PDA

View Full Version : Muscle Growth



HolyCrapItsWes
06-07-2009, 10:00 PM
When you work out, are you growing new muscle or are we all born with X amount of muscle fibers and have to build them as big as we can?

Frosty
06-07-2009, 11:35 PM
We can grow more muscle fibers but most hypertrophy is just that...hypertrophy of existing muscle fibers. Like most assumptions about the body it seems, are wrong. Like they used to say you can't reduce the number of fat cells, or your brain can't regenerate or anything....all totally wrong.

Nitro Fueled Barbie/Mel Marx
06-07-2009, 11:49 PM
What is the way for a woman to build muscle. I feel as though I have not put that much (if any) on in the last 3 years training. With all the cardio I do before the shows, I feel as though I am losing muscle.
Do I literally have to eat way more than I'm burning off and if so, what types of foods? Carbs? Red Meats? Fats?

Frosty
06-08-2009, 01:17 AM
Increasing training volume over time is a good way to increase hypertrophy. The body is a biological organism that adapts the best it can to the stress placed on it. If you can give your body time and enough calories, protein, fat, vitamins, minerals, etc, you can gradually increase training volume which places a higher demand on the muscular system. Higher strength plus more time under tension of the muscle fibers will equal greater hypertrophy.

Volume training used to be the way, then it was HIT, but I think the pendulum has swung too far in the one direction towards low volume. Do you really think you'll get more hypertrophy from 5 sets once a week or 20 sets per week if you gave your body the time to adapt to this volume?

Nitro Fueled Barbie/Mel Marx
06-08-2009, 01:29 AM
I was under the impression to lift to exhaustion. Meaning 5 super heavy reps where the 3rd or 4th set you cannot do.
I train now with moderate weight 3 sets of 10 reps. I think that is maintenance. If I want to build size I think I'll have to do the first.

Nitro Fueled Barbie/Mel Marx
06-08-2009, 01:37 AM
But then again I am looking to accomplish sarcoplasmic hypertrophy where several reps take play.
If I were to do the first option I would accomplish myofibrillated hypertrophy and pretty much be doing what a power lifter does.

Frosty
06-08-2009, 01:47 AM
If you want sarcoplasmic hypertrophy you have to increase nutrient requirements of the muscle fibers. This is done by higher rep ranges, say 12-15, incomplete rest intervals, say 30-45s, and a large number of sets, say 8-10 for compound lifts or more. This really taxes the ability of the muscle fibers to supply enough energy for the contractions and forces adaptations by increasing nutrient storage in the muscle tissue for future workouts.

freak
06-08-2009, 02:32 AM
what could be done to increase hyperplasia other then high dose gh?

Nitro Fueled Barbie/Mel Marx
06-08-2009, 04:14 PM
Isn't hyperplasia bad? I can be wrong.

Nitro Fueled Barbie/Mel Marx
06-08-2009, 04:27 PM
If training is started while the trainee is still in the growing stage, for example teenagers, hyperplasia is more likely to occur. This is because of the characteristically high HgH levels present during these maturation years. Some research theorizes that HgH combined with high-intensity exercise is capable of stimulating hyperplasia, at least in teenagers. Before you run out to obtain HgH you should be aware that this effect appears to apply only to immature individuals. Ironically, these are the very people that are most harmed by use of exogenous growth hormone. In teenagers it is likely to produce a sometimes grotesque disorder known as acromegaly. The only significant conclusion that can be drawn from this is that one of the hormones produced in the growth cycle plays a role in producing hyperplasia. It should be understood that in spite of all the bodybuilding press to the contrary, HgH does not produce hypertrophy. It isn't even anabolic. If it were, every teenager would have large muscles. HgH is a very effective fat burner and during the re-building process that takes place during sleep it burns fat to provide the energy for repair. HgH is also anti-catabolic while it is present in the system. This anti-catabolic function is, however, primarily prophylactic. The presence of HgH suppresses Cortisol release. In sum, HgH is lipolytic and anti-catabolic but not anabolic under normal conditions.



Looks like your answer is high gh levels.

Frosty
06-09-2009, 02:23 AM
Loaded stretching is one thing that can help with hyperplasia. IGF-1 is also related to hyperplasia, and high protein diets increase IGF-1, but I don't know if it's enough.

I bet ThePhysicalTherapist may be able to help us out on this one.

