MB Madaera
Lost 31.7 lbs fat
Built 11.7 lbs muscle


Chris Madaera
Built 9 lbs muscle


Keelan Parham
Lost 30 lbs fat
Built 4 lbs muscle


Bob Marchesello
Lost 23.55 lbs fat
Built 8.55 lbs muscle


Jeff Turner
Lost 25.5 lbs fat


Jeanenne Darden
Lost 26 lbs fat
Built 3 lbs muscle


Ted Tucker
Lost 41 lbs fat
Built 4 lbs muscle

 
 

Determine the Length of Your Workouts

Evaluate Your Progress

Keep Warm-Up in Perspective


ARCHIVES >>

"Doing more exercise with less intensity,"
Arthur Jones believes, "has all but
destroyed the actual great value
of weight training. Something
must be done . . . and quickly."
The New Bodybuilding for
Old-School Results supplies
MUCH of that "something."

 

This is one of 93 photos of Andy McCutcheon that are used in The New High-Intensity Training to illustrate the recommended exercises.

To find out more about McCutcheon and his training, click here.

 

Mission Statement

H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy

Privacy Policy

Credits

LOG IN FORUM MAIN REGISTER SEARCH
State of Exercise Science 2017
First | Prev | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

sirloin

Average Al wrote:
sirloin wrote:

I also like a bit of pinch of evidence with my science, example: the Nautilus North training freqency study ...




If your idea of good science is a Nautilus North study, then you have good reason to be disillusioned.


No its not, youve missed the point

Open User Options Menu

sirloin

Average Al wrote:
Crotalus wrote:
sirloin wrote:

Moreover, the research is in many cases poorly conducted or too short etc, theres also lieing and cheating that goes on, overstated findings .



That's my problem with 'scientific studies' no matter what's its about. They do 'studies' for one reason and that is to get you to believe what they want you to believe, for whatever reason that is and usually it's money ... like funding for the next 'study'.

Lying and cheating ??? Hell yeah it goes on all the time. For some reason these scientists are regarded as above all that , honest and and report only the real results and truth.

LOL, yeah right. When they do a study on lying and cheating scientists , that will be one I'll take the time to read ... even though that will be full of shit as well but entertaining to read.


So science, and particularly the way science funding works these days, has some flaws. Do you have a better way to generate knowledge about how the world works? Would you rather get your facts from politicians, media talk show hosts, televangelists, and Joe Weider? When you get sick, do you go to a Doctor or a faith healer?

Most of you guys are walking around with phones that are more powerful computers than what was used to build the first A-bomb or send the first humans to the moon. When I started out as an engineer, I learned to use a slide rule and had a book of tables to calculate logarithms and trig functions. Now I can (probably) just ask Siri. 100 years ago, a knee or hip injury often became a permanent limp or even disability. Now people get new joints popped in routinely. In another 20 or 30 years, you probably won't even be allowed to drive a car, because the car will be a better and safer driver. Where the heck do you think stuff like this comes from? It isn't from magical incantations or magical thinking.



With regards to the lieing and cheating that goes on, Dr Darden said the very same thing in his 21convention BBT talk.
Open User Options Menu

simon-hecubus

Texas, USA

That was an extremely eloquent statement, Al. Well done.

I have three big beefs with many (if not most) studies:

1. They are often done with insufficient, or at best, poorly designed control groups. They are often not comparable to the focus group, and thus, the outcome of the study is unfairly leveraged from the get-go.

2. They are almost never conducted for a sufficient time period to get meaningful results. A good example are the studies that "demonstrated" (not) that caffeine is a diuretic:

If you give a group of people more caffeine than they're used to, then of course they are going to pee a lot more. But a long-term caffeine addict like myself can tell you that I pee no more frequently than anyone else. In other words, the effect subsides with chronic use.

3. When 'scientists' have an agenda --- whether that be to discredit a rival or move a product --- the product or outcome is tainted before the study is even out of the gate. These people are the ones who may even deliberately stunt the prospects of the control groups as mentioned in #1.

Do I have a solution, you ask? The problems of funding and the advisarial nature of current academic and grant-based arenas are not going to go away.

Perhaps peer review before the study is conducted, and not just afterwards, would be one improvement that could be instituted. But of course the grant boards are supposed to be this pre-review and we see how that's working, right?

Other than that, I got nothin'!

We would seem to have take each of these on a case-by-case basis and tear them apart to find any kernels of truth hiding inside.

Best Regards,
Scott
Open User Options Menu

Crotalus

Al and Simon both make good points but I still go with Simon's views .

