

Re: Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

>

> I'm going to jump in here with one point that I think has bearing on the

> whole

> question: When we measure lean mass, we are not precise. We cannot be.

> What we

> get is some guess based on measurements which varies and can be misleading

> - and

> I recall Mel's comment long ago that the only truly accurate measure was

> " autopsy " . Few would desire to have their lean mass evaluated this way

> during a

> growth phase in training, so that's clearly out .

>

> With the known variance in measuring methods (and here I recall

> Krieger's

> good article on measuring that he thoughtfully shared some time ago with

> this

> group), my thinking is that there is a considerable margin of guessing

> that

> makes it possible to overestimate how much lean mass has been gained by an

> individual over time. I myself over the years have experienced wildly

> ranging

> measurements by folks who were said to be expert in such things -

> considering

> that the measurement of one's bodyfat subcutaneously or measurements to

> estimate

> a guess at overall bodyfat including a visceral estimate would have

> bearing on a

> presumed gain in lean mass by way of deducting the presumed bodyfat on

> board...

>

> I also once handed Mel a copy of a book that suggested you could 'squat

> for 6

> weeks and gain 20 pounds of lean hard muscle' and the response was that it

> was

> entertaining but unlikely to be accurate... Thankfully sq never had that

> effect

> on me personally or I'd have required more new wardrobes than I have been

> through personally over the years here as a competing powerlifter!

>

> So if we consider that measuring the bodyfat an individual has on board is

> still

> somewhat less effective than we would like, how then can we be sure of

> lean

> gains that would be based on our best guess of the fat to lean ratio of a

> person? Would not a " lean muscle gain " not be entirely muscle also, but

> the

> bones themselves responding to the increased loads as well?

>

> Interesting topic, back to reading.

>

> The Phantom

> aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

> Denver, Colorado, USA

>

> Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

>

> Krista's reports of 25-44 lbs of muscle gain within a year for life long

> ectomorphs.

>

> I will dissent, however, on the notion that 20-30 lbs of muscle gain in as

> little as three months are hype. Back from the 1930s into the early 60s

> many a

> trainee reported 20 or more pounds increase in manly muscle over a three

> month

> period by means of specializing in 5 sets of 20 reps of breathing squats,

> some

> adding the Hise shrug. Thrice weekly, consuming nutrient dense whole foods

> and

> the sole protein supplement of that bygone era: milk.

>

> Breathing squats are especially demanding, certainly no fun save for

> Masochists.

> With each set, one breath between reps 1-5, then 2 deep breaths for reps

> 6-10,

> three deep breaths for reps 11-15, and - you guessed it - four deep

> breaths

> between reps 16-20. The immediately onto a picnic bench for sets of 20

> reps,

> very light weight dumbbell flyes to expand the rib cage for a big chest.

>

> These days I'll defer to the exciting new work coming out of McMaster

> University

> comparing 1 set of 8-10 1 RM to failure vs 3 sets of 8-10 to failure 80% 1

> RM vs

> 3 sets of 30 reps to failure with 30% 1 RM. Adding volume at 80% and 30%

> produced essentially equal hypertrophy, both significantly greater than 1

> set to

> failure (a failed idea).

>

> In my personal experience and that of training others, hitting significant

> annual hypertrophy is far more easily facilitated when rep schemes,

> cadence or

> tempo, stage sets, drop sets, using 30-80% 1 RM are all intelligently and

> strategically applied to one end: avoiding plateaus, instead sustainable

> anabolism.

>

>

> > > Hello Everyone,

> > >

> > > I recently posted a question about rate of hypertrophy – basically,

> what are

>

> > > the optimal realistic results a person can expect, vs. the endless

> claims in

>

> > > the muscle mags, e.g., " Gain 20-30 pounds of lean muscle mass in six

> > > weeks!!! " I compared the responses with some other data, and I thought

> I

> > > would share it with the group.

