OUTDATED: Four Workout Ideas Science Just Debunked
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 30 ก.ย. 2024
- myoadapt.com/
👆🏻 Register your email to be notified when MyoAdapt launches!
In this video, Dr Milo Wolf shares his top 4 outdated fitness topics that science has debunked.
References:
1. www.ncbi.nlm.n...
2. pubmed.ncbi.nl...
3. pubmed.ncbi.nl...
4. pubmed.ncbi.nl...
5. pubmed.ncbi.nl...
6. pubmed.ncbi.nl...
7. pubmed.ncbi.nl...
8. pubmed.ncbi.nl...
9. journals.lww.c...
👇🏼 Get 12 FREE programs at my website!
wolfcoaching.c...
Follow us on socials for more:
• 📸 Wolf Coaching Instagram: / wolfcoaching_
• 💥 TikTok: / wolfcoaching
• 💻 Milo's Instagram: / wolfcoach_
If you enjoyed this video, please drop a like and SUBSCRIBE to the channel for more!
💻 Editing & Thumbnail provided by: blackboxmedia.uk
#outdated #hypertrophy #scienceexplained
"OUTDATED: Four Workout Ideas Science Just Debunked"
Music from Uppbeat.
Business Enquiries: milo@wolfcoaching.com
![[TH] FS vs BME - VCT Ascension Pacific - Lower Bracket Final](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wnygqsR2Fig/mqdefault.jpg)
Hey, Milo! Would you be open to doing a yearly upload of a hypertrophy checklist that changes based off the ever changing literature? It can be challenging to keep up with the new findings and having a series that sort of gives you the barebones or most important things to keep in mind for programing could be helpful.
Yearly?! I need that shirt monthly at least
Do we think the principles change? Progressive overload, reasonable volume, quality exercise selection, proper nutrition, enough sleep, and pound away at consistency. People have been building quality physiques for decades on that. Science doesn’t help much for 99% of lifters.
Time under tension is just bro talk for "don't fling the weights around"
yeah basically maintain control vs allow gravity or the machine to do the work
Tut is pencil neck rhetoric, you gave the bro translation
From the jeff clip it seems that he isn't even talking about time under tension. He just says that you want tension in the working muscle
Yeah. That wasn't a fair criticism.
The Jeff glazing is crazy
You're better than your thumbnails.
Don't be a dumbell
Now I want Jeff Nippard to compare RP Strength vs MyoAdapt
They're all in the same camp and Jeff is at least maintains a good relationship with both of them. No way Jeff is touching the AI apps especially since he owns an AI diet app (macro factor)
Ryan hasn't done surface EMG in quite a while, he has agreed with you that this has been debunked. This is the second time you've used him as the SEMG example, well after he stopped using it. Jeremy used it too but has been spared.
It's probably because Ryan is a douche nozzle.
And again, Ryan finally used SEMG to prevent other muscles to be excited too much when they shouldn't be the limited factor. I found that was a very good approach: not choosing an exercice that excites a lot a targeted muscle, but more one where others are less excited. I still don't think it's a bad idea.
And yet Ryan still gives mediocre advice
These debunked workout ideas will soon be redebunked and then bunked then debunked again because science.
maybe, maybe not. But the amount of exercise science research in the last 5-10 years is more than in the 70 years before it. the field has modernized a lot. so we know a lot more than we did 10 years ago.
I need a rebunk
I agree on the programming. Bro split is outdated. There is no reason to smash hard on one day for some muscle group and rest an entire week. Upper body for example, can recover a lot faster than lower body and can take more frequency than lower body. Imo I like the 3 days full body split because it gives the most bang for buck for casual gym goers that are looking for gym life balance.
You might be able to recovery from the fatigue of training a given muscle the next day but won’t you still be recovering from the damage from the previous session. Also, MYOPs would still be elevated from the session the day before. It doesn’t make sense to train the muscle so soon after.
For 40 years I've been lifting as the bronze era bodybuilders did, 3 times a week, full body, I'm no steve Reeves ,lol, but it worked for them and it works for me
Going to go out on a limb here and speculate that 97% of gym goers simply need to be told 'Get off your a** and just do something!'
