I love when trainers at the gym (most likely trolling for clients) ask me what I'm trying to accomplish with my workouts. I answer, "I'm trying to get taller." Of course they say, "You can't. That's written in your DNA." so I add, "Gosh.. I wonder if that applies to the rest of my body." About half get what I'm saying.
Well said, these genetic freaks will never ever think about how privileged they are and then they think they know the secret and become trainers with their methods, ridiculous
Re-watched, and just have to say, this has to be one of the most important wake-up call videos for the hypertrophy obsessed, myself included. Thanks Doug. Looking forward to discussing on our next pod.
I don't know, i thought i had bad genetics until i started dirty bulking and hard cutting. I'm 210lbs lean after 4 years of no progress not eating. You may not like it, but some of you just need to stuff your face and deal with the fat for a few months. TRUST ME, you'll never know until you try it.
When I first started training I was basically bulking for the first 8 years, then I kind of plateaued a bit. The gains were still coming but pretty slow and the last three years I kind of wrote off bulking altogether. Now after cutting down and maintaining for like 6 months I’m definitely seeing the need for bulking again if I want to try to gain any more muscle (if it’s even possible). Kinda waiting for a few injuries to heal up before I start bulking again
Basically your genetics will determine your ultimate potential but don't let your genetics prevent you from pushing as hard as you can to achieve the potential that you're individually capable of.
Perfect speech. Best ever on TH-cam. At least Doug knows what's what and stands giant heads and shoulders above the rest -- especially the supplement-selling or drug-taking wannabes who talk talk talk but say nothing of usefulness. It all boils down to: Conservation is nature's law; train intensely, briefly, don't get injured, eat sufficient calories, get sufficient recuperation between sessions (more as you get stronger and bigger) and just keep it up as long as you can. Less is always better. Progressive Overload is the key not "bombing and blitzing." And if your bone structure doesn't have the right structural genetic leverages to begin with, then good luck.
When I was 20 I weighed 150 lbs and barely deadlifted 200 lbs. Heck, I had problems with a 130 lbs bench-press. Now, Turning 50, I still weigh 150 lbs, but deadlift 450 for 6 reps. I have been stronger, but to this day I don't look particularily bigger than when in my early 20's, even though my strength is dramatically inproved compared to my younger days. And yeah, my calves still look like s**t.
That applies to a lot more than bodybuilding as well. I think a lot of misery is rooted in people trying to be something they were never meant to be and living up to the expectations of others.
@@gillettrandybut to survive you have to play the game. All the things we do as humans nowadays are not natural but we have to do them because the society is set up that way. We are slaves to the system. And the system is called life. Even a monkey in a jungle is slave to their own physical body. No one escapes as long as they live.
It's not the body doesn't want it. The body wants survival. If we give the body the proper stimulus to signal muscle growth is necessary for survival it will produce it.
@@oldnatty61 The body is responding to a perceived threat. In a perfect world the threat wouldn’t exist. Adaptation always comes with a cost. When the threat is removed the body returns to its “natural”, homeostatic state. It’s like the ability to develop a resistance to poison by exposing it to the poison gradually over time. While this defense can be useful at times the healthiest option is to avoid the poison altogether. Extreme fitness is not optimum health. That never stopped me but I had to pay to play. I gained in some areas but lost almost everywhere else.
Hey Doug, I stumbled across your channel. You reminded reminded me of an old friend of mine who trains people out of Illinois his name is Tim Ryan.. He use to train with him back in the 80s he was in the super slow protocol and used to be a correspondence with Ellington Darden. Actually in 1985 on the way to Florida in spring break we stopped in Florida at the Nautilis facility in Ellington Darden took us to a super slow work out.. at the time I had no idea who he was. I was just a college kid that was into working out, lol. But I’ve always appreciated what my friend has taught me about proper technique and form and control of the movement. I’m 58 now and continue to work out and it’s been on my part of my life since a teenager I wanted to say thanks for what you do and for showing people proper form and technique.
Very realistic approach. Its funny how the majority of fitness influencers accept that calf muscles are mainly genetics but don't apply the same logic to the rest of the body
@@theOGofREDS Exceptions aren't the rule. I don't know much about him, could be genetics, drugs or maybe he isn't getting as big as claimed or perceived. I wouldn't imagine it would be a good look for his youtube following if he said he had hit his ceiling and couldn't make further progress. Training isn't complicated, neither is diet. We make it so believing that if we just get the right combination of factors right we will start to make unbelievable progress and unfortunately that is not the case for the majority, however genetics are very complicated and that's why it gets overlooked but it has the ultimate influence over our potential Again, I don't know much about him, the fact he is doing well on youtube eludes to him having favorable genes for the particular endeavour
@ 2:12 " ...you would end up with the same result in regard to hypertrophy..!"..Finally someone made a clip on this topic, which I have observed in more than one case ( over 4 decades of training myself)....I would like to offer an anecdote (for those who care to know about it)...A few years back I watched a crew of 6 very experienced lifters, with the bodies to prove it, who decided to compete against each other in a powerlifting meet...Mind you, 2 of the guys were bodybuilders, whilst the other 4 mostly relied on calisthenics for their training...So all 6 followed the same powerlifting routine ( with assistance work) for 4 months....The result: All 6 got much stronger in the 3 mandatory lifts...However...none of them changed their physical appearance...Again, no one looked any different than before!...This is no hear-say as I personally watched these guys myself...Actually it was a friend of mine, who was a bodybuilding enthusiast, who brought that to my attention, as he said, " Did you notice that these guys look exactly the same as they did when they started out?!?"..That is when I first came to the conclusion that it does not matter what you do, as long as you progressively challenge the body within the range of its recovery ability..So, don´t overthink it, just stick to a program that you can stick with..It is that simple!
