Weightlifting Testosterone Vs Lactic Acid

[Hans]

@Hans, what do you think about this article: Are Bigger Muscles Better? Antioxidants and the Response to Exercise - Perfect Health Diet | Perfect Health Diet

Well, the body does produce ROS via a few mechanisms, which includes the mitochondria, NADPH oxidase (NOX), xanthine oxidase, myostatin, phospholipase A2, COX and LOX.
Being on a low PUFA diet will significantly lower ROS, LPO, prostaglandins, etc., and doesn't inhibit hypertrophy as far as I know, but will actually boost it because PUFAs are catabolic and anti-androgenic whereas saturated fats are anabolic and androgenic. Caffeine inhibits xanthine oxidase and can actually promote hypertrophy. Myostatin is a negative regulator of muscle growth.
A moderate acute spurt of ROS seems to be needed to promote adaption from exercise, whereas excessive and prolonged elevated ROS promotes proteolysis, so depleting anti-oxidants would definitely be silly.

Impact of Oxidative Stress on Exercising Skeletal Muscle
"Strong increases in ROS after strenuous exercise, aging and/or disease (e.g., chronic heart failure, COPD, cancer) can cause contractile dysfunction and muscle atrophy, which both promote muscle weakness and fatigue"

Mostly only during overtraining and malnutrition could ROS get out of hand and start causing some serious damage.
Eating a good diet which contains natural anti-oxidants should be enough to support weight training. I also think that a lot of supplemental anti-oxidants close to and around the workout will blunt the adaption, but taking the anti-oxidants on off days or 12+ hours away from your workouts should not interfere. I take my vitamin E on my off days only. Vince Gironda took large doses of vitamin E (400-1600IU) daily with about 300-500mg of vitamin C and he was all about what produced results. So I'm sure he wouldn't have done it if it was blunting his gains. But probably a big reason why he took so much was because he ate lots of eggs when bulking.

I think depleting yourself of anti-oxidants with the idea to get bigger, will actually cause atrophy, not hypertrophy. Maybe cell swelling from all the inflammation, but not hypertrophy. DHEA also increase the production of ROS, which seems to be highly beneficial. A little bit of ROS is also needed for insulin signaling. So ROS is needed, but excessive is bad.

Plus, trained men can tolerate ROS much better than untrained men, because they have adapted to it.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4496677/bin/biomolecules-05-00356-g002.jpg

 

[Logan-]

Well, the body does produce ROS via a few mechanisms, which includes the mitochondria, NADPH oxidase (NOX), xanthine oxidase, myostatin, phospholipase A2, COX and LOX.
Being on a low PUFA diet will significantly lower ROS, LPO, prostaglandins, etc., and doesn't inhibit hypertrophy as far as I know, but will actually boost it because PUFAs are catabolic and anti-androgenic whereas saturated fats are anabolic and androgenic. Caffeine inhibits xanthine oxidase and can actually promote hypertrophy. Myostatin is a negative regulator of muscle growth.
A moderate acute spurt of ROS seems to be needed to promote adaption from exercise, whereas excessive and prolonged elevated ROS promotes proteolysis, so depleting anti-oxidants would definitely be silly.

Impact of Oxidative Stress on Exercising Skeletal Muscle
"Strong increases in ROS after strenuous exercise, aging and/or disease (e.g., chronic heart failure, COPD, cancer) can cause contractile dysfunction and muscle atrophy, which both promote muscle weakness and fatigue"

Mostly only during overtraining and malnutrition could ROS get out of hand and start causing some serious damage.
Eating a good diet which contains natural anti-oxidants should be enough to support weight training. I also think that a lot of supplemental anti-oxidants close to and around the workout will blunt the adaption, but taking the anti-oxidants on off days or 12+ hours away from your workouts should not interfere. I take my vitamin E on my off days only. Vince Gironda took large doses of vitamin E (400-1600IU) daily with about 300-500mg of vitamin C and he was all about what produced results. So I'm sure he wouldn't have done it if it was blunting his gains. But probably a big reason why he took so much was because he ate lots of eggs when bulking.

I think depleting yourself of anti-oxidants with the idea to get bigger, will actually cause atrophy, not hypertrophy. Maybe cell swelling from all the inflammation, but not hypertrophy. DHEA also increase the production of ROS, which seems to be highly beneficial. A little bit of ROS is also needed for insulin signaling. So ROS is needed, but excessive is bad.

Plus, trained men can tolerate ROS much better than untrained men, because they have adapted to it.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4496677/bin/biomolecules-05-00356-g002.jpg

Thanks for the reply.

 

[Sapien]

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)

(this is a copy of the post i made on the thread "exercise the ray peat way", I am posting it in other forums that seem related )

 

[theoogabear]

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)

(this is a copy of the post i made on the thread "exercise the ray peat way", I am posting it in other forums that seem related )

outstanding post fren, i will try this new doorknob weightlifting protocol...