97% of the population perhaps, but definitely not 97% of gym goers. Most people I know got the effort part down but they have no clue how to actually optimally train and recover
Would you look into the effectiveness of Tens and EMT units? I know they are useful for rehabilitation and muscle targeting, but videos about it,like Pigmie, make them seem useful for building(minimal) core strenght. I also wonder how good they would work for glute muscles or maybe some group may benefit from them in particular.
i like PPL with 2 days off per week so that the ppl rotates around those days. This allows more time between leg work..... i can never recover legs on time.
This is the true issue with PPL. If you’re hammering legs week in and week out. Eventually 2 days off won’t be enough.
Old timers advised on explosive concentric and slower eccentric.
Milo, would you agree on the fact that long length partials mainly affect the distal region? That'd turn it into a big no for bodybuilding purposes, especially for arms and shoulders training. Noone wants a distal region too developed that it kills your biceps peak. Can also make your delts and triceps feel less "pumped". I think it's great for health benefits and injury prevention (stronger muscles near the tendon and stronger tendons as well), but not ideal when adopting it as your main method for muscle growth.
House of Hypertrophy just uploaded a video about that. I've been saying that for a while, but it seems that we're getting more evidence on it now. It's pretty obvious imho, you can even feel it when training and soreness will also be more prominent in that area, which reinforces the idea.
I mean... I get it that anecdote is questionable and science ideally should be put first but come on... bodybuilding is not that black and white and the trend now is to follow the ultra scientific training methods that this guy with the most mid physique of all time is pushing on us.
Kinda hard to not take this guy's studies with a grain of salt.
You missed out lengthened partials 😄
More volume is good. But insane amounts in one workout is only great when you’re on drugs and focussed on sarcoplasmic hypertrophy.
5) lengthened partials
NOt gonna happen since he based his entire channel, business and personality on those
@@logomarkzI mean, that’s what he studied for his phd. It’s part of his expertise. And he’s the first to report that they found no difference between lengthened partials and full ROM in the most recent study.
@@Inzane8 Only when the exercises are already focusing a lot on the lengthened part
@@Inzane8 so it was an overhyped marketing gimmick all along. Who would have thought....
I mean if you consider lengthened partials give the same results as full rom, then I don’t think it’s overhyped at all
How can you argue that body part split is bad when most pros seem to train this way?
Another thing that has been debunked is focusing on the squeeze and the peak contraction.
it is spiritually nourishing to squeeze a peak contraction though
1st is sucked out of finger
What "honestly" needs to stop is this broken laughable idea you're parroting that sCieNcE IS lAw!!
I like the science just because I like science. But the bros were getting as big as anyone currently using the science long before the science got popular because the basic reality is consistent, hard lifting over years is what grows muscle best. The weeks long studies are fun to debate and listen to, but you could lift for 22 weeks using the most optimal approach and it will still not do much for you as it is the years of grinding that get you where you want to go. The newbie gains are done fairly quickly, then it's the guys that stick with it after the newbie gains are gone grinding on smaller and smaller amounts of muscle year after year. That would be an interesting study for someone young like you to start. Do a sort of Seven and Up type of muscle study where you track some younger lifters like you and Pak over a life of lifting to see where that comes out. What is the psychology of someone that keeps lifting over years grinding out muscle growth and how much their training varies over the years to keep psychologically invested. If you're not sure what the Seven and Up series is, it's a documentary studying the effects of class in English society on young people that was updated every seven years. It's called the Up series. I bet a young guy like you could do the ultimate muscle study if it hasn't been done to see what muscle building is like over a lifetime rather than these week studies. Might be super difficult to pull off, but it would be one amazing study if someone could pull it off.
right, but they are most likely wasting time and not doing it efficiently. it depends on if u care about gym/life balance.
@@NeuronIron How would you even know if they were doing it "efficiently"? Doubtful that they are doing it inefficiently as we already watched a bunch of science-based guys try to use all this science advice and guess what? They aren't winning any more than the guys who just push hard in the gym. Isn't that the real litmus test for all the science? Are you winning competitions using science based lifting over say going to an experienced coach who is basing more of they are doing on their years of experience? Do the modern physiques using science look better than the guys who just get in and grind the weight? If the science based lifting isn't getting better results over years, then how do you ultimately prove they were right? A 20 week study doesn't somehow make a guy who has done things a certain "inefficient" way for years look wrong or suboptimal. At some point the science has to prove itself out by winning competitions and being the strongest or best looking guy in the competition. Look at Mike Israetel. This guy has been applying his science-based lifting for years to bodybuilding and he's not been able to take the next step. Is Milo going to be able to get his pro bodybuilding card using science based lifting? At the end of the day, if you're going to preach science it has to work to win and achieve optimum results over a lifting career to be called efficient. Lifting is something max out over years, not weeks. Even Brad Schoenfeld looks like some standard fitness guy and he's done years of science-based lifting and studied tons of science based lifters. When do the results also have to transfer into real world success rather than fun debate topics for fitness scientists to make videos about?