> > >

> >

> > I work with Berardi at Precision Nutrition, which runs a

> > muscle-gaining Scrawny to Brawny program. It's a one-year program that

> > focuses on step-by-step habit acquisition and entrainment, like our

> > other fat-loss program Lean Eating. We run a contest that awards money

> > to top finishers -- people who dramatically transform their bodies.

> >

> > Looking at our recent 12-month cohorts, our top finalists put on

> > between 25-44 lbs in a year. These are ectomorphs who are " lifetime

> > scrawnies " , so they gain mass relatively slowly -- some made notable

> > transformations even with relatively less muscle gain, because small

> > amounts of mass make a big difference on a shorter/skinnier frame.

> > This is with a highly structured eating and training program, a coach,

> > and daily check-ins (lessons and habits). All material is

> > science/research-based as you might expect from JB and PN.

> >

> > Interestingly, our 6-month program was not as dissimilar as you would

> > expect -- it doesn't seem to be a linear scale.

> >

> > Here are finalists from our early, 6-month program:

> > http://www.precisionnutrition.com/s2b-winners-2010

> >

> > Here are finalists from our 12-month program that begin in May 2011.

> > http://www.scrawnytobrawny.com/may-2011-finalists

> >

> > Krista

> > Toronto, ON

> >

> > --------------------

> > Krista -Dixon, PhD

> > Lean Eating Program Director

> > PrecisionNutrition.com

> > krista@...

> >

>

>

[Guest guest]

I don't think it's a good idea to come up with a new definition of strength

just for Supertraining. Usually strength is measured in terms of force,

i.e. either Newtons (N), Kilogram weight (Kg) of Pound weight (Lb).

Giovanni Ciriani - West Hartford, CT - USA

On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 5:27 PM, Ralph Giarnella <ragiarn@...> wrote:

> **

>

>

>

>

> Kenny Crox wrote:

> There are different type of strength. Power is a sub class of strength.

> Also, there's relatively no power in powerlifting

>

> ********************

>

> Perhaps you can clarify those two statements. How do you measure

> strength?

> I would define it as the ability to apply force to move a mass over a

> distance in period of time.

> Both Olympic lifters and Power lifters move a mass a certain distance in a

> given period of time. In both cases the power can be calculated. You can

> then compare who produces more power.

>

>

> Ralph Giarnella MD

> Southington Ct. USA

>

> ________________________________

> From: " KennyCrox@... " <KennyCrox@...>

> Supertraining

> Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2012 8:40 AM

>

> Subject: Re: Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

>

>

>

>

> There are different type of strength. Power is a sub class of strength.

>

> . The true power athletes are Olympic lifters, who have registered some

> of, if not, the highest power output forces on record.

>

> Kenny Croxdale, CSCS

> Rio Rancho, NM

>

> Re: Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

>

> I'm going to jump in here with one point that I think has bearing on the

> whole

> question: When we measure lean mass, we are not precise. We cannot be.

> What we

> get is some guess based on measurements which varies and can be misleading

> - and

> I recall Mel's comment long ago that the only truly accurate measure was

> " autopsy " . Few would desire to have their lean mass evaluated this way

> during a

> growth phase in training, so that's clearly out .

>

> With the known variance in measuring methods (and here I recall

> Krieger's

> good article on measuring that he thoughtfully shared some time ago with

> this

> group), my thinking is that there is a considerable margin of guessing

> that

> makes it possible to overestimate how much lean mass has been gained by an

> individual over time. I myself over the years have experienced wildly

> ranging

> measurements by folks who were said to be expert in such things -

> considering

> that the measurement of one's bodyfat subcutaneously or measurements to

> estimate

> a guess at overall bodyfat including a visceral estimate would have

> bearing on a

> presumed gain in lean mass by way of deducting the presumed bodyfat on

> board...

>

> I also once handed Mel a copy of a book that suggested you could 'squat

> for 6

> weeks and gain 20 pounds of lean hard muscle' and the response was that it

> was

> entertaining but unlikely to be accurate... Thankfully sq never had that

> effect

> on me personally or I'd have required more new wardrobes than I have been

> through personally over the years here as a competing powerlifter!

