Muscle Mythbusters
The 2007 ASEP National Conference
by Dr. Lonnie Lowery
http://www.t-nation.com/readTopic.do?id=1573546
[url=javascript:pager.gotoPage(1);]Next Page[/url] | Pages 1 [url=javascript:pager.gotoPage(1);]2[/url]
It
looks like dogma has led us astray. Lactic acid is good? Geez, maybe I
should start supplementing lactate dehydrogenase. And you know what?
We'll be able to say it all started right here...

— ASEP president, Jesse Pittsley

It was late Monday night when the phone rang. Although I hate being
bothered during my miniscule portion of "me time" in the evening, I
became pleasantly surprised. On the other end of the line was a senior
level Professor and an invitation I couldn't refuse. Before I knew what I was doing, I was half-way through the preparation of a talk for the American Society of Exercise Physiologistsannual
meeting. Although this particular meeting hasn't historically been
huge, its quality is well known. This year did not disappoint. In
fact, the presentations were so dogma-destroying that I've got to share
them with you. (Truthfully, I wasn't sure that I'd be writing this one
up for readers.) Some of what occurred will literally change the
textbooks. So, in true "roving reporter fashion," let me share the
meeting with you...

Knowledge is Not Enough The
first talk I'll summarize is my own. Before you roll your eyes, know
that this relates less to ego and more to timeline. You see, mine was
the first talk that provided practical content for trainers, coaches,
and perhaps T-men in general. What did I ramble about? Teaching facts
is just one of many factors that lead to lifestyle change. We need to
be problem solvers and partners. Fortunately, communication and rapport
can be (at least partly) broken down and studied. This is a big deal
when dealing with stubborn clients or issues. There are barriers to
overcome and issues beyond simply ignorance that we must recognize. This starts with some self
assessment. For example, do you talk over others or like to
self-disclose? If so, this is good to know ahead of time and can be
addressed. Or what about the assessment form you use? Is it
scientifically valid or just made up? It is, after all, what's going to
lead you through the upcoming session. Once underway, a
session should include tailored responses to a client that help provide
accurate communication and better goal setting. It's funny but
stereotypical "counselor" type responses should be included. Asking
open-ended questions rather than yes/no inquiries gets the client
sharing. Nodding, saying "mm hmm", and even "how do you feel
about that?" are all cliché but legitimate counseling responses. Asking
directly about client readiness to change by having him point to a
ruler (symbolizing a low-high ranking), can change the future action
plan. Only a fool sets lofty, rigorous goals for a
low-scoring client who's indifferent or unsure. You get the idea. When
an expert has the good sense to make referrals when necessary, these
leadership and communication tools can really help.

Calorie Burning During Weightlifting: Re-written! Here
we see work from Rob Robergs and his research group in New Mexico
really shaking things up (as they are wont to do). It appears as though
quantifying the energy cost of resistance training has been seriously
"under-supported by empirical evidence." One tough factor to
consider, of course, is getting a weightlifter into "steady state" in
order to assess calorie expenditure accurately. That is, imagine me
standing next to you in a lab coat and calmly asking you to steadily
squat or bench, near your max, at a 20-reps per-minute pace for several
minutes straight. It just ain't gonna happen. So, these
clever guys are having experienced lifters (another bonus for
extrapolating the data to all of us) use 3- 25% of their maxes so they
can keep going long enough to get good metabolic data. By
plotting a regression line at multiple points in this low range, the
researchers can extend it out beyond 25% to say, 70% or 85% or more.
Now, the predictability of caloric cost out to high loads isn't
perfect, but here's the conclusion: Your heavy weight training bouts
may be burning two to three times more calories than you have been told! Wow... just wow!

