-------------------- 1 --------------------
#1. Motor Recruitment and muscle shape? - from Jay
Top
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 16:33:57 +1200 (NZST) From: jason.morgan@stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Jay) Subject: Motor Recruitment and muscle shape? You will often see articles in mags or hear guys at the gym talking about changing the shape of their muscles by using specific exercises (ie a preacher curl to gain a higher peak on their bicep for example). However physiologically speaking this should not be possible (you cannot effectively put a boundary around one part of a muscle, overload that section thus causing it to alter in shape (Noncontiguous innervation - the neuron and motor unit sperad throughout the entire muscle). Muscle shape is to some degree hereditry, completely? Partially? When you place a muscle under load some type of neural firing pattern must result in order for the muscle to recruit enough fibres to contract. Is it the case that certain firing patterns relate to specific exercises (I would imagine that it was) and that the larger motor units called upon ,under heavy demands, may be distributed in different parts of the muscle? For example it is widely accepted that an incline bench will develop the clavicular region of the chest, while a flat bench will develop the lower section. Different adaption from different demands(or stimulation), same muscle same insertion. Can anyone out there clafify this... Happy Lifting Cheers Jay __ ___ / \___/ / | | ,,, | [=====|||||||||||||||| ::: } | | ``` \__/---\__\ JAY MORGAN "Guitar Tutor to the Stars"
-------------------- 2 --------------------
#2. Re:Valsalva - from Jarlo Ilano
Top
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 1998 20:47:10 -0700 From: Jarlo Ilano <jilano@ups.edu> Subject: Re:Valsalva James wrote: > > Are you saying that a valsalva maneuver should be discouraged in a > powerlifter performing a 1 RM squat? Or an Olympic lifter doing a clean? > Or someone doing sets of squats with near maximal loads (such as 3-5 RM > loads)? This would not be a good thing as far as prevention of spinal > injury is concerned. > > I agree with you a valsalva maneuver should be discouraged in individuals > with heart problems, elderly people, etc, where dramatic increases in blood > pressure are contraindicated. However, during short-term maximal efforts in > exercises that involve tremendous compressive forces upon the spinal discs, > such as 1-RM or near 1-RM squats or deadlifts, or Olympic lifts, a valsalva > maneuver is an important protective mechanism that should not be > discouraged. It also aids in force production. I would disagree with this statement. So-called "spinal injury" from "compressive loads" to the spinal discs, are most likely not helped by the "stability" created by intraabdominal pressure. The discs that most everyone talks about when the say "I blew a disc" or whatever are most likely joint dysfunctions. If it is truly a disc injury, then there are accompanying neural signs, what are referred to as "hard" neural signs are motor loss, and sensory changes. Whoops sorry I'm rambling, too much studying for my licensing exam... Anyway, compressive loads upon the spine are (in my opinion) are more appropriately controlled with proper alignment and "form", than with the application of the valsalva maneuver. Intradiskal pressure can increase exponentially with a "rounded back" posture or more accurately lumbar kyphosis, rather than the proper lordotic posture when handling loads. Also simply bending over with this round back, with no weight, significantly increases intradiscal pressure moreso that lifting with proper alignment. If you know of any studies that conflict with the above, please share, because I could be wrong... Also I posed a question in the last digest regarding if you are aware of any way to "stabilize" the spine during such things as squatting without performing a valsalva? Interesting discussion, thanks for contributing. Jarlo Ilano Graduate Physical Therapist University of Puget Sound Tacoma, Washington
-------------------- 3 --------------------
#3. RE: LATEST RAMBLINGS - from Mike Strassburg
Top
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 16:58:56 -0500 From: "Mike Strassburg"<MLSTRASS@hewitt.com> Subject: RE: LATEST RAMBLINGS I just finished reading the latest "Ramblings" on the Cyberpump site. It's another dose of highly opinionated musings from one of the SS proponents. The problem I have with these articles is that AB is telling me how I (the reader) feel & think about training, and that there is only one way to train. Of course that would be SS style. I've experimented with it and personally it's not for me, doesn't mean it's not productive, just means that for several reasons it's not right for me. First off, if I had to train SS style I would (as AB does) hate training, but I use my own version of HIT and really enjoy it. One's own interpretation of "fun" is probably the key. I train hard enough to often feel nauseous and end up lying on the floor for several minutes before I can function. But I also have "fun" as I set new PR's almost every workout, and feel a great sense of accomplishment when completing a workout. I actually enjoy getting into the leg press and pushing a heavy weight to failure, especially when I get 23 reps vs. the 21 I did during the previous workout. Your claim of people "not enjoying the act of exercise, but enjoying being in the testosterone permeated, muscle-head, & spandex bunny social atmosphere" just doesn't hold true for me (and many others I'm sure). You see, I train at 6:00 am in my home gym. Not real glamorous or social, but full of quality equipment for building strength. Secondly, and most important, I have a "passion" for training. I enjoy feeling the iron in my hands, I enjoy repping out on a set of dips, I enjoy throwing more weight on the leg press and bustin' my ass. Maybe that's the difference between me & you, I train because I derive pleasure from it, you seem to train because you feel that you have to. Either way will work, but yours sounds like a long journey to me. The whole tone of the article explains how exercise: shouldn't be fun, doesn't require change, must be BRUTALLY intense, etc.... Bullshit, I have fun, I change my core exercises on occasion, and I train to failure most of the time. According to AB I'm doing things all wrong, but when I look in my training log, I'm increasing poundage's almost continuously. And more importantly my strength/conditioning allow me to be a better athlete outside of the gym. AB does realize that there's a "life" outside of the gym, doesn't he??? AB do us all a favor and lighten up on the "extremist" attitude, moderation is the key...........Mike
-------------------- 4 --------------------
#4. Visit Redskin Park - from PRSNLFTNSS@aol.com
Top
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 17:25:59 EDT From: PRSNLFTNSS@aol.com Subject: Visit Redskin Park LaChance (PL) to Brzycki (MB) HIT Follow-up MB: In a phone conversation with Dan Riley (DR: Strength Coach of the Washington Redskins), he (DR) asked MB to post his response to the notion of whether or not his players train to the point of muscular failure. DR: "It is totally unfounded and untrue to say that we don't teach teach our players to go to muscular failure." PL: I can assure you from my current perspective (relative to experiences in Nautilus health clubs in the 70's, and what I saw and did to Penn State University football players in the 80’s and Army football in the 90’s), that none of Skin's I observed in the gym trained to failure on any set or came close to approaching personal best. There is a contrast in what DR has written or teaches and what his players achieved in the gym during my visit. My guess is that just about each set was completed one or two reps prior to all out maximal effort. Perhaps these training load/reps represented personal bests at one time and they were now able as training progressed to complete the same weight and rep schedule with less strain. MB: As a side note, Dan said that although it is not necessary to go to muscular failure to increase strength, it is necessary to do so for maximum gains. PL: The strongest athletes in the world have long known that it is not necessary to go to muscular failure to increase muscular strength and power. Many recognize training to failure as a non specific illogical fatiguing stress. MB/DR: Maximum gains are only possible if one trains to failure. PL: Maximum gains in what component of fitness? “No single training design stimulus can elicit maximal adaptation in all of the components of muscular fitness” (i.e., strength; endurance; speed; instantaneous, short and long duration power output; flexibility, or hypertrophy), not even in the most untrained individual. MB: Over the years, he (DR) had "hundreds and hundreds of coaches" invited to the facility to observe their workouts. Dan extends the invitation to anyone in this list to observe one of their workouts to judge for yourself. PL: Take Dan's invitation to observe one of their workouts to judge for yourself. See the 8 to 12 year veterans exercising on their own train the same way as the rookies during the in and off season. Look for the breakfast, brunch, or lunch buckets. And ask if you can look at their diaries for progress these guys have made over the current month and season. I doesn’t matter how many teams you have been around, you will be amazed with the size of some of these guys. PL: Pete LaChance, MS/prsnlftnss@aol.com