>

> So if we consider that measuring the bodyfat an individual has on board is

> still

> somewhat less effective than we would like, how then can we be sure of

> lean

> gains that would be based on our best guess of the fat to lean ratio of a

> person? Would not a " lean muscle gain " not be entirely muscle also, but

> the

> bones themselves responding to the increased loads as well?

>

> Interesting topic, back to reading.

>

> The Phantom

> aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

> Denver, Colorado, USA

>

> Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

>

> Krista's reports of 25-44 lbs of muscle gain within a year for life long

> ectomorphs.

>

> I will dissent, however, on the notion that 20-30 lbs of muscle gain in as

> little as three months are hype. Back from the 1930s into the early 60s

> many a

> trainee reported 20 or more pounds increase in manly muscle over a three

> month

> period by means of specializing in 5 sets of 20 reps of breathing squats,

> some

> adding the Hise shrug. Thrice weekly, consuming nutrient dense whole foods

> and

> the sole protein supplement of that bygone era: milk.

>

> Breathing squats are especially demanding, certainly no fun save for

> Masochists.

> With each set, one breath between reps 1-5, then 2 deep breaths for reps

> 6-10,

> three deep breaths for reps 11-15, and - you guessed it - four deep

> breaths

> between reps 16-20. The immediately onto a picnic bench for sets of 20

> reps,

> very light weight dumbbell flyes to expand the rib cage for a big chest.

>

> These days I'll defer to the exciting new work coming out of McMaster

> University

> comparing 1 set of 8-10 1 RM to failure vs 3 sets of 8-10 to failure 80% 1

> RM vs

> 3 sets of 30 reps to failure with 30% 1 RM. Adding volume at 80% and 30%

> produced essentially equal hypertrophy, both significantly greater than 1

> set to

> failure (a failed idea).

>

> In my personal experience and that of training others, hitting significant

> annual hypertrophy is far more easily facilitated when rep schemes,

> cadence or

> tempo, stage sets, drop sets, using 30-80% 1 RM are all intelligently and

> strategically applied to one end: avoiding plateaus, instead sustainable

> anabolism.

>

>

> > > Hello Everyone,

> > >

> > > I recently posted a question about rate of hypertrophy – basically,

> what are

>

> > > the optimal realistic results a person can expect, vs. the endless

> claims in

>

> > > the muscle mags, e.g., " Gain 20-30 pounds of lean muscle mass in six

> > > weeks!!! " I compared the responses with some other data, and I thought

> I

> > > would share it with the group.

> > >

> >

> > I work with Berardi at Precision Nutrition, which runs a

> > muscle-gaining Scrawny to Brawny program. It's a one-year program that

> > focuses on step-by-step habit acquisition and entrainment, like our

> > other fat-loss program Lean Eating. We run a contest that awards money

> > to top finishers -- people who dramatically transform their bodies.

> >

> > Looking at our recent 12-month cohorts, our top finalists put on

> > between 25-44 lbs in a year. These are ectomorphs who are " lifetime

> > scrawnies " , so they gain mass relatively slowly -- some made notable

> > transformations even with relatively less muscle gain, because small

> > amounts of mass make a big difference on a shorter/skinnier frame.

> > This is with a highly structured eating and training program, a coach,

> > and daily check-ins (lessons and habits). All material is

> > science/research-based as you might expect from JB and PN.

> >

> > Interestingly, our 6-month program was not as dissimilar as you would

> > expect -- it doesn't seem to be a linear scale.

> >

> > Here are finalists from our early, 6-month program:

> > http://www.precisionnutrition.com/s2b-winners-2010

> >

> > Here are finalists from our 12-month program that begin in May 2011.

> > http://www.scrawnytobrawny.com/may-2011-finalists

> >

> > Krista

> > Toronto, ON

> >

> > --------------------

> > Krista -Dixon, PhD

> > Lean Eating Program Director

> > PrecisionNutrition.com

> > krista@...

> >

>

>

[Guest guest]

I broke it down into smaller bit size pieces. Sorry that confused you.