Wow, Milo using Rationality and not only Empirical Evidence? Don't tell Dr Mike.
1:52 Are you ok?
Full day splits have a huge negative. You need a lot of time to warm up every muscle.
Damn, the comments are full of bro science. Like, how stupid do you have to be to say that “science” doesn’t work to demonstrate anything or that the bros knew that all along.
7:37 why chest and biceps instead of triceps?
To make sure your isolation work is done with fresh non fatigued muscles.
@@entrancemperium5506 I usually do back & biceps or chest and triceps. Maybe I will switch that up
@@Jay-it9cg If you do that, you need more rest.
Ayeeee dr Milo wolfffff❤❤❤
I just workout till I want to cry and then move on to a new muscle group. And as long as I wake up motivated to cry again I just keep doing it. Only when I wake up and have a panic attack from the idea of crying in my workout do I then adjust my #’s…
It’s pretty simple. Do stuff till you want to cry. The man who cries more grows more muscle.
So crazy. That weightlifters have been training two lifts (with a couple of accessories) for 4-6 times a week, sometimes twice a day, for decades and it didn't seem to stop them from progressing greatly. But then again Soviets in the 80's followed their lifters pretty much nationwide to accrue data. Now that's not hypertrophy training specifically, but you might think it's fair to assume it's not deleterious to hypertrophy either if they were successfully progressing.
Thank you! Every time I hear “TUT” from anyone, it screams: “I don’t keep up with basic science for building muscle”
If I play volleyball 3x week, would you say doing 3x full body is better than 2x upper 1x lower?
When is myodapt gonna release!! ??You keep talking about it. I’m very excited to use it
You can keep huffing and puffing those ads, mr wolf. Im not a big fan of the surfclam tbh
5-50 reps but atleast for me its easier to reach failure the closer you are to lowest end of that range. After that you risk lactic acid build up or your lungs being a limiter.
Awesome video. The part about who should choose what split is gem information.
How many of those studies have repeatability? How many contradict one another?
💪✝️
Excellent summary of key issues! All references supplied, love it.
Thank you for the valuable information as always.
This video is 41 minutes old, how is it already outdated?
💀
Fell off frfr
you dont need to train until failure if you are already a failure
I just moved from an ULPPL program to your 5-day full-body program. I am absolutely loving it so far. You just addressed the one question I had on it regarding training the same muscle two days in a row. I was surprised that I recovered fine for the next workout.
ur PO is probably crap. idk, dont sound good
Best fitness channel! Thank you, Milo.
audio is overprocessed
Not a doctor. You're Doctorate Milo Wolf.
haha maidenless, literally me.
What about training full body 5 times a week 4 sets per body part per day? Would that be stupid?
Can you recover in time?
I have been confused when it comes to the research specifically involving training a muscle multiple times per week. Just for clarity, would you agree that it is better to train 4 sets of biceps over a span of 2 days (e.g. 2 sets day 1; and 2 sets day 2) rather than training all 4 sets in one day in a given week?
Not sure if Dr Wolf will respond, but yes, 4 sets would be slightly better spent over two separate days. Ex 2sets day1, other stuff day2, 2sets day3. I'd add that if you separate them, make sure to make the most of your smaller workouts by going to failure and beyond.
@@entrancemperium5506 thank you so much for this!
Great information.
great
10 reps for 1 man is very different from 10 reps from another man. That's why time is a better unit of measurement than reps.
makes no sense, because the rep is no more than tension. The Time under tension does not matter that much, Rep times between 2-8 seconds relates to the same stimulus.
How tf is it different. Moving weight from point A to point B is not different ftom person to person. If you are talking about intensity then you should be going to or close to failure rvery time
@@senjai77308 I didn't say anything about intensity. I said time as in timing of reps, a man doing 1 pull up in 60 seconds is much harder than another doing 10 x 1 second pull ups.
