Anabolic and Catabolic Hormones

There are several endocrine hormones and growth factors that contribute to muscular hypertrophy and fat burning. These are chemical messengers released from various endocrine glands due to stimulation from the nervous system, or other hormones. Each hormone can be classified as an anabolic (building up) or catabolic (breaking down).

Let’s start out with a look at the anabolic hormones:

Growth hormone (GH) is produced in the anterior pituitary gland of the brain. This hormone is released following resistance training. Among its many functions is stimulating insulin-like growth factor (IGF) in muscles. IGF is one of the factors responsible for the division of satellite cells during the repair process. The other contributing factors include fibroblast growth factor (FGF) and hepatocyte growth factor (HGF).

Testosterone

Another anabolic hormone of utmost importance for hypertrophy is testosterone, which is secreted in the testes. It is also known as the androgen (male) hormone.  Testosterone levels are elevated during resistance exercise and the hormone acts to increase protein synthesis. This allows for optimal
repair of muscle fibers. In addition, it increases satellite cell count along with the number of androgen receptors in muscles, leading to greater hypertrophy.

Insulin

Insulin is also an anabolic hormone capable of increasing protein synthesis. It is produced in the pancreas and it mainly functions in activating glucose uptake in cells, such as muscle cells. It can also transport amino acids. During exercise, insulin sensitivity increases due to a muscle's additional need for glucose. This not only enhances glucose uptake, but also the uptake of amino acids, thus stimulating protein synthesis.

Glucagon

Unlike insulin, the catabolic hormone glucagon increases blood glucose. This hormone, also produced in the pancreas, breaks down fat to release glucose into the blood during periods when blood glucose levels are low. This can occur while performing cardio on an empty stomach and is
beneficial when trying to burn fat.

Cortisol

Cortisol is also released when blood glucose levels are low. It is a catabolic hormone secreted by the adrenal glands, and is often referred to as the stress hormone, as stress increases cortisol levels. When secreted, cortisol converts fatty acids and amino acids into glucose. This can negatively affect hypertrophy by slowing down or even preventing protein synthesis, as the amino acids needed for this process would be converted to glucose.

Epinephrine and Norepinephrine

Two catabolic hormones that help boost performance during training are epinephrine (adrenaline) and norepinephrine (noradrenaline). These hormones, produced in the adrenal glands, are released during exercise, especially high-intensity resistance exercise. The benefits of epinephrine and norepinephrine include increased strength, increased blood flow, and increased secretion of the anabolic hormone testosterone.

Irisin

Another hormone released during exercise is irisin. This hormone is secreted by muscles. Your body comprises two types of fat cells: white and brown. White adipose tissue, or white fat, is used by the body to store energy in the form of triglycerides. This kind of fat has little mitochondria, hence its white color.

The other type of fat, brown adipose tissue, or brown fat, is used to burn energy. Unlike white fat, it contains an abundance of mitochondria, which explains its brown color.

Brown fat expends energy via non-shivering thermogenesis, and it is highly activated during cold conditions. Most people only have a small amount of brown fat in their bodies. Also, as they age, the levels of brown fat decrease. There are, however, individuals with higher amounts of brown fat than the normal population, which gives them an advantage in terms of burning calories, due to the increased thermogenesis and thus increase in metabolism.

It is possible though to increase brown fat by performing intense exercise on a regular basis. This is because intense exercise causes muscles to release the hormone irisin, which converts white fat to brown fat. Irisin helps convert the energy-storing white fat cells to the energy-burning brown fat cells. By doing so, it causes an increase in metabolism, thus allowing your body to burn more calories.

What kind of cardio is more effective in losing weight?

For a long time cardio continues to be a hot topic in all discussions on methods of burning fat. After all, as we all know, not just cardio can dramatically change the composition of the body. Many studies have shown that actually weight training is more effective in the fight against fat. Despite this, people prefer to sit for hours on a stationary bike with a magazine reading gossip news. You are free to do what you think is necessary, but isn’t it better to try to get the most from workout? In this article, we will compare two most popular types of cardio – HIIT and LISS. By reading this article to the end, you’ll get an idea of ​​what kind of cardio is more suitable to you.

So what does mean cryptic abbreviations HIIT and LISS? HIIT – High-intensity interval training  is an enhanced form of interval training, an exercise strategy alternating periods of short intense anaerobic exercise with less-intense recovery periods. For example: 30 seconds sprinting, followed by a 4-minute walk to restore a normal heartbeat, and then repeat it as many times as needed. LISS – Low Intensity Steady State Cardio. This can be walking on a treadmill or pedaling a stationary bike. Now when you have an idea about these varieties of cardio, let’s get into the details.

Why do we need to test our lactate threshold (LT) and anaerobic capacity (AC)? LT and AC – this is an excellent cardio performance indicator. Our muscles burn glucose (blood sugar) in two ways: aerobic (with oxygen) and anaerobic (without oxygen). For example, LISS is considered aerobic workout but resistance training or HIIT is considered anaerobic workout. LT and AC – this is a great test for the cardio, as they help to determine under what load is produced ATP (adenosine triphosphate). ATP provides a quick burst of energy for working muscle group (for example, every time you bend your arms with barbell, ATP is produced). HIIT, unlike LISS, increases the body’s ability to endure physical stress. High-intensity training makes you workout outside of the LT and AC, which leads to faster metabolism, which eventually leads to more intense fat burning. But during LISS you do not reach your LT and AC.

How to speed metabolism

# 1. It is necessary to increase muscle mass and muscle oxidative capacity. In our muscle tissues there are structures that produce energy; they are called mitochondria, which produce ATP and burn fat. The more mitochondria we have and the more active they are, the greater oxidizing power will get our muscles and the faster we’ll lose fat. HIIT improves the performance of mitochondria and increases their number.