Kenny Croxdale

Rio Rancho, NM

Re: Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

>

> I'm going to jump in here with one point that I think has bearing on the

> whole

> question: When we measure lean mass, we are not precise. We cannot be.

> What we

> get is some guess based on measurements which varies and can be misleading

> - and

> I recall Mel's comment long ago that the only truly accurate measure was

> " autopsy " . Few would desire to have their lean mass evaluated this way

> during a

> growth phase in training, so that's clearly out .

>

> With the known variance in measuring methods (and here I recall

> Krieger's

> good article on measuring that he thoughtfully shared some time ago with

> this

> group), my thinking is that there is a considerable margin of guessing

> that

> makes it possible to overestimate how much lean mass has been gained by an

> individual over time. I myself over the years have experienced wildly

> ranging

> measurements by folks who were said to be expert in such things -

> considering

> that the measurement of one's bodyfat subcutaneously or measurements to

> estimate

> a guess at overall bodyfat including a visceral estimate would have

> bearing on a

> presumed gain in lean mass by way of deducting the presumed bodyfat on

> board...

>

> I also once handed Mel a copy of a book that suggested you could 'squat

> for 6

> weeks and gain 20 pounds of lean hard muscle' and the response was that it

> was

> entertaining but unlikely to be accurate... Thankfully sq never had that

> effect

> on me personally or I'd have required more new wardrobes than I have been

> through personally over the years here as a competing powerlifter!

>

> So if we consider that measuring the bodyfat an individual has on board is

> still

> somewhat less effective than we would like, how then can we be sure of

> lean

> gains that would be based on our best guess of the fat to lean ratio of a

> person? Would not a " lean muscle gain " not be entirely muscle also, but

> the

> bones themselves responding to the increased loads as well?

>

> Interesting topic, back to reading.

>

> The Phantom

> aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

> Denver, Colorado, USA

>

> Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

>

> Krista's reports of 25-44 lbs of muscle gain within a year for life long

> ectomorphs.

>

> I will dissent, however, on the notion that 20-30 lbs of muscle gain in as

> little as three months are hype. Back from the 1930s into the early 60s

> many a

> trainee reported 20 or more pounds increase in manly muscle over a three

> month

> period by means of specializing in 5 sets of 20 reps of breathing squats,

> some

> adding the Hise shrug. Thrice weekly, consuming nutrient dense whole foods

> and

> the sole protein supplement of that bygone era: milk.

>

> Breathing squats are especially demanding, certainly no fun save for

> Masochists.

> With each set, one breath between reps 1-5, then 2 deep breaths for reps

> 6-10,

> three deep breaths for reps 11-15, and - you guessed it - four deep

> breaths

> between reps 16-20. The immediately onto a picnic bench for sets of 20

> reps,

> very light weight dumbbell flyes to expand the rib cage for a big chest.

>

> These days I'll defer to the exciting new work coming out of McMaster

> University

> comparing 1 set of 8-10 1 RM to failure vs 3 sets of 8-10 to failure 80% 1

> RM vs

> 3 sets of 30 reps to failure with 30% 1 RM. Adding volume at 80% and 30%

> produced essentially equal hypertrophy, both significantly greater than 1

> set to

> failure (a failed idea).

>

> In my personal experience and that of training others, hitting significant

> annual hypertrophy is far more easily facilitated when rep schemes,

> cadence or

> tempo, stage sets, drop sets, using 30-80% 1 RM are all intelligently and

> strategically applied to one end: avoiding plateaus, instead sustainable

> anabolism.

>

>

> > > Hello Everyone,

> > >

> > > I recently posted a question about rate of hypertrophy – basically,

> what are

>

> > > the optimal realistic results a person can expect, vs. the endless

> claims in

>

> > > the muscle mags, e.g., " Gain 20-30 pounds of lean muscle mass in six

> > > weeks!!! " I compared the responses with some other data, and I thought

> I

> > > would share it with the group.

> > >

> >

> > I work with Berardi at Precision Nutrition, which runs a

> > muscle-gaining Scrawny to Brawny program. It's a one-year program that

> > focuses on step-by-step habit acquisition and entrainment, like our

> > other fat-loss program Lean Eating. We run a contest that awards money

> > to top finishers -- people who dramatically transform their bodies.