@@flow1188 Do you think a man doing 2 second pull ups is the same as another man doing 8 second pull ups? Stay weak.
@@changthunderwang1294 doing 1 pull ups in 60 seconds is totally pointless. According to studies how long you do the concecntric doesn't matter at all, so you can do it as fast as you want. And the benefits of slowing doen essentric stop at about 5-6 seconds. So more than 7 seconds per rep don't bring anything much but additional fatigue
height?
I look to you for the science, Dr. Milo.
Wise choice.
Milo Bro is so intimidating I'd follow his shitty advice out of fear
Monday: incline bench press+ flies+ overhead cable pulls (triceps)
Tuesday: leg press + calf raises. Cable lateral raises (side delts)
Wednesday: Cable Rows + lat pulldowns (superseted with shrugs)+ preacher curls
Thursday: leg extensions + leg curls + Dumbbell lateral raises superseted with straight bar face pulls.
Friday: pull-ups + dips + incline dumbbell curls supersets with hammer curls + overhead straight bar skull crunches superseted with clothes grip straight bar chest press ( triceps)
Saturday: squat (with lightweight ) + calf raises... Light day
Sunday: Watch football
How much do you weigh, Milo? 130 lbs?
1. Lengthened Partials are optimal.
2. Yes
@@entrancemperium5506 Sorry, number 1 is the myth that was debunked.
@@platonicguardian6923 Only for exercises that already put a lot of emphasis on the lengthened position/stretch the muscles well
When they say time under tension they mean volume
Great video. Terrible t shirts:)
that athleanx guy is really annoying.
Alright Milo
1 min ago!!!
Nice music taste
@@Leon-pq5kl Thanks man haha
In gymnastics, you do pull-ups, dips, push-ups, rope-climbs, for "warm ups," every day, before your regular 3 hour work-out. It's all anaerobic, five days a week, all the same body parts, and nobody had problems with recovery. Nobody watched their diet, either. In a couple of years, you're pretty jacked.
This is almost all relatively small people who almost universally began training as teens or even children. Of course they have no trouble with recovery and are lean - anyone who couldn't maintain that rate of work and had a body heavy enough to make those calisthenics require a lot of recovery washed out immediately from gymnastics.
@@fatterperdurabo42069 Got any scientific studies to support your assumption that recovery ability changes significantly with age? I've watch several hundred YT vids on "Over 50" resisitance training, and only found one vid recently, highlighting studies that recovery changes very little with age.
You fortgot Lenghten Partials Milo, you forgot. ^^. We all can go back do Team Full Rom.
Practically, the study didn't debunk lengthened partials. If they're not superior to, but still equally effective as full ROM for muscle growth, then they're still useful as a time-saver for the convenience of only executing half reps.
@@martingamer5591yes, as far as I’m concerned it validates lengthened partials being incorporated at the end of a working set. It means that I can do 10 full ROM reps and 2 ‘half’ reps with proper form, and my body is going to treat that as if I were doing 12 proper reps.
I can still apply progressive overload principles by monitoring the ratio of full ROM to partial reps that I’m able to squeeze out from week to week.
@@martingamer5591 If lengthened partials are as effective as full ROM, it means the lengthened part of the full ROM is what makes the full ROM effective :P
Only got debunked for exercises that put a lot of emphasis on the stretched position anyway.
Now you can add lengthened partials to the list
Won't do that since he based his entire channel, business and personality on those
@@logomarkzbullshit he just did a video about this.
Guys.... everything fucking works!!! Just switch it up occasionally and train hard always.
Most important is nutrition on point and adherence.
Agreed, the most important thing is to just do it the way it feels good so it's sustainable. But following the latest findings and enjoying the process of optimizing our precious time in the gym is a thing too, that's what Dr Wolf offers. Think of it as bodybuilding for ''tuning enthusiasts''. Some people just enjoy their sportscar/computer, some like to tune heck outta them for both the journey & the destination :)
If you analyse the muscles trained as synergists, an upper/lower split normally trains your arms and shoulders four times per week berween compound and isolation exercises. Specialization normally imposes hitting the same muscle group almost every workout adjusting to fatigue. It’s very individual and experimental.
