The secret to building muscle
Options
Replies
-
Adding:
I would bet a study that tested a varied program with strength and Hypertrophy incorporated would fair better than either Hypertrophy or strength in the singular form.
Hi mate,
I think the majority of people are misunderstanding my point... even a hypertrophy based routine is based on strength increase/progression via either volume (total tonnage) or direct tonnage (weight on the bar).. both of these are progression in strength.
I'm not saying you have to powerlift to get bigger, I'm saying you HAVE to get stronger regardless of whatever training routine you're using. Hope that makes sense?
That hits me as obvious3 -
NorthCascades wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »I just Googled that, and read the abstract of the paper that comes up.
I've seen a lot of different recommendations for protein intake, it's hard to know which one to follow. Depending which one I go with, I should get anywhere from 150g to 350g per day. I feel like the top end is exaggerated, but again as a cyclist for many years, I just have no idea. I've probably been getting 75g per day while I've been lifting for the past two months, and I feel like I've gained very little muscle during that time. Seems like the best explanation is that I'm not getting enough protein to build muscle with. Does that sound right? I'm getting plenty of carbs.
What are you stats if you don't mind me asking?
sex
weight
esitmated body fat
how long have you been lifting
what other exercise are you doing
whats your specific goal
all the good stuff & I'll be happy to help out with recommendations
I'm a 38 year old male, 6'1" tall and about 225 lbs. Estimated body fat is 20 % and lean body mass 42 %, according to my smart scale. I know that's not the best way to calculate, but it's the best I have available to me right now. I started lifting (moderate weight, high reps) on May 26 and started lifting heavy (low reps) July 1. I lift every other day for about an hour, always focusing on arm and chest. My goal is to build upper body muscle. I ride a road bike about 100 miles per week on average.
Ok, so the very first thing is to understand energy balance...
if you're wanting to lose weight you need to create a caloric deficit,
if you're wanting to gain weight you need to create a caloriec surplus
if you're wanting to lose FAT rather than overall weight, you'll need to manage your nutrition in a way that supports your lean body mass to ensure that the weight loss is mostly from fat mass
if you're wanting the weight gain to be mostly new muscle tissue, you'll need to adopt a slight calorie surplus that is enough to support the building of new muscle tissue, but not too much to avoid a significant amount of fat gain during the process
Now, I would recommend that you aim for building an overall well rounded physique rather than just trying to build your upper body exclusively as that will lead to muscular imbalances than can show up in the form of injury, pains, aches etc
If you're adamant on cycling that 100 miles each week, just understand that you're expending a very lage amount of calories to do so, thus meaning that you'll need even more calories going in to ensure that you're in an overall calorie surplus (although as a newbie, you can build muscle while in a deficit for a short period of time, maybe 3-6 months... so you could target fat loss & build new muscle at the same time before having to choose one goal exclusively)
If you're main goal right now is to put on lean mass tissue,
I'd recommend starting a solid plan which focuses on getting stronger with the compound lifts & then adding in accessories for any bodyparts that you feel need extra work
(starting strength, stronglifts 5x5 & ICF 5x5 are all great options for your current level)
now, as far as the nutrition.. you'll need to calculate you're TDEE (you can use an online calorie calculator to get a rough starting point) & then add a moderate surplus to support the building on new muscle tissue, my recommendation would be to add 200-300 calories to your TDEE or to add 10% of the total calories of your TDEE to you daily calories
Then it's a case of testing & tracking results
You should be able to shoot for a nice half a lbs per week at your current level, but if you find fat gain happening too fast, lower your goal to around 0.25lb per week
Hope this helps!!!?? 2 -
Adding:
I would bet a study that tested a varied program with strength and Hypertrophy incorporated would fair better than either Hypertrophy or strength in the singular form.
Hi mate,
I think the majority of people are misunderstanding my point... even a hypertrophy based routine is based on strength increase/progression via either volume (total tonnage) or direct tonnage (weight on the bar).. both of these are progression in strength.
