The Body Weight Factor

Training
1061

[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
That is very odd…but like you said, it isn’t because of emotional attachment because you aren’t gay.[/quote]

Back to gay bashing, Huh?[/quote]

Dude, don’t even take the bait. He will just somehow turn it around and somehow come to the deluded conclusion that you are homophobic for believing he is stating it in a derogatory way.

WHICH HE OBVIOUSLY WAS.

Can I ask X, your old cartoon Avi was of a muscular LEAN black guy, obviously what you thought was the ideal physique.

Why has that changed, realised it’s too much hard work or something?[/quote]

No bait taken. I think everyone at this point sees him as a play toy to bat around till they are bored. I’m certainly not worried about junior high insults. I think calling someone a “homo” was the first insult I heard when I was a kid. I’m surprised people still actually do that.

1062

[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

Back to gay bashing, Huh?[/quote]

Dude, if you are gay, this is 2013. No one should be looking down on you for it.[/quote]

LOL coming from someone that has dropped SteelyD’s name over and over in the last few threads…

I’m sorry if I put a bad image in anyones mind[/quote]

I’m into big, fat, cheeseburger eatin’, weightlifting black guys-- I don’t see the problem here.

PX, are we still gonna have ‘snuggle time’ tonight?

1063

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

Back to gay bashing, Huh?[/quote]

Dude, if you are gay, this is 2013. No one should be looking down on you for it.[/quote]

LOL coming from someone that has dropped SteelyD’s name over and over in the last few threads…

I’m sorry if I put a bad image in anyones mind[/quote]

I’m into big, fat, cheeseburger eatin’, weightlifting black guys-- I don’t see the problem here.

PX, are we still gonna have ‘snuggle time’ tonight?[/quote]

Dude, I am still trying to fix the bed from the last time we played “hide the burger”.

1064


Where me and Steely had our first date.

Oh, and to relate it to the topic, we both gained weight right before at a CiCi’s pizza.

1065

That’s romantic. I see that gym has a GHR

1066

That’s metroflex. The one in Houston looks just like Ronnie’s…ie. unuseable in the summer.

1067

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]browndisaster wrote:

exactly

a lean guy who trains
a full house guy who trains the same

who is going to have better insulin sensitivity? the lean guy
yay[/quote]

Really? You don’t understand that individuals are more complex than that and the leaner guy could have diabetes?

My uncle was diagnosed with diabetes and he has been thin and lean his whole life. How do you explain that?[/quote]

LOL. yeah, this diseased guy disproves optimization of hormones for a trained individual.

I knew a guy that drank OJ. Bam, he got herpes. So, don’t drink OJ.

Full retard.[/quote]

DD, after you explain why PX’s uncle got diabetes please explain why Willy Wonka never got diabetes.

1068

[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
That’s romantic. I see that gym has a GHR[/quote]

lol

ghey thread gone gay

1069

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Where me and Steely had our first date.

Oh, and to relate it to the topic, we both gained weight right before at a CiCi’s pizza.[/quote]

I still have that T-Shirt we won:

“I ate a whole CiCi’s Pizza and all I got was this power belleh”

1070

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Where me and Steely had our first date.

Oh, and to relate it to the topic, we both gained weight right before at a CiCi’s pizza.[/quote]

I still have that T-Shirt we won:

“I ate a whole CiCi’s Pizza and all I got was this power belleh”[/quote]

Fuck.

My shirt read “This fucker made me quit! -signed Da Cook”

1071

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Where me and Steely had our first date.

Oh, and to relate it to the topic, we both gained weight right before at a CiCi’s pizza.[/quote]

I still have that T-Shirt we won:

“I ate a whole CiCi’s Pizza and all I got was this power belleh”[/quote]

Fuck.

My shirt read “This fucker made me quit! -signed Da Cook”[/quote]

BEST PIZZA

1072

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]browndisaster wrote:

exactly

a lean guy who trains
a full house guy who trains the same

who is going to have better insulin sensitivity? the lean guy
yay[/quote]

Really? You don’t understand that individuals are more complex than that and the leaner guy could have diabetes?

My uncle was diagnosed with diabetes and he has been thin and lean his whole life. How do you explain that?[/quote]

LOL. yeah, this diseased guy disproves optimization of hormones for a trained individual.