If only Lee Haney, Dorian Yates, Ronnie Coleman and Jay Cutler had this information. Science is good, but we can't just disregard years and years of old school hard work, consistency, bulking, progressive overload, and sometimes doing things that might not be "optimal" but used to build character. Plus the extras like sleep, knowing when to take a break, nutrition, tracking workouts,....
and steroids
Nobody is telling you to disregard any of those
Hmmmm I don't see judges looking at character at shows. I see them looking at physique. I guess someone _somewhere_ may have seen Greg Doucette's chiseled sarcasm or Arnold Schwarzenegger's bulging humility 🙄 but if so it never became a cornerstone of bodybuilding. Christ, do you people ever proofread the things you write or even think before you speak?
Are you daft? Those men were on a boatload of drugs and banned substances for many many years. To try and compare that with your average gym rat that puts in years of hard, clean work is so ignorant I'm not sure what to even say.
@@Matthew.E.Kelly. it's not that the judge sees your character, but trust be, they see the results of your character.
Intensity is more important than volume or how often you train body parts. You can get significant gains on a Bro split, as long as you're going hard! Facts!
Ah the edutainment! Laughing and learning.
Time under tension helps me feel my muscles a ton more by making some reps last a lot longer. You literally just said add more reps instead. What if I like holding at a lengthened position more? Why are you trying to debunk what works? Different strokes for different folks! Also, at least you didn't hate on Dr. Mike in this video.
I agree. Training by science is interesting, and most of the time offers great benefits. But at the end of the day, each to their own and whatever works - works. Many people managed to develop muscles either way.
@@dakotablack7804 Thanks. Nothing was "Debunked" Dude literally just provided an alternative. Love how this "science" based dude can't make accurate and precise claims. Like wtf? Are you science or what?
He's searching for what's optimal. It all works, what you're doing is great. But eventually you'll have to change things up and try new things to continue growing.
@@Dougie.A.M So if more reps is an alternative to time under tension then is there something more optimal or is it just an alternative? And if it is an alternative then why say the former is debunked. Also wondering if you read before responding
@@Dougie.A.M Milo's focus in on solely on training for hypertrophy, by that he is using science to make his training system looking optimal. Sure science can show you results towards that standpoint but like a simple diet, it can't be individualized. Science says you can have good muscle gains by doing upright rows, but if your shoulders are fucked, you can easily change for another exercise targeting your traps/delts
I will die on the bro bro split.
Zzz. Science bores me. The VERY BEST never needed it. End of.
Lol. The SCIENCE behind the ''juice'' maybe?
Because the very best didn't have the knowledge we got now. Who says they couldnt have become bigger?
Never interrupt your opponent when he's making a mistake.
Then why are watching the video. The VERY BEST also had insane genetics and got jacked from basically just looking at weights, bro.
Science this, science that. The day will come science will debunk everything about training. Just go to the gym and work out like hell.
Science is the key to every single fudging thing in your daily life. But it's a long process and you are under no obligation to follow it. Just like you don't need to sit in front of a tree you just planted to assess its growth on the daily. If you don't enjoy following the process in all it's granularity, just sync up once or twice a year when multiple studies all point in the same in the same direction and a consensus in the community is reached. Ex: Creatine: it's benefit are now outrageously well established, but if you followed every single studies since the 70s you would have said ''science this science that'' just eat your proteins.
dnt be mad smart ppl r getting ahead. stay in ur lane and go slow for all we care
"I don't like word problems."
Well Timmy, life is a series of word problems and the better you get at solving them, the more success you will achieve.
I love TuT and it work
if it worked, wouldn't isometric exercise build as much muscle as doing actual sets? but it doesn't. like imagine instead of one set of 10 to failure, you just did one really really slow rep that lasted as long as those 10 reps. even if you did that, it wouldn't grow muscle.
So I guess you do 30 slow reps for every set?
Time under tension would literally just mean the lighter the weights the better, which isn’t true
Reps would literally just mean the lighter the weights the better, which isn't true.
@@changthunderwang1294 what
@@connorsaxton2920 Do you think reps are useless because lighter weights allow you to do more reps? Do you realise how stupid your first comment is?
Providing you do them to failure, they do build muscle at any rep range
@@lajoskoczan4428 2 kg dumbbells for 1000 raises, presses and pulls?