- 04-20-2013, 09:50 PM
I didn't want to post this in the overtraining thread because I did not want to hijack it. Ironically, I was going to start a thread asking if CNS problems were real. I thought they were, then I read that article by Mark Bell about how they are not. It didn't really change my mind as much as I wonder if his opinion comes from years of steroid use, which allow you to train much harder obviously. I would guess some signs would be lethargy, lack of motivation, things of that sort. That stuff can also be tied into your mood, though. Thoughts?
- 04-20-2013, 10:14 PM
I read that article. I think he was saying that it isnt as prevalent as stated since most people don't train hard or often enough to seriously tax their CNS. As far as your steroid comment, I'm natural and I've taxed myself to a point of overtraining. I think it's partially mental because of the need to sustain intensity. Here's my remedy: change one of two things:nutrition (more calories) or routine. Both of these components will change mental and physical engagement and thus remedy your overtraining. Sleep is essential as well. Good Luck! Taking a break or lightening for a set period can sometimes be a blessing for your body.
04-20-2013, 10:23 PM
I also agree with his point that people don't reach it as much as they think they do. If you are particularly stressed or eating like garbage or not sleeping, of course your workouts are going to suck. It has nothing to do with the CNS. I don't generally believe in either overtraining or CNS issues. I think it is a matter of having trouble keeping the intensity up. Which again can do with a lot of other things aside from either overtraining or CNS problems. Hell, endocronologists don't believe in CNS failure. It would need to be something very extreme to make that happen.
04-20-2013, 10:41 PM
No opposition to hormones either but theyre popular, just like you said, because they aid in recovery and muscle repair, anabolism. I think that people who aren't listening to their bodies blame it on fatigue rather than the real cause, boredom or ignorance.
04-20-2013, 11:19 PM
04-21-2013, 09:50 AM
I think a situation arises where, if you cannot cut something up and put it under a microscope to see what is happening, it is a tougher experiment to have data on.
I have also heard some gurus/scientists say, it is not necessarily the CNS, but the PNS that can be over taxed.
Questions also arise, that if you can train the muscle fibers & structural system along with cardio respiratory to adapt to a greater stimulus, then why not the CNS too?
There was a book written years ago about adapting to stress and small amounts of periods of time are good. People always seem to want a stress free life, but actually, stress can be good for you, as long as it is not overdone, just like many other things.
I think too, we relate CNS burnout with boredom in training, loss of libido, appetite mood swings etc. etc. but as far as specifics I believe it is still a study of how emotions and the mental states, relate or carryover if you will, to the physical states of our bodies.
I believe there is some research into neurons controlling specific movement, that with too much heavy or single max attempt work over time, become less responsive to stimulus and thus changing up the pattern or movement, even slightly helps or creates a different pattern. Is this why some routines use conjugate training?
As far as drugs/PEDS, I see what you guys are saying, but my question would be, that even with better recovery/strength from exogenous sources, could a level still be reached by the enhanced trainee, of a point of no return?
Drugs may enhance the length of time or total output compared to a natural trainee, but I don't think it means they would never have to deal with going past the point of no return IMO.
04-21-2013, 10:15 AM
Well, I think are lots of examples of people really damaging their body. Ronnie Coleman comes to mind. He was on PEDS but his training style was so intense that his body more or less shut down. I think it started with nerve damage that affected the growth of on side of his back. His situation was pretty intense. Since then he has bad surgery and other issues.
04-21-2013, 12:44 PM
Certain androgens, especially the stronger androgens will actually increase CNS drive, and can lead to a state of over training quicker if vol/int/freq and mental stress are not accounted for. I am not too familiar with the effects of steroids on the CNS such that increase its recovery.
Here's the thing. Over training is a real phenomenom. To say its just under eating, etc. is being foolish. Most people on here (typical bodybuilding routines) do not use the intensity (as a percentage of of 1 RM, or neurodynamic magnitude) to reach a true state of over training. But, for higher level athletes who are doing a lot of CNS demanding activities, such as 90%+ intensity training, plyometrics, sprinting, etc. over training is a very real concern, and is why periodization is so important.
Here is some reading, if you really are interested I can get the full texts of any of these studies:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23016079 (Free article, and good review)
Jason Cholewa, Ph.D., CSCS
04-21-2013, 01:20 PM
04-21-2013, 02:06 PM
Nice find Paul, and probably easier than reading what I put up. I also I noticed some of the pubmed citations I posted are hyperlinked in his article, which I appreciate.
