Pages
Categories
- Commentary
- Interviews
- Motivation
- Nutrition
- Prehab / Rehab
- Product Review
- Research
- Research Review
- Training
- Uncategorized
Archives
- April 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- November 2011
- October 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
My Newsletter
Sign up for my newsletter to be kept in the loop with the latest happenings at Mark Young Training Systems
Meta
Autor: markyoung
~ 28/02/11
.
A couple weeks back when I wrote my Ultimate Guide to Physique Assessment I came across the following question:
.
“Mark, I’m curious to see how you’re going to lay this out because in Part 1 you talk about the limits to the continued pursuit of more muscle … and the switch in priority to focus more on bringing up weak points potentially, focusing on shape, bringing the body as a whole into more balance/proportion, etc. Given muscle grows or shrinks, how does one bring up a lagging bodypart without adding more muscle?”
.
I responded in the next part of the series by reminding people that I didn’t say that muscle mass stops. I mentioned that advanced trainees can still build muscle, but suggested is that we must accept that it will be much slower and that we should put our efforts at further development where they are most needed instead of distributing them randomly about the body with no concern for aesthetic balance.
.
However, what I didn’t address was the idea that the body can break down muscle into its constituent amino acids and use them elsewhere. After chatting with my colleague Brad Schoenfeld this week I think he said it best.
.
“The body can (and does) break down tissue proteins into the constituent amino acids and then use these aminos in various capacities (can be for energy via gluconeogenic or ketogenic aminos, can be for use in other tissues, can become part of the free amino pool, etc). If you don’t train an “overdeveloped muscle” it will begin to atrophy and its proteins will be broken down. Technically any area of the body could use the amino acids for tissue building. So yes, it could “redistribute” to the underdeveloped muscle assuming it is provided with a growth stimulus.”
.
So there you have the full explanation. We can develop “new” muscle or possibly redistribute the old. In the end, I believe the focus on shape is more important than size for the advanced trainee.
.
What do you think?
As with many things, sounds nice in theory. In the real world I think most of us would say,in the contest of real-world results, not likely.
And how many people truly have a very overdeveloped area relative to the rest of the body? When was the last time you saw that in the average gym?
Comment by Erik Ledin — February 28, 2011 @ 8:00 AM
Erik – I guess the point I’m trying to drive home is that by deprioritizing one part we stand to have better abilities to maximize the development of lagging areas.
Comment by markyoung — February 28, 2011 @ 10:55 AM
Interesting is the muscle really redistrubted or just losing in one area and gaining in another? I guess the real point is you can even out you body by priority training.
Comment by bodybuilding — March 3, 2011 @ 10:25 PM
Technically you’d be sacrificing size in one area so you could resdistribute that size elsewhere. But you’re bang on about the key point. Setting a priority can bring balance.
Comment by markyoung — March 4, 2011 @ 6:14 AM
Interesting point Mark. I’d say we have tons of real-world examples of that, with disco-building and all. I’ve seen plenty of people with overdeveloped upper body and underdeveloped lower body.
My question is, how long would this redistribution take? From my knowledge, muscle atrophies very slowly, and quick atrophy will only take place when in a truly catabolic state, for example when bed-ridden because of injury or disease.
What is the least resistance needed to keep the muscle from atrophying?
Comment by Jacob Winqvist — March 4, 2011 @ 6:49 AM
Jacob – You’re correct. When a limb is immobilized you’ll see atrophy very quickly. You won’t see that in someone who is moving around all the time. As a general rule, I use the 30 repetition per week (for each muscle group) guideline as minimum to prevent atrophy. I find that this is a bare minimum.
Comment by markyoung — March 4, 2011 @ 8:11 AM