Studies show that due to high-intensity training, we lose more fat as increase oxidative capacity of muscle fibers. During LISS we burn calories only while exercising. Low intensity cardio does not speed up metabolism. Moreover, our body gets used to such load and we have to increase the duration of cardio workout to continue to burn fat. Most people do not realize that for best results, it is necessary to go beyond the comfort and try to spend as much energy as it possible. And if you feel pain during HIIT, then your body is working in uncomfortable mode and you’re doing all right!

# 2. Our body quickly gets used to everything. We’ve all seen people who spend hours doing LISS. Actually they should lose those extra pounds, but this does not happen, because their metabolism has adapted to the low-intensity training. Their body uses calories only during exercise, and speeding up the metabolism does not occurs. Regularly training LISS, you get results that could be achieved through diet alone. For example, you burn 200 calories in 30 minutes of LISS. But you could forego these 200 calories, reducing the amount of carbohydrates or fats in the diet. Plus, can use HIIT to accelerate the metabolism.

# 3. A study conducted by Dr. Wilson from the University of Tampa, Florida, shows that starting LIIS, from the beginning we lose weight, but this effect is quite short. In the first week of the experiment examinees people had lost about one kilogram, but thereafter everything stop. This happened because their metabolism has completely adapted to the new regime of physical activity. Furthermore, LISS combined with low-calorie diet can lead to loss of muscle mass. During a low-calorie diet, LISS is more catabolic (breaking muscle) activity, unlike HIIT which take care more carefully of muscle tissue. The reason is that our metabolism adapts to LISS and we have to increase the duration of cardio workout. A reduction of caloric intake often occurs by reducing carbohydrate intake. Glycogen stores in the muscles are depleted and our body needs energy. And what do you think, how did the body will draw energy? From protein! And our muscles just consist of proteins!

# 4. The same study showed that LISS cause greater loss of muscle mass then HIT. The fact is that during these workouts our muscles work differently. It’s like training with weights! HIIT – is another way to stimulate muscles. As an example, compare sprinters’ and a marathons’ runner body. With this research it is difficult to argue.

# 5. In another study, conducted by Dr. Naito, from Juntendo University of Japan, it was found that production of satellites cells in experimental rats body does not depend on duration of endurance training but because of its intensity. Most of you will say, “Well, it’s a rat.” However, rats’ body like human one synthesizes protein and has similar reaction on amino acids and their metabolism. For those who have never heard about satellite cells: These cells create new muscle fibers in the body, and this in turn leads to muscle growth. Thus, studies have shown that when rats were subjected to HIIT, were ensued stimulation of muscle fibers growth. During LISS similar reaction was not observed. This proves that in cardio the most important is the intensity rather than duration.

Now many of you are probably convinced that for muscle gain and burn fat is more suitable HIIT. However, it should be noted that LISS is not absolutely useless. These kinds of cardio make sense to be combined and here are the reasons:

You cannot do HIIT 5-6 days a week, because in the end it will reflect badly on weight training and muscle growth.
Many people have contraindications (orthopedic, cardiac and even psychological) to HIIT and they can do only LISS.
If used incorrectly, HIIT can lead to injury.

Therefore to insist that HIIT is more effective in changing the composition of the body is as wrong as saying that 6 reps per set is better than 20. HIIT and LISS have their own unique advantages. Both types of cardio are worthy to be including in your training program. Choose that kind of cardio that you like better. HIIT workout is shorter, more effective for fat loss, accelerates metabolism and helps maintain muscle mass. But not all people can engage in HIIT. LISS is safer, but to lose a similar amount of calories you will need double to spend your time. Furthermore, LISS does not affect metabolism.

We does not have the purpose to convince you to give preference to any of this cardio, even if you thought so. Just the time has changed and science has discovered a lot about HIIT. And in the end, it is for you to decide what type of cardio is more suited to you. We hope that after reading this article, it will be easier for you to make a choice. If you are still in doubt … Just start practicing!

Slow reps: strength training with light weights does give results

Strength athletes, who because of injury or sickness can only train with light weights, can still get a decent training stimulus out of their workouts if they make their movements with light weights slower than they would normally. A human study that researchers at the University of Tokyo suggests this.

The Japanese are looking for a training method that can help elderly people to fight sarcopaenia – loss of muscle mass and strength due to aging. Strength training with heavy weights is still the best method to build up muscle mass, but for one group of elderly people this kind of training is too risky. The Japanese want to know whether you can still build up muscle mass by using light weights.

The researchers got 40 subjects aged between 59 and 76 to train their leg muscles by using leg-extension and leg-curl machines for 12 weeks. All the subjects trained twice a week.

They used weights that were about fifty percent of the weight at which they could just manage 1 rep [1RM]. Each workout they did three sets of 8 reps, with one minute of rest between sets.

Half of the subjects trained at normal speed, which meant that both concentric and eccentric movements took one second to perform. A complete rep, including the isometric phase [where the muscles are held statically in a tensed position] after the concentric phase, lasted three seconds [LN; Normal speed training].

The other half of the subjects performed the movements at an exaggeratedly slow pace. Both concentric and eccentric movements took three seconds to perform. A complete repetition, including the isometric phase, lasted seven seconds [LST; Slow speed training].

At the end of the 12 weeks, the subjects that had trained slowly had built up more muscle mass and muscle strength than the subjects that had trained in the normal way.

How it is that slowly performed reps with light weights can have so much more effect than reps carried out at normal speed the researchers don’t understand.

They discovered that slow reps result in slightly more growth hormone being produced, and slightly less cortisol. The muscles also used slightly more oxygen when they performed slow reps.

But the effects were so small that they can’t account for the added value of doing exaggeratedly slow reps.

“Low-intensity slow-movement resistance training is effective in increasing muscle size and strength, even for older individuals”, the researchers conclude. “Since low-intensity slow-movement resistance training bears lower risk for orthopedic injury and cardiac events, this should be useful as a countermeasure against sarcopenia.”