I'm not saying you have to powerlift to get bigger, I'm saying you HAVE to get stronger regardless of whatever training routine you're using. Hope that makes sense?
Exactly, and not be some paper trainer. Trainers have to actually train people with results, relying on trial and error, using a idea as a guide not the say all..1 -
NorthCascades wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »I just Googled that, and read the abstract of the paper that comes up.
I've seen a lot of different recommendations for protein intake, it's hard to know which one to follow. Depending which one I go with, I should get anywhere from 150g to 350g per day. I feel like the top end is exaggerated, but again as a cyclist for many years, I just have no idea. I've probably been getting 75g per day while I've been lifting for the past two months, and I feel like I've gained very little muscle during that time. Seems like the best explanation is that I'm not getting enough protein to build muscle with. Does that sound right? I'm getting plenty of carbs.
What are you stats if you don't mind me asking?
sex
weight
esitmated body fat
how long have you been lifting
what other exercise are you doing
whats your specific goal
all the good stuff & I'll be happy to help out with recommendations
I'm a 38 year old male, 6'1" tall and about 225 lbs. Estimated body fat is 20 % and lean body mass 42 %, according to my smart scale. I know that's not the best way to calculate, but it's the best I have available to me right now. I started lifting (moderate weight, high reps) on May 26 and started lifting heavy (low reps) July 1. I lift every other day for about an hour, always focusing on arm and chest. My goal is to build upper body muscle. I ride a road bike about 100 miles per week on average.
Ok, so the very first thing is to understand energy balance...
if you're wanting to lose weight you need to create a caloric deficit,
if you're wanting to gain weight you need to create a caloriec surplus
if you're wanting to lose FAT rather than overall weight, you'll need to manage your nutrition in a way that supports your lean body mass to ensure that the weight loss is mostly from fat mass
if you're wanting the weight gain to be mostly new muscle tissue, you'll need to adopt a slight calorie surplus that is enough to support the building of new muscle tissue, but not too much to avoid a significant amount of fat gain during the process
Now, I would recommend that you aim for building an overall well rounded physique rather than just trying to build your upper body exclusively as that will lead to muscular imbalances than can show up in the form of injury, pains, aches etc
If you're adamant on cycling that 100 miles each week, just understand that you're expending a very lage amount of calories to do so, thus meaning that you'll need even more calories going in to ensure that you're in an overall calorie surplus (although as a newbie, you can build muscle while in a deficit for a short period of time, maybe 3-6 months... so you could target fat loss & build new muscle at the same time before having to choose one goal exclusively)
If you're main goal right now is to put on lean mass tissue,
I'd recommend starting a solid plan which focuses on getting stronger with the compound lifts & then adding in accessories for any bodyparts that you feel need extra work
(starting strength, stronglifts 5x5 & ICF 5x5 are all great options for your current level)
now, as far as the nutrition.. you'll need to calculate you're TDEE (you can use an online calorie calculator to get a rough starting point) & then add a moderate surplus to support the building on new muscle tissue, my recommendation would be to add 200-300 calories to your TDEE or to add 10% of the total calories of your TDEE to you daily calories
Then it's a case of testing & tracking results
You should be able to shoot for a nice half a lbs per week at your current level, but if you find fat gain happening too fast, lower your goal to around 0.25lb per week
Hope this helps!!!??
This information that you are providing is not any NEW news to us. We all give out this exact same advice, daily to all MFPers that wish to encounter the next step in their weight loss journey, maintenance journey or better yet get some ripped abs per se.
Just curious if I missed the punch line here and not being snarky at all, but I am confused that there is actually this "secret".. its not.. its all in just what you wrote for this poster.4 -
NorthCascades wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »I just Googled that, and read the abstract of the paper that comes up.
