T Nation

Let's Discuss some Bodybuilding Myths

I think we’ve all pretty much been there. We learn about working out, learn to love it and the lifestyle, read more into it and then get somewhat obsessive.

Suddenly, the things we once loved most become exercises in the minutia. Analyzing every macro, timing sets to the T, popping BCAA’s every 2.357 hours. You get the picture.,

But after awhile things become much more clear. Life becomes more cyclical. You learn that sometimes doing things as simply as possible; as you did when you started is best.

This thread is dedicated to those insignificant details you once labored over but now have faded into uselessness.

  • The whole PC/PF bullshit. Folks, it doesn’t matter at all. Your total macros of the day is what is truly important. The hormonal conseqences of a meal last much longer than 2-4 hours. The whole PC/PF things is totally irrelevant and in my experience, is useless.

  • Eating every 3 hours. This is important to follow if you are taking in a significant amount of calories to maintain, or gain weight on an already large physique (4000+ kcal I’d say). Otherwise, 3 meals plus snacks like mixed nuts or shakes in between meals is fine. Again, total calories of the day is king.

-Eating large amounts before bed leading to fat gain. If you fit your macros of the day, it really won’t make a lick of difference, I promise. In fact, I find eating a moderate meal before bed helps keep me from waking in the middle of the night and gets me to sleep easier.

-Dairy products somehow leading to fat gain-- If you don’t tolerate milk products, don’t eat’em, but let the rest of us be happy, damn it!.

More to come when I think of em.

your dp disturbs me

I disagree with your comments concerning macro combinations, as well as your thoughts on feeding every 3 hours. These are a couple of the better tips I have made use of over the years.

S

lifting heavy increases “mass”

lifting light “cuts you up”

it seems everywhere i go the consensus is the same that lifting a heavy set of a few reps is somehow going to add a ton of size whereas lifting in the 12-20 range is going to somehow make you shredded.

i wish they knew lifitng in low rep ranges is one of the worst ways to add size and should only be used if in fact youre trying to cut. its so backwards its funny, but i dont even argue it with people because somehow its in like the 10 gym commandments written by some gym-rat somewhere as told to him by the voice of Arnold.

I disagree with your take on macros, your theories on eating every 3 hours, and your before bed eating habits.

To prove yourself right. How about you eat most of your protein for breakfast. Eat most of your fats for lunch. Use up the rest of your prot in snacks. Now eat all of your carbohydrate and fats right before bed. Make sure this is your largest meal.

Try this for a month. I will bet money that you will look worse, feel like shit, and be rather unproductive in the gym. Total macros and calories will remain unchanged, what changed? You got it, your theories are wrong. The subjects are not that simple.

whenever anyone says “whatcha gotta do”
I’d rather here “an alternative is”

Nothing always works.
We try to wrap things up in a package. I don’t want to rehash the boulders, pebbles, sand, water analogy.

The the OP, sorry man but you’re dead wrong on the first and third theories.

Do what Zagman said, then come back and tell us how it went.

[quote]LiveFromThe781 wrote:
lifting heavy increases “mass”

lifting light “cuts you up”

it seems everywhere i go the consensus is the same that lifting a heavy set of a few reps is somehow going to add a ton of size whereas lifting in the 12-20 range is going to somehow make you shredded.

i wish they knew lifitng in low rep ranges is one of the worst ways to add size and should only be used if in fact youre trying to cut.

its so backwards its funny, but i dont even argue it with people because somehow its in like the 10 gym commandments written by some gym-rat somewhere as told to him by the voice of Arnold.[/quote]

this isn’t true???
i’m confused

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
I disagree with your comments concerning macro combinations, as well as your thoughts on feeding every 3 hours. These are a couple of the better tips I have made use of over the years.

S
[/quote]

agreed on the frequent eating. and besides, “snacks” is still a meal. I don’t like term snack just because people tend to think they can have a handful of cheezits and some string cheese.

PC/PF is dead. Please stop buying into this ridiculousness. Ask CT what he thinks of this garbage, and he’ll tell you even Berardi is moving away from that idea.

Also, Zagman I think you need to review your collegiate physiology handbook. So what if I ingest carbs before bed? If the muscle has been somewhat depleted of glycoglen (assuming a work out earlier in the day) carbohydrates don’t instantly go to fat.

Rather they are stored into the muscle tissue for the next day. I wouldn’t feel like shit and I would have stored carbohydrates for training the next day.

Also I’m not trying to go at such extremes as FAT one meal, PRO one meal, CARB one meal; I’m merely saying nutrient partitioning isn’t nearly as big of a deal as it’s made out to be.

Trust me it’s not like I instantly regarded these ideas as bunk. I am a college athlete and I have tested these nutrition theories to maintain a weight class.

[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
The Mighty Stu wrote:
I disagree with your comments concerning macro combinations, as well as your thoughts on feeding every 3 hours. These are a couple of the better tips I have made use of over the years.

S

agreed on the frequent eating. and besides, “snacks” is still a meal. I don’t like term snack just because people tend to think they can have a handful of cheezits and some string cheese.

[/quote]

I totally agree with you JF, when I “snack” (esp when bulking) what I do is measure 4 oz of walnuts and attempt to eat them throughout the day. Between each meal I also wash down a protein shake.

