Serious question X: I personally only read studies published in CSCS and Nutrition related journals as those type of studies relate to my own training. Are there actually any published ‘medical’ studies that have looked at the amount of muscle a human can gain?[/quote]
I have seen none conducted over two or more decades using elite genetics individuals to see a “limit”. The variables involved would make such a study almost pointless.
Actually, the SOURCE of that information should be questioned by anyone who actually does understand the variability that could fall into any study.
That is why you look at the perameters of that study…and focusing on natural bodybuilding alone leaves many questions left unanswered which we have just covered here…like all of those guys who are too awkwardly built to win a bodybuilding contest but are actually carrying more size…or all of those athletes.
It is dishonest to IGNORE the problems with the source data.
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
Since others have thrown in themselves as examples, I’ll use me too
5’10, size 10.5-11 shoe. Was 19 years old when I first lifted a weight. My height and shoe size are still the same. My weight at that time was just under 130. I’m in the 180’s now, I have NOT worked out consistently over the past 10 years (I’m 29 now), and my bodyfat percentage is lower than it was when I was 130 (decent vascularity now, zero vascularity then.)
This is why I tend to be in the X camp on the limits stuff. I don’t consider myself to be particularly close to my own limit, given my lack of dedication over the years, and I’ve put on at least 40 lbs lean mass as an adult. I think the degree of variance between individuals is larger than many realize.
Flame away ;)[/quote]
The more generally accepted standard seems to be a lean, 8-10%, 3 pounds per inch.
You still have 20+ pounds of pure muscle to go
Lookin good BTW[/quote]
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Does anyon actually believe that there are natural 5’10 210 pound basketball players at 6% who have never touched a weight in their life?[/quote]
no[/quote]
Well actually there was this black dude on youtube that seriously believes that Johnnie Jackson is natural…
[quote]Professor X wrote:
I simply feel bad for the guy who can do more but is convinced that he should stick to “exactly 2lbs of gain a month” because said this is all a person can gain…when that author has no clinical medical degree to back up that claim.
[/quote]
Serious question X: I personally only read studies published in CSCS and Nutrition related journals as those type of studies relate to my own training. Are there actually any published ‘medical’ studies that have looked at the amount of muscle a human can gain? I would imagine that in the absence of actual studies, that simply making educated approximations from collected data should be viewed not as limiting, but certainly giving a fairly useful picture, even if the sample group is somewhat narrow.
S
[/quote]
You should ask anonym sp? He is the pub med studies searcher master.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
I simply feel bad for the guy who can do more but is convinced that he should stick to “exactly 2lbs of gain a month” because said this is all a person can gain…when that author has no clinical medical degree to back up that claim.
[/quote]
I just find it hard to believe that anyone that gets into this and tries to learn as much as they can about it would let something as trivial as one article telling them how much they can gain stand in the way of them gaining as much as possible. Maybe I was just cocky, I think most of us are to a point, but if someone would have told me that at 19 I would have been like “F you, you might gain 2 but I can gain 10”.
And to the degree, I do believe 100% that a medical degree means you know more about the human body than most, however, I think that when it comes to diet, exercise, and the application of them, I think that med degree is brought more on an even playing field with masters and doctorates in kinesiology and nutrition as well as those that have sought other professional acknowledgements in that field. I say this simply because the human body and its inner workings is far more complex as a whole than the elements of the body that come into play with regards to diet and exercise.
I am related to someone who is a famous athlete…[/quote]
Wes Welker?[/quote]
You would probably never guess…and I don’t know if he wants to be talked about here.
I am just saying that if it were known who the guy is, maybe less would believe my gains are so unbelievable or whatever the issue is they seem to have with me.[/quote]
[quote]bpick86 wrote:
…I do agree that no one should impose any kind of limits on themselves. I look at my proposed 202 at 10% limit and think I can best that. Most lifters would I think.
Most of the discussions that have been had regarding limits really serve no purpose except to provide an interesting debate for those intrigued by the academic side of the human body. And I think some of the ideas discussed can be useful in providing a comparison between differently built individuals. [/quote]
I agree with the ‘no limit’ approach, however a goal and a limit are two different things.
If we substitute ‘averages’ for limits it works better.
I just find it hard to believe that anyone that gets into this and tries to learn as much as they can about it would let something as trivial as one article telling them how much they can gain stand in the way of them gaining as much as possible. [/quote]
But…stop right there.
KIDS are learning how to think as well…from their peers…so if everyone is telling them they CAN’T do something, you are saying they will disregard social programming and believe it can be done anyway from sheer will power?