I've seen a lot of different recommendations for protein intake, it's hard to know which one to follow. Depending which one I go with, I should get anywhere from 150g to 350g per day. I feel like the top end is exaggerated, but again as a cyclist for many years, I just have no idea. I've probably been getting 75g per day while I've been lifting for the past two months, and I feel like I've gained very little muscle during that time. Seems like the best explanation is that I'm not getting enough protein to build muscle with. Does that sound right? I'm getting plenty of carbs.
What are you stats if you don't mind me asking?
sex
weight
esitmated body fat
how long have you been lifting
what other exercise are you doing
whats your specific goal
all the good stuff & I'll be happy to help out with recommendations
I'm a 38 year old male, 6'1" tall and about 225 lbs. Estimated body fat is 20 % and lean body mass 42 %, according to my smart scale. I know that's not the best way to calculate, but it's the best I have available to me right now. I started lifting (moderate weight, high reps) on May 26 and started lifting heavy (low reps) July 1. I lift every other day for about an hour, always focusing on arm and chest. My goal is to build upper body muscle. I ride a road bike about 100 miles per week on average.
Ok, so the very first thing is to understand energy balance...
if you're wanting to lose weight you need to create a caloric deficit,
if you're wanting to gain weight you need to create a caloriec surplus
if you're wanting to lose FAT rather than overall weight, you'll need to manage your nutrition in a way that supports your lean body mass to ensure that the weight loss is mostly from fat mass
if you're wanting the weight gain to be mostly new muscle tissue, you'll need to adopt a slight calorie surplus that is enough to support the building of new muscle tissue, but not too much to avoid a significant amount of fat gain during the process
Now, I would recommend that you aim for building an overall well rounded physique rather than just trying to build your upper body exclusively as that will lead to muscular imbalances than can show up in the form of injury, pains, aches etc
If you're adamant on cycling that 100 miles each week, just understand that you're expending a very lage amount of calories to do so, thus meaning that you'll need even more calories going in to ensure that you're in an overall calorie surplus (although as a newbie, you can build muscle while in a deficit for a short period of time, maybe 3-6 months... so you could target fat loss & build new muscle at the same time before having to choose one goal exclusively)
If you're main goal right now is to put on lean mass tissue,
I'd recommend starting a solid plan which focuses on getting stronger with the compound lifts & then adding in accessories for any bodyparts that you feel need extra work
(starting strength, stronglifts 5x5 & ICF 5x5 are all great options for your current level)
now, as far as the nutrition.. you'll need to calculate you're TDEE (you can use an online calorie calculator to get a rough starting point) & then add a moderate surplus to support the building on new muscle tissue, my recommendation would be to add 200-300 calories to your TDEE or to add 10% of the total calories of your TDEE to you daily calories
Then it's a case of testing & tracking results
You should be able to shoot for a nice half a lbs per week at your current level, but if you find fat gain happening too fast, lower your goal to around 0.25lb per week
Hope this helps!!!??
This information that you are providing is not any NEW news to us. We all give out this exact same advice, daily to all MFPers that wish to encounter the next step in their weight loss journey, maintenance journey or better yet get some ripped abs per se.
Just curious if I missed the punch line here and not being snarky at all, but I am confused that there is actually this "secret".. its not.. its all in just what you wrote for this poster.
well quite obviously it is indeed very new information to alot of people who are unaware of this concept (read through the comments)
Also, If you read what I wrote.. I did state that it isn't really a secret, it's just that most people are never told or informed of this information, just like how most people are usually never informed that they need to create a caloric deficit to lose weight.0 -
Adding:
I would bet a study that tested a varied program with strength and Hypertrophy incorporated would fair better than either Hypertrophy or strength in the singular form.
Hi mate,
I think the majority of people are misunderstanding my point... even a hypertrophy based routine is based on strength increase/progression via either volume (total tonnage) or direct tonnage (weight on the bar).. both of these are progression in strength.
I'm not saying you have to powerlift to get bigger, I'm saying you HAVE to get stronger regardless of whatever training routine you're using. Hope that makes sense?