Testosterone propionate can have permanent effect on muscles

Good news for chemical bodybuilders who’d like to change to a steroid-free lifestyle, but are afraid that they’ll lose all the muscle that they’ve so carefully built up. Researchers at the University of Oslo in Norway did tests with mice and discovered that a considerable amount of the effect of testosterone administration on muscle tissue is permanent.

Athletes who’ve managed to – say – do six reps with 120 kg, and then don’t touch a barbell for ten years, will probably lose nearly all the muscle mass they’ve built up. But if they resume training, then they’ll get that lost muscle mass and strength back in no time at all. The phenomenon is called ‘muscle memory’.

In 2010 the Norwegians started a study in PNAS in which they described how muscle memory works. If you train muscles the fibres absorb more stem cells. These stem cells then grow into adult muscle cells in the muscles. The increase in the number of muscle cells in your muscle fibres makes your muscles stronger and bigger. If you stop training, then your muscle cells will become smaller, but the extra cells remain in your muscles.

In 2010 the Norwegians concluded that strength athletes can continue to derive benefit from their muscle strength into old age. Moreover, the researchers suspect that steroids users continue to derive benefit from the courses they’ve taken for years after stopping. “Anabolic steroids have been shown to increase the number of nuclei”, the researchers write. “Thus, the benefits of using steroids might be permanent and should have consequences for the exclusion time after a doping offense.”

Good news for chemical bodybuilders who’d like to change to a steroid-free lifestyle, but are afraid that they’ll lose all the muscle that they’ve so carefully built up. Researchers at the University of Oslo in Norway did tests with mice and discovered that a considerable amount of the effect of testosterone administration on muscle mass is permanent.

In the new study the researchers implanted pellets containing Testosterone Propionate  in mice. These meant that there was much more testosterone circulating in the animals’ bodies for a period of two weeks than in the bodies of the mice in the control group – the latter had been given an implant that did not contain an active substance.

As a result of the raised testosterone level, the number of muscle cells in the muscle fibres of the mice in the testosterone group increased by 66 percent. Their muscle fibres became 77 percent thicker.

After fourteen days the researchers stopped administering Testosterone Propionate. The number of muscle cells in the mice’s muscle fibres remained the same, but the dimensions of the muscle fibres decreased.

After a period of three months the researchers forced the mice to exercise their muscles more than normal for a period of six days. The muscles of the mice that had received testosterone grew faster than those of the mice in the other group.

“Our data demonstrate that in least in mice, an episode of testosterone use may recruit a long lasting pool of excess myonuclei, and a persistent increased ability to regain muscle mass by resistance exercise in the absence of further steroid exposure”, the Norwegians write. “Thus, the benefits of even episodic drug abuse might be long lasting if not permanent in athletes.

Carbs Make a Comeback

There was a time when bodybuilders ate food. It is difficult to visualize today, given the prominence of protein powders, energy drinks, and meal replacements in all their manifestions (bars, powders, and drinks). It may be difficult to realize as well that bodybuilding and powerlifting have their roots in the blue-collar community. Some modern bodybuilding pros live the life of celebrities, receiving impressive endorsement contracts to supplement prize earnings and other payments. This allows them to access a wide variety of foods, supplements, and dietary guidance to provide for an optimal diet.

Though many protein powders represent a good value for meeting the higher protein demands of iron athletes, it is difficult to obtain a quality intake of carbohydrates or fats through supplements. In fact, most products are void of fat and rely upon sugars to an extent that makes soda look healthy.

Bodybuilders have always sought out high-protein foods, relying upon lean meats and skim milk products. Those who experienced bodybuilding in the '70s and '80s likely remember their diet, finding little similarity with the recent meal plans spoken of by modern bodybuilders. In fact, it is pretty simple to write down the circa 1980 bodybuilding diet: breakfast— oatmeal, eggs, and skim milk; lunch— two turkey and swiss cheese sandwiches on whole-wheat bread with mustard; pre-workout— applesauce and two chicken breasts; dinner— steamed rice, two cans of tuna packed in water, and a can of vegetables mixed in a bowl; pre-bedtime— one chicken breast and celery with peanut butter.

This diet seems odd, but most amateur bodybuilders had very little discretionary income (spending money) and workplaces often did not have refrigerators. Those who continued to compete for decades likely went through a range of diets, from low-fat to balanced to ketogenic. Bear in mind that a huge bodybuilder weighed 230 pounds then (contest weight), well below the near 300-pound mark broached by today's Olympians.

The diets all work, as evidenced by the continuing development of bodybuilders over the years. Yet, there are subjective and objective differences. Back in the '80s, physiques looked fuller, though not nearly as lean. Binging was rarely heard of except for the post-competition parade of gluttony through pizza buffets and home-baked pastries. Balanced diets did not rise to prominence until after protein bars and powders appeared on the market; there really was not impact from these diets.

Once low-carbohydrate dieting appeared, physiques became shredded to an unprecedented degree; this was particularly true among drug-free athletes. Unfortunately, low-carbohydrate dieting often resulted in periodic binging— bodies often did not look as full, and workouts were less satisfying, due to failing strength and an inability to achieve a pump.

Low-carbohydrate diets were seized with glee and zeal initially, particularly among the drug-free crowd as body fat and subcutaneous water are shed with unparalleled results. However, over the years, the low-carbohydrate diets appeared to take their toll on bodybuilders and the sport. From contest to contest, bodybuilders who followed a low-carbohydrate diet progressively lost size, fullness, and presentation; injuries, onstage cramping, and other maladies became prevalent. A greater dependence upon exogenous insulin to promote muscle growth was related by professional competitors.