HolyCrapItsWes
06-10-2009, 03:19 PM
Doesn't IGF create satellite muscles? Someone had told me that once but wasn't sure if it was true or not.

freak
06-11-2009, 09:10 PM
Doesn't IGF create satellite muscles? Someone had told me that once but wasn't sure if it was true or not.
satellite muscles?!?! bahahahahaha

Strikerrjones
06-11-2009, 09:36 PM
Doesn't IGF create satellite muscles? Someone had told me that once but wasn't sure if it was true or not.

I think that IGF helps to activate satellite cells which then supply their nuclei to damaged muscle fibers. The more nuclei each muscle cell has, the more work it is able to do.

Tatyana
06-11-2009, 09:53 PM
satellite muscles?!?! bahahahahaha

He is correct, just a small error in the terminology.

Satellite cells are small mononuclear progenitor cells with virtually no cytoplasm found in mature muscle. They are found sandwiched between the basement membrane and sarcolemma (cell membrane) of individual muscle fibres, and can be difficult to distinguish from the sub-sarcolemmal nuclei of the fibres. Satellite cells are able to differentiate and fuse to augment existing muscle fibres and to form new fibres.

Tatyana
06-11-2009, 09:57 PM
I was under the impression to lift to exhaustion. Meaning 5 super heavy reps where the 3rd or 4th set you cannot do.
I train now with moderate weight 3 sets of 10 reps. I think that is maintenance. If I want to build size I think I'll have to do the first.

You may want to try a muscle fibre type test, as slow and fast twitch muscle respond differently to different rep ranges, or at least that is how the theory goes.

Fast twitch muscle hypertrophies to a greater extent and responds to lower rep training, slow twitch, less hypertrophy, higher reps.

Most people are mixed, however, you may have dominance of one fibre type, and this could vary from muscle group to muscle group.

freak
06-11-2009, 10:44 PM
He is correct, just a small error in the terminology.

Satellite cells are small mononuclear progenitor cells with virtually no cytoplasm found in mature muscle. They are found sandwiched between the basement membrane and sarcolemma (cell membrane) of individual muscle fibres, and can be difficult to distinguish from the sub-sarcolemmal nuclei of the fibres. Satellite cells are able to differentiate and fuse to augment existing muscle fibres and to form new fibres.
yeah... i know. you see "a small error in terminology" and i see i huge error in understanding

Tatyana
06-11-2009, 10:58 PM
yeah... i know. you see "a small error in terminology" and i see i huge error in understanding

Not everyone studies science at uni.

I think a lot of BBers do quite well without formal education.

freak
06-11-2009, 11:15 PM
Not everyone studies science at uni.

I think a lot of BBers do quite well without formal education.
i dont. most believe pretty much any line of shit that some "guru" says and they dont actually understand the concepts. they just memorize some pathway that magically leads to 15684631346841531684651354684% increase in mass. like in my thread to dave about glucose transport. you may think this is insignificant but it shows daves level of understanding of some things.. either that or hes tryin to push his product with bullshit bro-logic. that is shit that you learn in first year biochemistry. that means that a person in their first year of arts & sci, biochem, organic chemistry, nutrition, pre-med, etc. has a better understanding of processes, mechanisms, WHAT IS ACTUALLY HAPPENING IN THE BODY then dave (and probably 99% of so-called nutritional gurus)

freak
06-11-2009, 11:29 PM
just to clarify the last post, i still respect dave and what he does. but i think his specialty and major value is in drugs.

Tatyana
06-11-2009, 11:36 PM
just to clarify the last post, i still respect dave and what he does. but i think his specialty and major value is in drugs.

Dave did three years of medical school.

It was some time ago, and obviously there are some things that have been furthered revealed, he may have forgotten some things, but you have to give him credit for that as well.

There are some glaringly obvious ignorant posts, but I have also found that there are people with very little or no graduate education who are really up on a lot of physiological and biochemical concepts.

It is also important to remember that when you get a PhD in Science, it is still a doctorate of philosophy.

While some things are pretty concrete, I think it is always best to realise that everything is based on the best of our knowledge right now.

There have been a few occasions that scientist have gotten things really wrong.

freak
06-12-2009, 06:03 AM
Dave did three years of medical school.

It was some time ago, and obviously there are some things that have been furthered revealed, he may have forgotten some things, but you have to give him credit for that as well.

There are some glaringly obvious ignorant posts, but I have also found that there are people with very little or no graduate education who are really up on a lot of physiological and biochemical concepts.

It is also important to remember that when you get a PhD in Science, it is still a doctorate of philosophy.

While some things are pretty concrete, I think it is always best to realise that everything is based on the best of our knowledge right now.