Studies are to get you to believe what they want you to believe , not to present the truth ... and like everything else , it goes back to money ; selling shit ... books, methods, products , or getting funds for the next 'study'.

I was involved in a wildlife population study many years ago. After a season one snake in particular was obviously in very good status . When I expressed how pleased I was about this to the person running things he agreed but added that that info can not go into the seasons report or it would cut the chances of receiving funds for the next season.

I was as naive as hell at the time and shocked that a educated, professional zoologist would be so crooked. LOL, one of my first
WAKE THE FUCK UP - welcome to the REAL WORLD experiences.

Of course I found out later the same shit happens in every field , every day ... not a fucking thing is really 'honest' anymore.

Open User Options Menu

sirloin

simon-hecubus wrote:
That was an extremely eloquent statement, Al. Well done.

I have three big beefs with many (if not most) studies:

1. They are often done with insufficient, or at best, poorly designed control groups. They are often not comparable to the focus group and the outcome of the study is unfairly leveraged from the get-go.

2. They are almost never conducted for a sufficient time period to get meaningful results. The studies that "demonstrated" (not) that caffeine is a diuretic are a good example.

If you give a group of people more caffeine than they're used to, then of course they ware going to pee a lot more. But long-term caffeine addicts like myself can tell you that I pee no more frequently than anyone else. In other word, the effect subsides with chronic use.

3. When 'scientists' have an agenda, whether that be to discredit a rival or move a product. The product is tainted before the study is even out of the gate. These people are the ones who may even deliberately stunt the prospects of the groups as mentioned in #1.

Do I have a solution, you ask? The problems of funding and the advisarial nature of current academic and grant-based arenas is not going to go away.

I guess peer review before the study is conducted, and not just afterwards, would be one improvement that could be instituted.

Other than that, I got nothin'! We would seem to have take each of these on a case-by-case basis and tear them apart to find any kernels of truth hiding inside.

Best Regards,
Scott


Agreed.
Open User Options Menu

S.M.Punisher

The government being in science doesn't mean good science can't be and isn't being done; it just takes longer for truth to establish itself, which is often in shining light on government-funded scams.
Open User Options Menu

Crotalus

S.M.Punisher wrote:
The government being in science doesn't mean good science can't be and isn't being done; it just takes longer for truth to establish itself, which is often in shining light on government-funded scams.


LOL, those illustrations state the truth, unfortunately .
Open User Options Menu

Grant D

Illinois, USA

Why I Use OMEGA Set (sparingly)

I wanted to share why I use an Omega Set rarely for a few reasons . . .
a) Hard to get weight into position of maximum contraction. Need assistance from a partner or another arm/leg.
b) very easy to overtrain as the weight load is so immense in a full contraction that much muscle inroad is achievable. It is so much isolated load that one does not expect to have an extended recovery time, and it could easily exceed that of the rest of your session exercises.
c) Not easy to measure TUL since it is so short (temporaly and dimensionaly).
d) not easy to lower weight in control (without help)

But it does create an intense inroad if focused, and is very safe as movement is zero
Open User Options Menu

Lioncourt

simon-hecubus wrote:
3. When 'scientists' have an agenda --- whether that be to discredit a rival or move a product --- the product or outcome is tainted before the study is even out of the gate. These people are the ones who may even deliberately stunt the prospects of the control groups as mentioned in #1.


Along these same lines is my problem with the volume studies you see comparing 1-2 sets vs. multiple sets. Most of these people using the HIT protocol are new to it and as most of us here know being able to reach true failure takes practice on your own. If you're a scientist with an agenda to prove you need more volume to grow, you're likely not going to force the participants to really hit those last few reps when they think they are at failure. It would be even worse if it is a grad assistant coaching them and not even the primary researcher themselves.
Open User Options Menu

Grant D

Illinois, USA

Attention Trainees

Be careful not to use set extenders. We all likely feel that extra time will help us inroad. But, in most cases, assuming movement/hold was correctly enacted, you will overtrain and overload your system (CNS). In the case of an extender using Omega ... it will be brutal ... as you will likely not experience a typical recovery and delay progress.

Many SS advocates attempted set extenders once SS gains stagnated ... but no mas. In my case I used them for at least 20 months with no gains or progress ... on any exercises. But then along cam Max Pyramid, Done-in-One from Pro Little!
Open User Options Menu

Grant D

Illinois, USA

Attnetion Trainees

... ever wonder why you make no gains, get hurt, have kinks, get sick? It is likely one or a combination of these factors ...

Loads not focused or too light
Loads not applied through gravity circuit
Too much outroading, squiggling, and/or throwing the load

Some of us ultra-experienced trainees have advanced to the scietific limits post-1970's protocols, and experienced the limits ... until the progressive revelations of current 2017 Science.