[quote]LiveFromThe781 wrote:
lifting heavy increases “mass”

lifting light “cuts you up”

it seems everywhere i go the consensus is the same that lifting a heavy set of a few reps is somehow going to add a ton of size whereas lifting in the 12-20 range is going to somehow make you shredded.

i wish they knew lifitng in low rep ranges is one of the worst ways to add size and should only be used if in fact youre trying to cut.

its so backwards its funny, but i dont even argue it with people because somehow its in like the 10 gym commandments written by some gym-rat somewhere as told to him by the voice of Arnold.[/quote]

I’m pretty 100% sure that heavy compound lifts (in the 80% or greater 1RM range)increases mass of which I assume by mass you mean muscle mass. It also has the side affect of increasing strength too!

I also think that the current wisdom is you should lift heavy while cutting as the best means of preserving muscle mass

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

hexx-

I can’t take your thread seriously. What have you offered up as personal proof that the things you state are myths. You just parrot what you think you may have read.

Where’s your proof? Where are your before/after pics? Where is your plan that you followed that dispels these ‘myths’?

[quote]hexx wrote:
jehovasfitness wrote:
The Mighty Stu wrote:

I totally agree with you JF, when I “snack” (esp when bulking) what I do is measure 4 oz of walnuts and attempt to eat them throughout the day. Between each meal I also wash down a protein shake. [/quote]

That might explain why you’re only 180 :wink:

4oz of walnuts during the whole day? man, I how do you stomach all that :smiley:

[quote]LiveFromThe781 wrote:
lifting heavy increases “mass”

lifting light “cuts you up”

it seems everywhere i go the consensus is the same that lifting a heavy set of a few reps is somehow going to add a ton of size whereas lifting in the 12-20 range is going to somehow make you shredded.

i wish they knew lifitng in low rep ranges is one of the worst ways to add size and should only be used if in fact youre trying to cut.

its so backwards its funny, but i dont even argue it with people because somehow its in like the 10 gym commandments written by some gym-rat somewhere as told to him by the voice of Arnold.[/quote]

so your saying you think lower reps wont build muscle well but 15-20 rep sets will do it much better?

[quote]pumped340 wrote:
LiveFromThe781 wrote:
lifting heavy increases “mass”

lifting light “cuts you up”

it seems everywhere i go the consensus is the same that lifting a heavy set of a few reps is somehow going to add a ton of size whereas lifting in the 12-20 range is going to somehow make you shredded.

i wish they knew lifitng in low rep ranges is one of the worst ways to add size and should only be used if in fact youre trying to cut.

its so backwards its funny, but i dont even argue it with people because somehow its in like the 10 gym commandments written by some gym-rat somewhere as told to him by the voice of Arnold.

so your saying you think lower reps wont build muscle well but 15-20 rep sets will do it much better?[/quote]

Explain yourself better because if you really believe this is true then your thought is just wrong (unless you are one in a million that actually do get bigger light weight high reps)

How are low reps bad for adding size? You ever see the size of PLers?

[quote]Player wrote:
pumped340 wrote:
LiveFromThe781 wrote:
lifting heavy increases “mass”

lifting light “cuts you up”

it seems everywhere i go the consensus is the same that lifting a heavy set of a few reps is somehow going to add a ton of size whereas lifting in the 12-20 range is going to somehow make you shredded.

i wish they knew lifitng in low rep ranges is one of the worst ways to add size and should only be used if in fact youre trying to cut.

its so backwards its funny, but i dont even argue it with people because somehow its in like the 10 gym commandments written by some gym-rat somewhere as told to him by the voice of Arnold.

so your saying you think lower reps wont build muscle well but 15-20 rep sets will do it much better?

Explain yourself better because if you really believe this is true then your thought is just wrong (unless you are one in a million that actually do get bigger light weight high reps)[/quote]

exactly what i was thinking. I’m not saying only use low reps but getting stronger is the 5-12 rep range i think will get most people much more size than 13+ reps other than for a change of pace.

OK I’m going to post this in the same light as the “Things you Believe, but Can’t Prove” thread over on the T-Alpha page. The following observations are things which I’m inclined to believe after training for several years.

1.) Squats are King…FOR MOST. If you have very long femurs, as I do, going beyond parallel with any appreciable weight is quite awkward. I still do squats…mostly front and hack…but I attribute most of my leg growth to leg presses.

2.) Fish Oil is great, but megadoses are not magical. Remember, oh?, about 7 years ago when experts were advising people to drink as much flax oil as possible, touting its near drug-like effects?

Do we even see flax oil sold anymore? Certainly, DHA and EPA hold a plethora of benefit at reasonable doses…I don’t need to go into this. However, I am of the opinion that megadosing it holds no additional benefit.

3.) If you’re young and healthy, your body can usually take whatever you can dish out (or, “Stop using Overtraining as an excuse, you lazy pussy!”). Your body is remarkably good at adapting to stress. I don’t want to belabor these oft-used comparisons, but they illustrate my point. Rock-climbers have freaky backs. Mechanics have freaky arms.

Male synchronized divers have…well…freaky whatever it takes to make them male synchronized divers. Your body ADAPTS, because the alternative is not acceptable.

I’m not saying there isn’t a point where demand exceeds capacity, but you hear “Overtraining” mentioned SO often in gyms these days from novice lifters its almost astounding. To paraphrase the back of a neon-pink muscle shirt purchased in Venice beach…“Shut up and lift!”

4.) So-called “Isolation” or (eek!) “Finishing” exercises, if performed with heavy-ass weight, can be extremely conducive to growth. I personally attribute a lot of my chest growth to heavy cable-crossovers (4-5 reps to failure)