I get what you are saying. You are advocating the 3-5 rep range rather than the hypertrophic rep range basically, no? The "your muscles have to get stronger to get bigger" kinda falls in the "no *kitten*" category and your contention seems to be debating that the 3-5 rep range is a better way to accomplish this based on the study you posted.
That's how I'm reading it all anyway. So my point remains that I am guessing that a combination would be most effective.0 -
Adding:
I would bet a study that tested a varied program with strength and Hypertrophy incorporated would fair better than either Hypertrophy or strength in the singular form.
Hi mate,
I think the majority of people are misunderstanding my point... even a hypertrophy based routine is based on strength increase/progression via either volume (total tonnage) or direct tonnage (weight on the bar).. both of these are progression in strength.
I'm not saying you have to powerlift to get bigger, I'm saying you HAVE to get stronger regardless of whatever training routine you're using. Hope that makes sense?
I get what you are saying. You are advocating the 3-5 rep range rather than the hypertrophic rep range basically, no? The "your muscles have to get stronger to get bigger" kinda falls in the "no *kitten*" category and your contention seems to be debating that the 3-5 rep range is a better way to accomplish this based on the study you posted.
That's how I'm reading it all anyway. So my point remains that I am guessing that a combination would be most effective.
Hi again mate, sorry I didnt explain myself properly...
So, I'm not saying that any particular rep range is 'better', I'm just pointing out the same fact that you've also pointed out... you need to get stronger regardless of the rep range in order to get bigger. That's all
You can work with any rep range, but if you're not getting stronger, you won't get (much) bigger.
The lower rep range v's the higher rep range stuff is also a really good topic, but a separate one..
Hope that makes sense mate?
This is all stuff that you quite obviously already know though 0 -
Adding:
I would bet a study that tested a varied program with strength and Hypertrophy incorporated would fair better than either Hypertrophy or strength in the singular form.
Hi mate,
I think the majority of people are misunderstanding my point... even a hypertrophy based routine is based on strength increase/progression via either volume (total tonnage) or direct tonnage (weight on the bar).. both of these are progression in strength.
I'm not saying you have to powerlift to get bigger, I'm saying you HAVE to get stronger regardless of whatever training routine you're using. Hope that makes sense?
I get what you are saying. You are advocating the 3-5 rep range rather than the hypertrophic rep range basically, no? The "your muscles have to get stronger to get bigger" kinda falls in the "no *kitten*" category and your contention seems to be debating that the 3-5 rep range is a better way to accomplish this based on the study you posted.
That's how I'm reading it all anyway. So my point remains that I am guessing that a combination would be most effective.
Hi again mate, sorry I didnt explain myself properly...
So, I'm not saying that any particular rep range is 'better', I'm just pointing out the same fact that you've also pointed out... you need to get stronger regardless of the rep range in order to get bigger. That's all
You can work with any rep range, but if you're not getting stronger, you won't get (much) bigger.
The lower rep range v's the higher rep range stuff is also a really good topic, but a separate one..
Hope that makes sense mate?
This is all stuff that you quite obviously already know though
We are all reading the same group of experts, i.e., Aragon, Helms, et al. I'm sure I'm not alone in subscribing to the AARR. What you're saying also seems to form much of the philosophical basis for Norton's PHAT program.1 -
Yeah, strength and muscle size are highly correlated to each other, that's not really a secret.
There's wiggleroom for size without extra strength and vice versa but the link is the reason you don't see someone whose thighs you can grip around with one hand outsquatting a strongman.2 -
Adding:
I would bet a study that tested a varied program with strength and Hypertrophy incorporated would fair better than either Hypertrophy or strength in the singular form.
Hi mate,
I think the majority of people are misunderstanding my point... even a hypertrophy based routine is based on strength increase/progression via either volume (total tonnage) or direct tonnage (weight on the bar).. both of these are progression in strength.
I'm not saying you have to powerlift to get bigger, I'm saying you HAVE to get stronger regardless of whatever training routine you're using. Hope that makes sense?
