There has been research done with comparing Bodybuilidng vs Powerlifting. When they both did the same VOLUME and exercises, but switched the sets/reps. The outcome was exactly the same.
So let's say bodybuilders did 5 sets of 10 reps with appropiate weight (50 reps) and short rest and Powerlifters did 10 sets of 5, and long rest, the amount of hypertrophy was exactly the same.
Only difference, bodybuilders took about 15 minutes to complete the workout, and powerlifters over 2 hours. A small side note, almost all of the powerlifters at the end of the line where overtrained.
On Topic:
The prometheus protocol.
I recall reading that study. It jibes with some of Schoenfeld research that demonstrated similar size increases using a number of load/rep/set approaches, which also jibes with DeLorme seminal work on the topic.
Bottom line is you need nutrition to support hypertrophy. If you're eating more and getting fat, you aren't asking enough of yourself. If you aren't getting bigger you aren't eating enough. And from a very superficial POV, "bodybuilding" and hypertrophy are the exact same thing, at least at a non-competitive level.
The next thing that helps is the shot of growth hormone, metabolite accumulation and glucose depletion from a longer finishing set - that is really all that is needed.
All of these current high volume/low load hypertrophy programs rely on data that shows similar signalling responses, but I have serious doubts about long term comparisons with heavier loading protocols. Plus, if you're going to spend the time, why would you want to want to have a lower limit strength outcome by design?
You can get a very comparable volume equivalent by using Clusters, Rest/Pause, even DropSets
as long as the initial load is a very high % of your 1RM. Be advised, these all work by increasing the volume from fewer reps/set at heavier load, over a comparable amount of training minutes to a longer rep count/fewer set approach.
This can be done in a somewhat minimalist format,
but not in terms of exercise selection unless you adopt a low frequency approach as well. If you attempt this with the same 3 exercises high frequency all the time you will NOT get a favorable long term response compared to other approaches.
Longer sets that accumulate more metabolic fatigue induce more hypertrophy by method, also require lesser loading and more recovery. Heavier sets that do not induce metabolic fatigue do not trigger similar hypertrophy. It is not difficult to combine the two with a variety of strategies. The rules haven't changed much going back to DeLorme and continuing with approaches like 5/3/1 - the last set is the maker or breaker.