Cheers, Grant.

PS: recall ... you must educate yourselves from the source materials, and not fall prey to cyberspace fractoids
Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

Too much outroading, squiggling, and/or throwing the load

Some of us ultra-experienced trainees have advanced to the scietific limits post-1970's protocols, and experienced the limits ... until the progressive revelations of current 2017 Science.

==Scott==
I have been training off and on for some 40 years so I think I have a little experience at this stuff. You keep stating that throwing the load and squiggling etc will outroad and cause progress to stagnate. I've tried a zillion routines and quite the contrary to what you say I found that I made my best progress when I cheated at the end of sets.I'm not saying it's the best way to train but it does produce results!! All this talk of the necessity to isolate specific muscles or gains will stop is pure hog wash.
Mr. Grant you've done well for yourself on here by carefully cherry picking some of Dr. Dardens key phrases and even eliciting a positive response from him but don't think for a minute that those of us on here with any brains don't know you're a big phony.I challenge you to prove me wrong!! Post some pictures of yourself!!Lets see your workout in action!!
Open User Options Menu

justmax7

Texas, USA

Ellington,
Are you going to write a book on training for us guys over 70?
I'm 78 and using your New HIT.
Thank you.
Max Fowler
Open User Options Menu

Ellington Darden

I don't know, but I'll give it some thought.

Ellington
Open User Options Menu

StuKE

justmax7 wrote:
Ellington,
Are you going to write a book on training for us guys over 70?
I'm 78 and using your New HIT.
Thank you.
Max Fowler

Good on you, Max.Hope to be able to say the same at your age.

Open User Options Menu

tensionstrength

I've been following this thread for awhile. I feel like there's been some very good stuff talked about. Might sound strange but I like to be reminded of things sometimes that I don't do and maybe be reminded of why I don't do them.

I usually using a weight/resistance that feels fairly significant. I try to maintain a decent amount of tension in the muscles being worked while maintaining form.

I find counting reps or time during a set to be distracting from focusing on tension and form. If that's your thing though more power to you. I would do much better to video my workout and then go back and watch and count those things.

The whole outroading thing is interesting. I mean for myself if I'm doing say a chest press or a squat type of movement, I'm creating tension any many different muscles, how do you not? If I'm doing an exercise like biceps curls or leg extensions, I still have tension in muscles besides the quads or the biceps. For a biceps curl I'm focusing on the biceps but I have to pay attention to/contract other muscles as well or I will fall forward or the weight will pull my body into positions I don't to be in, etc. I have some mixed thought s on the whole "attempting to isolate thing".
Open User Options Menu

hit4me

Florida, USA

The whole outroading thing is interesting. I mean for myself if I'm doing say a chest press or a squat type of movement, I'm creating tension any many different muscles, how do you not? If I'm doing an exercise like biceps curls or leg extensions, I still have tension in muscles besides the quads or the biceps. For a biceps curl I'm focusing on the biceps but I have to pay attention to/contract other muscles as well or I will fall forward or the weight will pull my body into positions I don't to be in, etc. I have some mixed thought s on the whole "attempting to isolate thing".
[/quote]

that's why Arthur and Reeves and Colbert were advocates of full body, nothing is truly isolated
Open User Options Menu

HeavyHitter32

I don't know, I never felt my legs were affecting my chest training or vice versa even if there is a little bit of synergism in some movements (like DB or BB rowing as it affects a lot of muscles and includes hamstring statics to a lesser degree). But, for a long time I've been laser focused on that muscle I am targeting, feel, and the contractions - as well as not using what I would consider excessive loads. I know some guys use so much weight, heaving, momentum, etc. that it does bring those things into play and what I would consider real "outroading" but it depends on your goals. If doing something like Olympic training, obviously things like that come into play more versus proper bodybuilding and more focus on "isolation".
Open User Options Menu

sirloin

https://forums.T-Nation.com/...h-dr-ken/131025

Am sure most here have read this article, but it always comes to my mind when talking about isolation. After obsevering an autopsy Dr K and seeing anatomy charts, he mentions that our muscles are too interwoven and interbound to be isolated. Muscles work in conjuntion with each other.
Open User Options Menu

tensionstrength

hit4me wrote:
The whole outroading thing is interesting. I mean for myself if I'm doing say a chest press or a squat type of movement, I'm creating tension any many different muscles, how do you not? If I'm doing an exercise like biceps curls or leg extensions, I still have tension in muscles besides the quads or the biceps. For a biceps curl I'm focusing on the biceps but I have to pay attention to/contract other muscles as well or I will fall forward or the weight will pull my body into positions I don't to be in, etc. I have some mixed thought s on the whole "attempting to isolate thing".