> >

> > Looking at our recent 12-month cohorts, our top finalists put on

> > between 25-44 lbs in a year. These are ectomorphs who are " lifetime

> > scrawnies " , so they gain mass relatively slowly -- some made notable

> > transformations even with relatively less muscle gain, because small

> > amounts of mass make a big difference on a shorter/skinnier frame.

> > This is with a highly structured eating and training program, a coach,

> > and daily check-ins (lessons and habits). All material is

> > science/research-based as you might expect from JB and PN.

> >

> > Interestingly, our 6-month program was not as dissimilar as you would

> > expect -- it doesn't seem to be a linear scale.

> >

> > Here are finalists from our early, 6-month program:

> > http://www.precisionnutrition.com/s2b-winners-2010

> >

> > Here are finalists from our 12-month program that begin in May 2011.

> > http://www.scrawnytobrawny.com/may-2011-finalists

> >

> > Krista

> > Toronto, ON

> >

> > --------------------

> > Krista -Dixon, PhD

> > Lean Eating Program Director

> > PrecisionNutrition.com

> > krista@...

> >

>

>

[Guest guest]

Kenny,

I'm not sure what you mean even in your last post.

Giovanni Ciriani - West Hartford, CT - USA

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 9:11 AM, <KennyCrox@...> wrote:

> **

>

>

>

> I broke it down into smaller bit size pieces. Sorry that confused you.

>

> Kenny Croxdale

>

> Rio Rancho, NM

>

> Re: Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

> >

> > I'm going to jump in here with one point that I think has bearing on the

> > whole

> > question: When we measure lean mass, we are not precise. We cannot be.

> > What we

> > get is some guess based on measurements which varies and can be

> misleading

> > - and

> > I recall Mel's comment long ago that the only truly accurate measure was

> > " autopsy " . Few would desire to have their lean mass evaluated this way

> > during a

> > growth phase in training, so that's clearly out .

> >

> > With the known variance in measuring methods (and here I recall

> > Krieger's

> > good article on measuring that he thoughtfully shared some time ago with

> > this

> > group), my thinking is that there is a considerable margin of guessing

> > that

> > makes it possible to overestimate how much lean mass has been gained by

> an

> > individual over time. I myself over the years have experienced wildly

> > ranging

> > measurements by folks who were said to be expert in such things -

> > considering

> > that the measurement of one's bodyfat subcutaneously or measurements to

> > estimate

> > a guess at overall bodyfat including a visceral estimate would have

> > bearing on a

> > presumed gain in lean mass by way of deducting the presumed bodyfat on

> > board...

> >

> > I also once handed Mel a copy of a book that suggested you could 'squat

> > for 6

> > weeks and gain 20 pounds of lean hard muscle' and the response was that

> it

> > was

> > entertaining but unlikely to be accurate... Thankfully sq never had that

> > effect

> > on me personally or I'd have required more new wardrobes than I have been

> > through personally over the years here as a competing powerlifter!

> >

> > So if we consider that measuring the bodyfat an individual has on board

> is

> > still

> > somewhat less effective than we would like, how then can we be sure of

> > lean

> > gains that would be based on our best guess of the fat to lean ratio of a

> > person? Would not a " lean muscle gain " not be entirely muscle also, but

> > the

> > bones themselves responding to the increased loads as well?

> >

> > Interesting topic, back to reading.

> >

> > The Phantom

> > aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

> > Denver, Colorado, USA

> >

> > Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

> >

> > Krista's reports of 25-44 lbs of muscle gain within a year for life long

> > ectomorphs.

> >

> > I will dissent, however, on the notion that 20-30 lbs of muscle gain in

> as

> > little as three months are hype. Back from the 1930s into the early 60s

> > many a

> > trainee reported 20 or more pounds increase in manly muscle over a three

> > month

> > period by means of specializing in 5 sets of 20 reps of breathing squats,

> > some

> > adding the Hise shrug. Thrice weekly, consuming nutrient dense whole

> foods

> > and

> > the sole protein supplement of that bygone era: milk.

