Other/Mixed Studies and/or research on anti glycolitic training?

Other strength modalities (e.g., Clubs), mixed strength modalities (e.g., combined kettlebell and barbell), other goals (flexibility)

bluejeff

Level 6 Valued Member
Does anyone have links or quick reference to studies or academic articles on AGT? I have read what Pavel has to say on it in books like Q&D and in online articles but am having trouble finding scientific articles or studies which address it. Articles directly about AGT or even relevant biological processes would be great.
Thanks!
 

bluejeff

Level 6 Valued Member
Some of the metabolic/chemistry aspect is different cup of tea
I suppose info on HIIT/traditional glycolitic work vs alactic would be good too.

I'm looking more for data on physiological changes, such as:
- affect on mitochondria
-pH in the muscles
-how it can induce myofibrillar hypertrophy
-measured effects of AGT style training vs traditional HIIT/glycolytic ( such as any differences in anabolism, recovery rate, etc) and/or measured differences/effects relating to long term sustainability between the two types of training....

Like I said, I have read articles that lay all this out, but haven't (yet) come across studies or hard data, other than anecdotal (no matter how strong the anecdotal data seems).

This is more than just for my own interest; I have no reason to doubt the effects of AGT. I am trying to see if there is enough data out there for me to do a biology project about it :)

I should note that I am not trying to make the forum do my homework! I have just been having a hard time finding research data on the subject.
 
Last edited:

silveraw

Level 7 Valued Member
I know the book has a reference section in the back. Not sure if that would be helpful to you, as one of the disclaimers is the Russian stuff is in Russian. I can’t say I’m smart enough to understand all of the papers either.
 

Antti

Level 9 Valued Member
Have you tried looking at sports textbooks?

For example, in Kurz' Science of Sports Training, there is a part which discusses HIIT, and gives rough guidelines for different goals, whether it's development of power or capacity of which energy system, alactic, lactic or aerobic. But it doesn't really go into specifics of why, rather just what to do.
 

North Coast Miller

Level 8 Valued Member
I suppose info on HIIT/traditional glycolitic work vs alactic would be good too.

I'm looking more for data on physiological changes, such as:
- affect on mitochondria
-pH in the muscles
-how it can induce myofibrillar hypertrophy
-measured effects of AGT style training vs traditional HIIT/glycolytic ( such as any differences in anabolism, recovery rate, etc) and/or measured differences/effects relating to long term sustainability between the two types of training....

Like I said, I have read articles that lay all this out, but haven't (yet) come across studies or hard data, other than anecdotal (no matter how strong the anecdotal data seems).

This is more than just for my own interest; I have no reason to doubt the effects of AGT. I am trying to see if there is enough data out there for me to do a biology project about it :)

I should note that I am not trying to make the forum do my homework! I have just been having a hard time finding research data on the subject.
It isn't even easy to find studies on myofibrilar vs sarcoplasmic hypertrophy, let alone anything on AGT vs "traditional" metabolic response.

I think you'd have to get very specific with your questions re either approach and then look for corresponding research. You are unlikely to find any interventions that directly compare.
 

Starlord

Level 5 Valued Member
I suppose info on HIIT/traditional glycolitic work vs alactic would be good too.

I'm looking more for data on physiological changes, such as:
- affect on mitochondria
-pH in the muscles
-how it can induce myofibrillar hypertrophy
-measured effects of AGT style training vs traditional HIIT/glycolytic ( such as any differences in anabolism, recovery rate, etc) and/or measured differences/effects relating to long term sustainability between the two types of training....

Like I said, I have read articles that lay all this out, but haven't (yet) come across studies or hard data, other than anecdotal (no matter how strong the anecdotal data seems).

This is more than just for my own interest; I have no reason to doubt the effects of AGT. I am trying to see if there is enough data out there for me to do a biology project about it :)

I should note that I am not trying to make the forum do my homework! I have just been having a hard time finding research data on the subject.

In my opinion mate, good anecdotal date > scientific data.

Why do I beleive that?