that's why Arthur and Reeves and Colbert were advocates of full body, nothing is truly isolated


I pretty much always do full body. If splitting up is someone's thing, again more power to them. I sometimes go for many days without working out. So I guess part of it is that. Part of it is what you say in your response. I also feel like I'm "missing out" if I don't address the whole body when I do train.
Open User Options Menu

tensionstrength

HeavyHitter32 wrote:
I don't know, I never felt my legs were affecting my chest training or vice versa even if there is a little bit of synergism in some movements (like DB or BB rowing as it affects a lot of muscles and includes hamstring statics to a lesser degree). But, for a long time I've been laser focused on that muscle I am targeting, feel, and the contractions - as well as not using what I would consider excessive loads. I know some guys use so much weight, heaving, momentum, etc. that it does bring those things into play and what I would consider real "outroading" but it depends on your goals. If doing something like Olympic training, obviously things like that come into play more versus proper bodybuilding and more focus on "isolation".

.
There is a "feel" that I go for. Pretty vague I guess but there's a point where the weight feels too heavy and a point where it's too light. Sometimes it might take some short warmup or feeler sets to find the right weight. Finding that weight seems to help me maintain form/ tension.

Open User Options Menu

tensionstrength

sirloin wrote:
https://forums.T-Nation.com/...h-dr-ken/131025

Am sure most here have read this article, but it always comes to my mind when talking about isolation. After obsevering an autopsy Dr K and seeing anatomy charts, he mentions that our muscles are too interwoven and interbound to be isolated. Muscles work in conjuntion with each other.


I like that part you talk about here. I think I may have read this article quite some time ago. Great read! Some great comments after as well! I like where he got into the speed part as well.

Very good motivation here these other comments about keeping that ability to lift things relativley heavy, using a lot of force quickly. Keeping/maintaining strength. Addressing the whole body but still and or also keeping that mind/muscle, tension feel, connection.

Open User Options Menu

HeavyHitter32

tensionstrength wrote:
HeavyHitter32 wrote:
I don't know, I never felt my legs were affecting my chest training or vice versa even if there is a little bit of synergism in some movements (like DB or BB rowing as it affects a lot of muscles and includes hamstring statics to a lesser degree). But, for a long time I've been laser focused on that muscle I am targeting, feel, and the contractions - as well as not using what I would consider excessive loads. I know some guys use so much weight, heaving, momentum, etc. that it does bring those things into play and what I would consider real "outroading" but it depends on your goals. If doing something like Olympic training, obviously things like that come into play more versus proper bodybuilding and more focus on "isolation".
.
There is a "feel" that I go for. Pretty vague I guess but there's a point where the weight feels too heavy and a point where it's too light. Sometimes it might take some short warmup or feeler sets to find the right weight. Finding that weight seems to help me maintain form/ tension.



I also find that having trained for 27 years and being 45 years old - I cannot get away with stuff that I could in my younger years. I've got to watch lower back or knees, and lately elbows. When I was 25, I could use max loads to utter failure for 5-10 reps and generally be fine. If I try that now, I pay a price. All of that heavy training will catch up to you at some point. I also learned that the extra loads never contributed to more muscle and even some more recent experiments showed that for me. Better to focus on contraction, fatigue and isolating that muscle as much as you can. It actually takes a lot less load to do that versus heaving around heavy weights chasing a number and then wondering how you gain all of that "strength" with no new muscle. The other part of it is diet and making sure you have enough nutrients and calories while at the same time staying reasonably lean....10-15% BF.
Open User Options Menu

StuKE

As someone said a few posts ago, yes you can feel tension in other muscles whilst say bench pressing, but it is likely that a number of muscles are working pretty hard together, but perhaps the fact that your triceps, delts and lats are helping, prevents your pecs from being hit really really hard. Same with many other exercises.
When I squat, I feel it the next morning in mu hamstrings, hips, lower back and to a lesser degree, thighs. But if I do my version if a single leg/sisay squat, the next day, the whole upper leg is aching, particularly the quads. So I think there are certainly a lot of reasons to do whole body, compounds only, but by the same token, a lot of reasons why isolation also is valuable.
Open User Options Menu

madmax

Texas, USA

Steroids were originally created, according to my doctor, to help folks who have been in hospitals an extended time and have lost muscle.
He informed me of this in 1963 when, like an idiot, I talked him into prescribing steroids for me. Fortunately, 6 months later I came to my senses, quit steroids and became healthy again.
Open User Options Menu
First | Previous | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | Next | Last
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy