.gif "IP Gear")
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2005
- Messages
- 816
Is a Large Amount of Resistance Required to Increase Muscle Mass and Strength?
Tanimoto M, Ishii N.
Effects of low-intensity resistance exercise with slow movement and tonic force generation on muscular function in young men. Journal of Applied Physiology. 2006; 100: 1150-1157.
Resistance training performance and recommendations by professional groups traditionally have revolved around using large amounts of weight, i.e., force. The belief for decades has been that the mechanical stress from high force was a necessary part of the resistance training stimulus. For example, this belief has led to recommendations that loads in resistance training for each exercise should range from about 70% to 90% or more of a one repetition maximum (1RM) Tanimoto and Ishii challenged this belief. They noted studies using lower resistance (40% to 50% of 1 RM) combined with moderate vascular occlusion that resulted in gains in strength and muscle mass. Tanimoto and Ishii noted three mechanisms that could make such training effective. These mechanism are stimulated secretion of growth hormone, moderate production of reactive oxygen species that may be associated with tissue growth, and the additional recruitment of fast-twitch fibers as a result of a hypoxic condition
(p.1150). The results of these studies point toward metabolic, hormonal, and neuronal factors, not just mechanical stress, as important for producing responses to resistance training. It is strongly advised that you do not attempt to train with vascular occlusion. Besides being potentially dangerous, the reason not to train with vascular occlusion is because a simple approach to training may produce the same favorable effects without any of the potential problems.
The key appears to be maintaining continuous force generation throughout a set. This can be done by performing relatively longer duration repetitions. In the present study, 24 young men who did not regularly perform resistance training were randomly assigned to one of three groups in a 12-week training program involving the knee extension exercise. In each group, three sets of the exercise, with one minute between sets, were performed three times per week. Resistance was adjusted as the participants progressed. In one condition (LST), knee extension repetitions were performed with 50% of 1 RM taking three seconds for the negative part of the repetition, three seconds for the positive part, and a one second pause (fully contracted point) with no relaxing phase. Participants could perform about eight repetitions in this style and trained to exhaustion
on each set. In another condition (HN) similar to the training observed in many gyms and health clubs, the knee extension was performed with 80% of 1 RM taking one second for the positive part of the repetition, one second for the negative part, and then one second for relaxing. Participants could perform about eight repetitions in this style and trained to exhaustion on each set. In the third condition (LN), participants performed eight repetitions in the knee extension with 50% of 1 RM in the same style as the HN condition but given the relatively lower load and the repetition performance, men in this condition did not train to exhaustion.“Studies refute claims about energy expenditure from resistance training and the absolute resistance required to increase strength and muscle mass.”
The results showed that both training with slower repetitions with a pause (LST) and more conventional training (HN) were effective. Both LST and HN produced increases in strength and thigh muscle mass. Training with 50% of 1 RM but not to exhaustion (LN) produced some minimally favorable outcomes for strength. The LST protocol resulted in almost continuous muscle tension throughout the knee extension’s range of motion. Oxygenation levels showed wider variability and more minimum levels in LST compared to the other two training conditions. Lower muscle oxygenation coupled with increased blood lactate may be related to mechanisms associated with muscular hypertrophy. Systolic blood pressure
during exercise was lower in LST than in HN. Blood lactate levels for LST and HN were similar but HN did not show as low levels of oxygenation as LST. For both LST and HN conditions, increases in strength appeared attributable primarily to increases in muscle mass. Bottom-line: The slower controlled repetition protocol (LST) used in this study is similar to ones recommended previously . It is not known whether or not longer duration repetitions (e.g, 8 seconds, pause,
4 seconds vs the 3 seconds, pause, 3 seconds LST protocol) would produce different or better outcomes. The study only used three-set protocols. The study did not demonstrate whether a one-set LST protocol would produce the same outcomes as the three-set LST protocol. Other research indicates this would likely be the case. The study did, however, demonstrate that a high intensity training style without high force (a large resistance) can produce strength and muscle mass gains. A caveat is that the demonstration of strength at specific exercise speed and angles may require specific training at the test or performance (lifting contest) speed and angle. However, training with longer duration, controlled repetitions may be ideal for most trainees who do not have an interest in weight lifting or powerlifting. Many trainees are interested in safely increasing muscle mass and relative strength. In their discussion section, Tanimoto and Ishii noted interesting findings from their pilot work. In searching for an effective longer duration protocol they found that a four seconds positive, four seconds negative protocol did result in continuous tension. However, trainees only were able to perform several repetitions with 50% of 1 RM previously tested at a conventional repetition duration. For example, if the 1 RM knee extension (presumably one second up) was 100 lbs, then the trainees only could perform several 4,4 repetitions with 50 lbs. These findings suggest that a conventionally performed 1 RM and repetition style within a set may use considerable momentum and may not be a good indicator of actual strength. Other factors are involved such as literally learning to throw weights. To the professionals in the field with a weight lifting orientation, such ideas are heresy. Perhaps, a better way to assess strength is to perform a 1 RM taking at least four seconds for the positive phase. Strength changes also may be better assessed by simply monitoring change within a given training protocol. For example, the resistance used at the start of training in an exercise with six, 4, 4 repetitions can then simply be compared to the resistance used in the same exercise performed for the same repetitions in the same style and range of motion three months later. This also is heresy for most professionals in the field. With any different training style of training, there is a period of neuromuscular learning. With such learning, it may (and certainly appears to be the case) that people can reach a point where they can perform six to eight longer repetitions with a relatively high percent of 1 RM as assessed in the same way they are training. Such a training approach may be particularly effective but we need additional longer-term studies to demonstrate that such is the case.