 

[Spartan300]

@Sapien with only one set of maximum contraction, how many body parts do you train each session? And how long before you train the same bodypart again?

I'm still suffering with exercise intolerance and hoping this could help - thanks

 

[Sapien]

@Sapien with only one set of maximum contraction, how many body parts do you train each session? And how long before you train the same bodypart again?

I'm still suffering with exercise intolerance and hoping this could help - thanks

Sorry for the misinformation lol but I recently learned that Arthur Jones was wrong in his assertion that the muscle is fully activated in its maximally contracted state. Nautilus equipment has since been updated to better match the strength curve of the muscle, with maximal resistance in the middle. I still do the same types of workouts, known as "overcoming isometrics", but now I do them at the middle of the range of motion.


to answer your question about volume and frequency,: I no longer agree with the "one set only" principals of HIT, as I realized that without eccentric training, there is no muscle damage and thus no "recovery" needed. In my original post I mentioned the Great Gama and how he would do these isometric workouts; he was known to do hundreds of reps every single day so I think there is no limit on how much you can workout. (Except for the fact that muscle glycogen will run out, not sure of how that works specifically) However there is a caveat that you should keep the "sets" short with ample rest in between them as Ray and Georgi have cautioned that lifting weights can cause a lot of lactic acid to be released. You want to feel the muscle working, but it should not "burn". You need to exert a high degree of effort to hit your fast twitch fibers (which have the greatest growth potential) so short and intense sets are best to achieve both of these stipulations

Although I have changed my mind on a lot, some of the principals I outlined in my post I still believe:

I do not believe conventional strength training with weights is optimal for the same reasons I listed in my previous post: there is no good way to avoid eccentric movements with most exercises;

also matching the strength curve of the muscle closely is pretty difficult when taking gravity Into consideration (thus the genius of nautilus equipment), but can be done fairly well if one chooses the right exercises. This is merely a side point the eccentric movements are the main downside

With that being said, it is indisputable that conventional training can and does produce results. I see it as a "2 steps forward one step back" situation, where the mechanical tension from lifting weights builds muscle and the eccentric movements damage/destroy muscle. As long as one is not "overtraining" as Mentzer put it, one will build muscle.

To your statement about exercise intolerance: In those Mike Mentzee videos I mentioned, he said that ones ability to recover varies, as a personal trainer for hundreds of clients he said that there is a bell curve with a small subsection of people, for whatever reason, less proficient at recovering from a workout. He said some of his clients would not gain muscle until he made them lift only once every 2 weeks or something. This is one way of solving that problem, but knowing now what I learned from Ray Peat about eccentric exercise, I think a better solution for someone like this (and probably everyone for that matter) would be to avoid eccentric exercise as a whole. The best way I know of doing this is overcoming isometrics, which HIT advocate Drew Baye says are just as effective as conventional training. I do not agree with his implementation of them however, as he claims one must do circa 90 second sets (which he admits is an arbitrary number, but somewhere in that range) for proper HIT training. This to me stems from a sort of Puritan style "no pain no gain" philosophy, as when I was a member of his group he could not satisfactorily answer my questions on what is wrong with doing short sets using logic.

I do not assuredly know if there are any benefits one loses from not performing a full range of motion, but Drew Baye has YouTube videos on why its just as good you could check out. His videos and group actually taught me a lot I highly reccomend it, he instructs in a manner so that you can understand the logic behind it, not just "thou shalt perform 3 sets of ten" like most influencers. Very similar to Peat in that regard. However with that being said if you watch his videos with a critical eye you will likely come to the same questions I have that he simply has no answers for.

He also has videos on which specific exercises he performs for this style of training, however I think most are behind a paywall of some sort. You can sign up for his group "the hitlist" for $20 binge the videos and cancel like I did.

Sorry if this post is messy I just wrote it spur of the moment hope it helps feel free to reply or dm me with any comments/questions

 

[jagvel24]

how does cardio respiratory fitness (vo2 max) come into play in this?

 

[BeanSprouts]

You can absolutely lift to failure; It's how you build muscle. Intensity is the sole determinant of productive lifting for muscle building. You can't curl a soup can 100 times and expect 17-inch arms. This is just contorting some of his words to fit some idea you had, like when people shun eccentrics, which is like telling people that when you pick up milk out of your fridge, you're not allowed to lower it because that is an eccentric contraction and that's "not peaty!!!"

To keep from being chronically stressed, you just workout less and rest more. Go to the gym, get the work done, don't play there for 2 hours, go home, and have rest days. Never workout two days in a row; it's the worst thing you can do for lifting because you don't recover in less than 24 hours drug free. You're not a pro athlete and so most of your week should be rest days. If you get antsy on rest days, get another hobby. Ray painted for example.