I get what you are saying. You are advocating the 3-5 rep range rather than the hypertrophic rep range basically, no? The "your muscles have to get stronger to get bigger" kinda falls in the "no *kitten*" category and your contention seems to be debating that the 3-5 rep range is a better way to accomplish this based on the study you posted.
That's how I'm reading it all anyway. So my point remains that I am guessing that a combination would be most effective.
Hi again mate, sorry I didnt explain myself properly...
So, I'm not saying that any particular rep range is 'better', I'm just pointing out the same fact that you've also pointed out... you need to get stronger regardless of the rep range in order to get bigger. That's all
You can work with any rep range, but if you're not getting stronger, you won't get (much) bigger.
The lower rep range v's the higher rep range stuff is also a really good topic, but a separate one..
Hope that makes sense mate?
This is all stuff that you quite obviously already know though
Gotcha. We are on the same page. :Shake:1 -
NorthCascades wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »I just Googled that, and read the abstract of the paper that comes up.
I've seen a lot of different recommendations for protein intake, it's hard to know which one to follow. Depending which one I go with, I should get anywhere from 150g to 350g per day. I feel like the top end is exaggerated, but again as a cyclist for many years, I just have no idea. I've probably been getting 75g per day while I've been lifting for the past two months, and I feel like I've gained very little muscle during that time. Seems like the best explanation is that I'm not getting enough protein to build muscle with. Does that sound right? I'm getting plenty of carbs.
What are you stats if you don't mind me asking?
sex
weight
esitmated body fat
how long have you been lifting
what other exercise are you doing
whats your specific goal
all the good stuff & I'll be happy to help out with recommendations
I'm a 38 year old male, 6'1" tall and about 225 lbs. Estimated body fat is 20 % and lean body mass 42 %, according to my smart scale. I know that's not the best way to calculate, but it's the best I have available to me right now. I started lifting (moderate weight, high reps) on May 26 and started lifting heavy (low reps) July 1. I lift every other day for about an hour, always focusing on arm and chest. My goal is to build upper body muscle. I ride a road bike about 100 miles per week on average.
Ok, so the very first thing is to understand energy balance...
if you're wanting to lose weight you need to create a caloric deficit,
if you're wanting to gain weight you need to create a caloriec surplus
if you're wanting to lose FAT rather than overall weight, you'll need to manage your nutrition in a way that supports your lean body mass to ensure that the weight loss is mostly from fat mass
if you're wanting the weight gain to be mostly new muscle tissue, you'll need to adopt a slight calorie surplus that is enough to support the building of new muscle tissue, but not too much to avoid a significant amount of fat gain during the process
Now, I would recommend that you aim for building an overall well rounded physique rather than just trying to build your upper body exclusively as that will lead to muscular imbalances than can show up in the form of injury, pains, aches etc
If you're adamant on cycling that 100 miles each week, just understand that you're expending a very lage amount of calories to do so, thus meaning that you'll need even more calories going in to ensure that you're in an overall calorie surplus (although as a newbie, you can build muscle while in a deficit for a short period of time, maybe 3-6 months... so you could target fat loss & build new muscle at the same time before having to choose one goal exclusively)
If you're main goal right now is to put on lean mass tissue,
I'd recommend starting a solid plan which focuses on getting stronger with the compound lifts & then adding in accessories for any bodyparts that you feel need extra work
(starting strength, stronglifts 5x5 & ICF 5x5 are all great options for your current level)
now, as far as the nutrition.. you'll need to calculate you're TDEE (you can use an online calorie calculator to get a rough starting point) & then add a moderate surplus to support the building on new muscle tissue, my recommendation would be to add 200-300 calories to your TDEE or to add 10% of the total calories of your TDEE to you daily calories
Then it's a case of testing & tracking results
You should be able to shoot for a nice half a lbs per week at your current level, but if you find fat gain happening too fast, lower your goal to around 0.25lb per week
Hope this helps!!!??
