Exercise the Ray Peat way?

[Inabruzzo]

Thanks @Sapien

 

[EnergeticLeo]

This is a topic I have been pondering as of late, as a peaty young male looking to build muscle safely and effectively. Ray mentions that muscle mass is beneficial as it increases RMB, and also cited studies that show bodybuilders live longer. However, he has concerns with the eccentric stuff and lactic acid production.

So in summary- a good training routine is one that builds muscle, avoids eccentric movements, and minimizes muscle oxygen debt (i.e, "the pump) as it increases lactic acid.

He once said something along the lines of "brief, infrequent use of muscle is good" (probably butchered the quote but something along those line)

His advice reminded me of a famous bodybuilder in the 80's, Mike Mentzer, who postulated that all bodybuilders are overtraining, and the principals of muscle growth only required a brief and infrequent session to momentary muscular failure. Interestingly, in Synchronicity fashion, I discovered Ray's work just weeks after discovering Mentzer. I noticed great crossover between the two. Mentzer actually cited Hans Selyes "the stress of life" in one of his books about the harms of overtraining, which blew me away. Even Mikes nutritional advice was peaty, emphasizing the importance of (simple) carbohydrates and sugar, and dispelling the myth of the whey(ste product) protein industry that you needed to overload the body with protein to build muscle.

He has some great lectures on youtube on the topic of HIT, specifically, his audio tapes: The logical path to successful bodybuilding are a MUST watch for anyone interested in the topic of building muscle. He was a very intelligent man, many regarded him as a philosopher, and after watching these tapes you will realize why. His articulate speaking manner and use of logic is extremely impressive. He dispels much of the authoritarian dogma in the fitness industry, and like Peat, attempts to teach one about the science behind the topic rather than just giving a protocol. In other words, he was a proponent of "Perceive, Think, Act".

In my opinion, the theory of High Intensity Training is the most logical, science backed theory of effective exercise, and is the antithesis of the current state of bodybuilding- high volume "pump" style workouts popularized by Arnold (Mentzer's arch nemesis).

His training was based on the work of a man named Arthur jones, the inventor of Nautilus equipment proved that brief exercise to failure is the optimal way to build muscle

There is a book titled "body by science" that goes into this in more detail for anyone interested. Mentzer also has serval books of his own

As peaty as all of this sounds, minimizing the amount of stress to the organism and only doing the bare minimum required, there is still the concern of both eccentric movements and lactic acid, albeit to a DRASTICALLY lower degree.

Coauthor of body by science, John Little (a friend and disciple of Mentzer), has a program that implements these principals of brief, infrequent maximal effort training, AND eliminates these two issues. I present to you: Max contraction training (link). He talks about how a scientist in the 50s proved great results simply by a maximal muscular contraction of just 1-6 seconds.

I have applied this routine to a degree, simply contracting a muscle as hard as possible either on its own or against an immovable object (isometric), briefly and infrequently, and I honestly have had better results doing this the past 2 months than in years of traditional bodybuilding. Each day I wake up in amazement of my progress. I will see muscles that I never knew I had; a couple days after a single pull up I noticed new muscles in my upper back that I had never seen before; after a single rep of a chest contraction I grew my stubborn upper chest more in one workout that I never seemed to build with years of bench press (
"Why I never bench press and you shouldn't either" ) .

Some examples of exercises I will do are: flexing bicep in maximal contracted position as hard as possible by using a doorknob, doing the concentric part of a pull up and maximally contracting for a few seconds at the top then dropping, contracting hamstring by lying down placing heel against the ground, holding the contracted portion of a "mountain climber" pose or sit up for abs, simply contracting my rhomboids or rear delts super hard, doing a "lateral raise" against the bottom of my work desk to provide an immovable resistance, placing my forearm against the back of my (opposite) hamstring and contracting my chest across my body, etc etc. Pretty much anything that you feel a contraction will be effective, you can play around yourself. Using weights in a manner shown in the max contraction video is probably just as if not more viable, but I have seen great results even without going to the gym. The many forms of Isometrics I mentioned, contracting against an immovable object, will provide great stimulation as it will recruit ALL of the possible muscle fibers MAXIMALLY. This is a key principal of HIT (henemens size principal), fatiguing the fast twitch muscle fibers. It can be achieved in any rep range by simply training to failure, but isometrics allow you to do so with minimal/no lactic acid as only one contraction is required.

There was a wrestler named the great gama, who is famous for going 5000-0 in his bouts (yes you read that right) , who touted the benefits of maximal isometric contractions that inspired me to use immovable objects instead of the weights shown in the max contraction video. (that and I don't have a training partner crazy enough to train this way with me lol) Essentially it is the same concept, providing maximal resistance, stimulating the fast twitch muscle fibers ( henemens size principal).