Fat NCAA Offensive Linemen This
presentation, as many later ones would be, was less of a
literature-spanning review and more of a documentation of a single
phenomenon. This specific topic has, after all, gotten some
attention since that 2005 JAMA paper that pointed a finger at
overweight football players. In a nutshell, the investigation revealed
that body mass index (BMI) badly overestimated the prevalence of
obesity among these athletes — at 51% of cases. This
isn't surprising, as heavily muscled guys are technically "overweight"
for their height. Use of bioimpedance analysis showed true over-fatness
in just 17.6% of players. Interestingly, however, 16.4% of players were judged obese by all three methods
used (BMI, bioimpedance, waist girth). It was the offensive linemen
that were the, uh, most offensive in true body fatness. Although we
don't need lab equipment to tell us that the "meat wall" is larger than
ever, this is the first time I have personally seen prevalence
percentages applied to NCAA football players across positions.

Avoid Useless Leg Work This
next study, using ECG monitoring of muscle activity, dealt with
comparisons of different exercises regarding hamstring activation. Many
of us already know that athletes tend to disproportionately train their
quadriceps compared to their hams. Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)
injuries and other issues can result. But how much direct hamstring
work is necessary? As
often hypothesized at T-Nation, exercises such as the deadlift — and to
a lesser extent step-ups, lunges and squats — seriously activate the
hamstrings, even though they're considered quadriceps movements. Deads
offer nearly double the hamstring stimulation of the other quad-focused
exercises. In fact, the data regarding the deadlift "suggest it's a
better hamstring training stimulus than exercises previously thought to
specifically train the hamstrings such as the stiff legged deadlift,
single legged deadlift, and good morning exercises." What
this means to some readers is A.) Prevention of ACL injuries could be
partly addressed just by performing your favorite "quad movements" and
B.) Don't waste extra time doing step-ups and lunges and squats in the
same session as far as hamstrings are concerned. These movements all
stimulate the hams about equally.

Getting Stronger Bones: Forget the Dogma Interestingly,
the general understanding that bones become stronger, in some vague
way, as a response to weight bearing (axial loading) is getting a
facelift. It's not as simple as consuming more calcium or even how much
of it's embedded in your bones. Indeed, vibration platforms
and the 3-D structural arrangement within our bones are the kinds of
things now getting attention. NASA-related researchers are revealing
that not only do osteoblasts ("bone builder cells") migrate to where the tension is occurring, but blood flow seems to be an important mechanism. Think
about it. Astronauts lose bone density from their legs but actually
gain some in their skulls. Since we know blood flow increases to the
head in microgravity, this is a real clue. Of course, many of
us already know that tension at the site of tendonous insertion leads
to demonstrably increased bone mineral content among bodybuilders. But
this talk offered further insight — even to those of us already above
the 90th percentile for bone mineral density (BMD).

Rate of Force Development: New Data Change a Few Things According
to the group from Marquette University, gender (sex) differences aren't
significant regarding how rapidly muscular force can be applied. This
conclusion differs from past studies. The data also differ in that
essentially all the newly reported times regarding rate of force
development (RFD) were slower than previously reported, at least
regarding time to takeoff (TTT) in the vertical jump. (Milliseconds do
make a difference when it comes to this highly important sports
assessment.) I myself have just put in a proposal for a piece
of equipment known as the Ballistic System, which tests RFD in a very
cool, free form way. (Forget quad extensions on a Cybex, one could
literally assess cleans and other Olympic bar movements!) I've used
this piece of lab/gym equipment before and with a price tag far below
most lab machinery, it's almost within grasp of "high-end consumers".

Dynamic Exercise: A Bigger Deal for Men College
students who regularly engage in lower body resistance training helped
offer insight into the dynamic versus isometric debate. (Yes, some
sources report maximal motor unit recruitment with unmoving
isometrics.) In this study, it was men, in particular, that
really benefited from greater motor unit recruitment (nerve-muscle
activation) during dynamic squatting. For example, the rectus femoris
yielded an average 3.5 times greater recruitment during dynamic
squatting than during isometric effort. The vastus lateralis
scored a 1.6 fold improvement. Although few bodybuilders will swear by
isometrics as a substitute for "regular" dynamic squatting, it's cool
to see A.) Quantification of just how much better "real" squatting is
(researchers used the second rep of a 6 RM effort) and B.) the sex
difference.