From age 45-65 my lean body mass, as measured by an impedance scale has been in the range of 170-175 despite doing everything possible short of hormones and/or steroids to improve it. My bodyweight has been as high as 220 and as low as 195. It's a bit of a relief to recognize that. I'll finally stop chasing something I was never going to catch.
Seems a lot of people are putting words into Dr M’s mouth… it seems to me the key takeaway is just train responsibly and consistently without spending to much time worrying about which training philosophy you are employing. Because at the end of the day all of them can be similarly effective. Additionally outside of genetic outliers and drug enhancement we should remain grounded in realistic / reasonable expectations. Switching training methods wishing for miraculous outcomes isn’t based in real science, but rather “bro science”. Hope I too am not putting words in his mouth…
Perfect Dr. M I don't need hypertrophy to indulge my ego. I follow your program to give me a balanced set of strong, functional muscles and bones. Thanks for another great video!!
The Bill Grant, Chris Dickerson and Boyer Coe examples should be eye opening to anyone who think they can overcome genetics. Do we really want to believe Tom Platz didn’t train the rest of his body with the same intensity he trained his legs?
So true and even after 30 plus year of training and 15 years since I have read Body by Science in the back of my mind I won’t accept it and still believing one day something magical will happen 😅 and I’m 49 years old now, natural. But this is what give me the motivation to keep going and training hard. At least I’m retaining my current muscle mass, which is not that bad overall. But for example my legs seems never to grow despite all the effort I’m putting in.
This was what Goku said during the cell games. About getting big and losing the ability to move as efficient as possible. It’s wisdom. The look should be a bonus side effect, not the goal or motivation. You will get to where you can get and no further, so train hard but rest even harder. Also recognizing the talent that can surpass you and guiding it to fruition is also the ask as well. Thanks Doctor
So well put. Makes complete sense and Dr. McGuff explains everything so well. Very down to earth, and refreshing to hear someone speak about training without all the hype and nonsense you here so often these days. Thank you sir!
I somewhat agree with you. In the field I’ve been in for the the last 27 years (PhD Anatomy and Physiology, Bachelor’s Degree in Physiology, degree in Myology) it 100% is determined by what dominant types of muscle fibers each individual has. What works for individual A won’t work for individual B.
No that makes no sense. If your lagging you have to put more work in it. it has to be a priority. we are obsessed with chest back and arms, but we neglect leggs the most. forarm to. it has to be a priority as in 70% and the rest has to wait
It's always been the general consensus... people pretty much just repeat it out without even thinking. I've tried many different types of training and I've always come back to and had the best results with high intensity low volume.
I’m in medical school now and you really inspire me Dr. McGuff. Anecdotally, and to your point, I used to train high volume. But a year before med school and even through med school I’ve switched to low volume. What I learned is that whether it’s low volume or high, hypertrophy just comes. Like you noted, it is a side effect.
Great presentation Dr McGuff. Makes training more enjoyable to hear truths like this and be free from the prison of thinking that more muscle will come from the next greatest program or more volume,etc. I’ll never be that muscular at all, but I know I’m still deriving some very good benefits from proper strength training without being overly concerned about producing impressive muscle size. Thank you for your explanation
Thanks for the good reminder -- genetics IS a limiting factor that cannot be ignored. I'm still improving/increasing, trying to discover what is MY genetic max. Good vid. thanks.
08:46 "To our body, hypertrophy is an undesired side effect that is heavily negatively regulated". That is a pretty novel statement, but it makes a lot of sense. As I excruciatingly slowly grow muscle, I notice a reduced range of motion just because muscle is getting in the way. This statement is so counter to the online strength training community we have today. Thanks for the insight.
I think of Greg daily. Actually had a phone consult today with one of his former clients. He couldn't believe that Greg did my SuperSlow certification.
This makes a lot of sense, for a lot of reasons. My personal belief is you should lift for basic strength, mobility & flexibility and above all, because it just feels good.
Nothing makes me more frustrated at the gym than people who are clearly on steroid or other peds trying to tell young kids at the gym all they have to do is eat like crazy and chug protein shakes of specific brands to get muscular like them.
Very true. My calf muscles have always been visible, despite barely working them. Something genetically passed down from my father I can work my quads and biceps, and they just don't get the visibility and natural strength as my calves
We’re similar. My calves? Beautiful. Strong, visible. Quads? Eh. Strong, yes, but I’ve worked with a trainer to get form and weight correct. Doesn’t show up, even if I am strong. Biceps are solid, but given the effort and time I expect more by now. But that’s how it is. I’ve accepted it. I feel good and perform well. Good enough for me.
Good video, thanks. Arthur Jones, Casey Viator, Mike (and Ray) Mentzer and Dorian Yates all agreed that one’s genetics are the limiting factor of a bodybuilder’s success (as you stated). However, their arguments were that HIT enabled an athlete to reach his/her potential faster than volumetric training (VT) and that dedicating so much time in the gym to VT for building mass was a waste of time/energy compared to HIT. Mentzer stated that he’d rather use the time he would’ve been spending on VT on more useful pursuits (such as using the time to become an MD, as an example) instead of being a gym rat.