Well for an incredibly long time science has been chasing the anecdote. Not the other way around. The performance community whether it be technicians within specific sports, conditioning coaches, strength coaches, PED specialists etc pioneer things and the science back them at some point at a later date.

Additionally, the majority of research done on "experienced strength trainees" are not done on a subject population that is worthy of the total of "experience strength trainees." So most scientific studies are not worth the paperless paper they are written on.

A bit of a rant and not totally related to your original query. Let me try and redeem myself a little bit.

Traditional HIIT protocol e.g. Tabata is VERY rarely witnessed. VERY rarely. This is great for sharp increases in VO2 max and increase mobility of visceral fat. However the sharp increase in VO2 max is transient and will taper off quickly when you finished your protocol. So this should be reserved for PEAKING. Although you have to be mindful of what being peaked for your event actually looks like. For example a marathon runner would have no real business doing Tabata, where as a rugby player could find this IMMENSELY useful.

Glycolitic training. This is longer bouts of work at what may seem like high intensity but the body honestly cannot sustain TRUE high intensity for this long. This is beneficial for fighters in particular. Imagine striking, clinching, dodging, blocking and maneuvering for minutes at a time before an adequate lull.

AGT is typically done by sprinters. Imagine a 100m sprinter doing 6-12 60m sprints and slowly building that up over weeks as part of his/her protocol. However because they never require to work in a fatigued state, they will wait until they feel COMPLETELY refreshed. Waiting potentially 10 minutes long. Much like all out plyometrics training. With some slight adjustments you can quickly make this less power orientated and more conditioning orientated. Rest until you have caught your breath and your heart rate is under control but you are not FULLY recovered. All of a sudden you have a means of developing power and aerobic conditioning simultaneously. However you are sacrificing maximum power development for building a wider athletic base.

Ultimately you don't need to know the minutiae of how this works on a cellular level in the body. You just need to know what does what, what your needs are and how to manipulate these training methods to acheive your goals.
 

bluejeff

Level 6 Valued Member
Thanks all.

I think I’m just going to have to use generic data on energy systems. I also found an article by Craig Marker on breaking muscle that details an experiment using AGT to improve the performance of CrossFit athletes.
 

bluejeff

Level 6 Valued Member
It isn't even easy to find studies on myofibrilar vs sarcoplasmic hypertrophy, let alone anything on AGT vs "traditional" metabolic response
Just had a thought:
There must be some studies on myofibrillar/sarcoplasmic hypertrophy... otherwise how do we know that the former makes the muscle “denser” and the latter increases muscle fluid and organelles?
 

North Coast Miller

Level 8 Valued Member
Just had a thought:
There must be some studies on myofibrillar/sarcoplasmic hypertrophy... otherwise how do we know that the former makes the muscle “denser” and the latter increases muscle fluid and organelles?
Try to find them.
In fact most studies show no difference in the muscle tissue relative to training approaches. Its my belief the difference has more to do with tendon remodeling.
 

ali

Level 6 Valued Member
For muscle related ins and outs read the work of Andy Galpin. He's a muscle biopsy expert and researcher. Many, many don't knows and don't know that yet conclusions.
 

wespom9

Level 6 Valued Member
Certified Instructor
+1 to @ali . Galpin has great short/medium/long videos on multiple topics.
It's absolutely a part of the field we are still in the infancy stage of understanding.
 

bluejeff

Level 6 Valued Member
So I figured I would just post anything I found that might be relevant. Bear in mind I am no expert, but perhaps some interesting ideas will come out of this.

Today I found this while working on a biology assignment:

The article discusses how mechanical tension can cause micro tears in cell membranes, which, in the presence of free radicals (produced more by the mitochondria during intense exercise/glycolysis) does not repair as fast/efficiently. Their study showed that Vitamin E helped to plug holes in the cell membrane, essentially blocking the free radicals. The Vitamin E deficient mice had smaller and more inflamed muscles post exercise. I thought this might relate to AGT because if there were less metabolic waste, perhaps there would be less repair to be done.