> >

> > Breathing squats are especially demanding, certainly no fun save for

> > Masochists.

> > With each set, one breath between reps 1-5, then 2 deep breaths for reps

> > 6-10,

> > three deep breaths for reps 11-15, and - you guessed it - four deep

> > breaths

> > between reps 16-20. The immediately onto a picnic bench for sets of 20

> > reps,

> > very light weight dumbbell flyes to expand the rib cage for a big chest.

> >

> > These days I'll defer to the exciting new work coming out of McMaster

> > University

> > comparing 1 set of 8-10 1 RM to failure vs 3 sets of 8-10 to failure 80%

> 1

> > RM vs

> > 3 sets of 30 reps to failure with 30% 1 RM. Adding volume at 80% and 30%

> > produced essentially equal hypertrophy, both significantly greater than 1

> > set to

> > failure (a failed idea).

> >

> > In my personal experience and that of training others, hitting

> significant

> > annual hypertrophy is far more easily facilitated when rep schemes,

> > cadence or

> > tempo, stage sets, drop sets, using 30-80% 1 RM are all intelligently and

> > strategically applied to one end: avoiding plateaus, instead sustainable

> > anabolism.

> >

> >

> > > > Hello Everyone,

> > > >

> > > > I recently posted a question about rate of hypertrophy – basically,

> > what are

> >

> > > > the optimal realistic results a person can expect, vs. the endless

> > claims in

> >

> > > > the muscle mags, e.g., " Gain 20-30 pounds of lean muscle mass in six

> > > > weeks!!! " I compared the responses with some other data, and I

> thought

> > I

> > > > would share it with the group.

> > > >

> > >

> > > I work with Berardi at Precision Nutrition, which runs a

> > > muscle-gaining Scrawny to Brawny program. It's a one-year program that

> > > focuses on step-by-step habit acquisition and entrainment, like our

> > > other fat-loss program Lean Eating. We run a contest that awards money

> > > to top finishers -- people who dramatically transform their bodies.

> > >

> > > Looking at our recent 12-month cohorts, our top finalists put on

> > > between 25-44 lbs in a year. These are ectomorphs who are " lifetime

> > > scrawnies " , so they gain mass relatively slowly -- some made notable

> > > transformations even with relatively less muscle gain, because small

> > > amounts of mass make a big difference on a shorter/skinnier frame.

> > > This is with a highly structured eating and training program, a coach,

> > > and daily check-ins (lessons and habits). All material is

> > > science/research-based as you might expect from JB and PN.

> > >

> > > Interestingly, our 6-month program was not as dissimilar as you would

> > > expect -- it doesn't seem to be a linear scale.

> > >

> > > Here are finalists from our early, 6-month program:

> > > http://www.precisionnutrition.com/s2b-winners-2010

> > >

> > > Here are finalists from our 12-month program that begin in May 2011.

> > > http://www.scrawnytobrawny.com/may-2011-finalists

> > >

> > > Krista

> > > Toronto, ON

> > >

> > > --------------------

> > > Krista -Dixon, PhD

> > > Lean Eating Program Director

> > > PrecisionNutrition.com

> > > krista@...

> > >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Hmmm... Newtons is a measure of force, but I'm not so sure it's a way

of measuring strength, as it doesn't take into account the amount of time.

I can be as strong as a horse for the first 1/4 second, but the rate of 

acceleration on the object will quickly degrade, but other, " stronger "

people can keep it accelerating longer.  Newtons.. but for how long?

Dave Salisbury, Boulder, CO

 

Posted by: " Giovanni Ciriani "  Giovanni.Ciriani@...   gciriani

Sun Jun 17, 2012 3:35 pm (PDT)

I don't think it's a good idea to come up with a new definition of strength

just for Supertraining. Usually strength is measured in terms of force,

i.e. either Newtons (N), Kilogram weight (Kg) of Pound weight (Lb).

