all posts post new thread

Kettlebell HIRT for Hypertrophy

Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
very interesting discussion for sure.

All we have to do to really figure it out is take a few groups of identical people, and put them through slightly different training programs for a decade or so, and see what the results are
Sometimes I think that I don't really know if it works what I do, as there was not the identical clone me who started a different training regime let's say three years ago when I immersed into "repeat training". I could say very soberly: I snatched a lot, that I now can snatch a lot. That's it.
I did what I did and then I enjoy a good dose of confirmation bias:
while science can inform the prescription
or rather the information entertains my doing.

we practice what we know works (
...looking at me as a whole: either I don't work what I know, or I don't know what works or I don't practice what works. Oh damn…

now I feel a little bit like Schrödinger's Cat itself. It's not always easy to live in a world I can not "understand". This "whole" stuff is not only more mystical than I imagine, but than I can imagine.
 
Ultimately, we know that most training works. I think the issue when comparing HIIT with HIT with HIRT (say that five times fast) is trying to figure out when each one is the most appropriate/efficient use of time. With respect to hypertrophy, I suppose it's a question of "My goals are hypertrophy and...[what?]" If my goal is big muscles that function aerobically, HIRT might be the ticket. If it's big muscles with a high lactate threshold, then maybe HIIT. If it's just big muscles and who cares about the rest, HIT seems to do alright. All we have to do to really figure it out is take a few groups of identical people, and put them through slightly different training programs for a decade or so, and see what the results are ;)

The best tool for how much time we have, balanced against our total stressor load, divided by how well we tolerate this or that protocol.

This is where I find a lot of reading can come in handy and then consider it vs what we see/experience in ourselves and others. It is uncommon to get results that are way out of whack with a lot of the literature or well-used training strategies. The best reading is where a given strategy either failed to produce the expected results or delivered results that weren't expected. Some are just poorly constructed but some have altered protocol that let us see the "A-ha" of what factors are most important. Knowing why allows us to nibble around the edges with better outcome should we for one reason or another have to modify some of this stuff.

Re mitochondrial harm or just plain overtraining from higher intensity protocols, it really comes down to too long duration per or too little recovery time between. You almost have to deliberately set out to cause harm though. It is lack of oxygen that causes most mitochondrial harm, not acid accumulation. An acidic environment protects mitochondria in conditions of low oxygen, so evolution has that one covered outside of very extreme circumstances. In the body, inorganic phosphate builds up faster than we can burn O2 or accumulate H ions, reducing muscle contraction. Extremes of either environment are self limiting = not normal.

HIIT use does work well with muscle building programs, making it easier to preserve mass while also increasing mitochondrial and capillary density due to its relatively low upfront calorie cost and reduced training time, but it isn't a muscle building protocol by itself. HIIT also improves lactate clearance and tunes the mitochondia to process pyruvate at higher throughput - this is the one adaptation that LSD does not improve relative to the two. LSD work does a better job of building capillary density and improving cardiac performance, requiring more training time to do so.

Realistically both should be used.

Outside of going really crazy, the body does a good job of adapting to whatever training we use - you get the adaptations you train for. Figure out the hierarchy of results you're looking for and assemble a strategy. For GPP esp "Ultimately, we know that most training works." Quote of the day!
 
The people who didn't wash their uniform regularly smelled like cat p*ss, not fun when practicing self defense with close contact.. :cool:

There was a time when I was heavy into BBing I would wear my shirt and underpants into the shower at the gym, rinse em standing, then take em off, ring em out, and finish the shower. This to keep my gym bag from smelling like a litterbox.

IDK how I found the time to train an hour and a half each day.
 
Many years ago I asked my chemistry teacher about workout clothes smelling like ammonia. I didn't catch the details but he went through the components of sweat and what breaks down into what and concluded that it probably really is ammonia. I got the impression that it's from normal components of sweat and nothing nefarious. For what that's worth.

Yep, it really is ammonia caused by the final breakdown of AMP, just as the link says. This is a pretty normal outcome of high ATP turnover in a short time, which is why working up a sweat at an easy jog or because its hot out doesn't have the same effect. The breakdown of AMP still happens, producing ammonia just at much lower levels.

Interesting but maybe not relevant to healthy individuals, there is a condition caused by a lack of AMP deaminase that prevents that breakdown of AMP - causing a buildup of adenosine and AMP in the muscle. Folks with this condition experience muscle fatigue and cramping when exercising and are more prone to rhabdomyolysis, so a bit of this is breakdown is beneficial.
 
now I feel a little bit like Schrödinger's Cat itself. It's not always easy to live in a world I can not "understand". This "whole" stuff is not only more mystical than I imagine, but than I can imagine.
Me no understand it either.. but then again I'm more a dog person.. ROFL
I could say very soberly: I snatched a lot, that I now can snatch a lot.
Me understand this.. (y)
 
Great conversation. Over the next few months, you will see a few articles on these topics from myself and a person much smarter than myself. In Strong Endurance, we cover a great deal of the fine details of how much acid is the right amount. As Al mentioned there are quite a few individual differences that change what is happening. Thus, when we create a protocol, we are hoping it hits the desired effects, but it varies from person to person.

I am thinking about writing an article soon discussing a recent Journal of Physiology paper. In that paper, they investigated three groups:
-5 seconds of work and 30 seconds of rest
-20 seconds of work and 4.5 minutes of rest
-steady state aerobics.

The results on the systems vary quite a bit. What is missing are the in-between work to rest intervals. We should have some more science on those coming out soon from the lab.
unnamed.png

1


Fiorenza, M., Gunnarsson, T. P., Hostrup, M., Iaia, F. M., Schena, F., Pilegaard, H., & Bangsbo, J. (2018). Metabolic stress-dependent regulation of the mitochondrial biogenic molecular response to high-intensity exercise in human skeletal muscle. The Journal of Physiology, 596(14), 2823–2840. https://doi.org/10.1113/JP275972
 

Attachments

  • Fiorenza et al. - 2018 - Metabolic stress-dependent regulation of the mitoc.pdf
    987 KB · Views: 10
I am thinking about writing an article soon discussing a recent Journal of Physiology paper. In that paper, they investigated three groups:
-5 seconds of work and 30 seconds of rest
-20 seconds of work and 4.5 minutes of rest
-steady state aerobics.

Fiorenza, M., Gunnarsson, T. P., Hostrup, M., Iaia, F. M., Schena, F., Pilegaard, H., & Bangsbo, J. (2018). Metabolic stress-dependent regulation of the mitochondrial biogenic molecular response to high-intensity exercise in human skeletal muscle. The Journal of Physiology, 596(14), 2823–2840. https://doi.org/10.1113/JP275972

This is the type of study that is well worth reading, even if some of the science is over my head!

Is this link at bottom the same study as referred to above?

RS = 18 × 5 s “all-out”efforts interspersed with 30 s of passive recovery
SE comprised 6 × 20 s “all-out” efforts interspersed with 120 s of passive recovery
CM consisted of 50 min of continuous exercise at a relative intensity corresponding
 
Even if this was an academically settled conclusion, these two states occur together in working muscle tissue. From a behavioral perspective, they’re exactly the same thing.

Yes and no. Safe to say if you have low blood O2 you have lowered Ph, but blood Ph can drop independent of low oxygen levels. Lactate production skyrockets at the initial onset of any high demand anaerobic work, however brief. Since the mitochondria can tolerate pretty sharp drops in Ph no matter what the oxygen levels are, this winds up being somewhat proactive protection, at least initially.
 
Great conversation. Over the next few months, you will see a few articles on these topics from myself and a person much smarter than myself. In Strong Endurance, we cover a great deal of the fine details of how much acid is the right amount. As Al mentioned there are quite a few individual differences that change what is happening. Thus, when we create a protocol, we are hoping it hits the desired effects, but it varies from person to person.

I am thinking about writing an article soon discussing a recent Journal of Physiology paper. In that paper, they investigated three groups:
-5 seconds of work and 30 seconds of rest
-20 seconds of work and 4.5 minutes of rest
-steady state aerobics.

