hit post too soon....
It's been on my mind, I'll start a thread. These are concepts I've wrestled with for 20 years when I got my bachelors in biology to now. We have newer studies now but these concepts are always on my mind. This also isn't minutia (ie which joint angle will perfectly hit the outer 1/18 of my biceps, etc. etc). These are big, bold "things" that can radically impact what is happening when and how you eat and train:
What this leads me to personally are a handful of overarching concepts to drive myofibrillar hypertrophy and escape MND size limit and RBE:
- Train infrequently. I don't know exactly how often, but it definitely isn't 4+ times a week. Likely 1-2...possibly three but unlikely.
- Train very hard with extremely high tension, no momentum, and put a lot of focus on negatives (negatives cause much more muscle damage)
- Food is the most important thing (duh). No sets, no reps, no volume builds the muscle. Cause damage by lifting infrequently and eat a lot of food, specifically protein. "If muscle is going to gain mass, protein synthesis must exceed protein breakdown". This is a big "duh" for us. This is not apparent for casual lifters. Animal protein should be the driver. Higher protein is best. Added carbs will contribute to sarcoplasmic hypertrophy. Some carbs are fine, I'm not saying never eat them at all. Eating a metric ton is a key driver of sarcoplasmic hypertrophy (again, I'm not saying it's bad).
- There is no MND size limit on sarcoplasmic hypertrophy. Eat carbs, drive a pump, drive frequency and you can shoot sarcoplasmic hypertrophy to the mother effing moon. Add in anabolic and holly hell. Again, for sarcoplasmic you don't have almost any of the above to contend with AND you don't even have to train that hard.
- It's not all one or the other. Luki and I may disagree on sarcoplasmic (although, all cards on the table I think the science is settled comparing sarcoplasmic verse myofibrillar hypertrophy and what's what) hypertrophy but I do agree with him the way some bodybuilders train and eat many are driving some level of "real" (myrofibrillar) growth. It's not all one or the other but as you become and accustomed lifter over and over and over you hit MND size limit, RBE kicks in, and real growth is over.
Lastly, It is up to the individual if it matters. When you see guys online say "don't worry if you haven't trained in a month and you are smaller you can just start lifting and muscle memory comes in" that is referring all to sarcoplasmic hypertoprhy. When you see Mike Isratel talk about doing some reps on vacation so you don't lose size that is all sarcoplasmic.
Years back I stopped all carbs, went carnivore and stopped lifting for a month while also staying overall active. I lost a ton of "muscle". That doesn't happen with real muscle. It's fake, phony, fluid. I'm not arguing if anyone should care about any of this. I do. Theoretically the more myofibrillar muscle you can drive then you can follow that up with more sarcoplasmic.
You can go deep in the weeds, but the top 5 concepts are pretty tried and true and concepts we should consider. Just listen to how influencers talk though. All of these kind of quotes are not about real muscle if you watch these guys on youtube...
"go the gym once or twice on vacation and you won't lose any muscle while your gone"
"concerned about your muscle loss while on the beach for a week, it's normal, and you will get it back"
"it's normal that if you don't lift a few weeks you will lose muscle but it comes back as soon as you go in there"
Milos sarcev talking about he pump, insulin, etc. that's all pumping fluid, it's not building myofibrillar tissue
the list goes on and on...
sorry that's just kind of thoughts off the cuff...No need to get tied off on 50 different concepts and paralysis by analysis...but I believe we should be thinking about those five key concepts above...