'One day after defeating an opponent much larger than he, someone asked him how he was able to get so strong.' "
“It’s really quite simple,” the Indian said good-naturedly. “In the Punjab, where I lived there was a large tree behind my house. Each morning I would rise up early, tie my belt around it, and try to throw it down.” “A tree?” the boy marveled. “For twenty years.” “And you did it?” “No, little one,” Gama smiled, “but after a tree…a man is easy.” Great gama (link) .

^ This may sound like "bro science", but it actually is an example of "Heneman's size principal" in action. When contracting against an immovable object, you are using ALL of your possible effort, thus stimulating fast twitch muscle fibers.

This all may sound unbelievable, too good to be true; is it really not only possible but OPTIMAL to train this brief and infrequently?; but when one considers the biochemistry of the subject, it makes sense. Muscles are ANEROBIC, the opposite of AEROBIC exercise. This is why sprinters have very muscular legs, while a marathon runner is almost always frail. High intensity, short duration exercise such as sprinting uses predominantly fast twitch, carbohydrate burning fibers, while jogging uses slow twitch fibers that rely on fat. It is the fast twitch muscle fibers that are a lot more prone to growth

While the principals of HIT have been demonstrated scientifically ( View: https://youtu.be/ag5YMTcAudw, View: https://youtu.be/NndeNFVf9eU , View: https://youtu.be/wVYEjFZAERw ), and shown to work in practice by the success of Mentzer and Dorian Yates, these principals have been all but forgotten. It was only through an unrelenting, thorough search for a logical approach to building muscle that I discovered HIT. I have always been unconvinced of the science of traditional bodybuilding; I would follow routines and wonder WHY 3 sets of 10 ( View: https://youtu.be/hddsfYdaZ1k ), why 2 minutes of rest, why not 53 seconds of rest? All of these arbitrary decrees never sat right with me. In science, there is no room for the arbitrary, The principals of HIT initially defined by Arthur Jones and popularized by Mike Mentzer and Dorian Yates use science and logic, rather than the arbitrary tradition based programs that are popular today.

As to why it's unknown and forgotten, I don't really have a good answer other than the fact that we live in a "dark age" to some degree, with sheeple believing whatever the popular opinion is, rather than using the logical principals created by Aristotle to cultivate knowledge. It is through the use of logic and reason that I was able to discover ray peat and the community, rather than believing whatever info the dietary guidelines told me, and these same principals of logic led me to discover HIT. As a group of logic based people who Perceive, Think, Act; rather than cultivating information simply because an authority figure told you something, I know you all will really appreciate the science based approach of HIT.

The implications of this are staggering. The entire fitness industry is following the high volume approach simply out of tradition, not logic or science. I wonder how many people's lives would be changed with a proper approach to building muscle, how many more people would take up the sport if only minutes a week were necessary. Hell, a gym membership isn't even required! If anyone decided to try these principals out for themselves (after thorough evaluation of the logic of the theory, not per my advice , {Perceive Think Act!}), please update us with your results!

(P.S , I probably did a poor job explaining the exact science behind HIT, Henemens size principal, fast twitch muscles etc., I recommend reading the works of Dr Doug mcguff, Mike mentzer, Arthur jones and the content of Jay Vincent. This post was a spur of the moment thing after seeing this forum on the home page, I just did my best based on my knowledge of the topic)

Thanks for this post - I found it extremely interesting!
I used to lift regularly and then shifted to a HIT protocol which was intense, and then stopped that thinking I was stressing myself out too much. Now thanks to Peat I'm understanding the importance of building muscle for supporting the whole organism, and am thinking of getting back into HIT.

I found your statement "It is through the use of logic and reason that I was able to discover ray peat and the community..." very interesting - would you be able to elaborate on how exactly you found peat through logic?

 

[Comstock]

simply contracting a muscle as hard as possible either on its own

@Sapien Is this a viable way to train on its own? I just tried flexing the heck out of certain muscles with no weights, and it feels nice. Almost feels like weights are a shortcut to creating the mind muscle connection, but you could do without the weights if you are able flex hard enough on your own.

 

[Runenight201]

I find it ironic that Mike Metzner's exercise routines are being promoted here when the guy died at 49 of a heart attack.

Now I can't discount the fact that he took steroids, which depending on which compounds are being taken can increase the size of the heart and exacerbate atherosclerosis. And one could make the argument that it wasn't his exercise routines that killed him but rather the steroids, but you cannot separate the two from each other, and the truth may lie somewhere in the middle, that excess mass, no matter whether muscle, fat, or bone, is detrimental to the body.

So why train in a way that promotes excess muscle mass? Yes of course, muscle is important, and as we age we lose it, but does that mean we want to train in a way that maximizes muscle growth? Or do we want to train in a way that maintains the muscle that we do have, and if we do build muscle, to build it in a way that reinforces functional patterning?

For instance, what would the purpose be of building the biggest chest possible? What utility will being able to bench press 400+ pounds serve someone functionally as they age? Just take a look at where Ronnie Coleman is now, with multiple surgeries, daily mass doses of painkillers, and using crutches to hobble around everywhere and ask yourself if bodybuilding and lifting all that heavy weight and carrying all the mass was actually a good idea for long term quality of life. He doesn't a regret a thing, how could he, he earned his name body building, but I cannot come to believe that that lifestyle is anything that we should be promoting in a society which values quality of life and the long term well-being of people. There is arguably much better utility in being able to bend down and pick something off the ground, to run around and play with your children, strong enough arms to hold a lover, sufficient leg mass and coordination to walk up a flight of stairs, developed enough proprioception and eccentric muscle strength to break a fall (which is a MASSIVE risk factor for death as we age).

We should train in a way that makes sense with what provides for maximal health and life spans, as that will increase our well-being and quality of life. As much as they are arrogant and self-righteous, Functional Patterns hits the nail on the head when it comes to this style of training. They emphasize training which focuses on our foundational evolutionarily designed movement patterns, Standing, Walking, Running, and Throwing. This is what our bodies were evolved to do over millennia, and any ancient human who couldn't do these patterns was as good as dead. Well, luckily we have modern medical technologies to assist people who can't do these things and maintain some semblance of quality of life, but for any other able bodied person, training in a way that reinforces these fundamental movement patterns will maximize health and life spans.

 

[Osukhan]

I find it ironic that Mike Metzner's exercise routines are being promoted here when the guy died at 49 of a heart attack.

Now I can't discount the fact that he took steroids, which depending on which compounds are being taken can increase the size of the heart and exacerbate atherosclerosis. And one could make the argument that it wasn't his exercise routines that killed him but rather the steroids, but you cannot separate the two from each other, and the truth may lie somewhere in the middle, that excess mass, no matter whether muscle, fat, or bone, is detrimental to the body.

So why train in a way that promotes excess muscle mass? Yes of course, muscle is important, and as we age we lose it, but does that mean we want to train in a way that maximizes muscle growth? Or do we want to train in a way that maintains the muscle that we do have, and if we do build muscle, to build it in a way that reinforces functional patterning?

For instance, what would the purpose be of building the biggest chest possible? What utility will being able to bench press 400+ pounds serve someone functionally as they age? Just take a look at where Ronnie Coleman is now, with multiple surgeries, daily mass doses of painkillers, and using crutches to hobble around everywhere and ask yourself if bodybuilding and lifting all that heavy weight and carrying all the mass was actually a good idea for long term quality of life. He doesn't a regret a thing, how could he, he earned his name body building, but I cannot come to believe that that lifestyle is anything that we should be promoting in a society which values quality of life and the long term well-being of people. There is arguably much better utility in being able to bend down and pick something off the ground, to run around and play with your children, strong enough arms to hold a lover, sufficient leg mass and coordination to walk up a flight of stairs, developed enough proprioception and eccentric muscle strength to break a fall (which is a MASSIVE risk factor for death as we age).

We should train in a way that makes sense with what provides for maximal health and life spans, as that will increase our well-being and quality of life. As much as they are arrogant and self-righteous, Functional Patterns hits the nail on the head when it comes to this style of training. They emphasize training which focuses on our foundational evolutionarily designed movement patterns, Standing, Walking, Running, and Throwing. This is what our bodies were evolved to do over millennia, and any ancient human who couldn't do these patterns was as good as dead. Well, luckily we have modern medical technologies to assist people who can't do these things and maintain some semblance of quality of life, but for any other able bodied person, training in a way that reinforces these fundamental movement patterns will maximize health and life spans.

well put, and i agree
even though i train prob similar style to Metzner but with resistant band style rather than Heavy weights
functionally i lagged behind and working on more of that now, although my profession has led to some back issues
need to give FP a closer look, but really liking ATG at the moment

 

[Rinse & rePeat]

I would really like to know:

1) What guidelines would someone follow in order to do cardio exercise safely (ie. Peatly)

RP says exercise should feel enjoyable, not stressful like work, like dancing or short bursts of expending high energy like tennis.