04-21-2013, 04:06 PM
04-21-2013, 04:33 PM
As far as steroids go, I was wondering if his point of view was due to the amount of time he spent on PEDS. I think they allow you to push your body harder which would then push back the normal state of when you would overtraining. Say you are a natural trainer and you have trained to the brink of overtraining. Steroids would then allow you to push your physical limitsl so it's not an issue entire a higher training threshold. If they were not effective for those purposes, world class athletes wouldn't bother with them. CNS issues in world-class athletes is an issue. I think that's why sometimes athletes in certain sports disappear.
I guess I'm stating the everyday gym goer doesn't really have to worry about CNS issues for the most part. Most of their concerns are lack of sleep, poor diet, and additional stressors such as work, children, etc that do not allow them to go to their fullest at the gym.
04-21-2013, 05:19 PM
The overtraining that is spoken frequently on forums doesn't happen; they're usually either out of shape, undereating, or both. AAS changes the game to an extent, but most highly overrate the degree in which it will help with CNS recovery. They undisputedly help with the muscular side of the equation, but that is not the source of overtraining.
Bell himself will tell you that overtraining does exist, but seldom is it going to truly happen in the recreational gym rats that spend 4-6 hours training per week.
M.Ed. Ex Phys
04-21-2013, 05:56 PM
I figured steroids, with their increase in aggression and drive, would block out some CNS issues one might have. I didn't figure they had a direct connection to the CNS so to speak, but I figured they would help more. Count me as one of the ones that over stated its abilities in that department. haha
04-21-2013, 08:41 PM
PEDs will help more so with the work capacity aspect than really ramp up CNS recovery. One the reasons why Westside is such a strong gym is their emphasis on a high work capacity. With a higher work capacity, your body will recover quicker and you'll be able to train at a higher percentage. However, to say you'll be setting PRs every time is far from true.
M.Ed. Ex Phys
04-21-2013, 09:02 PM
04-21-2013, 09:21 PM
04-22-2013, 06:50 AM
Also, and some here may disagree, but linear progression is still probably better for most, in staving off staleness or what might appear to be, overreaching and keeping the gains coming over cycles.
04-22-2013, 07:47 AM
In regards to linear progression, that really depends on the level of lifter, but I can say with near 100% certainty that it will not work at all for a geared lifter. You want overreaching at the end of each cycle, but it does have to be properly programmed according to that specific lifter and their strength level/work capacity. Linear progression, IMO, fails to really capture this aspect in that it is too rigid and lifters are rarely going to stay on course with the plan due to a myriad of reasons.
M.Ed. Ex Phys
04-22-2013, 08:27 AM
There is no doubt that you have to give Lou his dues on successful lifters. And I agree it seems tipped towards geared lifting. Just to play devils advocate however, taking the deadlift, Lou has had IMO (compared to other non WSB routines and or programs) less success compared to BP & squat, since it is a harder lift to get help from gear out of.In regards to linear progression, that really depends on the level of lifter, but I can say with near 100% certainty that it will not work at all for a geared lifter. You want overreaching at the end of each cycle, but it does have to be properly programmed according to that specific lifter and their strength level/work capacity. Linear progression, IMO, fails to really capture this aspect in that it is too rigid and lifters are rarely going to stay on course with the plan due to a myriad of reasons.
I just read a post from a PL'er on a differing forum, about how the vast majority of lifters, will have great success with say the "Workout Of The Month" in PLUSA, which has been almost always, a linear type set up.
Oh, and apology for a thread derail to o/p...!
04-22-2013, 08:55 AM
M.Ed. Ex Phys
04-22-2013, 02:16 PM
Well, I do think quite a few "raw" perhaps some "unity" lifters still use it in some form or fashion. Maybe there is a bit of miscommunications on our descriptions of linear.
Coan used it and it worked pretty good for him. Albeit before the super gear I suppose.
This was also an interesting read, vvv but mentions how Lou moved away from it more with the geared stuff, so I can see your points too.
Raw Lifting and Linear Periodization â€¢ Myosynthesis
04-22-2013, 04:01 PM
No worries about hijacking paul! I like good reads and already saw what I needed to see. My feeling was correct and verified.
04-22-2013, 04:05 PM
M.Ed. Ex Phys
04-22-2013, 06:23 PM
04-22-2013, 07:58 PM
Similar Forum Threads
- By Sheesh in forum Training ForumReplies: 3Last Post: 01-25-2003, 10:21 PM
- By Sanosuke in forum AnabolicsReplies: 11Last Post: 01-06-2003, 11:20 AM
- By labrad in forum General ChatReplies: 6Last Post: 12-23-2002, 03:27 PM
- By pjorstad in forum AnabolicsReplies: 3Last Post: 12-20-2002, 05:58 PM
- By deaconbill in forum Weight LossReplies: 11Last Post: 11-29-2002, 12:38 PM