I knew a guy that drank OJ. Bam, he got herpes. So, don’t drink OJ.

Full retard.[/quote]

DD, after you explain why PX’s uncle got diabetes please explain why Willy Wonka never got diabetes. [/quote]
lolol best post

cici’s pizza is white trash

1073

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]rrjc5488 wrote:

The fact that you think it’s “safe to say muscle is being gained if lifts are increasing” is absurd. Maybe your professors skipped over the central nervous system in the entirety of your academic career?[/quote]

I do believe I already wrote in this thread that strength can be increased by simply learning the movement which means neural adaptation and technique.

I am not sure how that shows anything about my professors since I already mentioned it.
[/quote]
[/quote]
“simply learning the movement” isn’t the same as improving your CNS effeciency. I learned to squat properly (and if I’m allowed to brag, damn near perfectly) a few years back. I am not LEARNING how to squat anymore. I am, however, improving my CNS effeciency. I have gotten stronger because of that. I know this, because I have gotten stronger without increasing body weight before.

You did not mention the CNS, you mentioned “learning a movement.” If I spent the time learning how to do a proper snatch, I’m not any stronger, I just know how to do a snatch now. Now that I know how to do a snatch, I can get stronger in the snatch without gaining weight. This is due to neural effeciency.

If I weigh 550lbs (full house status) and I gain 20lbs of fat, my leverages will improve. If I once weighed 550lbs, but now weigh 570, with those extra 20lbs being fat mass, I’ve done what you call a BODY WEIGHT INCREASE. So, gaining those extra 20lbs of PURE FUCKING FAT will improve my leverages and make me stronger. Your words.

Gaining 20lbs, whether fat, muscle, or a mixture of both is a BODY WEIGHT INCREASE.

Nope. Seems like you didn’t understand much of what I wrote at all.

Why is it when some of you try to tell me what I mean, you get it so wrong?

Why not just quot exactly what I wrote? Why change words around?[/quote]

I didn’t change a single word you wrote. Maybe it’s your reading comprehension?

1074

[quote]rrjc5488 wrote:

“simply learning the movement” isn’t the same as improving your CNS effeciency. I learned to squat properly (and if I’m allowed to brag, damn near perfectly) a few years back. I am not LEARNING how to squat anymore. I am, however, improving my CNS effeciency. I have gotten stronger because of that. I know this, because I have gotten stronger without increasing body weight before.

You did not mention the CNS, you mentioned “learning a movement.” If I spent the time learning how to do a proper snatch, I’m not any stronger, I just know how to do a snatch now. Now that I know how to do a snatch, I can get stronger in the snatch without gaining weight. This is due to neural effeciency. [/quote]

I am not sure how you are making the argument that learning a movement does NOT involve neural adaptation.

I wasn’t aware anyone who wasn’t a beginner needed to write out “CNS” every single time for that to be understood.

[quote]

If I weigh 550lbs (full house status) and I gain 20lbs of fat, my leverages will improve. If I once weighed 550lbs, but now weigh 570, with those extra 20lbs being fat mass, I’ve done what you call a BODY WEIGHT INCREASE. So, gaining those extra 20lbs of PURE FUCKING FAT will improve my leverages and make me stronger. Your words.

Gaining 20lbs, whether fat, muscle, or a mixture of both is a BODY WEIGHT INCREASE.[/quote]

My words were that body weight increases aid in leverage. Yes, this can happen with fat as well and most people, even obese people, do not just gain body fat unless bed ridden. They gain a mixture of fat and muscle of varying degrees.

[quote]

I didn’t change a single word you wrote. Maybe it’s your reading comprehension?[/quote]

Hope that cleared it up for you.

Yes, there are obese people who can bench more than a trained person even untrained because of the leverage. Most people do not just gain body fat when they gain weight.

Most people also do not just lose body fat when they lose weight. Your body is more complex than that and yes, body weight can affect leverage alone whether it is mostly muscle or not.

1075

[quote]rrjc5488 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]rrjc5488 wrote:

The fact that you think it’s “safe to say muscle is being gained if lifts are increasing” is absurd. Maybe your professors skipped over the central nervous system in the entirety of your academic career?[/quote]

I do believe I already wrote in this thread that strength can be increased by simply learning the movement which means neural adaptation and technique.

