Guest viewing limit reached
  • You have reached the maximum number of guest views allowed
  • Please register below to remove this limitation

Article: Stimulate, Supply, and Signal

Great article, but in decades of lifting, I've heard so many different theories, I only get more confused as I age. It's mysterious to me why there aren't more definitive studies about hypertrophy development. My experience continues to be that changing lifts is more effective than anything else.
 
Isn't there more like 3500 cals in a pound of muscle?

I believe the author was explaining the amount of energy (700 kcals that can be drawn from fat stores or dietary nutrition etc.) the body must use to synthesize a lb of muscle, of which 3,500 kcals of materials is used as the building blocks.

I was also confused at first.

sent from my tricorder 3000
 
can someone please rephrase whatever he is trying to say here "If you take a close look at someone who has trained naturally a long time they will often look like a collection of bodyparts probably due in part to this difference. The traps, necks, and deltoids will often appear disproportionately underdeveloped then the quads, chest, etc." Is he trying to say that its hard to have proportionately developed shoulders, traps, and necks if you dont juice? I mean I guess I would agree with the delts thing but I always just assumed it was because people in general ineffectively train their delts and traps, at least from what Ive seen.
 
good piece that refutes alot of nada out there.

makes me think people over think this.
nothing much but back as a 17y.o benching >400lbs. all i did was eat eat eat and go hard hard hard.
however i feel rest needs to come in play. as a 17y.o i needn't be at a desk job the whole day stressing out over crap. whilst in school(who cares about school).

that's also the reason why i don't do weights anymore. i spent too many days banging metal.

back then there was no internet(marketing) but more common sense.
 
Back
Top