http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0430105358.htm
Another fucking "study," for your entertainment/amusement/despair-for-the-future-of-humanity. If someone has already posted this, I apologize.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0430105358.htm
Another fucking "study," for your entertainment/amusement/despair-for-the-future-of-humanity. If someone has already posted this, I apologize.
Just looking at the media condensate, it appears that everything wrong with exercise science is revealed in this one study. An excellent find. Thanks.
I'm actually very pleased whenever a study like this comes out. If everybody got wind of how to properly train, who would we look smugly down on from atop our lofty perches?
Anything works for a beginners, right?
I found
"The researchers first determined the maximum weight each subject could lift one time in a knee extension. Each subject was assigned to a different training program for each leg."
to be particularly entertaining.
Ronnie Coleman won the Olympia with a routine that included 15 pound tricep kickbacks. On a bosu ball.
I took a quick look at the full paper.
- There were 18 subjects, all untrained.
- The exercise used was knee extension; they used a different protocol for each leg. (?!)
- There were three groups: 80%x3 sets, 80%x1 set, 30%x3 sets, all done to failure.
- They did not find statistically significant differences in quadriceps volume.
- They did find a significant difference in strength; the 80% protocols caused greater increase in 1RM.
Honestly, I'm glad shit like this comes out. You know why? It's our society's way of punishing those who only want to train for larger muscles and don't give a fuck about strength. I think it's hilarious, and I'm convinced researchers are just trolling the susceptible public.
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.Quote:
Originally Posted by PressesPeople
If only.Quote:
Originally Posted by PressesPeople