I am not sure how that shows anything about my professors since I already mentioned it.

[quote]
“simply learning the movement” isn’t the same as improving your CNS effeciency. I learned to squat properly (and if I’m allowed to brag, damn near perfectly) a few years back. I am not LEARNING how to squat anymore. I am, however, improving my CNS effeciency. I have gotten stronger because of that. I know this, because I have gotten stronger without increasing body weight before.

You did not mention the CNS, you mentioned “learning a movement.” If I spent the time learning how to do a proper snatch, I’m not any stronger, I just know how to do a snatch now. Now that I know how to do a snatch, I can get stronger in the snatch without gaining weight. This is due to neural effeciency.[/quote]

[quote]
Also, according to you, increasing fat will improve leverages, thus improve strength levels. [/quote]

No, that was NOT written. It was written that BODY WEIGHT INCREASES can improve leverage. You will not see any affect like this by gaining fat and losing weight.

[quote]
If I weigh 550lbs (full house status) and I gain 20lbs of fat, my leverages will improve. If I once weighed 550lbs, but now weigh 570, with those extra 20lbs being fat mass, I’ve done what you call a BODY WEIGHT INCREASE. So, gaining those extra 20lbs of PURE FUCKING FAT will improve my leverages and make me stronger. Your words.

Gaining 20lbs, whether fat, muscle, or a mixture of both is a BODY WEIGHT INCREASE. [/quote]

Nope. Seems like you didn’t understand much of what I wrote at all.

Why is it when some of you try to tell me what I mean, you get it so wrong?

Why not just quot exactly what I wrote? Why change words around?[/quote]
I didn’t change a single word you wrote. Maybe it’s your reading comprehension? [/quote]
Or maybe it’s your inability to quote posts.

Fixed for ya :slight_smile:

1076

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]rrjc5488 wrote:

“simply learning the movement” isn’t the same as improving your CNS effeciency. I learned to squat properly (and if I’m allowed to brag, damn near perfectly) a few years back. I am not LEARNING how to squat anymore. I am, however, improving my CNS effeciency. I have gotten stronger because of that. I know this, because I have gotten stronger without increasing body weight before.

You did not mention the CNS, you mentioned “learning a movement.” If I spent the time learning how to do a proper snatch, I’m not any stronger, I just know how to do a snatch now. Now that I know how to do a snatch, I can get stronger in the snatch without gaining weight. This is due to neural effeciency. [/quote]

I am not sure how you are making the argument that learning a movement does NOT involve neural adaptation.

I wasn’t aware anyone who wasn’t a beginner needed to write out “CNS” every single time for that to be understood.

[quote]

If I weigh 550lbs (full house status) and I gain 20lbs of fat, my leverages will improve. If I once weighed 550lbs, but now weigh 570, with those extra 20lbs being fat mass, I’ve done what you call a BODY WEIGHT INCREASE. So, gaining those extra 20lbs of PURE FUCKING FAT will improve my leverages and make me stronger. Your words.

Gaining 20lbs, whether fat, muscle, or a mixture of both is a BODY WEIGHT INCREASE.[/quote]

My words were that body weight increases aid in leverage. Yes, this can happen with fat as well and most people, even obese people, do not just gain body fat unless bed ridden. They gain a mixture of fat and muscle of varying degrees.

[quote]

I didn’t change a single word you wrote. Maybe it’s your reading comprehension?[/quote]

Hope that cleared it up for you.

Yes, there are obese people who can bench more than a trained person even untrained because of the leverage. Most people do not just gain body fat when they gain weight.

Most people also do not just lose body fat when they lose weight. Your body is more complex than that and yes, body weight can affect leverage alone whether it is mostly muscle or not.[/quote]

These were your words:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

if lifts are increasing, it is safe to say some muscle is being gained.[/quote]

[quote]Professor X wrote:

I already wrote in this thread that strength can be increased by simply learning the movement which means neural adaptation and technique.[/quote]

Thanks for refuting the first statement with the second.

So again as X says, lifts increasing doesn’t necessarily mean muscle was gained, as X said. He is now arguing with himself.

1077

[quote]cueball wrote:
These were your words:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

if lifts are increasing, it is safe to say some muscle is being gained.[/quote]

[quote]Professor X wrote:

I already wrote in this thread that strength can be increased by simply learning the movement which means neural adaptation and technique.[/quote]

Thanks for refuting the first statement with the second.