Just recently, the resurgence of an idea that was nearly dead from neglect has erupted back into professional bodybuilding, with the drama of an ex-girlfriend catering your wedding reception. Those not able to watch the 2009 Olympia missed a showdown between two giants who showed size and fullness, along with a taut leanness due to skin pulled tight by inflated mass, rather than the shrink-wrapped appearance that followed whole-body depletion. Jay Cutler and Branch Warren, as well as many of the other competitors, displayed pumped muscles and lean physiques that challenged the imagination of Marvel comics artists. In addition to being full and lean, there was also a pleasant near-absence of GH-belly.

Year-to-year comparisons will show physique improvement among many of these competitors, in the eyes of many. The first assumption made may be a new drug regimen, as people often wish to ascribe enhancements and competitive success to either genetic or pharmaceutical advantage. However, there is a more basic explanation; something missing was restored.

Bodybuilding, even more so than mainstream dieting, is filled with "gurus." Unfortunately, there is no qualification to self-proclaiming oneself as an expert in bodybuilding, sports consultant, or dieting expert. This had led to a confusing library of contradiction. However, amongst the amalgam of advisors, a few rise to the top through the success of their clients. In the case of the 2009 Olympia, this includes George Farah, who guided Branch Warren to his second place finish, as well as Jay Cutler's advisor, Hany Rambod. Take the example of George Farah, a well-spoken gentleman with a passion for the sport, as evidenced by his own status as an IFBB pro, despite surviving multiple gunshot wounds over 12 years ago. What differentiated the contest preparation of these two, and others in the Olympia, from the practices of prior years, was a greater tolerance of carbohydrates in the diet.

As mentioned earlier, there was a pendulum swing from low-fat to low-carbohydrate plans in the diets of Olympians and everyday people. Yet, many competitors were placing lower, despite losing significant amounts of bodyweight and body fat. Why? It's simple: bodybuilding is a competition based upon presentation. Judges defined the ideal presentation by penalizing those who lost muscle fullness, had difficulty holding poses, and looked weak, rather than strong. George Farah reiterated a comment I have heard many a time in the sport, "It is a sport of building bodies, building muscle." Farah, whose diet advice was certainly a component of Branch Warren's success, was perplexed upon seeing the trend toward low-carbohydrate dieting. Staying with a program defined over time, based upon his personal experience and observations of numerous elite clients, Farah has transformed the physiques of many. Warren is just the latest of a string of successes directed by Farah.

In a telephone interview, Farah responded to a number of questions about what, why and how he instructs his clients nutritionally. He began with the astute observation that muscles don't grow when carbohydrates are restricted. Not only is there a deficit that impairs anabolism, but overall metabolism is disrupted by low-carbohydrate dieting by athletes.

One general measure that demonstrates the effect of long-term carbohydrate depletion is low body temperature. Farah sees clients come in with body temperatures of 96ºF, which quickly rose to normal after reintroducing carbohydrates into the diet. Interestingly, he also pares back cardio to a single 30-minute session daily.

Given that these athletes are reducing body fat despite eating very significant quantities of carbohydrates (Branch Warren consumed as much as 1,000 grams of carbohydrates a day— 4,000 calories worth!), and cutting back on cardio, suggests that the 'in vogue' programs are overly stressful to the body, and catabolic as well. Apparently, the increase in metabolism more than compensates for the increase in calories or any fat-storing effect of diet-induced insulin surges.

Not only have his clients demonstrated improvements in their appearance, Warren and others also were hitting personal records in their training.1 Those who have followed low-carbohydrate diets are hard-pressed to maintain strength and mass, let alone enjoy workouts or feel a pump. In comparing Warren to his peers onstage, Farah noted that not only was Branch hitting his poses to the delight of fans and judges alike, he continued to hit leg shots as the judges called "relax." Other competitors weren't conditioned to the same extent.

Of course, Warren was defeated in the final posedown by Jay Cutler, who appeared in peak condition. Did Cutler win because he avoided carbohydrates? No. To the contrary, he also followed a carbohydrate-full diet plan, directed by Hany Rambod. Though Rambod was not available for comment due to publishing deadlines, Cutler's diet was well-known, via Jay's blog and industry talk. Slightly less than Warren's 1,000 grams-per-day carbohydrate intake, Cutler consumed approximately 700 grams per day, accounting for nearly half his macronutrient intake. Rambod and Farah follow similar philosophy in advising their clients, so it is likely no consequence that their disciples gained 1st and 2nd place, respectively.

Of course, Warren and Cutler are not your everyday lifters. They can hardly be compared to recreational bodybuilders, representing the pinnacle of modern-day bodybuilding. Yet, there is a great deal to support the inclusion of carbohydrates back into the diet, welcoming them like the proverbial prodigal son. This assumption may be more specific to athletes, as it should be realized that sugars are the preferential energy source for short-term and explosive action.

A sedentary person may not be utilizing intramuscular and hepatic (liver) glycogen sufficiently, forcing the carbohydrate-sourced calories to be stored as fat. Glucose uptake occurs throughout the body, but skeletal muscle will preferentially take up glucose immediately after exercise, promoted by the migration of glucose transporters to the membrane and the increased blood flow to the working muscle. Not only is glucose driven into muscle cells under the influence of insulin, but so is potassium. This may help protect bodybuilders from cramping onstage.

Of course, it is important to bear in mind some of the wisdom imparted by George Farah. Eating what seems like a huge quantity of carbohydrates is not carte blanche to devouring unlimited carbohydrates. Also, by increasing carbohydrates, there is a concomitant decrease in dietary fat.

Farah is quick to cut saturated fats, and like Rambod, promotes fats known to be easily used for energy or health, such as olive oil and fish oils. However, rather than pushing gelcaps, the gurus emphasize fat intake in food. This reduces the inconvenience level of the diet, and lowers the glycemic index/load of each meal. Farah rarely considers the glycemic index of any individual food, as the presence of fiber, fat, and other factors modifies the glycemic and insulinemic response of the body. Certain meals may include a fattier meat, such as steak, to lower the glycemic response.

Is it possible that carbohydrates may be the forlorn answer to improving the physique for an active person? What about for the everyday man or woman?

A number of head-to-head studies have shown that for weight loss, all diets are equal over time (months to years), so long as calories are equal. Yet, what about the effect of carbohydrates in the diet for people not purposefully altering their diet or trying to lose weight? A recent study that looked at the association of carbohydrate intake as a percentage of calories, finding that those who ate the least amount of carbohydrates had the highest risk of obesity and overweight.20 In fact, the intake that was the healthiest included 47-64% carbohydrates. Not surprisingly, this includes the range that Farah and Rambod prescribe.

There is theory, and there is practice. The best results come from following those skilled in both. Bodybuilding is ever a contest between men who build the best bodies, not tear them down. While there is a time for ketogenic dieting, it appears to be a tool of limited use. Rather, it allows one to turn right when entering the grocery mart, filling the cart with yams, sweet potatoes, and other forbidden fruit.

Strength training increases success of attempts to quit smoking

People who stop smoking are more often successful if they start strength training at the same time. Researchers at Brown University in the US think that strength training also prevents the increase in body fat that ex-smokers often face.

There are a few studies that suggest that physical exercise makes giving up smoking easier. The withdrawal symptoms, the craving, low moods and weight gain are all less if ex-smokers exercise.

So you’d expect that the form of exercise that demands the most of the body – strength training – is even more useful for ex-smokers than other forms of exercise. But until recently no scientific research on the matter had been done.

Joseph Ciccolo of Alpert Medical School at Brown University did a study, a small one. It’s a pilot study. Ciccolo got 25 smokers aged between 18 and 65 to stop, gave them counselling and nicotine patches – and got half of them to do strength training twice a week.

Each session consisted of a full body workout of 10 exercises. Initially the subjects did just one set of 10 reps of each exercise, but increased this to two sets after three weeks. The subjects increased the amount of weight they lifted when they noticed that they could perform more than 10 reps per set.

At the end of the three months the strength training stopped, but Ciccolo followed the subjects for another three months. He discovered that the strength training doubled the chance of staying off smoking.

After six months 16 percent of the subjects who had done strength training had still not touched a cigarette. In the control group the figure was half that.

The strength training also prevented the subjects from putting on weight. At the end of the three months the ex-smokers had actually lost half a kg of fat mass.

“Cigarette smoking kills more than a thousand Americans every day, and while the large majority of smokers want to quit, less than five percent are able to do it without help”, says Ciccolo. “We need any new tools that can help smokers successfully quit and it appears resistance training could potentially be an effective strategy.”

“Adequately powered trials of resistance training for smoking cessation, including comparisons to other types of physical activity (e.g. aerobic exercise) and cost-effectiveness analyses are now required”, says Ciccolo.

The study was funded by the American National Cancer Institute.

Bulking vs Lean Mass Building

Amongst the old-school bodybuilders it was common practice to “bulk-up” when attempting to gain muscle. This went on for decades, with everyone from beginners to professionals ascribing to this method of mass-gaining. It was well understood that in order to get big, one needed to eat big…and eat big they did. Despite the relative lack of knowledge available in those days, this approach allowed many to pack on muscle at an astounding rate, often with minimal and in some cases no chemical enhancement.

The off-season was ruled by a time of culinary indulgence, in which food choices were centered primarily around high protein selections such as meats, eggs and milk, with carbohydrates being viewed as less important. Still, the sheer amount of food consumed by some of these men was legendary and is no doubt responsible for birthing some of the most outrageous tales of food consumption ever witnessed by the weight training community…or any community for that matter. At times their eating habits could more accurately be described as a feeding frenzy than dinner, with one man having been recorded as guzzling down an entire tank of water—which just so happened to contain dozens of “live” goldfish. I guess that’s one way to get in your daily protein requirements, although I would be curious to know if such an event was ever repeated, given the large content of bones which had to make their way through the digestive tract.

Out of all the bodybuilders who came up in the early days of the iron game, Bruce Randall was probably the most well known for his off-season eating habits. Starting at a scant 164 pounds, Bruce was able to increase his bodyweight to 192 lbs after just 58 days. Not too shabby, but nothing which hadn’t been accomplished many times before. However, Bruce didn’t get serious about his weight gain until his last year in the marines, in which he raised his bodyweight from an all too common 203 lbs to a massive 342 lbs in just 14 months. By that point Bruce was able to do the following lifts: A max-single good-morning of 685 lbs (a truly monumental lift), supine press with 482 lbs, a standing overhead press with 365 lbs for a double, a strict barbell curl with 228 lbs, ¼ squats with over 2,100 lbs.

While none of these lifts would be considered extraordinary (outside of the good morning and ¼ squat, which isn’t done anymore these days), the fact that Bruce achieved these numbers in such a short period of time while remaining 100% drug-free is truly mind-blowin. It goes without saying that of the 139 lbs Bruce gained during this time (178 lbs in total), a considerable portion of it was bodyfat. Still this does not take away from the fact that it was Bruce’s dietary habits which played the largest role in his body’s ability to add mass & strength so quickly. It should also be added that Bruce later decided to ‘cut-up’, after which he took home the NABBA Mr. Universe crown—one of the most coveted titles of his day.

So, just what did Bruce eat to achieve such rapid gains in mass & strength without the assistance of drugs? Bruce would regularly consume 2 quarts of whole milk, 28 fried eggs, and half loaf of bread for breakfast alone. As a supplement to his regular meals, he would drink 8-10 quarts of milk per day, and it was not uncommon to see him fill nearly an entire cafeteria tray with rice & pork, which he would eat in a single sitting.

It is hard to equal Bruce in the eating department, but 3X World Strongest Man, Bill Kazmaier, was no slouch himself. Although recognized by the masses for achieving a level of strength previously thought unattainable, he was also known for his humungous appetite by those who knew him best. By putting in as much time at the dinner table as the gym, Bill added a staggering 100 lbs of muscular bodyweight and brought his bench up to 600 lbs within his first 2 years of training alone! By the following year and at only 25 years of age, Bill had reached a massive 340 lbs and was on par to hit a 700 lb bench press before tearing his pec during the annual WSM competition. Eating whole turkeys and other similar dietary feats was considered routine in Bill’s daily life…and both his bodyweight and herculean strength were the proof.

These days the “bulking” method has largely fallen out of favor among competitive and non-competitive bodybuilders alike. Opting instead for the “lean gains” approach, today’s physique enthusiast more closely monitors his food intake than those of the former generation, which enables them to maintain a tight and hard physique year-round. With such a stark difference in beliefs among the different generations and with a much greater degree of knowledge available today, many have come to the conclusion that the original bodybuilding elite were simply misguided—that such monstrous eating serves no other purpose than making it more difficult to get in shape come contest day, but is this the entire truth or is there more to the story? Well, it depends on the circumstances.

Before we attempt to answer this question, let’s first define the meanings behind the terms “lean mass-building” and “bulking”. In decades past bulking was traditionally described as a method of eating designed to add muscle mass as quickly as possible via caloric excess. Although protein foods were favored, there was little discrimination when it came to food selection and no set meal plan—the bodybuilder would simply eat as much as he could throughout the day. This often resulted in 1000,’s of extra calories being consumed on a regular basis. When combined with a relative disregard for the types of calories being eaten, it is not surprising that proponents of the bulking method often accumulated an unacceptable amount of body fat.

While the old-school bodybuilders may not have understood the science of nutrition as well as we do today, one thing they did understand is that the body will only grow as quickly as possible when calorie-nutrient availability is optimal. If you share similar priorities in terms of maximizing growth rate, then the fastest way to accomplish this goal is to eat as much as the body can tolerate without adding an unacceptable amount of fat. Obviously, if you start morphing into a fat hog in record time, then you have exceeded your caloric surplus by too large of a margin, but why gain any fat at all? Can’t we just eat only what the body needs to maximize growth without adding any fat? Although this would be ideal, the truth is that none of us can really know when we reached this point until we have exceeded it…and the only way to know we have exceeded it is through fat gain.

Fat gain is the “proof”—the evidence that the body has been supplied with all the calories-nutrients it needs to maximize growth. In the same way, if someone never adds any body fat…or barely any, what are the odds that they are perfectly straddling that fine line between maximum growth and fat gain? Basically non-existent. In this case, the lack of fat gain experienced by these individuals is the “proof” that they are not eating enough to maximize growth. There are just too many variables involved—many of which cannot be accurately tracked due to their internal and constantly fluctuating nature—which prevent us from accurately determining our optimal caloric intake. For this reason, if we want to grow as fast as possible then some fat gain is inevitable. Now, there is no reason to completely abandon our aesthetic standards in favor of a Pillsbury Dough Boy appearance, but slow, consistent fat gain should be accepted as part of the deal when we want to pack on muscle at the most rapid rate possible.

For professional bodybuilders whose livelihoods depend on placing well in competition, this is not necessarily so. In fact, such an approach is likely to be counter-productive to their goals, as many pros have already built most (and in some cases all) of the mass they will ever require, negating the need for an extreme mass-gaining diet. With competition success now being the #1 priority, the typical pro will be better served by staying lean in the off-season, as this will allow him to more easily maintain size during prep and in most cases, achieve superior conditioning. There are also certain cosmetic benefits attached to this practice, such as tighter skin and reduced stomach distension, both of which positively contribute to the BBr’s overall look. As a final consideration, a less rigorous diet also places less stress on the body in general.

Pro bodybuilders fitness models, MPD competitors, those with regularly scheduled photo shoots or other industry obligations, or anyone else who places greater importance on staying lean for whatever reason, will probably be better off using the lean-gains approach, as this will allow them to continue making progress, albeit more slowly, without jeopardizing their other short or long-term goals. In any case, the approach you take to building your ultimate physique will be dictated by your priorities. Most advanced competitors have more to concern themselves with than just growing muscle tissue and therefore, will need to ensure that their off-season plan coincides with the bigger picture. However, when it comes to the non-competitor who just wants to get big, they gave the luxury of being able to focus solely on mass-gaining and their program can potentially reflect that.

As you can see, there really isn’t a “best” way to go about gaining muscle mass. While many of today’s top coaches espouse the lean-gains approach, you should remember that they are usually dealing with top competitors—many of whom earn a living in the sport. Their situation is quite different than the non-competitor who just wants to get big. Do not just blindly follow along with the program of another because it was used by a professional bodybuilder. The bottom line is that each individual is unique and will need to consider both his/her short and long-term goals before being able to put together their ideal off-season plan.

The Hercules Workout: A three-days-per-week full-body program with a twist

Old-school training brings to mind the likes of Steve Reeves and company performing full-body workouts three times a week. Today such a routine is often passed on in favour of more ‘advanced’ training splits — training the body over four or five days. Whether that’s really more effective, though, is open to question.

Supposedly the advanced split enables your body to recover over a longer period of time and lets you perform more sets for each body part; however, that approach to training frequency isn’t better than the other. The full-body workout has its place in bodybuilding. It’s stood the test of time and can be used by beginner, intermediate and advanced bodybuilders alike.

Remember, Reeves had an awesome physique, one that is still considered great, so he must have been on to something.

Why the Hercules workout works

1) Overall muscle balance and conditioning. A total-body workout, performed three non-consecutive days a week — for example, Monday, Wednesday and Friday — is efficient. Working the entire body in one session enables all -body parts to develop at about the same rate, which is essential for beginners seeking to build overall muscle mass and strength. Too often beginners perform endless sets of barbell curls and bench presses four times a week. In the end they either burn out or are injured because of muscle imbalance.

The full-body routine encourages — perhaps forces — you to devote an equal amount of effort to developing each body part, since it would be virtually impossible to do 12 sets of chest exercises, followed by squats, lunges, dips, deadlifts — you get the picture. In addition to encouraging overall muscular development, a full-body approach forces you to learn different exercises. Even for advanced athletes, the reduced volume on each exercise encourages more concentration and proper form because you have to get the job done with fewer sets. You automatically train harder.

2) Better ripping results. When you’re dieting hard, the reduced carbohydrate intake means your glycogen stores are low. Consequently, your muscles often appear flat, and you feel like crap when you work out. The last thing you want to do is 15 to 20 sets for back at one workout. The main goal during a fat-loss phase is to lose fat. Your workouts should therefore be geared more toward muscle maintenance, not extreme hypertrophy. Performing a full-body workout with reduced rest time between sets — 45 to 60 seconds — keeps you in the fat-burning zone, adds to the cardiovascular effect and boosts your metabolism after you train. In fact, full-body workouts may enable you to do cardio to two to three times a week instead of the usual five to six.

3) Active recovery. A few months ago I put myself on Arnold’s six-days-per-week, 20-plus-sets-per-body part routine for four weeks. At the end of it I’d made significant gains, but I was starting to feel the effects of overtraining — unable to sleep well, increased fatigue, decreased appetite. I knew it was time to cut back, or the muscle I’d gained would disappear in a matter of weeks. A three-days-per-week full-body program was perfect at that point. For many bodybuilders decreasing workout volume is a tough pill to swallow. Unless your gym buddies are Deca Durabolin and Dianabol, however, you’ll have to cycle your training from higher to lower volume periodically, or you’ll risk suffering the effects of burnout.

After intensive training for four weeks or more, the average person requires anywhere from one to three weeks to fully recover. A lower-volume routine lets the body regenerate while still giving it adequate muscle stimulation. It also allows time for mild injuries to heal. Most important, the back-off period is usually the time when you enjoy the most muscle gains. Why do I make such a bold statement? Consider Arthur Jones, the creator of Nautilus machines and the father of high-intensity training. Top pros who were performing 30 to 40 sets per workout would come to him and be put through full-body workouts of 10 to 12 sets three times a week and — Boom! — their gains would go through the roof.

The Hercules Workout
You should be motivated to give full-body training a shot. Given that the average Joe (or Jane) has time commitments to school, job, family, spouse and so on, 12 to 15 sets per workout (not per body part!) should be perfect for consistent muscle size and strength gains.

That translates into four or five different exercises for working the entire body. Because you get only one exercise for each body part, compound, or multijoint, movements are best so that you work a number of muscles simultaneously. Also, it’s best to complete the workout within 45 to 75 minutes to prevent excess muscle catabolism. Here’s a traditional three-days-per-week full-body program that uses the same exercises at each session:
Monday, Wednesday, Friday

Bench presses 3 x 10
Seated military presses 3 x 10
Bent-over rows 3 x 10
Squats 3 x 10
Leg curls 3 x 10

For most people performing that same workout three times a week for three to four weeks would get pretty boring — and you’d be limiting yourself by using the same exercises over and over; your muscles aren’t being worked from different angles, which means you wouldn’t be ensuring total muscular hypertrophy.
The solution is to vary the exercise choice at each workout. Here is the variable Hercules workout, designed to train your entire body from different angles throughout the week.
Monday

Dumbbell bench presses 3 x 10
Seated dumbbell presses 2 x 10
Wide-grip chins 3 x 10
Leg presses 3 x 10
Glute/ham raises 3 x 15

Wednesday

Flat-bench flyes 3 x 10
Bent-over rows 3 x 10
Squats 3 x 10
Leg extensions 3 x 12
EZ-curl-bar curls 2 x 15
Dips 1 x 15-20

Friday

Incline dumbbell presses 3 x 10
Cable rows 3 x 10
Stiff-legged deadlifts 4 x 8
Dumbbell lunges 2 x 15
Standing calf raises 3 x 20-25

The variable Hercules program doesn’t devote a lot of time to training the arms and forearms directly. That’s because you will already be developing significant arm strength and size by doing the basic compound movements like bench presses, rows, chins and dips. Your grip strength will improve from those big moves as well.

One last comment: As with any workout program, be sure to get enough rest every day and eat right. If you use the Hercules workout correctly, you should see Herculean results sooner than you thought possible.

Quadriceps exercises

It is important not to forget the fitness of the quadriceps, as are the large muscles of the thigh, and represent a very important muscle mass. Unfortunately, as their training is very tired, many people forget to train at the time of going to a gym.

So just because your training is tired so interesting train: muscles are a very important muscle that allow lifting and produce a positive anabolic hormonal response in the body assembly. So even though your workout can be hard, the results will not disappoint.

There are many exercises for the quadriceps question of isolation movements, or basic movements that allow all the muscular thighs. These exercises use machines, bars or just dumbbells, therefore a wide variety of fitness accessories. So it is easy to train the quadriceps of the large number of exercises in the world.

But beware, as a function of each morphology, some bodybuilding exercises quadriceps should avoid, or at least, play a certain way.

Exercises:

The exercises of quadriceps bar offer virtually the 2 functions. For this reason, the work of the thighs with this instrument is an excellent idea: most massively developed quadriceps possibilities, since it is simple and effective.

But the interest in the use of the bar is more important than the simple development of the quadriceps. Indeed, all (or most) will be called closed chain exercises. Thus, muscle imbalances are limited because the other muscles (glutes, hamstring, calves, back …) in synergy intervene or to ensure the balance of power around different joints.

The bar is the basic instrument of the harmonious development of the quadriceps, but also globally thighs: improved efficiency, increased full weight faster and less imbalances, therefore less risk of damage … but as always condition to perform the exercises correctly. The aim should be for the work of muscles cleanly, and not putting the maximum possible weight on the bar.

Body Composition and Optimal Health

More than 60 million Americans have some form of cardiovascular disease (CVD), and more than 2,600 people die from CVD each day. Hypertension is found in about 50% of individuals above 55 years. Metabolic syndrome (Syndrome X), characterized by elevated blood glucose insulin responses, is one of the most common conditions seen today and is estimated to be present in about 22% of men and 24% of women.

A central factor in all of these conditions is altered body composition. Adults with altered body compositions are at high risk for developing:

• Cardiovascular disease (CVD)
• High blood pressure
• Dyslipidemias such as high blood cholesterol
• Metabolic syndrome
• Type 2 diabetes

What is Altered Body Composition?

Body composition is a measure of the amount of body mass (weight) that is present as fat, bone, and lean muscle. Altered body composition may occur from increased fat and/or loss of lean muscle, which result in an increase of fat-to-lean body mass. Although the most common form of altered body composition is excess fat, decreased skeletal mass by loss of bone, such as seen with osteoporosis, is also a form of altered body composition.

Body composition can be determined by:

1. Body Mass Index (BMI): BMI is calculated from weight and height or can be obtained from an easy-to-use chart. Individuals with a BMI of 25 to 29.9 are considered overweight, while individuals with a BMI of 30 or greater are considered obese.
2. Waist Circumference or Waste to Hip Ratio (WHR): People who accumulate fat in the abdominal area (apple-shaped body) are at a significantly increased risk for developing diseases as compared to those with fat accumulation primarily in the hips and thighs (pear-shaped body). A waist circumference greater than 35 inches for women or 40 inches for men, or a WHR of 0.8 or greater in women, or 1.0 or greater in men indicates abdominal adiposity.
3. Bioelectric Impedance Analysis (BIA): BIA uses electric signals at different frequencies, which are impeded (slow down) on whether they are moving through the fat or lean muscle mass.

How can I Support Healthy Composition?

An important part of a clinical management program to improve body composition is adequate nutrition to support lean body mass, while appropriately limiting caloric intake. The low-calorie diets commonly used in weight-loss programs may not be beneficial, and such diets may produce side effects of fatigue, dizziness, and weakness, and result in loss of lean muscle mass. Research has shown that clinical programs that include a supplemental meal replacement are more successful for weight loss. Intervention for healthy body composition should always include resistance exercise as well, since increasing muscle mass increases energy needs, helps combat fatigue, and decreases the likelihood that fat mass will return after the program is completed.

Soy Protein, Isoflavones, and Healthy Body Composition
Soy protein is a high-quality protein source that may improve blood pressure and blood lipids. Based on a thorough review of the research literature, the FDA has issued a health claim stating that a daily consumption of 25 grams of soy protein as part of a diet low in saturated fat and cholesterol may reduce the risk of CVD. Specific preparations of soy protein have also been shown to promote healthy body composition. For example, a soy-based medical food has been shown to promote lean body mass over a non-soy based meal replacement in a weight management program. And, perimenopausal women fed 40 grams of an isoflavone-containing soy protein daily for 24 weeks showed increases in lean mass, whereas a control group consuming whey protein did not.

Glycemic Index (GI), Fructose and Metabolic Syndrome
The GI assesses blood glucose response to a food, and research documents that people at risk of diabetes should maintain a diet with low GI foods. Recently, a soy-based medical food was shown to have a low GI, suggesting it could be a suitable source of protein and nutrients while maintaining a healthy blood glucose and insulin levels.

The source of sweetener in any food should be a considered as well, and fructose is a low GI, naturally occurring sweetener. Fructose is suggested as preferred sugar source for diabetics since large doses of fructose (50 grams) only modestly raise blood sugar or insulin levels, and small doses show virtually no effect on blood sugar or insulin.

Fiber and BMI
Fiber is known to promote healthy digestion, blood insulin, and blood glucose levels, as well as maintenance of healthy cholesterol levels; and, fiber associated with lower risk of CVD. In the 10-year-long CARDIA Study of more than 2,000 adults, those individuals with the highest intake of fiber had the lowest body weight and WHR, and those with the highest body weight showed higher blood lipids and blood pressure. Fiber intake of 20 -30 grams per day should be considered in the optimal diet for promoting healthy body composition.

Homocysteine, Folate, Vitamin B12 and Optimal Health
Elevated blood homocysteine is associated with aging and obesity, and is an independent risk factor for CVD. Research also shows that it is associated with altered body composition in both adults and children. Folate and Vitamin B-12 are key vitamins that promote reduction of homocysteine levels.

Calcium, Magnesium and Potassium Balance
Early studies suggested restricting sodium may be helpful in older persons, but more recent data-including those from the large, multi-center Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) trial-suggested calcium, potassium, and magnesium are more important in maintaining healthy blood pressure. Low intake of calcium is also associated with higher levels of body fat, and calcium supplementation had been shown to promote healthy body composition and decreased fat retention in clinical trials and animal studies.

Bone Health and Body Composition
Throughout life, skeletal and lean muscle masses are related. Bone density decreases dramatically after the age of 40, so that by 80 years of age, men have lost on an average of 12% and women 25% of bone. Major factors in bone health are adequate intake of bone-support nutrients, and weight-bearing exercises to promote new bone growth.

Calcium supplementation has been shown to slow or even prevent bone loss in older individuals. About half the weight of bone mineral is from phosphorus, and it is important that intake of phosphorus and calcium be in balance. Low magnesium, vitamin D and vitamin K levels are associated with decreased bone mass and increased prevalence of fractures. Supplementation with these nutrients is important in promoting bone density. In addition, research suggests that soy with isoflavones reduces the bone resorption often during and after menopause.