Giovanni Ciriani - West Hartford, CT - USA

[Guest guest]

Well one bodybuilder at the gym I was training at was about 275 lbs. huge and

ripped. He only did machine training. He never used more than 100 lbs. on any

exercise whether it was the cable bench press, cable shoulder press, pulldown,

seated row, leg press, machine squat, leg curl, or any other machine. I

observed him doing about 100 reps per set on each machine. Then after his

weight training he would always do 30 minutes of cardiovascular training. Now

he was big and ripped but lifted only light weights with high reps.

If I were to do that I would be a skinny refugee from camp.

I think it was the steroids that were causing him to be huge and ripped with low

weight/high rep workouts.

Edwin Freeman, Jr.

San Francisco, USA

Re: Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

I'm going to jump in here with one point that I think has bearing on the whole

question: When we measure lean mass, we are not precise. We cannot be. What we

get is some guess based on measurements which varies and can be misleading - and

I recall Mel's comment long ago that the only truly accurate measure was

" autopsy " . Few would desire to have their lean mass evaluated this way during a

growth phase in training, so that's clearly out .

With the known variance in measuring methods (and here I recall Krieger's

good article on measuring that he thoughtfully shared some time ago with this

group), my thinking is that there is a considerable margin of guessing that

makes it possible to overestimate how much lean mass has been gained by an

individual over time. I myself over the years have experienced wildly ranging

measurements by folks who were said to be expert in such things - considering

that the measurement of one's bodyfat subcutaneously or measurements to estimate

a guess at overall bodyfat including a visceral estimate would have bearing on a

presumed gain in lean mass by way of deducting the presumed bodyfat on board...

I also once handed Mel a copy of a book that suggested you could 'squat for 6

weeks and gain 20 pounds of lean hard muscle' and the response was that it was

entertaining but unlikely to be accurate... Thankfully sq never had that effect

on me personally or I'd have required more new wardrobes than I have been

through personally over the years here as a competing powerlifter!

So if we consider that measuring the bodyfat an individual has on board is still

somewhat less effective than we would like, how then can we be sure of lean

gains that would be based on our best guess of the fat to lean ratio of a

person? Would not a " lean muscle gain " not be entirely muscle also, but the

bones themselves responding to the increased loads as well?

Interesting topic, back to reading.

The Phantom

aka Schaefer, CMT/RMT, competing powerlifter

Denver, Colorado, USA

Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

Krista's reports of 25-44 lbs of muscle gain within a year for life long

ectomorphs.

I will dissent, however, on the notion that 20-30 lbs of muscle gain in as

little as three months are hype. Back from the 1930s into the early 60s many a

trainee reported 20 or more pounds increase in manly muscle over a three month

period by means of specializing in 5 sets of 20 reps of breathing squats, some

adding the Hise shrug. Thrice weekly, consuming nutrient dense whole foods and

the sole protein supplement of that bygone era: milk.

Breathing squats are especially demanding, certainly no fun save for Masochists.

With each set, one breath between reps 1-5, then 2 deep breaths for reps 6-10,

three deep breaths for reps 11-15, and - you guessed it - four deep breaths

between reps 16-20. The immediately onto a picnic bench for sets of 20 reps,

very light weight dumbbell flyes to expand the rib cage for a big chest.

These days I'll defer to the exciting new work coming out of McMaster University

comparing 1 set of 8-10 1 RM to failure vs 3 sets of 8-10 to failure 80% 1 RM vs

3 sets of 30 reps to failure with 30% 1 RM. Adding volume at 80% and 30%

produced essentially equal hypertrophy, both significantly greater than 1 set to

failure (a failed idea).

In my personal experience and that of training others, hitting significant

annual hypertrophy is far more easily facilitated when rep schemes, cadence or

tempo, stage sets, drop sets, using 30-80% 1 RM are all intelligently and

strategically applied to one end: avoiding plateaus, instead sustainable

anabolism.

> > Hello Everyone,

> >

> > I recently posted a question about rate of hypertrophy – basically, what

are

> > the optimal realistic results a person can expect, vs. the endless claims in

> > the muscle mags, e.g., " Gain 20-30 pounds of lean muscle mass in six

> > weeks!!! " I compared the responses with some other data, and I thought I

> > would share it with the group.

> >

>

> I work with Berardi at Precision Nutrition, which runs a

> muscle-gaining Scrawny to Brawny program. It's a one-year program that

> focuses on step-by-step habit acquisition and entrainment, like our

> other fat-loss program Lean Eating. We run a contest that awards money

> to top finishers -- people who dramatically transform their bodies.

>

> Looking at our recent 12-month cohorts, our top finalists put on

> between 25-44 lbs in a year. These are ectomorphs who are " lifetime

> scrawnies " , so they gain mass relatively slowly -- some made notable

> transformations even with relatively less muscle gain, because small

> amounts of mass make a big difference on a shorter/skinnier frame.

> This is with a highly structured eating and training program, a coach,

> and daily check-ins (lessons and habits). All material is

> science/research-based as you might expect from JB and PN.

>

> Interestingly, our 6-month program was not as dissimilar as you would

> expect -- it doesn't seem to be a linear scale.

>

> Here are finalists from our early, 6-month program:

> http://www.precisionnutrition.com/s2b-winners-2010

>

> Here are finalists from our 12-month program that begin in May 2011.

> http://www.scrawnytobrawny.com/may-2011-finalists

>

> Krista

> Toronto, ON

>

> --------------------

> Krista -Dixon, PhD

> Lean Eating Program Director

> PrecisionNutrition.com

> krista@...

>

[Guest guest]

newton, abbr. N, unit of force in the mks system of units, which is based

on the metric system; 

it is the force that produces an acceleration of 1 meter per second per second

when exerted on a mass of 1 kilogram. The newton is named for Sir Isaac Newton.

Ralph Giarnella MD

Southington Ct. USA 

________________________________

From: Salisbury <jetskers@...>

" Supertraining " <Supertraining >

Sent: Monday, June 18, 2012 1:33 PM

Subject: Re: More About Rate of Hypertrophy

 

Hmmm... Newtons is a measure of force, but I'm not so sure it's a way

of measuring strength, as it doesn't take into account the amount of time.

I can be as strong as a horse for the first 1/4 second, but the rate of 

acceleration on the object will quickly degrade, but other, " stronger "

people can keep it accelerating longer.  Newtons.. but for how long?

Dave Salisbury, Boulder, CO

 

Posted by: " Giovanni Ciriani "  Giovanni.Ciriani@...   gciriani

Sun Jun 17, 2012 3:35 pm (PDT)

I don't think it's a good idea to come up with a new definition of strength

just for Supertraining. Usually strength is measured in terms of force,

i.e. either Newtons (N), Kilogram weight (Kg) of Pound weight (Lb).

Giovanni Ciriani - West Hartford, CT - USA

[Guest guest]

You are right, Obviously one has to define the context and the rules under

which you measure the force, and that would clarify what we are talking

about. That's why we normally compare an athletic performance with a like

athletic performance with the same rules.

Giovanni Ciriani - West Hartford, CT - USA

On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Salisbury <jetskers@...> wrote:

> **

>

>

>

>

> Hmmm... Newtons is a measure of force, but I'm not so sure it's a way

> of measuring strength, as it doesn't take into account the amount of time.

> I can be as strong as a horse for the first 1/4 second, but the rate of

> acceleration on the object will quickly degrade, but other, " stronger "

> people can keep it accelerating longer. Newtons.. but for how long?

>

> Dave Salisbury, Boulder, CO

>

>

> Posted by: " Giovanni Ciriani " Giovanni.Ciriani@... gciriani

> Sun Jun 17, 2012 3:35 pm (PDT)

>

> I don't think it's a good idea to come up with a new definition of strength

> just for Supertraining. Usually strength is measured in terms of force,

> i.e. either Newtons (N), Kilogram weight (Kg) of Pound weight (Lb).

> Giovanni Ciriani - West Hartford, CT - USA

>

>