@@granddaddyofthemall6320 For one, because the body and all of creation is obviously designed. I'm not saying that rudely, it's just a reality. Some will say it's not obvious to them, but God, who does knows the hearts of everyone, says in Romans 1 that everyone knows, but some suppress that truth in unrighteousness...to justify sinning and not turning to Jesus Christ (who is God) for forgiveness.
@@davidryan5755 You just asserted that it was creation again I'm asking you how do you know it's creation? It's not obvious that's just you asserting it's obvious. And so what Romans one has to say that's like if somebody told you what the Quran says you wouldn't care, and lastly Jesus never existed. You said a whole lot of nothin.
I am currently working professionally with an individual in his 50's who has multiple health issues, 5 mini strokes, a heart attack kidney failure and copd. However despite this he is poweful in the upperbody and has amazing calfs....... He has never done any resistance training but tells me his dad was a big fellow........ Yes, leaving aside drugs (Peds, i think more accurately described as "phenomenally efective drugs" genetics is absolutely everything...
The amount of hypertrophy and strength anyone can develop is ultimately capped by genetics. But I don't see how that precludes the possibility that some people may find it easier to reach that limit with a higher volume approach. You clearly have not found that to be the case for you. But I've read many anecdotes where specific individuals found themselves losing muscle mass on routines that were very intense but very infrequent and low in volume, and were only able to reverse that trend by increasing volume. Just as people respond differently to a particular drug, depending on genetics, different individuals may respond differently to a particular training protocol. The dose-response relationship to exercise may also vary among individuals. I also question the idea that hypertrophy is entirely an unwanted side effect. Larger muscles can serve as an amino acid reservoir which may help animals survive prolonged periods of famine.
Perhaps I was not clear enough. There is a subset of the population that has an exaggerated hypertrophy response and they commonly express this at a higher volume and frequency of training.
@@dr.dougmcguff282 There is no proof that anyone has reached their genetic ceiling. This whole theory is just made up and misapplied to people who havent come close to optimizing. Just because the idea of a limit exists, doesnt make it relevant in practice.
HITters love using the word 'Genetics', It's a way to keep their clients small and underdeveloped. I had below average genetics when I used HIT but when I switched to high volume training I now have great genetics.
But God damn it, I love that talk about Bill Grant, and Chris Dickerson and his twin brother, this truly puts training talk in a whole another perspective.
To state the fact that ones hypertrophic response to resistance training is greatly determined by genetics blows a huge hole in the marketing gimmick of personal trainers. They peddle the idea that, with just the right training modality, you can be as jacked as your favorite bodybuilder. Its a lucrative lie.
Logical rational clear advice. The problem is Doug, people won't listen, they will put their fingers in their ears and say la la la my method and arnies method is working for me. It reminds me of the religious community. They just dont want to look at the facts
What many fail to mention is the importance of 'recovery' especially as you progress through the aging cycle. A trainee in their 20's and 30's will have greater recovery ability to train 4 or 5 times per week. But trainees 50 and over that systemic recovery ability takes much longer, so 2- 3 times per week is plenty enough when using a HIT protocol. 💪
When I try to say this online, I hear 'cope!' even though I've trained much harder, longer and more consistently than most and have had better results than most.
Do you agree with those who say that strength is more important than mass for longevity and health span? If so, what would you recommend for increasing strength?
I think this research is simply uncovering that more people will express strength out of proportion to mass gains as compared to people that gain more size than strength. As if you had a choice about which you will get. Just resistance train....its good for you.
Serious question about perceived strength coming up... SOmebody else posted in here about trying HIT, but felt he became weaker in lifting heavy things as a result, and concluded he needed more training volume to be objectively stronger. I have the same experience. I am a fickle creature and switch between HIT at a gym & "normal" 5X5 types of programs with free weights. I find that even though I progress nicely within HIT, I always have to reduce weights when going back to free weight training. Progress is quick, though. My question is: Is this about the difference in "Skill" vs "strength" - as it requires more skill to lift free weights safely - or is it really a difference in the muscles ability to produce force. Thoughts?
Great video and explanation!!! Training is very beneficial for us even if we don’t express a large degree of muscularity. Some will, as you explained, but I hope you encouraged the rest to continue to seek improved strength and fitness without becoming injured or losing the benefits and enjoyment of training. Thank you for all you do Dr. McGuff
Well articulated, Doug. Thanks. So if someone has reached their genetic potential for a body part from a hypertrophic standpoint, have they also reached their potential for general strength of the body part as well? Of course, they may gain additional skill and efficiency with that given exercise, such as someone continuing to squat more weight, but additional actual transferable strength?
I agree that it is a great question and will go further and say that it is the only relevant question. Will a person with a low genetic potential for hypertrophy have the same potential to continue to increase strength as a person with a high genetic potential for hypertrophy?
@@Rileyed thanks for your perspective. Would you say you got stronger in a transferable way or only increasing the weight of your lifts? For example, if you were doing a chore or sporting task, were you stronger/better? I ask because some improvements in weight lifted in the gym is a result of becoming more technically skilled at the movement.
well said. If the motion is extremely slow (or zero speed) then a trainee has the best chance of not developing skill and efficiency. In fact if the volume is limited (so as not to invade the CNS) then I'd say there is no chanc eof skill or perfroamnce creeping into to the inroad. John Little stated that a skill to perform a movement is far far easier than the volition to inroad a muscle as one gets stronger.
"For the vast majority of the population their entire body is like Bill Grants calves" daaaaaamn, most peoples bodies reduced to a small piece of calf muscle.
Joe Weider lied to us teenagers in 1966. It only took a year of hard training to realize this, but it kept sinking in a little more every year. This sounds like the final.
From 8:18 - 8:29, when you said "now they all look identical", did you mean that all the muscle groups grow around the same amount (and therefore look identical in terms of muscle growth), or that all bodybuilders that use those drugs end up looking identical?
I came to that conclusion when I realised I did not want to look like a pantyhose full of walnuts - I wanted to be, instead, the 90-year-old man who fully lives his life. Best of health, Doug. - Ev
PROTEIN ... would love a video from Doug on how protein fits into the muscle growth equation. I'm hearing .73 to 1.0 grams per pound of body weight is needed.
Doug, I think if you changed the title to "Muscle gain" rather than "hypertrophy" you will get more click throughs =). More relatable term IMO. Great stuff again Doug. Love the consistency.
Thanks. Anyone that needs to hear this knows what hypertrophy is...those that don't are so early in the game they won't understand. Click throughs are not my goal.
I"m living proof of Dr. McGuff's observations. I've been doing a weekly high intensity workout based on Body By Science for almost 5 years. I am moving 50% more weight now than when I started, and am stronger and have fewer aches and pains(I'm 73). But I have only added about 4 pounds of muscle!
No, I think it means that there are genetic variations in response to stimulus. Some people's bodies will respond to this program by adding significant muscle volume, some less so. I come from a line of lean people on both my parents' sides. I'm pleased to have gained a lot of strength without adding much weight. I'm a hockey player, and don't want to have to haul any more weight around while skating!
I've been doing High Intensity Training for years (January 2005 was my first ever workout, with a trainer that knew what they were doing. It was just 8 sets, Ellington Darden inspired. Eye opening and amazing). I've since read Body By Science and all of Drew Baye's blog posts since about 2008. I was on the Body By Science forum when you had one, and I've swapped emails with Doug Holland. I've watched all of your free content and all of Drew Baye's free content, and I've watched all of the talks that you've given and podcast episodes that you have been on that I could find on TH-cam. I can safely say that for me personally, given everything that I know (which is a fair bit, but not everything, far from it) this is the best and most concise video on hypertrophy. I love the references you use at the end with the various bodybuilders from the 1970s and 1980s and their various bodyparts. The two things that your references made me remember from years ago on various online forums were: Someone was saying that Jacques Neuville clearly knew more about abdominal training than Boyer Coe. I countered with the point that Boyer clearly knew more about bicep training than Jacques and then the discussion derailed from there. The other one I didn't get involved in but I remember reading on Ellington Darden's old forum which no longer exists. The same person on the same discussion thread was desperately asking David Landau what his arm routine was but at the same telling him that he clearly didn't know how to train his legs. These people were contradicting themselves an they didn't even know it.
I bought your book years ago when it was first published and I was a member of a big-box gym. I now live in a rural area with limited access to gyms with weight machines. I do have a home gym with barbells, dumbbells and kettlebells. I also incorporate bodyweight training. How can I do this style of training safely alone at home or find more information to do so? Thank you for your great content.
The same things can be said about intelligence, personality, etc. Genes overwhelmingly dictate what's possible, accepting this fact is crucial to not fall for utopian dreams
wats ur recomendation for nutrition i can't find any video of yours on that Please mike menzter , Arthur Jones said high carb some modern doc says Intermittent Fasting with Low carb high fat like Dr Micheal Van Dr Eric berg Please make a detailed video on Nutrition or give a video you recommend from eating frequency to macro split
I love when trainers at the gym (most likely trolling for clients) ask me what I'm trying to accomplish with my workouts. I answer, "I'm trying to get taller." Of course they say, "You can't. That's written in your DNA." so I add, "Gosh.. I wonder if that applies to the rest of my body."
About half get what I'm saying.
LOL! I love the way you challenge these trainers.
👍
Well said, these genetic freaks will never ever think about how privileged they are and then they think they know the secret and become trainers with their methods, ridiculous
Excellent point!! 👌
Haha!!! Nice😂
Re-watched, and just have to say, this has to be one of the most important wake-up call videos for the hypertrophy obsessed, myself included. Thanks Doug. Looking forward to discussing on our next pod.
I don't know, i thought i had bad genetics until i started dirty bulking and hard cutting. I'm 210lbs lean after 4 years of no progress not eating. You may not like it, but some of you just need to stuff your face and deal with the fat for a few months. TRUST ME, you'll never know until you try it.
When I first started training I was basically bulking for the first 8 years, then I kind of plateaued a bit. The gains were still coming but pretty slow and the last three years I kind of wrote off bulking altogether. Now after cutting down and maintaining for like 6 months I’m definitely seeing the need for bulking again if I want to try to gain any more muscle (if it’s even possible). Kinda waiting for a few injuries to heal up before I start bulking again
Basically your genetics will determine your ultimate potential but don't let your genetics prevent you from pushing as hard as you can to achieve the potential that you're individually capable of.
Perfect speech. Best ever on TH-cam. At least Doug knows what's what and stands giant heads and shoulders above the rest -- especially the supplement-selling or drug-taking wannabes who talk talk talk but say nothing of usefulness. It all boils down to: Conservation is nature's law; train intensely, briefly, don't get injured, eat sufficient calories, get sufficient recuperation between sessions (more as you get stronger and bigger) and just keep it up as long as you can. Less is always better. Progressive Overload is the key not "bombing and blitzing." And if your bone structure doesn't have the right structural genetic leverages to begin with, then good luck.
"undesired side effect for your body". Simply eye-opening.
When I was 20 I weighed 150 lbs and barely deadlifted 200 lbs. Heck, I had problems with a 130 lbs bench-press. Now, Turning 50, I still weigh 150 lbs, but deadlift 450 for 6 reps. I have been stronger, but to this day I don't look particularily bigger than when in my early 20's, even though my strength is dramatically inproved compared to my younger days. And yeah, my calves still look like s**t.
Maybe you should have gained weight? 150 pounds is nothing
It is paradoxical how many of us are looking for something that our body does not want.
Excellent Doug!!
That applies to a lot more than bodybuilding as well. I think a lot of misery is rooted in people trying to be something they were never meant to be and living up to the expectations of others.
@@gillettrandybut to survive you have to play the game. All the things we do as humans nowadays are not natural but we have to do them because the society is set up that way. We are slaves to the system. And the system is called life. Even a monkey in a jungle is slave to their own physical body. No one escapes as long as they live.
It's not the body doesn't want it. The body wants survival. If we give the body the proper stimulus to signal muscle growth is necessary for survival it will produce it.
@@oldnatty61 The body is responding to a perceived threat. In a perfect world the threat wouldn’t exist. Adaptation always comes with a cost. When the threat is removed the body returns to its “natural”, homeostatic state. It’s like the ability to develop a resistance to poison by exposing it to the poison gradually over time. While this defense can be useful at times the healthiest option is to avoid the poison altogether. Extreme fitness is not optimum health. That never stopped me but I had to pay to play. I gained in some areas but lost almost everywhere else.
@@gillettrandy Don't remove the threat.
Pure gold…man, that’s hard truth right there!!
'Hypertrophy is a side effect from weight training that your body tolerates up to a point'.. wow.. it makes so much sense now... Thank You..
Hey Doug, I stumbled across your channel. You reminded reminded me of an old friend of mine who trains people out of Illinois his name is Tim Ryan.. He use to train with him back in the 80s he was in the super slow protocol and used to be a correspondence with Ellington Darden. Actually in 1985 on the way to Florida in spring break we stopped in Florida at the Nautilis facility in Ellington Darden took us to a super slow work out.. at the time I had no idea who he was. I was just a college kid that was into working out, lol. But I’ve always appreciated what my friend has taught me about proper technique and form and control of the movement. I’m 58 now and continue to work out and it’s been on my part of my life since a teenager I wanted to say thanks for what you do and for showing people proper form and technique.
Doug and Tim know each other. 😉
Wait...so you're telling me that I don't have to do 52 sets per body part, per week? Blasphemy!
Very realistic approach.
Its funny how the majority of fitness influencers accept that calf muscles are mainly genetics but don't apply the same logic to the rest of the body
But how do you explain someone like Geoffrey verity Schofield who hasn't stopped getting bigger?
@@theOGofREDS Exceptions aren't the rule.
I don't know much about him, could be genetics, drugs or maybe he isn't getting as big as claimed or perceived.
I wouldn't imagine it would be a good look for his youtube following if he said he had hit his ceiling and couldn't make further progress.
Training isn't complicated, neither is diet. We make it so believing that if we just get the right combination of factors right we will start to make unbelievable progress and unfortunately that is not the case for the majority, however genetics are very complicated and that's why it gets overlooked but it has the ultimate influence over our potential
Again, I don't know much about him, the fact he is doing well on youtube eludes to him having favorable genes for the particular endeavour
100agreed%WhiteBro
@@theOGofREDS GVS is 100 percent on steroids.
@ 2:12 " ...you would end up with the same result in regard to hypertrophy..!"..Finally someone made a clip on this topic, which I have observed in more than one case ( over 4 decades of training myself)....I would like to offer an anecdote (for those who care to know about it)...A few years back I watched a crew of 6 very experienced lifters, with the bodies to prove it, who decided to compete against each other in a powerlifting meet...Mind you, 2 of the guys were bodybuilders, whilst the other 4 mostly relied on calisthenics for their training...So all 6 followed the same powerlifting routine ( with assistance work) for 4 months....The result: All 6 got much stronger in the 3 mandatory lifts...However...none of them changed their physical appearance...Again, no one looked any different than before!...This is no hear-say as I personally watched these guys myself...Actually it was a friend of mine, who was a bodybuilding enthusiast, who brought that to my attention, as he said, " Did you notice that these guys look exactly the same as they did when they started out?!?"..That is when I first came to the conclusion that it does not matter what you do, as long as you progressively challenge the body within the range of its recovery ability..So, don´t overthink it, just stick to a program that you can stick with..It is that simple!
Oh so true.💪
👏🏻
Thank you! listening to what you say could save a fortune of precious lifetime😊
From age 45-65 my lean body mass, as measured by an impedance scale has been in the range of 170-175 despite doing everything possible short of hormones and/or steroids to improve it. My bodyweight has been as high as 220 and as low as 195. It's a bit of a relief to recognize that. I'll finally stop chasing something I was never going to catch.
For the past 12 years I have found the same..
Seems a lot of people are putting words into Dr M’s mouth… it seems to me the key takeaway is just train responsibly and consistently without spending to much time worrying about which training philosophy you are employing. Because at the end of the day all of them can be similarly effective. Additionally outside of genetic outliers and drug enhancement we should remain grounded in realistic / reasonable expectations. Switching training methods wishing for miraculous outcomes isn’t based in real science, but rather “bro science”.
Hope I too am not putting words in his mouth…
Perfect Dr. M
I don't need hypertrophy to indulge my ego. I follow your program to give me a balanced set of strong, functional muscles and bones.
Thanks for another great video!!
The Bill Grant, Chris Dickerson and Boyer Coe examples should be eye opening to anyone who think they can overcome genetics. Do we really want to believe Tom Platz didn’t train the rest of his body with the same intensity he trained his legs?
My experience has been that the more I believe and expect a training protocol will result in hypertrophy, the more it results in hypertrophy.
I know right ??
Someone this makes sense even tho it's not scientific.
In general the placebo effect accounts for roughly 40% of legitimate therapeutic effects.
So true and even after 30 plus year of training and 15 years since I have read Body by Science in the back of my mind I won’t accept it and still believing one day something magical will happen 😅 and I’m 49 years old now, natural. But this is what give me the motivation to keep going and training hard. At least I’m retaining my current muscle mass, which is not that bad overall. But for example my legs seems never to grow despite all the effort I’m putting in.
You are a gift to this industry.
Thank you, Dr. McGuff, keep it coming, please.
This was what Goku said during the cell games. About getting big and losing the ability to move as efficient as possible. It’s wisdom. The look should be a bonus side effect, not the goal or motivation. You will get to where you can get and no further, so train hard but rest even harder. Also recognizing the talent that can surpass you and guiding it to fruition is also the ask as well. Thanks Doctor
So well put. Makes complete sense and Dr. McGuff explains everything so well. Very down to earth, and refreshing to hear someone speak about training without all the hype and nonsense you here so often these days. Thank you sir!
One of the best videos on building muscles EVER! Highly recommended!!
I somewhat agree with you. In the field I’ve been in for the the last 27 years (PhD Anatomy and Physiology, Bachelor’s Degree in Physiology, degree in Myology) it 100% is determined by what dominant types of muscle fibers each individual has. What works for individual A won’t work for individual B.
Why only somewhat agree?
No that makes no sense. If your lagging you have to put more work in it. it has to be a priority. we are obsessed with chest back and arms, but we neglect leggs the most. forarm to. it has to be a priority as in 70% and the rest has to wait
4:48 what the heck, I've never even heard of pennate muscles. This guy drops knowledge. Subscribed.
LOVE that you're posting more frequently lately! Body By Science became my fitness Bible when it came out.
Doc I have smashed through all your videos, i absolutely love this stuff, please keep em comin
It's always been the general consensus... people pretty much just repeat it out without even thinking. I've tried many different types of training and I've always come back to and had the best results with high intensity low volume.
I’m in medical school now and you really inspire me Dr. McGuff. Anecdotally, and to your point, I used to train high volume. But a year before med school and even through med school I’ve switched to low volume. What I learned is that whether it’s low volume or high, hypertrophy just comes. Like you noted, it is a side effect.
Very clear statement with regard to a little understood, and largely misunderstood, topic. Thank you,
Great presentation Dr McGuff. Makes training more enjoyable to hear truths like this and be free from the prison of thinking that more muscle will come from the next greatest program or more volume,etc.
I’ll never be that muscular at all, but I know I’m still deriving some very good benefits from proper strength training without being overly concerned about producing impressive muscle size.
Thank you for your explanation
Thanks Doug. Wisdom that needs to be more widely accepted. But there is no cash in this message.
That's the effin' truth!
Thanks for the good reminder -- genetics IS a limiting factor that cannot be ignored. I'm still improving/increasing, trying to discover what is MY genetic max. Good vid. thanks.
08:46 "To our body, hypertrophy is an undesired side effect that is heavily negatively regulated". That is a pretty novel statement, but it makes a lot of sense. As I excruciatingly slowly grow muscle, I notice a reduced range of motion just because muscle is getting in the way. This statement is so counter to the online strength training community we have today. Thanks for the insight.
Great video! I really miss talking with Greg.
I think of Greg daily. Actually had a phone consult today with one of his former clients. He couldn't believe that Greg did my SuperSlow certification.
This makes a lot of sense, for a lot of reasons. My personal belief is you should lift for basic strength, mobility & flexibility and above all, because it just feels good.
This really makes so much sense! Thank you for this, great info.
Nothing makes me more frustrated at the gym than people who are clearly on steroid or other peds trying to tell young kids at the gym all they have to do is eat like crazy and chug protein shakes of specific brands to get muscular like them.
Very true.
My calf muscles have always been visible, despite barely working them. Something genetically passed down from my father
I can work my quads and biceps, and they just don't get the visibility and natural strength as my calves
We’re similar. My calves? Beautiful. Strong, visible. Quads? Eh. Strong, yes, but I’ve worked with a trainer to get form and weight correct. Doesn’t show up, even if I am strong. Biceps are solid, but given the effort and time I expect more by now. But that’s how it is. I’ve accepted it. I feel good and perform well. Good enough for me.
