PALEOFOOD Archives

Paleolithic Eating Support List

PALEOFOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Justin Hasselman <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 3 Sep 2000 14:24:02 CDT
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (149 lines)
>>JUSTIN SAID:
>>I've met several people who employ a 6 day per week volume routine, >>are
>>drug free, and have made excellent gains.  In my gym there's one >>40yr
>>old man who's drug fee and trains 6 days per week.  He's a >>powerlifter
>>and squats 500lbs at a bodyweight of 165lb.  With this >>level of
>>strength, I don't consider him to be overtraining.
>DAVE SAID:
>Some have one lift they are really proficient at. Is he strong at the
>other 2 lifts? I really doubt that he is drug free. It's a >possibility but
>I doubt it based on my experiences.
>I suppose some might have superior drug free recovery ability but >this
>doesn't mean they couldn't do better.

His name is Tim.  His bench is weak compared to his squat and
deadlift.
Although his bench may be improved with less volume, it's mainly due
to his
genetics.  He genetically has powerful thighs and lower back (squat
and
deadlift), and although his chest, shoulders, and triceps are also
powerful,
they are not as strong as his lower body.  I know him fairly well, and
he is
a lifetime natural athlete.  There are a few other things I forgot to
mention.  He works 10 hour construction days.  Then he goes to the gym
and
hammers out a volume routine.  He also does cardio about every other
day on
the treadmill. He has never attempted HIT so it is always possible
that his
gains would be better with with less volume.  I tried his routine at
the age
of 17.  I was very weak b/c it overtrained me.  But he has made gains
at the
age of 40 something training this way.

>DAVE WROTE:  Those these "old guys" may not be big and freakish as the
>drugged up >muscle mag poster boys they have awesome physiques and strength
>that >is 99.99% above the average for their age and weight.

Agreed.  And even if powerlifters do use drugs, typically,
powerlifters and
athletes use far less drugs than bodybuilders.  Top powerlifters will
typically use 600-1200mg of a fast acting testoserone ester.
Bodybuilders
will typically use 2000-3000mg testosterne, thyroid medications, high
dose
of human growth hormone (hGH), PFG2 (a prostaglandin for localized
hypertrophy), synthol (MCT oil injected into a muscle for a temporary
size
gain before a contest), DNP (a mitochondrial uncoupler that converts
incoming carbs into glucose), insulin, clenbuterol or EC combo,
amphetamines
to blunt hunger, etc.  There are some top powerlifters who are drug
free.
There are no (yes, not 1 single person) top bodybuilders who are drug
free.
(By "top" bodybuiler, I am referring to the top profressionals and NPC
level
amateurs).

>DAVE WROTE: How many do you know will train brutally hard and reduce
>training to >once every 2-4 weeks? Most stop for fear that they are under
>training >but are more than willing to criticize a technique they haven't
>truly >implemented.

I don't know anyone that trains with that level of infrequency, so I
cannot
comment on it's effectiveness.  Myself, I do upper body once every 7
days
and lower body once every 7 days.  I tried doing this once every 14
days and
I gained strength for the first 2 workouts.  I later learned that this
occured b/c the growth of Type IIC white muscle fiber (a disuse fiber)
outweighed the atrophying of my other fibers.  So it did produce
benefits
for the first month (2 workouts). But then I eventually began to lose
a
small degree of strength b/c my muscles just continued to fall into
disuse.


>DAVE WROTE:
>Ask to look at their training journals. Did they really make >progress?

Most bodybuilders don't keep training journals.  Most athletes and
powerlifters do.

>>JUSTIN WROTE:
>>Some HIT trainees throw out terms like recovery ability, yet most of
>> >>them have not even read The Classic Collection by Arthur Jones so
>> >>they don't even understand the foundation of it.
>DAVE WROTE:
>Read it.

It's amazing, isn't it?!  When I first stumbled upon those articles I
knew I
had struck a gold mine. :) Arthur was way ahead of his time.


>DAVE WROTE:
>You are pretty young aren't you Justin? You may see things >differently
>because of your age. No slam intended because you are >much more focused,
>intelligent, and inquisitive then most twice your >age but do you think
>that everyone's physiology is that different? >Though we all lose and gain
>bodyfat in varying degrees we all >function under the SAME physiological
>principles. No calorie >deficient no BF lost. I happen to believe it more
>efficacious to >implement a lifestyle change than to implement a short term
>aerobic or dietary program.

I'm 21.  Yes, I do believe everyone's physiology is that different.
Look at
Mentzer's and Arnold's routines.  They were very different.  Although
they
functioned under the "SAME physiological principals," their individual
physiology varied greatly.  Mentzer's genetics were obviously suited
well to
infrequent, intense workouts, 2-3 times per week.  Arnold's genetics
were
suited towards pounding out 4-5 hour long volume sessions 6 days per
week.
They both used low dosages of steroids (2-3 Dianabol pills per day was
considered high back then) so I don't believe Arnold's ability to
recover
from those session can be credited to steroids anymore than Mentzer.

>>JUSTIN WROTE:
>>People respond differently to individual foods.  Some are allergic >>to
>>dairy (I know I am), but others are not and respond well to a >>good whey
>>protein supplement.  Some are allergic to bananas, but I >>certainly seem
>>to respond well to them.  We are all genetically >>different.
>DAVE WROTE:
>Genetic code is not self expressive. We actually vary very little
>genetically. The driving force of genetic expression is lifestyle. >Mental,
>physical, and chemical forces are what drive genetic >expression not some
>uncontrollable invisible force.

I would disagree.  I believe we all vary greatly genetically.  Look at
our
variances in height (midgets and 7'0 giants and everything in
between), hair
and skin color (blondes, brunettes, blacks, whites, and everything in
between), genetic shape (Arnold had a huge chest, Menter's was weak;
Nasser
El Sonbaty has weak lats, Dorian Yates' lat spread looked like a total
eclipse).

Justin Hasselman

ATOM RSS1 RSS2