BodyRecomposition Support Forums  

Go Back   BodyRecomposition Support Forums > General information > General training questions
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Unread 08-28-2018, 12:15 PM
lylemcdonald lylemcdonald is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,162
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alcahuetej View Post
Ah, yes that's probably quite different than here in Boston. My company will pay for it, and the school's here are excellent. I'm also in the Biopharmaceutical industry, which is also quite good in the Boston area.
I doubt many are getting garbage degrees in biopharmaceuticals

Ex phys on the other hand.....

Bret's thesis involved some EMG work and his big study, the one he based his entier book on compard glute growth in two twins. One did half squats, one did glute bridges. two subjects, no crossover. That wouldn't get past a high school science fair. But it got him his PhD. MIght as well have been from a Cracker Jack Box.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Unread 08-28-2018, 04:24 PM
alcahuetej's Avatar
alcahuetej alcahuetej is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 777
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lylemcdonald View Post
I doubt many are getting garbage degrees in biopharmaceuticals

Ex phys on the other hand.....

Bret's thesis involved some EMG work and his big study, the one he based his entier book on compard glute growth in two twins. One did half squats, one did glute bridges. two subjects, no crossover. That wouldn't get past a high school science fair. But it got him his PhD. MIght as well have been from a Cracker Jack Box.
A few years ago one of my co-workers was doing a mock defense of her thesis to get input on it before the real thing. I don't remember too much from it, but I'm fairly certain it was a bit more complex than that.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Unread 08-28-2018, 08:04 PM
lylemcdonald lylemcdonald is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,162
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by alcahuetej View Post
A few years ago one of my co-workers was doing a mock defense of her thesis to get input on it before the real thing. I don't remember too much from it, but I'm fairly certain it was a bit more complex than that.
4 subjects?
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Unread 08-29-2018, 05:23 AM
alcahuetej's Avatar
alcahuetej alcahuetej is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 777
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lylemcdonald View Post
4 subjects?
Ha, yeah something like that.

n = 2, n = 4...that wouldn't fly in the biopharm world. That's uh, obviously no way near statistically significant for a "thesis".

Heck, I don't know if that would have been ok during my undergrad in Sports Med, never mind a post doc.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Unread 08-29-2018, 03:23 PM
lylemcdonald lylemcdonald is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,162
Default

Here ya' go

https://bodyrecomposition.com/resear...h-review.html/
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Unread 08-30-2018, 07:36 AM
w1cked w1cked is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,890
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lylemcdonald View Post
Thanks for the write up. Plenty of doofuses will aim for 45 sets now, regardless.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Unread 08-30-2018, 11:07 AM
HeavyLifting145 HeavyLifting145 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 89
Default

Thanks Lyle, that was a brilliant write up. I agree with everything you wrote.

Now, I don't mean to crap on Brad because I think he does great work, but, I looked at his routines in his textbook and M.A.X. muscle book (I'm pretty sure you did a review on the textbook, Lyle). And, honestly, I saw so many problems with them. And I know you can find problems with any training program, but the problems I found with them were a little bigger than minor things like 'should I bench or do OH press first.' His upper lower split is similar to the GBR except with a bit more volume with the upper end being 32 sets (8 chest, 8 back, 8 shoulders, 4 bi's and 4 tri's). For an upper intermediate or advanced lifter this is just too much and will take forever.

He has another routine which is a 6 day Chest/Back, Legs, Delts/Arms routine, but first off 6 days is nuts and overkill (and each day has a ton of volume), and second off since its 6 days you hit delts/arms one day and chest/back literally the next day which obviously isn't good.

His other routines were low volume strength, or 3 full body days, and I get it that he suggests periodizing and going from low to higher volume, but I'm still not a fan of the specific routines.

What did you think of his routines, Lyle?
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Unread 08-30-2018, 03:28 PM
holly70 holly70 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Michigan
Posts: 299
Default

Is this the "ask Lyle random questions about his last article" thread?

Because the bit about muscle size corresponding to strength directly (120 kg squat = X mm muscle) made me wonder if that has actually been studied.

Something like recruiting untrained people, grouping by muscle size/thickness? (hopefully with a roughly equal number of men and women in each group), then train them for 8 weeks and see if the theory is validated?

Or maybe 6 weeks...whatever interval would be mostly neurological adaptation vs. hypertrophy.

Not important, but I wondered if any kind of metric had been developed and if maybe there was any difference between men and women or if it was straight up muscle mass.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Unread 08-30-2018, 03:55 PM
lylemcdonald lylemcdonald is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,162
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by holly70 View Post
Is this the "ask Lyle random questions about his last article" thread?

Because the bit about muscle size corresponding to strength directly (120 kg squat = X mm muscle) made me wonder if that has actually been studied.

Something like recruiting untrained people, grouping by muscle size/thickness? (hopefully with a roughly equal number of men and women in each group), then train them for 8 weeks and see if the theory is validated?

Or maybe 6 weeks...whatever interval would be mostly neurological adaptation vs. hypertrophy.

Not important, but I wondered if any kind of metric had been developed and if maybe there was any difference between men and women or if it was straight up muscle mass.
To my knowledge, not in that way. And it wouldn't really work. Strength gains in beginners are dissociated from changes in msucle size. neural adaptations explain it.

However, there is a strong relationship between msucle cross sectional area and force production. A bigger muscle is a potentially stronger muscle. This interacts with things like nervous system function, levers and biomechanics.

So two people with very different lever lengths won't lift the same weight for a given muscle cross sectional area. Then again, the longer limb also alters cross sectional area.

So far a women vs. men, muscle is *basically* muscle. So if you take women and men's actual absolute strength, it's always higher in men by some amount. And if you normalize it to their actual muscle mass, the difference essentially goes away. It's not quite that simple due to small differences in fiber typing (I vs. II) and areas but, by and large, if you correct for muscle size, women and men are 'equally' strong.

So one pound of muscle on a woman generates the same force as one pound of muscle on a man. The man is stronger mostly by dint of simply having more muscle than a woman.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Unread 08-30-2018, 03:56 PM
lylemcdonald lylemcdonald is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,162
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HeavyLifting145 View Post
Thanks Lyle, that was a brilliant write up. I agree with everything you wrote.

Now, I don't mean to crap on Brad because I think he does great work, but, I looked at his routines in his textbook and M.A.X. muscle book (I'm pretty sure you did a review on the textbook, Lyle). And, honestly, I saw so many problems with them. And I know you can find problems with any training program, but the problems I found with them were a little bigger than minor things like 'should I bench or do OH press first.' His upper lower split is similar to the GBR except with a bit more volume with the upper end being 32 sets (8 chest, 8 back, 8 shoulders, 4 bi's and 4 tri's). For an upper intermediate or advanced lifter this is just too much and will take forever.

He has another routine which is a 6 day Chest/Back, Legs, Delts/Arms routine, but first off 6 days is nuts and overkill (and each day has a ton of volume), and second off since its 6 days you hit delts/arms one day and chest/back literally the next day which obviously isn't good.

His other routines were low volume strength, or 3 full body days, and I get it that he suggests periodizing and going from low to higher volume, but I'm still not a fan of the specific routines.

What did you think of his routines, Lyle?
I haven't looked at any of them since he wrote Look Better Naked in his early career. A tragedy of a book pushing 3X10RM/1' for women to avoid getting bulky. I've never let him live that down.

But he seems to really like doing short-term overreaching, going to huge volumes for a couple of weeks before cutting back. Meh.

Why he's so desperately trying to prove this super high volume is beyond me.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:55 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.