There have been a few occasions that scientist have gotten things really wrong.
i give dave credit for the medical training which has probably helped him a lot with his drug protocols more then anything.

and the posts from people that are up on their phtsiological and biochemical concepts LACK UNDERSTANDING of these concepts. they know a process by straight memorization, they dont actually understand the chemistry. but you cant hold that against them as probably 80% of university students are the same. they can memorize text book shit but when it comes to application they are fucked.

and i think when you get a degree or Phd in science it is quite a bit more then just philosiphy. that sounds like something a fuckin religious zealot would say. these theories are presented after pain-staking expariments, data, compilation, and a lot of other things. they arent just proposed as a good idea. but you are right that some things arent concrete and that is the beauty of science. you're always learning and going with the evidence, not clinging to old ways just because... but this also means actively keeping up with your field of study.

nursebber
06-12-2009, 07:16 AM
A PhD is awarded for extensive and original contributions to a specific field. They tried to differentiate a doctorate in philosophy from others, but that was pretty minor for the actual doctors of philosophy to want D. Phil....and they didnt even see his tv show. Anyone who has ha the immense joy of embarking on a medical journey knows one, two, fellowships, none give you any true "knowledge" of biochemical processes to an expert level, whatever that is. I mean , yes some of us can really understand why we use a cetain drug to get desired effects and why that same drug wont raise intercranial pressure. But very few can take that and apply it to the use of "plasma expanders" in bodybuilding. I am amazed by some stuff i hear. Then i sit back and realize the pseudo science of what is being said but I can't really refute it based on my knowledge at the time. So again , I agree with keeping up on your field or hobby. My field will never give me answers on using insulin, but a thorough understanding of the uderlying processes might. I love when some people assume insulin transports glucose and aminos to adipose and muscle(brain, liver is by diffusion) The processes are complicated and so are the dangers of messing up the hexose transporters themselves. Much more stuff going on. That would a concentration of a PhD..might only be 4 years of studying the numbers and effects of GLUT 4 in tissue and organs. I went too far but yes I was reading in the thread about satellite cells and "gurus" in bbing helping with drugs. I laugh because bbing is so simple and enjoyable. when i competed we just figured lets do more of what we did 3 day after but three before. everyone looks better from 6hrs to 2 days. We could say it catecolemines whatever..its food muscles were depleted and got filled up with everything

Frosty
06-12-2009, 12:50 PM
My theory on muscle growth is this....train to lift with more volume and more weight in the right rep range for your muscle groups, eat lots of protein, sleep a lot, and you'll probably get bigger :)

Tatyana
06-12-2009, 12:57 PM
i give dave credit for the medical training which has probably helped him a lot with his drug protocols more then anything.

and the posts from people that are up on their phtsiological and biochemical concepts LACK UNDERSTANDING of these concepts. they know a process by straight memorization, they dont actually understand the chemistry. but you cant hold that against them as probably 80% of university students are the same. they can memorize text book shit but when it comes to application they are fucked.

and i think when you get a degree or Phd in science it is quite a bit more then just philosiphy. that sounds like something a fuckin religious zealot would say. these theories are presented after pain-staking expariments, data, compilation, and a lot of other things. they arent just proposed as a good idea. but you are right that some things arent concrete and that is the beauty of science. you're always learning and going with the evidence, not clinging to old ways just because... but this also means actively keeping up with your field of study.

All knowledge is originally from philosophy as this is where logic and reasoning first originated, so really, the scientific method stems from philosophy.

Consider how you feel people do not understand science may be similar in your thoughts about philosophy.

The etimology of PhD is Latin, Philosophiae Doctor.

Philosophy isn't the study of religion, that is theology.

Philosophy is the study of knowledge, nature, validity, language, truth.....

It is very interesting when you start to consider things like phenomenology, or how we acquire knowledge.


It is easier to see this connection when you study physics.

Frosty
06-12-2009, 01:06 PM
It is easier to see this connection when you study physics.

Yeah, then you really start to see limitations of science, like when you get into quantum mechanics or ask fundamental questions of the science. It's kind of funny when you ask a relatively simple question and you get a response like "I don't think that can be answered by science."

Tatyana
06-12-2009, 01:10 PM
Yeah, then you really start to see limitations of science, like when you get into quantum mechanics or ask fundamental questions of the science. It's kind of funny when you ask a relatively simple question and you get a response like "I don't think that can be answered by science."


There is an issue in that humans don't really 'see' reality.

Our observations of the world are often incorrect and inaccurate.