The results on the systems vary quite a bit. What is missing are the in-between work to rest intervals. We should have some more science on those coming out soon from the lab.
unnamed.png

1


Fiorenza, M., Gunnarsson, T. P., Hostrup, M., Iaia, F. M., Schena, F., Pilegaard, H., & Bangsbo, J. (2018). Metabolic stress-dependent regulation of the mitochondrial biogenic molecular response to high-intensity exercise in human skeletal muscle. The Journal of Physiology, 596(14), 2823–2840. https://doi.org/10.1113/JP275972

Thanks Craig, I’ll be looking for it. Not for the science part so much as for the programming for it. I like the one stop shop type of thing no matter what it’s called, HIRT, A+A, All Terrain Training, even though I’m not close to all terrain anymore.
 
Blood levels and cellular levels drastically differ, and for good reason. Mitochondrial exposure is within the cell, not in the blood.

From a behavioral perspective, they’re exactly the same thing.


Again, yes and no. Blood Ph tends to be a little more alkaline compared to tissue Ph, but not by a huge margin.

In the mitochondria it can swing around quite a bit more to maintain efficient transport through the membrane(s). Interesting or maybe not given evolution, the ability of the mitochondria to produce ATP/unit of time is increased at lower Ph. At closer to resting Ph the rate slows way down. This maybe is one of the reasons for that fast initial PCr recharge at the stop of heavy exertion.

Either way mitochondria are pretty resilient to hypoxia and low Ph in the range of a healthy person - the system is self limiting in several ways. Getting a little off topic on this one, end of day we're just looking at responses to different strategies, whatever fits the goals. In whatever direction you push it, there is a trade off of adaptive responses, whatever the rationale.
 
Again, yes and no. Blood Ph tends to be a little more alkaline compared to tissue Ph, but not by a huge margin.

In the mitochondria it can swing around quite a bit more to maintain efficient transport through the membrane(s). Interesting or maybe not given evolution, the ability of the mitochondria to produce ATP/unit of time is increased at lower Ph. At closer to resting Ph the rate slows way down. This maybe is one of the reasons for that fast initial PCr recharge at the stop of heavy exertion.

Either way mitochondria are pretty resilient to hypoxia and low Ph in the range of a healthy person - the system is self limiting in several ways. Getting a little off topic on this one, end of day we're just looking at responses to different strategies, whatever fits the goals. In whatever direction you push it, there is a trade off of adaptive responses, whatever the rationale.

Fantastic. How does this inform your training?
 
Fantastic. How does this inform your training?

For starters I train a variety of load and rep ranges with TUT and rest periods running the gamut. I don't avoid glycolysis as I have seen no reason to do so and many reasons why this is a positive for GPP. The body adapts to better use this when it is used often and within reason.

To some philosophies it represents a failure mode, to me it is just another pathway and in many respects (for 99% of our day to day anaerobic exertion) the PCr pathway exists only to allow the necessary ramp-up time to initiate glycolysis - in practice they all work in concert. They are the exact same muscle fibers.

I've found esp as I've gotten older I get a far better response to HIT, something S Maxwell noted years ago in himself and his older trainees, but I didn't give it much weight till I got closer to 50 myself. Began noticing a subtle but general decline in body comp, adaptive response and strength carry-over using less intense strategies (though was still able to put on some size and make strength gains). When you look at the documented metabolic response to various strategies especially as we age, it makes a lot of sense to me why this works better (at least for me).

There are a lot of ways to get and stay fit. As with diet, there is no perfect choice and like as not it will have to be changed over time anyway.
 
I don't avoid glycolysis as I have seen no reason to do so and many reasons why this is a positive for GPP. The body adapts to better use this when it is used often and within reason.
I don't think anyone has claimed that the body doesn't or can't adapt to repeated exposure to glycolysis. But the argument has been advanced that exposure to glycolysis has a higher cost to us than the alternatives, and that more glycolytic training can, e.g., be introduced in the ramp up to a competition for a competitive athlete and those athletes can still perform well, and according to at least some studies, better than those whose training doesn't try to minimize glycolysis.

General Physical Preparedness can mean many things. If it means being prepared to perform in glycolysis without advanced notice, then I can't argue with your assumption, but that's a trade-off I, and I think most people, are quite willing to make in order to train in a way that takes the least from our lives and gives back the most.

-S-
 
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Back
Top Bottom