Tanimoto M, Ishii N.
Effects of low-intensity resistance exercise with slow movement and tonic force generation on muscular function in young men. Journal of Applied Physiology. 2006; 100: 1150-1157.
Resistance training performance and recommendations by professional groups traditionally have revolved around using large amounts of weight, i.e., force. The belief for decades has been that the mechanical stress from high force was a necessary part of the resistance training stimulus. For example, this belief has led to recommendations that loads in resistance training for each exercise should range from about 70% to 90% or more of a one repetition maximum (1RM) Tanimoto and Ishii challenged this belief. They noted studies using lower resistance (40% to 50% of 1 RM) combined with moderate vascular occlusion that resulted in gains in strength and muscle mass. Tanimoto and Ishii noted three mechanisms that could make such training effective. These mechanism are stimulated secretion of growth hormone, moderate production of reactive oxygen species that may be associated with tissue growth, and the additional recruitment of fast-twitch fibers as a result of a hypoxic condition
(p.1150). The results of these studies point toward metabolic, hormonal, and neuronal factors, not just mechanical stress, as important for producing responses to resistance training. It is strongly advised that you do not attempt to train with vascular occlusion. Besides being potentially dangerous, the reason not to train with vascular occlusion is because a simple approach to training may produce the same favorable effects without any of the potential problems.
The key appears to be maintaining continuous force generation throughout a set. This can be done by performing relatively longer duration repetitions. In the present study, 24 young men who did not regularly perform resistance training were randomly assigned to one of three groups in a 12-week training program involving the knee extension exercise. In each group, three sets of the exercise, with one minute between sets, were performed three times per week. Resistance was adjusted as the participants progressed. In one condition (LST), knee extension repetitions were performed with 50% of 1 RM taking three seconds for the negative part of the repetition, three seconds for the positive part, and a one second pause (fully contracted point) with no relaxing phase. Participants could perform about eight repetitions in this style and trained to exhaustion
on each set. In another condition (HN) similar to the training observed in many gyms and health clubs, the knee extension was performed with 80% of 1 RM taking one second for the positive part of the repetition, one second for the negative part, and then one second for relaxing. Participants could perform about eight repetitions in this style and trained to exhaustion on each set. In the third condition (LN), participants performed eight repetitions in the knee extension with 50% of 1 RM in the same style as the HN condition but given the relatively lower load and the repetition performance, men in this condition did not train to exhaustion.“Studies refute claims about energy expenditure from resistance training and the absolute resistance required to increase strength and muscle mass.”
The results showed that both training with slower repetitions with a pause (LST) and more conventional training (HN) were effective. Both LST and HN produced increases in strength and thigh muscle mass. Training with 50% of 1 RM but not to exhaustion (LN) produced some minimally favorable outcomes for strength. The LST protocol resulted in almost continuous muscle tension throughout the knee extension’s range of motion. Oxygenation levels showed wider variability and more minimum levels in LST compared to the other two training conditions. Lower muscle oxygenation coupled with increased blood lactate may be related to mechanisms associated with muscular hypertrophy. Systolic blood pressure
during exercise was lower in LST than in HN. Blood lactate levels for LST and HN were similar but HN did not show as low levels of oxygenation as LST. For both LST and HN conditions, increases in strength appeared attributable primarily to increases in muscle mass. Bottom-line: The slower controlled repetition protocol (LST) used in this study is similar to ones recommended previously . It is not known whether or not longer duration repetitions (e.g, 8 seconds, pause,
4 seconds vs the 3 seconds, pause, 3 seconds LST protocol) would produce different or better outcomes. The study only used three-set protocols. The study did not demonstrate whether a one-set LST protocol would produce the same outcomes as the three-set LST protocol. Other research indicates this would likely be the case. The study did, however, demonstrate that a high intensity training style without high force (a large resistance) can produce strength and muscle mass gains. A caveat is that the demonstration of strength at specific exercise speed and angles may require specific training at the test or performance (lifting contest) speed and angle. However, training with longer duration, controlled repetitions may be ideal for most trainees who do not have an interest in weight lifting or powerlifting. Many trainees are interested in safely increasing muscle mass and relative strength. In their discussion section, Tanimoto and Ishii noted interesting findings from their pilot work. In searching for an effective longer duration protocol they found that a four seconds positive, four seconds negative protocol did result in continuous tension. However, trainees only were able to perform several repetitions with 50% of 1 RM previously tested at a conventional repetition duration. For example, if the 1 RM knee extension (presumably one second up) was 100 lbs, then the trainees only could perform several 4,4 repetitions with 50 lbs. These findings suggest that a conventionally performed 1 RM and repetition style within a set may use considerable momentum and may not be a good indicator of actual strength. Other factors are involved such as literally learning to throw weights. To the professionals in the field with a weight lifting orientation, such ideas are heresy. Perhaps, a better way to assess strength is to perform a 1 RM taking at least four seconds for the positive phase. Strength changes also may be better assessed by simply monitoring change within a given training protocol. For example, the resistance used at the start of training in an exercise with six, 4, 4 repetitions can then simply be compared to the resistance used in the same exercise performed for the same repetitions in the same style and range of motion three months later. This also is heresy for most professionals in the field. With any different training style of training, there is a period of neuromuscular learning. With such learning, it may (and certainly appears to be the case) that people can reach a point where they can perform six to eight longer repetitions with a relatively high percent of 1 RM as assessed in the same way they are training. Such a training approach may be particularly effective but we need additional longer-term studies to demonstrate that such is the case.
Last edited:
