all posts post new thread

Other/Mixed Hypertrophy in 40s 50s 60s ?

Other strength modalities (e.g., Clubs), mixed strength modalities (e.g., combined kettlebell and barbell), other goals (flexibility)
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
is that muscle mass is an additional protein reservoir that be tapped into under extreme duress events, like dangerous illness that leaves you bed ridden, post surgery recovery, and is a bigger buffer against wasting.
I seem to remember a Peter Attia podcast where he was talking about being obese does this as well when you have an acute illness/injury/suddenly need surgery.
It greatly increased your chance of degenerative disease, but also increased your chances of surviving something that puts you in bed for long periods.
 
Perhaps if we drop the 'hyper' and replace with 'iso'; isotrophy

EDIT: or running to stand still :)

Is there not a point where excess bodymass of any type has a detrimental effect on health?
I'd be happy if I could take what I've got right now at 65 and still have something similar when I'm 80, so treading water is fine with me.

Would be even happier if I could ever press double 28s as easily as Brett Jones presses the double 32s in his video. So am hoping to outrun the Sarcopenia and the Dynopenia for a few more years yet ........ probably cashed in the newbie gains by now

At the moment am closer to 80 than 40 and the comments in the video about making an effort to increase the amount of time spent on hypertrophy every decade were a surprise because by Dan's reckoning I'm 25 years behind schedule. Never really thought much about attempting deliberate hypertrophy until recently.

@ali By Ali's reckoning am doing fine

.......... and WOW ! ! thanks for all the recommended resources and comments above am currently working through them all
 
Dunno about that...

Novel stimulus can drive new adaptations.

I get some of my best results when I switch from training in one "rep zone" to another in a mesocycle block.

Pump training is definitely a useful add-on to my training, as it increases my muscular work capacity and sets me up to do a higher volume of strength training when I switch modes back.
Sure, but that is not the point I am trying to make. I was thinking in terms of the 80/20 principle

And yes, switching from classic StrongFrist programming to a more classic hypertrophy cycle every now and then might be beneficial from a training perspective and possibly from a longevity perspective.

However, my point is that about everyone participating in this forum is probably fine when it comes to training and muscle mass. Far ahead from the sedentary obese crowd.

As time and attention are limited, I think it is often more helpful to get everything else in check first:
Be active throughout the day, preferably outdoors, eat real food, drink plenty of water, sleep enough, have a social life, pursue things that bring you joy or are meaningful to you, etc.

If you have these things in check, then sure, go ahead and optimize it the last bits of your training towards longevity.
 
…an endorsement of strength training done in such a way as to not allow muscle mass to deteriorate beyond what might be normal in middle age. IOW, one should strive to maintain some muscle mass, and using myself as an example, I strive to keep what I've got.
That is the foot race from my POV. While older folk can still generate good muscle, the adaptive response begins to shrink in magnitude. At the same %of body fat, the total mass of muscle will tend to shrink, taking everything with it.

Am not sure what a normal amount of muscle shrinkage is but I’d prefer to be abnormal. I don’t know if this requires traditional BB but certainly hope not - my tolerance for moderate load high volume has shrunk quite a bit, and mentally I prefer a high RPE anyway.

Part of this discussion falls under one of Kenny’s favorite topics, the need for older athletes to increase protein consumption just to maintain.
 
Just saw a meta analysis by Menno Henselmans about aging & muscle loss. Summary: its true & a factor but less significant than common belief.
Building or preserving muscle is a good long term goal. Another factor to consider with transitioning to changing your strength work from 1-3s to 5-8s is lowering joint stress while maximizing muscle tension. Its always a balance.... but in another 20 years if I have quality movement, joints feel good & quality lean body mass, Im ok dropping my deadlift from 2.5x bodyweight to 2x bodyweight... Whether 16 or 60: move well, be strong enough then work on body composition. Eventually maintaining is progress.
 
Another factor to consider with transitioning to changing your strength work from 1-3s to 5-8s is lowering joint stress while maximizing muscle tension.

Being lighter in body weight means any multiple of bodyweight is also lighter, and my personal opinion is that being lighter is about the easiest way of "lowering joint stress" there is.

-S-
 
Being lighter in body weight means any multiple of bodyweight is also lighter, and my personal opinion is that being lighter is about the easiest way of "lowering joint stress" there is.

-S-
Sure, use whatever metric you like. My point is i can drop from 425 to 315, or heck, eventually to 225 & not worry. There is a baseline goal that's good enough then other factors to balance.
 
Sure, use whatever metric you like. My point is i can drop from 425 to 315, or heck, eventually to 225 & not worry. There is a baseline goal that's good enough then other factors to balance.
I understand, and I wish to make the counterpoint to that, that if you remain thin, you don't need to lift less weight as you age. I get that some people say lifting less doesn't matter but I am, at age 67, not willing to agree. Strength as a multiple of bodyweight (or Wilkes point or some other measure) isn't something I wish to give up.

-S-
 
I tend towards strength to weight ratio as the most valid 'number' which captures the health component to a sport performance measure. Other measures are available of course but in general its a pretty good snapshot. No idea what that number is or should be though!
 
I tend towards strength to weight ratio as the most valid 'number' which captures the health component to a sport performance measure. Other measures are available of course but in general its a pretty good snapshot. No idea what that number is or should be though!
Id bet we can accept basic parameters. Working hard but not exceeding recovery ability. Not fat to promote disease nor too thin to bear some challenges. Strong but world records arent necessary. If you favor one edge of the spectrum or another, you're still in a good situation...
 
I tend towards strength to weight ratio as the most valid 'number' which captures the health component to a sport performance measure. Other measures are available of course but in general its a pretty good snapshot. No idea what that number is or should be though!

Peter Attia's strength criteria for longevity seem to be ever evolving, but at one point one of his was:

bodyweight DL for 10 reps

He even made some remarks that you shouldn't even bother obsessing about things like supplements until you can do that.
 
One of my favorite Attia-isms is "strong beliefs loosely held". Go with what the research seems to point at as being the right answer, but hold that belief loosely so that when new information comes along you don't cling to out dated ideas that probably aren't so correct.
I don't know who Attia is, but this seems like a recipe for perpetual tail-chasing.
 
Not to split hairs or anything, but as far as I know Pavel eats once a day and doesn't seem to focus on hypertrophy yet looks and is doing fine.
 
One of my favorite Attia-isms is "strong beliefs loosely held". Go with what the research seems to point at as being the right answer, but hold that belief loosely so that when new information comes along you don't cling to out dated ideas that probably aren't so correct.
Are we talking about him distancing himself from Gary Taubes?
 
Lets recognize that while there are differences, theres also a whole lot of overlap.

Traditional hypertrophy superset:
Presses & Pullups for 3-5 sets of 6-15 reps.
Rite of Passage:
Presses & Pullups for 3-5 ladders of 123 (6) to 12345 (15) rungs.
Advanced German Volume Training:
10 sets of 6 (step volume)
KB Strong! Long Haul:
Mostly 10 sets of 3-6 (waved volume).

If you're pressing only the 16kg or empty bar, definitely focus on strength. But Id never fault a 50 year old for accepting half bw KB or bw press & focusing on volume & lean body mass. It's great success regardless of which end of the strength/mass spectrum you prefer!
 
I'm 52 and do more hypertrophy work than I used to.

I have a specific hypertrophy-focused block for 12 weeks per year.
Turning forty soon and I shall keep this in mind. I’m already programming a 12 week Quick and Dead into every year thus far. I might also add a Kettlebell Muscle block or PTTP Bear cycle in.
 
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Back
Top Bottom