Yeah, it's an accepted fact that pro bodybuilders routinely use anabolic drugs, and those who don't, in fact, compete in separate events reserved for "natural" competitors (who are often impressively muscular and ripped, but a lot smaller - i.e. more normal). I'm sure you're right that people who want to develop their muscles to the utmost must take care not to be protein-deficient, but I suspect this could typically be achieved with a lower intake than is imagined, unless their systems are being supercharged with anabolic supplementation. Like your husband, I don't train with heavy weights, and when I shed large amounts of fat I lost a lot round my waist (6 inches) but also a small amount (about 1/4 inch) round my arms, because there was sub-cutaneous fat there too, just much less of it. All-in-all, I ended up looking more "defined" - i.e. you can what muscle there is more effectively. My strength also improved considerably over the same period, because of the exercise overload (pushups, chinups etc + a lot of walking with light weights "heavyhands" style).
David
Not being a guy, I have no idea how muscle grows on guys, or when! It seems to have something to do with myostatin: if you don't have much of it, you grow bigger muscles. Meat chickens and meat cows are myostatin deficient. Maybe the big weight-lifters are too (and creatinine is a mystatin blocker? Maybe some foods are too? or maybe some exercises change the production of myostatin?). But even so, the animals also need the protein feedings to get the big muscles. I think maybe people do too.
The bodybuilders do seem to get bigger muscles: maybe it is water but the sheer volume of the "stuffed sausage" look makes that hard for me to believe. Of course they also might all be using drugs. Certainly the early body-builders weren't so huge! Jack LaLane wasn't very huge in his prime either, just strong. The "father of body building" (Sandow) looks pretty normal to me.Interestingly, my husband started some major exercising and he certainly lost some fat (not that he had much to lose), but his muscles aren't any bigger. If anything they look smaller and leaner. He's not doing weight-lifting though.On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 2:24 AM, David Nyman <david@davidnyman.com > wrote:
This is very interesting, Heather. However, isn't it the case that the chickens are in a developmental period analogous, in human terms, to the growth-spurt of adolescence, with its naturally-accelerated anabolic effects? Hence one might expect excess calories to be used preferentially for muscle-building under these conditions. I'm not sure that one would typically see similar results in fully-grown human adults, absent artificial hormone supplementation, of course. There's quite a lot of evidence that much of the mass gained by typical drug-free adult trainers during "bulking" over-eating tends to be fat and extra hydration, and this is revealed by how much they have to shed to reach competition body-fat percentages; net gains in muscle mass are usually quite modest, but this of course can still look impressive when in a "ripped" low-fat state.
DavidO
No comments:
Post a Comment