This information that you are providing is not any NEW news to us. We all give out this exact same advice, daily to all MFPers that wish to encounter the next step in their weight loss journey, maintenance journey or better yet get some ripped abs per se.
Just curious if I missed the punch line here and not being snarky at all, but I am confused that there is actually this "secret".. its not.. its all in just what you wrote for this poster.
While it isn't a secret I would say based on some of the questions I see people just don't have the knowledge.2 -
sunnybeaches105 wrote: »Adding:
I would bet a study that tested a varied program with strength and Hypertrophy incorporated would fair better than either Hypertrophy or strength in the singular form.
Hi mate,
I think the majority of people are misunderstanding my point... even a hypertrophy based routine is based on strength increase/progression via either volume (total tonnage) or direct tonnage (weight on the bar).. both of these are progression in strength.
I'm not saying you have to powerlift to get bigger, I'm saying you HAVE to get stronger regardless of whatever training routine you're using. Hope that makes sense?
I get what you are saying. You are advocating the 3-5 rep range rather than the hypertrophic rep range basically, no? The "your muscles have to get stronger to get bigger" kinda falls in the "no *kitten*" category and your contention seems to be debating that the 3-5 rep range is a better way to accomplish this based on the study you posted.
That's how I'm reading it all anyway. So my point remains that I am guessing that a combination would be most effective.
Hi again mate, sorry I didnt explain myself properly...
So, I'm not saying that any particular rep range is 'better', I'm just pointing out the same fact that you've also pointed out... you need to get stronger regardless of the rep range in order to get bigger. That's all
You can work with any rep range, but if you're not getting stronger, you won't get (much) bigger.
The lower rep range v's the higher rep range stuff is also a really good topic, but a separate one..
Hope that makes sense mate?
This is all stuff that you quite obviously already know though
We are all reading the same group of experts, i.e., Aragon, Helms, et al. I'm sure I'm not alone in subscribing to the AARR. What you're saying also seems to form much of the philosophical basis for Norton's PHAT program.
Yep, agreed!
But I'd love this stuff to reach the lay person, rather than only be known in the inner circles of the fitness community... unfortunately the majority of the public get their advice from scam artists peddling crap because they've mastered the art of marketing & spend their time on mostly useless stuff, staying in a continuous cycle of confusion & never getting the results they really want1 -
sunnybeaches105 wrote: »Adding:
I would bet a study that tested a varied program with strength and Hypertrophy incorporated would fair better than either Hypertrophy or strength in the singular form.
Hi mate,
I think the majority of people are misunderstanding my point... even a hypertrophy based routine is based on strength increase/progression via either volume (total tonnage) or direct tonnage (weight on the bar).. both of these are progression in strength.
I'm not saying you have to powerlift to get bigger, I'm saying you HAVE to get stronger regardless of whatever training routine you're using. Hope that makes sense?
I get what you are saying. You are advocating the 3-5 rep range rather than the hypertrophic rep range basically, no? The "your muscles have to get stronger to get bigger" kinda falls in the "no *kitten*" category and your contention seems to be debating that the 3-5 rep range is a better way to accomplish this based on the study you posted.
That's how I'm reading it all anyway. So my point remains that I am guessing that a combination would be most effective.
Hi again mate, sorry I didnt explain myself properly...
So, I'm not saying that any particular rep range is 'better', I'm just pointing out the same fact that you've also pointed out... you need to get stronger regardless of the rep range in order to get bigger. That's all
You can work with any rep range, but if you're not getting stronger, you won't get (much) bigger.
The lower rep range v's the higher rep range stuff is also a really good topic, but a separate one..
Hope that makes sense mate?
This is all stuff that you quite obviously already know though
We are all reading the same group of experts, i.e., Aragon, Helms, et al. I'm sure I'm not alone in subscribing to the AARR. What you're saying also seems to form much of the philosophical basis for Norton's PHAT program.
Yep, agreed!
