Well, percentages vary quite a bit depending on study design and the subjects they were looking at, but my understanding is that for growth hormone weightlifting increases it about 400%, while free Testosterone is increased around 30% or so. Now that’s a transient increase, there is also evidence that resistance training creates long term increases in basal levels but the increases are smaller, though still pretty significant. Obviously this isn’t going to compete with the kinds of increases you can get from using assistance but for natural trainees it’s important.
Let me show you how bro science works.
Compound exercises cause a temporary spike in testosterone and GH levels. GH(and to a lessor extent, testosterone) causes an increase in IGF-1. Increased levels of IGF-1 have been linked to increased occurance of certain cancers.
Therefore, squats cause cancer. It can be further extrapolated from evidence that people who do Starting Strength are 3 times more likely to get cancer than those on a bro split.
Stick to leg extensions.
[quote]blue9steel wrote:
Well, percentages vary quite a bit depending on study design and the subjects they were looking at, but my understanding is that for growth hormone weightlifting increases it about 400%, while free Testosterone is increased around 30% or so. Now that’s a transient increase, there is also evidence that resistance training creates long term increases in basal levels but the increases are smaller, though still pretty significant. Obviously this isn’t going to compete with the kinds of increases you can get from using assistance but for natural trainees it’s important.[/quote]
Nope. That’s not how GH works. GH PRODUCTION may increase at such a level, but that doesn’t mean blood levels of GH increase to that extent. Same for test. There is an enormous difference between those concepts.
Basically what LoRez said is true. The increases are not enough to make a practical difference.
Sure, I get the difference, I’m just saying that doesn’t seem to match what I’ve read elsewhere. I don’t want to be argumentative, I actually want to understand what’s going on here.
Here’s an example of the kind of thing I’ve seen elsewhere:
Endogenous anabolic hormonal and growth factor responses to heavy resistance exercise in males and females.
Charts on pg 231 & 232 seem to directly contradict what you’re saying.
Some relevant quotes:
“Serum testosterone responses are shown in
Fig. 1. Concentrations were increased in males by both exercise
protocols and for up to 15 mm into the recovery periods.”
For growth hormone, “significant increases in serum levels above pre-exercise
values were observed for the males at mid-exercise and
at 30 mm following the exercise protocol.”
Now, whether or not transient increases are actually relevant to muscle growth is a whole different question, more complicated and much less settled.
[quote]blue9steel wrote:
Sure, I get the difference, I’m just saying that doesn’t seem to match what I’ve read elsewhere. I don’t want to be argumentative, I actually want to understand what’s going on here.
Here’s an example of the kind of thing I’ve seen elsewhere:
Endogenous anabolic hormonal and growth factor responses to heavy resistance exercise in males and females.
Charts on pg 231 & 232 seem to directly contradict what you’re saying.
Some relevant quotes:
“Serum testosterone responses are shown in
Fig. 1. Concentrations were increased in males by both exercise
protocols and for up to 15 mm into the recovery periods.”
For growth hormone, “significant increases in serum levels above pre-exercise
values were observed for the males at mid-exercise and
at 30 mm following the exercise protocol.”
Now, whether or not transient increases are actually relevant to muscle growth is a whole different question, more complicated and much less settled.[/quote]
Lol
Quite a lengthy thread and perhaps I should have read more of it before adding my dos centavos here.
If an exercise makes the targeted muscle bigger, it is good for bodybuilding. Squats do this, but different variations work best for different people. Same goes for every other major compound lift, and there’s no need to stick to one variation just because it is a lift with which every guy measures his strength. You don’t have to back squat, conventational dead, or flat bench or overhead press. You can do front squats, incline presses, dumbbell presses, Swiss bar overhead press, cambered bar benches, stiff leg deadlifts, sumo deadlifts, trap bar deadlifts–whatever gets the job done!
And if you use steady and progressive resistance you will grow optimally. So if you are a tricep bencher, you can do inclines, pre-exhaust beforehand, whatever. If you are more of a deadlifter (long legs, short torso), you can do a front squat to target the quads. Again, whatever gets the job done for each individual bodybuilder.
Quads are my best part, and I think the only part for which I have great genetics aside for bis (everything else is genetically average and responds to training like so), so all I’ve had to do to make them grow is back squats, conventional deadlifts, and lunges. That’s it! No pre-exhaust, no extensions, no particular rep range. And my numbers aren’t even impressive!
Uh, now… if only the same could be said for my pecs and calves. 
I actually hate you a little bit, Brick, for how good your quad genetics are.
[quote]Yogi wrote:
I actually hate you a little bit, Brick, for how good your quad genetics are.[/quote]
Thanks. 
Now thats squating functional style imagine doing this with a 225lb Kb while wearing a 50lb weightvest quads for days bro!!
[quote]oldmaniron64 wrote:
Now thats squating functional style imagine doing this with a 225lb Kb while wearing a 50lb weightvest quads for days bro!![/quote]
cool story bro.
Front squat even with low reps, are maybe the best quad builder plus they don’t make you glutes look too big
My legs are pretty good, I can Squat 465 for 7, but I don’t consider Squats to be a great exercise for the quads. My experience has been that Hack Squats are the best. I have been using Squats recently to help bring up my hamstrings, which they seem to be doing. I’m not very tall so I don’t believe that is the reason for that (5’8"). Probably has to do with my posterior strength from my deadlifts, so my body tries to rely on those muscles more. But doesn’t matter to me. My legs themselves are pretty balanced.
So there are a couple of reasons why you might use back squats in your route:
-
You want to grow your quads
-
They’re efficient in that they hit a whole bunch of muscles and thus it means you may need less total exercises in your routine
-
You’re a natural lifter and want the hormone release caused by a big compound movement
#1 really depends on your form and body mechanics as to whether they’re the best choice for you. For some people they may be better off with front squats or the leg press.
For pros who are on assistance #2 and #3 are a lot less relevant since their higher recovery allows for more total exercises and direct hormone control means the natural sources aren’t as important.
Im Suffering from a similar issue, Ive been Squatting with heavy weight and good form , and lack development in my hamstrings from them. What did you do to fix this?
[quote]bigtom91 wrote:
Im Suffering from a similar issue, Ive been Squatting with heavy weight and good form , and lack development in my hamstrings from them. What did you do to fix this?[/quote]
Wait, why would expect good hamstring development from squats?
[quote]bigtom91 wrote:
Im Suffering from a similar issue, Ive been Squatting with heavy weight and good form , and lack development in my hamstrings from them. What did you do to fix this?[/quote]
Good mornings, stiff-legged RDL’s, glute-ham raises. Use heavy weight, but not so heavy that your glutes take over.