Fantastic video . Thank you
Ty
Thank you. That was very useful synopsis.
Good video, thanks. Arthur Jones, Casey Viator, Mike (and Ray) Mentzer and Dorian Yates all agreed that one’s genetics are the limiting factor of a bodybuilder’s success (as you stated). However, their arguments were that HIT enabled an athlete to reach his/her potential faster than volumetric training (VT) and that dedicating so much time in the gym to VT for building mass was a waste of time/energy compared to HIT. Mentzer stated that he’d rather use the time he would’ve been spending on VT on more useful pursuits (such as using the time to become an MD, as an example) instead of being a gym rat.
I loved when he said "because these muscles (in the hand) are designed to be in tight spaces."
Indeed, the body is designed by our glorious Maker.
How do you know there's a "glorious Maker"?
He hasn’t seen my father‘s hands though. He was a bricklayer and had boxing gloves with sausages attached 😀
@@granddaddyofthemall6320
For one, because the body and all of creation is obviously designed. I'm not saying that rudely, it's just a reality. Some will say it's not obvious to them, but God, who does knows the hearts of everyone, says in Romans 1 that everyone knows, but some suppress that truth in unrighteousness...to justify sinning and not turning to Jesus Christ (who is God) for forgiveness.
@@davidryan5755 You just asserted that it was creation again I'm asking you how do you know it's creation? It's not obvious that's just you asserting it's obvious. And so what Romans one has to say that's like if somebody told you what the Quran says you wouldn't care, and lastly Jesus never existed. You said a whole lot of nothin.
@@granddaddyofthemall6320 👍
Thanks Doug. Makes good sense.
Thx, doc; you and drew are 1A & 1B in the world of exercise coaches in the world! always appreciate your time and info
Brilliant, as always, dear Doc Mcaguff. Thank you again
This video should be required viewing for everyone after they hit 6 months lifting.
Thanks Doc, interesting information as always, all the best from Liverpool UK 👍
Fellow scouser here from Waterloo 😊
I am currently working professionally with an individual in his 50's who has multiple health issues, 5 mini strokes, a heart attack kidney failure and copd. However despite this he is poweful in the upperbody and has amazing calfs....... He has never done any resistance training but tells me his dad was a big fellow........ Yes, leaving aside drugs (Peds, i think more accurately described as "phenomenally efective drugs" genetics is absolutely everything...
vaxxed smoker?
Heavy smoker still, previously heavy drinker, gypsy fighter in his youth
The amount of hypertrophy and strength anyone can develop is ultimately capped by genetics. But I don't see how that precludes the possibility that some people may find it easier to reach that limit with a higher volume approach. You clearly have not found that to be the case for you. But I've read many anecdotes where specific individuals found themselves losing muscle mass on routines that were very intense but very infrequent and low in volume, and were only able to reverse that trend by increasing volume. Just as people respond differently to a particular drug, depending on genetics, different individuals may respond differently to a particular training protocol. The dose-response relationship to exercise may also vary among individuals. I also question the idea that hypertrophy is entirely an unwanted side effect. Larger muscles can serve as an amino acid reservoir which may help animals survive prolonged periods of famine.
Perhaps I was not clear enough. There is a subset of the population that has an exaggerated hypertrophy response and they commonly express this at a higher volume and frequency of training.
So we need to try both and see what works for us.
@@dr.dougmcguff282 There is no proof that anyone has reached their genetic ceiling. This whole theory is just made up and misapplied to people who havent come close to optimizing. Just because the idea of a limit exists, doesnt make it relevant in practice.
@@solb101there it is
HITters love using the word 'Genetics', It's a way to keep their clients small and underdeveloped. I had below average genetics when I used HIT but when I switched to high volume training I now have great genetics.
I agree with everything you just said sir. I've had the same experiences in the past 20 years.
But God damn it, I love that talk about Bill Grant, and Chris Dickerson and his twin brother, this truly puts training talk in a whole another perspective.
To state the fact that ones hypertrophic response to resistance training is greatly determined by genetics blows a huge hole in the marketing gimmick of personal trainers. They peddle the idea that, with just the right training modality, you can be as jacked as your favorite bodybuilder. Its a lucrative lie.
I'm naturally skinny, so I accept I'll never look like Superman. I'm fine with that. Can still look hot without being "impressively" muscular.
Logical rational clear advice.
The problem is Doug, people won't listen, they will put their fingers in their ears and say la la la my method and arnies method is working for me.
It reminds me of the religious community.
They just dont want to look at the facts
"Do some dope, shieeetttttt." -Dr. McGuff
This video needs to explode.
Thank you for this Dr. McGuff.
What many fail to mention is the importance of 'recovery' especially as you progress through the aging cycle. A trainee in their 20's and 30's will have greater recovery ability to train 4 or 5 times per week. But trainees 50 and over that systemic recovery ability takes much longer, so 2- 3 times per week is plenty enough when using a HIT protocol. 💪
Intensity w low volume. But you do need some volume. But genetics are key. Very good video made me rethink muscle growth.
When I try to say this online, I hear 'cope!' even though I've trained much harder, longer and more consistently than most and have had better results than most.
train hard brief smart and no injures... I'm in
Very well said. THANK YOU Doug.