But I'd love this stuff to reach the lay person, rather than only be known in the inner circles of the fitness community... unfortunately the majority of the public get their advice from scam artists peddling crap because they've mastered the art of marketing & spend their time on mostly useless stuff, staying in a continuous cycle of confusion & never getting the results they really want
I definitely agree with you there. Where the hell were all these good trainers years ago when I started? I was told white rice was horrible, had body part splits and sets of 10 pushed, had to learn to squat from Rippetoe videos, etc. lots of banging my head against a wall there.
Do some good.0 -
sunnybeaches105 wrote: »sunnybeaches105 wrote: »Adding:
I would bet a study that tested a varied program with strength and Hypertrophy incorporated would fair better than either Hypertrophy or strength in the singular form.
Hi mate,
I think the majority of people are misunderstanding my point... even a hypertrophy based routine is based on strength increase/progression via either volume (total tonnage) or direct tonnage (weight on the bar).. both of these are progression in strength.
I'm not saying you have to powerlift to get bigger, I'm saying you HAVE to get stronger regardless of whatever training routine you're using. Hope that makes sense?
I get what you are saying. You are advocating the 3-5 rep range rather than the hypertrophic rep range basically, no? The "your muscles have to get stronger to get bigger" kinda falls in the "no *kitten*" category and your contention seems to be debating that the 3-5 rep range is a better way to accomplish this based on the study you posted.
That's how I'm reading it all anyway. So my point remains that I am guessing that a combination would be most effective.
Hi again mate, sorry I didnt explain myself properly...
So, I'm not saying that any particular rep range is 'better', I'm just pointing out the same fact that you've also pointed out... you need to get stronger regardless of the rep range in order to get bigger. That's all
You can work with any rep range, but if you're not getting stronger, you won't get (much) bigger.
The lower rep range v's the higher rep range stuff is also a really good topic, but a separate one..
Hope that makes sense mate?
This is all stuff that you quite obviously already know though
We are all reading the same group of experts, i.e., Aragon, Helms, et al. I'm sure I'm not alone in subscribing to the AARR. What you're saying also seems to form much of the philosophical basis for Norton's PHAT program.
Yep, agreed!
But I'd love this stuff to reach the lay person, rather than only be known in the inner circles of the fitness community... unfortunately the majority of the public get their advice from scam artists peddling crap because they've mastered the art of marketing & spend their time on mostly useless stuff, staying in a continuous cycle of confusion & never getting the results they really want
I definitely agree with you there. Where the hell were all these good trainers years ago when I started? I was told white rice was horrible, had body part splits and sets of 10 pushed, had to learn to squat from Rippetoe videos, etc. lots of banging my head against a wall there.
Do some good.
yep, same here mate.... I live by "doing the right thing, is always the right thing"
I think if you give more than you get, you'll always be ok.
And if I know something, that other people need/want, it's our personal responsibility to help & give that info away to those who need/want it.1 -
shrugs, I don't see a lot of ground breaking stuff here...but have at it OP...
0 -
-
not mocking anything, just pointing out that there is nothing ground breaking here...0 -
not mocking anything, just pointing out that there is nothing ground breaking here...
to you maybe... if you've read through the comments you'll see that alot of people are unaware of this concept.2 -
not mocking anything, just pointing out that there is nothing ground breaking here...
to you maybe... if you've read through the comments you'll see that alot of people are unaware of this concept.
all of that information could of been found in the "most helpful posts" section of this forum, or any other forum for that matter...1 -
not mocking anything, just pointing out that there is nothing ground breaking here...
to you maybe... if you've read through the comments you'll see that alot of people are unaware of this concept.
all of that information could of been found in the "most helpful posts" section of this forum, or any other forum for that matter...
Yet some people are still unaware of this concept (some even argue against it who haven't yet become familiar with the science & application) ...your posts are now pointless and taking away from the topic. This topic is obviously not of any use to you, so there's no point in you commenting anymore unless it's to help contribute.2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 390 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 922 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions