>But all of this might not be necessary. A brand new study was just published ahead of print showing that just flexing your muscles throughout a full range of motion was equally effective as traditional weight training (but strength gains were greater in the high load condition compared to the no load condition).
wow thank go we have modern science and technology to figure out what Sandow instructed over 100 years ago:
>[The] brain will do as much as dumbbells, even more. For example, when you are sitting down reading, practice contracting your muscles. Do this every time you are sitting down leisurely, and by contracting harder and harder each time, you will find that it will have the same effect as the use of dumbbells or any more vigorous form of exercise.
This is why you don't go for the "studies have shown..." types. Listen to experience. An advanced lifter and coach will, in 2 years, do more experiments on himself and his pupils than an academic is able to do in a decade through strict scientific methodology. Read works by people who have been there and succeeded, science is always several steps behind.
Please flex your serratus anterior and then your rear delts. After that try your rhomboids, adductors, and the long head of your tricep.
Dead simple I'm sure
Adam Powell
Okay, Lamarck. Next you're going to tell me that if I learn the violin my kids will be born knowing how to play it.
Kevin Stewart
Good job missing the point of the thread faggot
Brody Watson
And apparently they'll be autistic, too.
Nathan Roberts
Kek
Levi Morris
Fuggin rekt
Ryan Williams
>my kids will be born It's time to put down the fantasy books, user.
Jace Anderson
You're unbelievably retarded and small if you think that flexing your muscles will get you any serious gains. Every retard on the planet would be jacked if it was that easy.
Hudson King
what if you held your hands together and did a tricep extention with one arm and curled with the other hand so that they have to go against each others force
What I hate about this retarded thread is that I don’t know enough to disprove it but I know its bullshit cause if not everyone would be doihg it
Ryder Cruz
id say you could achieve good muscle tone or mantain it doing that but it probably sucks for hypertrophy on its own might be useful to get more muscle mind connection and be able to flex every muscle properly
Nathan Fisher
It's just what every study on the subject + the father of bodybuilding have said. But eh, what do they know, user here read the sticky and he knows you can't build muscle without heavy compounds.
Josiah Mitchell
the argument against it is that if it was true, noone would ever stall.
if lifting weights is not needed, everyone who lifted babbyweights for long enough would get huge. progressive overload would be useless because weights are not required.
this is not what is happening.in the real world.
I bet the study is porpusely misleading or the methology is extremely flawed. which is why it was not linked in the OP.
Kevin Scott
Big Iron and Big Gym pays a lot of money to suppress this information. The truth is out there
David Hughes
>The purpose of the study was to remove the influence of an external load and determine if muscle growth can be elicited by maximally contracting through a full range of motion. In addition, the acute physiologic and perceptual responses to each stimulus were also investigated. Thirteen participants completed 18 sessions of unilateral elbow flexion exercise. Each arm was designated to either NO LOAD or HIGH LOAD condition (70% one repetition maximum). For the NO LOAD condition, participants repeatedly contracted as hard as they could through a full range of motion without the use of an external load. Our results show that anterior muscle thickness increased similarly from Pre to Post, with no differences between conditions for the 50% [Pre: 2.7 (0.8) vs. Post: 2.9 (0.7)], 60% [Pre: 2.9 (0.7) vs. Post: 3.1 (0.7)] or 70% [Pre: 3.2 (0.7) vs. Post: 3.5 (0.7)] sites. There was a significant condition × time interaction for one repetition maximum (p = 0.017), with HIGH LOAD (+ 2.3 kg) increasing more than the NO LOAD condition (+ 1 kg). These results extend previous studies that have observed muscle growth across a range of external loads and muscle actions and suggest that muscle growth can occur independent of an external load provided there are enough muscle fibers undergoing mechanotransduction. bretcontreras.com/do-we-even-need-to-lift/
>bretcontreras.com/do-we-even-need-to-lift/ >examines beginners making noob gains >also, the flexer group trained more >less then 20 participants >they each trained one arm with weights and one arm with flexing, which removes potential hormonal benefits of the "destroy your muscle" training vs pump training
the second study is noobs as well. also, they made 4% muscle thickness gains in 3 months. In noobs. seems crappy to me.
TL;DR: Noobgains are easy. good luck replicating that with experienced lifters. and the methodology is crappy.
also, they still have to train, perhaps more than normal lifters.
Liam Roberts
>Our results show that anterior muscle thickness increased similarly from Pre to Post
>whatever it's all noob gains Ah is that the type of "good methodology" you had in mind?
Logan Gutierrez
>Ah is that the type of "good methodology" you had in mind? i didnt do the study you faggot. good methodology would have been a bigger study size with a control group instead of a control arm. in experienced lifters. that would have been a good study.
and the gains the second group made (4% volume in their first 3 months of training seem pathetic to me, but I may be wrong.
but whatever. stop lifting and contract all your muscles 3 times a week like a retard. make those mad epileptic gains. then come back here in 2 years and post your body.
Dylan Fisher
Nobody said anything about not lifting weights concomitantly, all fitness studies cover different demographics, techniques and stages, the growth on the arm that actually lifted weights the traditional way was the same, etc etc
You're mad at nothing.
Bentley Rodriguez
>idnt do the study you faggot. good methodology would have been a bigger study size with a control group instead of a control arm. in experienced lifters. that would have been a good study.
>Using G*Power software (GPower 3.1), an estimated sample size of 12 people was recommended to appropriately observe statistical significance at the 0.05 alpha level with a power level of 0.8.
