Posted on 08/11/2010 11:49:40 AM PDT by decimon
HAMILTON, ON. August 10, 2010 – Current gym dogma holds that to build muscle size you need to lift heavy weights. However, a new study conducted at McMaster University has shown that a similar degree of muscle building can be achieved by using lighter weights. The secret is to pump iron until you reach muscle fatigue.
The findings are published in PLoS ONE http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0012033
"Rather than grunting and straining to lift heavy weights, you can grab something much lighter but you have to lift it until you can't lift it anymore," says Stuart Phillips, associate professor of kinesiology at McMaster University. "We're convinced that growing muscle means stimulating your muscle to make new muscle proteins, a process in the body that over time accumulates into bigger muscles."
Phillips praised lead author and senior Ph.D. student Nicholas Burd for masterminding the project that showed it's really not the weight that you lift but the fact that you get muscular fatigue that's the critical point in building muscle. The study used light weights that represented a percentage of what the subjects could lift. The heavier weights were set to 90% of a person's best lift and the light weights at a mere 30% of what people could lift. "It's a very light weight," says Phillips noting that the 90-80% range is usually something people can lift from 5-10 times before fatigue sets in. At 30%, Burd reported that subjects could lift that weight at least 24 times before they felt fatigue.
"We're excited to see where this new paradigm will lead," says Phillips, adding that these new data have practical significance for gym enthusiasts but more importantly for people with compromised skeletal muscle mass, such as the elderly, patients with cancer, or those who are recovering from trauma, surgery or even stroke.
Reps ping.
True.
I developed my abs, 12 ounces at a time.
I always heard heavy weight + low reps builds bulk, while light weight + high reps builds definition.
nothing new there. all weight training and body building routines have low weight high rep segments.
Wow. What a breakthrough. /sarc
This is considered new? We were always taught that you build mass through heavy weight and stamina and definition with high reps of lighter weight. Why do they consider this news?
God, this has been well known for many many years. How much did it cost to do the study.
WE now are taking about muscle confusion also being effective, but exercise to muscle fatigue has been long known behind muscle building. Using heavier wts gets you to fatigue faster.
Probably a study that was paid for by the tax payers.
Anyone know how I can get the Steve Reeves look? Everyine said lift or pullups wide. i.e. on lat machine or pull up put hands as far apart as possible.
how much did we pay for that study?
Those will all help. I’m no super-expert, but if you want a broad back, and to get it in a healthy way, you’ll have to do a lot of things, not just a set of back exercises. FReepmail me if you want more blathering from me.
The principle that guides all exercise physiology is SAID.
Specific
Adaptation to
Imposed
Demand
Higher reps & lighter weights is a different (neuromuscular) adaptation than the demand imposed by heavier weight.
Exercise Phy. 101
There are different types of muscle fibre that do different things.
You need a combination of low reps and high reps to build both.
Any gym rat could tell them this.
Big, bulky, slow-twitch muscles if you want to lift pianos. High weight, low reps.
The best book i ever had on weightlifting said to lift doing as many reptitions as it took to FAIL.
If it was 50 pounds for 100 reps, or 150 pounds for 3 reps- the important part was to REACH the point where you fail.
I bulked up so fast I couldnt believe it. And I lost weight- even though I was usually starving to death after a workout like that.
Finally made it to be able to bench over 250 in less than 6 months
Here's something to think about, while I was no where as built as The Rock (Duane Johnson), I could out bench him back in... well it must have been about 8 years ago. He told me he trains solely for muscular endurance and size, and didn't lift very heavy weights any more. His physique still made me look small however..
Let me guess, you used the high rep method.
Arthur Jones proved this in the 70s. This is nothing new.
That being said, strength gains will be minimal on this kind of routine due to the lack of tension.
Muscle size will increase, but it will be hollow muscle, rather than the more dense muscle that results from higher weights.
Let me guess, in a related study it was confirmed that burning more calories than you consume leads to weight loss.
“This is considered new? We were always taught that you build mass through heavy weight and stamina and definition with high reps of lighter weight. Why do they consider this news?”
This is sort of news (to me anyway), because the study indicates that you can build size (i.e. mass) through light weights and high reps, whereas I always remember being told that you only build definition but not mass from such. This is a very important concept (if true), because it means that the elderly and infirm can safely build lean body mass without endangering fragile joints, tendons and ligaments from the stresses of really heavy weights.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.