Category: Training

This post previously contained an analysis of a paper by Barbalho et al. examining varying training volumes in women.     I have taken that analysis down for the time being.

Roughly a week ago, a paper was released pointing out inconsistencies (or rather extreme similarity) of the data in a number of Barbalho’s papers, raising the question of their validity.  Their study on training volume in men was already retracted  and it’s entirely possible that more of their studies will be as well.  Until such time as the situation has been resolved, it seems most prudent to remove the analysis of their paper.

However, I have chosen not to fully depublish this post since I feel that is more honest to leave it up with an explanation of why the analysis is no longer here.  If the Barbalho et al. data turns out to be valid and the papers are not retracted, I will republish the text.… Keep Reading

So the concept of sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is currently back in the limelight of the fitness industry.  This is due to an additional analysis of the Huan et. al. study that Mike Israetel was involved with.  I discussed the original study in detail in my series on Training Volume and Hypertrophy and will briefly re-examine it below for background context of the newer paper.

In fact, I was originally going to do a research review on the new paper but, honestly, it was going to be boring and overly detail oriented and it seemed more useful to look at the topic in a more general sense (while still being my own boring, neurotic detail oriented self).

Edit on June 6th, 2015: When I originally wrote this, the paper had not passed peer review but it has just been published officially.  As I knew it would.

Now, I have written about the concept of sarcoplasmic hypertrophy in the past, probably in my Ultimate Diet 2.0 but I imagine elsewhere. … Keep Reading

Ok, here’s the thing.  For years I’ve said that there are no training secrets that it’s just hard work plus genetics plus time plus a few other things.  But it’s time to come clean: I’ve been lying.  There are training secrets.  I mean true training secrets, guarded closely by the Illuminatty, and only shared with those who have achieved the 32nd degree of Clean Eating.

This is where you become so morally pure through your superior life choices (and self-righteously judging all those that don’t follow them) that you can survive on light and air (NOTHING is less processed).  You develop the ability to synthesize ATP from sunlight and fix nitrogen from the air like a plant; simply standing outside equals growth at this point.  Few achieve it but for those that do, there is no limit.

But having concluded that the Illuminatty is really a false Illuminatty, and that I and only I carry the true word of Arnold, I will now share with you the two most truly powerful training approaches ever yet devised to generate all of the mass, strength, symmetry, leanness that you could ever want: the ultimate training secret.  … Keep Reading

In recent months, a variety of #fitpros have jumped on the high-frequency training bandwagon.  Eric Helms and Omar Isuf did a video where Eric claims to be training full body every day.  Before then stretching the definition of full body to it’s breaking point. Apparently now you can work the ‘full body’ over multiple days but last time I looked that’s called a split routine.

Others have done it too, claiming all kinds of great results from their ‘new training paradigm’.

Nevermind that research absolutely does NOT support this type of training in any form or fashion.  But the “evidence based community” has now decided that evidence includes their own personal anecdotes.  More on that in another video.

And yes, I know all about the Norwegian Frequency Program. A program where the guy who ran the study even said that for growth he’d train a muscle less frequently with higher volumes and intensities.… Keep Reading

Ok, let’s finish this thing up.  So far I’ve looked at the 7 current studies (as of this article’s writing in October of 2018) in often excessive detail in Part 1 and Part 2 and now it’s time to put them all together to see how training volume and muscle growth relate.

The Studies

As noted in Part 1, I’m throwing the Radaelli paper into the trash.  I consider the results too random and nonsensicial  to be worth considering.  You can agree or not and that’s fine.

There is simply no world where growth in triceps in beginners doesn’t start until 45 sets per week but 18 sets for biceps is effective and where LBM gains are higher for calisthenics than low-volume weight training.  So it’s out.  Agree or not, I put my reasoning up front and looked at it in detail to explain why I think it’s garbage so it wasn’t just a hand-wave like most would do.… Keep Reading