Luckily we have developed other means to measure things, however not all things have been measured (yet).

Frosty
06-12-2009, 01:34 PM
There is an issue in that humans don't really 'see' reality.

Our observations of the world are often incorrect and inaccurate.

Luckily we have developed other means to measure things, however not all things have been measured (yet).

And the measurements still require human observation :) I got into a debate with jim over quantum state chains, but you just cannot answer if a chain is broken before a human observes even a measurement. How can you possibly answer that?

freak
06-12-2009, 04:46 PM
All knowledge is originally from philosophy as this is where logic and reasoning first originated, so really, the scientific method stems from philosophy.

Consider how you feel people do not understand science may be similar in your thoughts about philosophy.

The etimology of PhD is Latin, Philosophiae Doctor.

Philosophy isn't the study of religion, that is theology.

Philosophy is the study of knowledge, nature, validity, language, truth.....

It is very interesting when you start to consider things like phenomenology, or how we acquire knowledge.


It is easier to see this connection when you study physics.
one of my chem classes got into some quantum theory and it was fucked. like a photon has particle-wave duality and shit and the way it acts is based on if your observing it or not

freak
06-12-2009, 04:52 PM
All knowledge is originally from philosophy as this is where logic and reasoning first originated, so really, the scientific method stems from philosophy.

Consider how you feel people do not understand science may be similar in your thoughts about philosophy.

The etimology of PhD is Latin, Philosophiae Doctor.

Philosophy isn't the study of religion, that is theology.

Philosophy is the study of knowledge, nature, validity, language, truth.....

It is very interesting when you start to consider things like phenomenology, or how we acquire knowledge.


It is easier to see this connection when you study physics.
i agree that an theory begins with philosophy, but is then tested. taking the philisophical to a reliable, theory (or at-least the best explanation for now). but yes philosophy is valuable as it encourages creative and abstract thinking.

Tatyana
06-12-2009, 04:56 PM
i agree that an theory begins with philosophy, but is then tested. taking the philisophical to a releiable, theory (or at-least the best explanation for now). but yes philosophy is valuable as it encourages creative and abstract thinking.

How else do you discuss things like the nature of being, reality or existance?

Philosophy is total brain candy.

maxititer
06-14-2009, 12:50 AM
What is the way for a woman to build muscle. I feel as though I have not put that much (if any) on in the last 3 years training. With all the cardio I do before the shows, I feel as though I am losing muscle.
Do I literally have to eat way more than I'm burning off and if so, what types of foods? Carbs? Red Meats? Fats?

you can use peptides to improve the process. By using GH 176-191 you can get lean faster by doing less dieting and less cardio preserving more muscles. Another peptide PEG MGF you can use to increase your muscle size even when dieting. Give it a try.

maxititer
06-14-2009, 12:58 AM
best read on how muscles growth and regenerate is a book

Skeletal Muscle Repair and Regeneration
Edited by
Stefano Schiaffino

ISBN 978-1-4020-6767-9 (HB)
ISBN 978-1-4020-6768-6 (e-book)


any one interested let me know, I can share.

fury-
06-16-2009, 12:36 AM
best read on how muscles growth and regenerate is a book

Skeletal Muscle Repair and Regeneration
Edited by
Stefano Schiaffino

ISBN 978-1-4020-6767-9 (HB)
ISBN 978-1-4020-6768-6 (e-book)


any one interested let me know, I can share.

and now im going to be reading away

maxititer
06-16-2009, 02:41 AM
here it is (http://a16.in/books/Skeletal_Muscle_Repair_and_Regeneration_Springer20 08.pdf)

ryu-soma
06-21-2009, 12:36 AM
We can grow more muscle fibers but most hypertrophy is just that...hypertrophy of existing muscle fibers. Like most assumptions about the body it seems, are wrong. Like they used to say you can't reduce the number of fat cells, or your brain can't regenerate or anything....all totally wrong.

Wow Frosty just made me do a 180, but I suppose that the previous assumptions can be credited to total bull, if you ever really think about them enough.

rediculus
06-23-2009, 12:03 AM
Just hopped on the site and My comment is


Tatyana Rules

I believe IGF-1 is the only one to possibly "Grow new muscle" at an amplified rate anyways however I also believe HGH effects the bodies IGF-1 levels? Again this is a gardner talking mechanics but.

HGH= my dream script

Frosty
06-23-2009, 12:35 AM
HGH= my dream script

Haha if I could only have 3 things I'd have test, DNP, and clen :D