adamant

Numerous studies have reported that muscles are in an anabolic state for a maximum of only 36-72hrs. HST frequency recommends training every 48 hrs to ensure you are constantly in an anabolic state. (for one HST cycle anyway). This one is a little more complicated. Muscles grow in response to load. The muscles then adapt to that load so they won't grow if given the same stimulus. To counteract this law, HST increases the load every workout so you're constantly adapting. Once you have reached your maximum load (most you can lift) you have a variety of options.. you can perform eccentric only movements, continue lifting your max or SD (strategic decondition) etc. If you want me to elaborate on SD I can. The reps are arbitrary. They are basically to accomodate the increasing load however different rep ranges have different benefits. As you may or may not know (approx): 10-15 range promotes lactic acid burn which has been shown to help strengthen/repair connective tissue (tendons and the like). 8-15 range favours release of GH growth hormone (stands for growth hormone funnily enough). 5-8 range favours release of testosterone growth hormone. 5-8 also recruits more type 2a and b muscle fibres where the benefits of this vary depending on muscle group and/or fibre type composition. All these have their place within a weightlifting routine and you should try and utilise them all, although 5-8 are most effective in hypertrophy. ------ As you probably can tell Casey Butt is anti-HIT as are practically all the scientific community, this is because it makes false scientific claims. This is an undeniable truth. Many people do make good gains using it and I won't nor have I denied or disputed that fact. There are many positives in using that system but I won't list them as it doesn't help my case I'm personally exploring HST and believe it has tweaking to become more effective in practice. I know said something along the lines of "have to be on steroids to work out that frequently" or something along those lines. You will actually find that the majority of people that use HST are the exact opposite, regular joe's who benefit a lot because it can provide good gains while avoiding the "injury associated intensity" and short workouts. However I do believe it is scientifically the most advance workout system to date, and has the most potential to maximise hypertrophy (as the name suggests). Given that, I will defend it when somebody questions its principles which are scientifically sound. Thanks, Adam.

Okay. You say needed? I'll assume you mean needed for hypertrophy. Well in terms of what your muscle 'needs' to grow, I'm sure that you could get away with even less than that (depending on your circumstances). The goal of any bodybuilding system is to provide maximum efficiency ie. maximum growth in a given period. Probably everything I would say is given in this article: http://www.engr.mun.ca/~butt/training/volume.html It is scientific however its not difficult to understand (as are all his articles and are well worth the look). Key points are: -too much neuromuscular fatigue induced performing that intensity -time under tension is too small Again, it is necessary to point out that this is for maximum hypertrophy. In regard to your "leftist" statements, I don't believe that has anything to do with why I asked you to have an "open mind". Myself and ex-banana eater are trying to introduce you to a system, scientifically superior to your current one. You refusing to accept this fact translates to a flaw in your critical and logical thought processes which I'll put down to ego but whatever it is, it isn't of importance. Frankly, I don't care about your position anymore. If you decide to try HST, good luck, if you stick with Heavy Duty, good luck. Just don't contribute to the wealth of false information that already plagues the bodybuilding community. It will only hinder progress.

Calm down. So I assume you know the researchers behind the studies featured in the link you gave? Who are they? Hate to break it to you champ, but science isn’t simple. Also, explain to me how “one set to failure is all that is required” is common sense. If you knew ANYTHING about HIT and its derivatives, you would know that its fundamental beliefs about muscle growth requirements have been scientifically disproven countless times. In regards to your typical left wing statement.. I AM LEFT WING and I don't give a #$@$ how it goes down on this board.

If you take the time to look at the article presented it is targeted at “long-term recreational weightlifters”. To further contradict the articles intention, the subjects in this test were performing these exercises three times a week. Another “academic” was quoted further down saying: Strength in muscle tissue? The maximal force muscle tissue can sustain? Or produce? In no way does he relate this to hypertrophy. I find it interesting that you claim HST is nothing bar “internet BS” and then supply that link. I’m not arguing for either program although I personally practice HST, I thought it necessary to point out your double standards, of which there are plenty more in the replies you have posted. Personally I suggest you have a good hard look at HST, not necessarily to implement it, but to at least understand what is available and the philosophies behind different systems, as opposed to blindly dismissing anything that is not in line with your perspective, which you have obviously done here.