So again as X says, lifts increasing doesn’t necessarily mean muscle was gained, as X said. He is now arguing with himself.

[/quote]
As a stat major I simply have to point out the logical fallacy occurring.

lifts are increasing = safe to say some muscle gain =/= absolute surety of muscle gain

neural adaptation and technique = lifts are increasing =/= no muscle gains

If you improve technique you are increasing your lifts without necessarily having increased muscle gains, but if you are increasing your lifts, it is more likely than not that you are experiencing muscle gain. That’s basically what he said, and there is no contradiction.

They taught us in school to talk kinda like that lol. You use your data in statistics to tell people something without ever giving them any absolutes.

1078

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:
Obesity-associated activation of NF-�?�ºB heightens inflammatory responses that exacerbate insulin resistance.[/quote]

How many times have I written that OBESITY causing insulin resistance isn’t being debated at all?

Why did you post this? [/quote]

Way to read that and see the one word you wanted instead of the number of mechanisms by which MORE FAT CELLS causes insulin resistance.

How many times in this thread did you say that there was ZERO evidence for more bodyfat causing greater insulin resistance? At least 5 because I replied to all of them. Good job moving the goalposts later, but you’re still wrong.

1079

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]rrjc5488 wrote:

“simply learning the movement” isn’t the same as improving your CNS effeciency. I learned to squat properly (and if I’m allowed to brag, damn near perfectly) a few years back. I am not LEARNING how to squat anymore. I am, however, improving my CNS effeciency. I have gotten stronger because of that. I know this, because I have gotten stronger without increasing body weight before.

You did not mention the CNS, you mentioned “learning a movement.” If I spent the time learning how to do a proper snatch, I’m not any stronger, I just know how to do a snatch now. Now that I know how to do a snatch, I can get stronger in the snatch without gaining weight. This is due to neural effeciency. [/quote]

I am not sure how you are making the argument that learning a movement does NOT involve neural adaptation.

I wasn’t aware anyone who wasn’t a beginner needed to write out “CNS” every single time for that to be understood.

[quote]

If I weigh 550lbs (full house status) and I gain 20lbs of fat, my leverages will improve. If I once weighed 550lbs, but now weigh 570, with those extra 20lbs being fat mass, I’ve done what you call a BODY WEIGHT INCREASE. So, gaining those extra 20lbs of PURE FUCKING FAT will improve my leverages and make me stronger. Your words.

Gaining 20lbs, whether fat, muscle, or a mixture of both is a BODY WEIGHT INCREASE.[/quote]

My words were that body weight increases aid in leverage. Yes, this can happen with fat as well and most people, even obese people, do not just gain body fat unless bed ridden. They gain a mixture of fat and muscle of varying degrees.

[quote]

I didn’t change a single word you wrote. Maybe it’s your reading comprehension?[/quote]

Hope that cleared it up for you.

Yes, there are obese people who can bench more than a trained person even untrained because of the leverage. Most people do not just gain body fat when they gain weight.

Most people also do not just lose body fat when they lose weight. Your body is more complex than that and yes, body weight can affect leverage alone whether it is mostly muscle or not.[/quote]

Since I suck at quotes, I’ll just copy and paste.

You said: I am not sure how you are making the argument that learning a movement does NOT involve neural adaptation.

I am not making that argument. Of course that’s true. The argument I’m making is that neural adaptation can occur on a movement you’re already proficent at. You’re talking about neural adaptation by learning a NEW lift.

Are you arguing that you cannot make neural adaptations by doing a movement you’re already proficient at? Are you arguing that someone cannot get stronger via neural adaptations without learning a new lift?

RE: body weight gain.

Are you arguing that gaining PURE FAT (on top of whatever LBM/fat mass you’ve already got) is not a body weight gain?

Whether or not it’s likely to gain PURE FAT or not, it’s possible, and it’s still considered a “body weight gain.” Which is what you said will improve leverages and thus increase strength. Using the transitive property, this states:

Gaining fat → improved leverages → increased strength. Thus, gaining fat → getting stronger.

…so are you still arguing that you cannot get stronger without gaining muscle?

1080

WTF are we doing in here? Seriously.