I might be making a huge stretch here, but it seems like that would account for lessened soreness/inflammation after AGT compared to HIT or HIIT.

Feel free to critique this, it's quite a novice hypothesis 🙃
 

North Coast Miller

Level 8 Valued Member
So I figured I would just post anything I found that might be relevant. Bear in mind I am no expert, but perhaps some interesting ideas will come out of this.

Today I found this while working on a biology assignment:

The article discusses how mechanical tension can cause micro tears in cell membranes, which, in the presence of free radicals (produced more by the mitochondria during intense exercise/glycolysis) does not repair as fast/efficiently. Their study showed that Vitamin E helped to plug holes in the cell membrane, essentially blocking the free radicals. The Vitamin E deficient mice had smaller and more inflamed muscles post exercise. I thought this might relate to AGT because if there were less metabolic waste, perhaps there would be less repair to be done.

I might be making a huge stretch here, but it seems like that would account for lessened soreness/inflammation after AGT compared to HIT or HIIT.

Feel free to critique this, it's quite a novice hypothesis 🙃
There might be a connection between muscle damage and training modality, but by and large supplementing with anti-oxidants in humans has not generally panned out.
 

bluejeff

Level 6 Valued Member
@North Coast Miller yeah, I found the article because I needed something that at least talked about membranes. But I thought there was an interesting potential connection there. I have indeed seen/read that anti-oxidants may imede results from training.
 

North Coast Miller

Level 8 Valued Member
@North Coast Miller yeah, I found the article because I needed something that at least talked about membranes. But I thought there was an interesting potential connection there. I have indeed seen/read that anti-oxidants may imede results from training.
There very well might be. Most of the studies demonstrate that natural anti-oxidant capacity is only overwhelmed by infrequent, very acute exercise. The ability of the body to adapt to high amounts of ROS is nothing short of incredible, as long as it is built up incrementally.


One of the more interesting tidbits I've come across re mitochondria, in a high Ph environment they physically change shape, will begin pumping out ATP with no other signalling, and can easily withstand local Ph levels would kill a person if system wide.
But, white blood cells not so much. One of the first signs of consistent overtraining is recurring/frequent upper respiratory infections. The immune system is the canary in the coal mine for too much/too frequent glycolytic exposure.
 

bluejeff

Level 6 Valued Member
Here's another I've found. Doesn't really talk about damage from ROS or anything, but I'd say it supports other aspects of AGT.

 

ShawnM

Level 8 Valued Member
Does anyone have links or quick reference to studies or academic articles on AGT? I have read what Pavel has to say on it in books like Q&D and in online articles but am having trouble finding scientific articles or studies which address it. Articles directly about AGT or even relevant biological processes would be great.
Thanks!
Check out @Al Ciampa site, bellwellandstrong.com. He is without a doubt the best at explaining A&A training and has a crazy great, in depth article on his site that should explain everything you need.
 

North Coast Miller

Level 8 Valued Member
Here's another I've found. Doesn't really talk about damage from ROS or anything, but I'd say it supports other aspects of AGT.

Very interesting stuff!
Many of the observations seem counter-intuitive, higher availability of PCr in the LS group, lower Ph at the end, lower rates of glycolysis.

Would be interesting to see if there is a performance difference between cohorts after a 6 week intervention, or if the primary obsevation is more a study of fatigue mechanics. Also a very small group, any one outlier could produce a large effect.
 

bluejeff

Level 6 Valued Member
Very interesting stuff!
Many of the observations seem counter-intuitive, higher availability of PCr in the LS group, lower Ph at the end, lower rates of glycolysis.
Are we reading the results the same way? 🤔

To me it seems to line up with the AGT style of training:
The SS group had the less acidic pH overall.
The SS group also had lower "markers" (if that's the right word)for glycolysis: lower pyruvate and lactate levels.
The SS group had a lower reduction in muscle ATP as well.
Also, the G-6-P is interesting. If I'm not mistaken that's a molecule which is part of glycolysis.

1614733188750.png
 
Top Bottom