Our current poor population would deny that from sheer perpetual limitations on a social level through out families (let me know if that needs explanation due to wording).
[quote]bpick86 wrote:
This “limit” is completely separate from the one we beat to death earlier first off. But yes, it would take a very large frame person to hit 210 6%bf @ 5’10". That being said, there have been some very successful naturally large framed body builders, Dave Draper comes to mind. Reg Park was very large framed back in the day. And the reason bodybuilders were used as a gauge to try to quantify “LBM potential” is because they are the ones that have come the closest to achieving that.[/quote]
No, by large I do not just mean big muscles or wide shoulders.
For instance, how tall are you and what is your shoe size?[/quote]
5’10.5" size 11.5 I also have small wrists and ankles but wide shoulders for my frame[/quote]
lol I’m 5’8 and wear 13s
[quote]bpick86 wrote:
This “limit” is completely separate from the one we beat to death earlier first off. But yes, it would take a very large frame person to hit 210 6%bf @ 5’10". That being said, there have been some very successful naturally large framed body builders, Dave Draper comes to mind. Reg Park was very large framed back in the day. And the reason bodybuilders were used as a gauge to try to quantify “LBM potential” is because they are the ones that have come the closest to achieving that.[/quote]
No, by large I do not just mean big muscles or wide shoulders.
For instance, how tall are you and what is your shoe size?[/quote]
5’10.5" size 11.5 I also have small wrists and ankles but wide shoulders for my frame[/quote]
lol I’m 5’8 and wear 13s[/quote]
I just find it hard to believe that anyone that gets into this and tries to learn as much as they can about it would let something as trivial as one article telling them how much they can gain stand in the way of them gaining as much as possible. [/quote]
But…stop right there.
KIDS are learning how to think as well…from their peers…so if everyone is telling them they CAN’T do something, you are saying they will disregard social programming and believe it can be done anyway from sheer will power?
Our current poor population would deny that from sheer perpetual limitations on a social level through out families (let me know if that needs explanation due to wording).[/quote]
…and I am just using shoe size as a point because I was making that observation recently. But yes, I would assume some guy who is average height but with much larger hands and feet will likely NOT fall into some “average” category as afr as “lean body mass” gains…which calls that into question even more.
I just find it hard to believe that anyone that gets into this and tries to learn as much as they can about it would let something as trivial as one article telling them how much they can gain stand in the way of them gaining as much as possible. [/quote]
But…stop right there.
KIDS are learning how to think as well…from their peers…so if everyone is telling them they CAN’T do something, you are saying they will disregard social programming and believe it can be done anyway from sheer will power?
Our current poor population would deny that from sheer perpetual limitations on a social level through out families (let me know if that needs explanation due to wording).[/quote]
[quote]bpick86 wrote:
This “limit” is completely separate from the one we beat to death earlier first off. But yes, it would take a very large frame person to hit 210 6%bf @ 5’10". That being said, there have been some very successful naturally large framed body builders, Dave Draper comes to mind. Reg Park was very large framed back in the day. And the reason bodybuilders were used as a gauge to try to quantify “LBM potential” is because they are the ones that have come the closest to achieving that.[/quote]
No, by large I do not just mean big muscles or wide shoulders.
For instance, how tall are you and what is your shoe size?[/quote]
5’10.5" size 11.5 I also have small wrists and ankles but wide shoulders for my frame[/quote]
lol I’m 5’8 and wear 13s[/quote]
Hey…we’re black…[/quote]
I found out recently that I have a little black blood in me when I did my family tree. Incredibly interesting stories in there for anyone who ever takes on that project.
[quote]bpick86 wrote:
This “limit” is completely separate from the one we beat to death earlier first off. But yes, it would take a very large frame person to hit 210 6%bf @ 5’10". That being said, there have been some very successful naturally large framed body builders, Dave Draper comes to mind. Reg Park was very large framed back in the day. And the reason bodybuilders were used as a gauge to try to quantify “LBM potential” is because they are the ones that have come the closest to achieving that.[/quote]
No, by large I do not just mean big muscles or wide shoulders.
For instance, how tall are you and what is your shoe size?[/quote]
5’10.5" size 11.5 I also have small wrists and ankles but wide shoulders for my frame[/quote]
lol I’m 5’8 and wear 13s[/quote]
Hey…we’re black…[/quote]
I found out recently that I have a little black blood in me when I did my family tree. Incredibly interesting stories in there for anyone who ever takes on that project.[/quote]
Yeah it is. I have European, Native American, and Chinese ancestry. That’s as much as I know right now.