Do you agree with those who say that strength is more important than mass for longevity and health span? If so, what would you recommend for increasing strength?
I think this research is simply uncovering that more people will express strength out of proportion to mass gains as compared to people that gain more size than strength. As if you had a choice about which you will get. Just resistance train....its good for you.
Serious question about perceived strength coming up... SOmebody else posted in here about trying HIT, but felt he became weaker in lifting heavy things as a result, and concluded he needed more training volume to be objectively stronger. I have the same experience. I am a fickle creature and switch between HIT at a gym & "normal" 5X5 types of programs with free weights. I find that even though I progress nicely within HIT, I always have to reduce weights when going back to free weight training. Progress is quick, though.
My question is: Is this about the difference in "Skill" vs "strength" - as it requires more skill to lift free weights safely - or is it really a difference in the muscles ability to produce force. Thoughts?
Great video and explanation!!!
Training is very beneficial for us even if we don’t express a large degree of muscularity.
Some will, as you explained, but I hope you encouraged the rest to continue to seek improved strength and fitness without becoming injured or losing the benefits and enjoyment of training.
Thank you for all you do Dr. McGuff
Well articulated, Doug. Thanks. So if someone has reached their genetic potential for a body part from a hypertrophic standpoint, have they also reached their potential for general strength of the body part as well? Of course, they may gain additional skill and efficiency with that given exercise, such as someone continuing to squat more weight, but additional actual transferable strength?
Great question!
I agree that it is a great question and will go further and say that it is the only relevant question. Will a person with a low genetic potential for hypertrophy have the same potential to continue to increase strength as a person with a high genetic potential for hypertrophy?
@@Rileyed thanks for your perspective. Would you say you got stronger in a transferable way or only increasing the weight of your lifts? For example, if you were doing a chore or sporting task, were you stronger/better? I ask because some improvements in weight lifted in the gym is a result of becoming more technically skilled at the movement.
well said. If the motion is extremely slow (or zero speed) then a trainee has the best chance of not developing skill and efficiency. In fact if the volume is limited (so as not to invade the CNS) then I'd say there is no chanc eof skill or perfroamnce creeping into to the inroad. John Little stated that a skill to perform a movement is far far easier than the volition to inroad a muscle as one gets stronger.
This is the best advice for all average natty lifters. Train hard with small progressive overload avoiding major injuries
Your sign off is dope!
I needed to here this thankyou
"For the vast majority of the population their entire body is like Bill Grants calves" daaaaaamn, most peoples bodies reduced to a small piece of calf muscle.
@@Rileyed Half an inch? This has to be a joke
Brilliantly put Dr. McGuff.
Tough to find it. Drew Baye, What I've learned from 30 years of High Intensity Training.
Joe Weider lied to us teenagers in 1966. It only took a year of hard training to realize this, but it kept sinking in a little more every year. This sounds like the final.
From 8:18 - 8:29, when you said "now they all look identical", did you mean that all the muscle groups grow around the same amount (and therefore look identical in terms of muscle growth), or that all bodybuilders that use those drugs end up looking identical?
“Go do some dope shit” best mic drop I’ve heard to date.
I came to that conclusion when I realised I did not want to look like a pantyhose full of walnuts - I wanted to be, instead, the 90-year-old man who fully lives his life. Best of health, Doug. - Ev
What a lesson! ☘️
PROTEIN ... would love a video from Doug on how protein fits into the muscle growth equation. I'm hearing .73 to 1.0 grams per pound of body weight is needed.
Doug, I think if you changed the title to "Muscle gain" rather than "hypertrophy" you will get more click throughs =). More relatable term IMO. Great stuff again Doug. Love the consistency.
Thanks. Anyone that needs to hear this knows what hypertrophy is...those that don't are so early in the game they won't understand. Click throughs are not my goal.
Change your way of thinking from a Y gener. Clicks are not an important part of life!
25k views! I stand corrected! @@dr.dougmcguff282 (even though that's not the goal).
Excellent Doug ! one of my 3 smartest best men in lifting world / matt wenning ,andy galpin /
I"m living proof of Dr. McGuff's observations. I've been doing a weekly high intensity workout based on Body By Science for almost 5 years. I am moving 50% more weight now than when I started, and am stronger and have fewer aches and pains(I'm 73). But I have only added about 4 pounds of muscle!
It just means that the program is not working for hypertrophy LOL, which is exactly the point of those who encourage more volume
No, I think it means that there are genetic variations in response to stimulus. Some people's bodies will respond to this program by adding significant muscle volume, some less so. I come from a line of lean people on both my parents' sides. I'm pleased to have gained a lot of strength without adding much weight. I'm a hockey player, and don't want to have to haul any more weight around while skating!
Fantastic advice !
Great insights, Doc
I've been doing High Intensity Training for years (January 2005 was my first ever workout, with a trainer that knew what they were doing. It was just 8 sets, Ellington Darden inspired. Eye opening and amazing).
I've since read Body By Science and all of Drew Baye's blog posts since about 2008. I was on the Body By Science forum when you had one, and I've swapped emails with Doug Holland. I've watched all of your free content and all of Drew Baye's free content, and I've watched all of the talks that you've given and podcast episodes that you have been on that I could find on TH-cam.
I can safely say that for me personally, given everything that I know (which is a fair bit, but not everything, far from it) this is the best and most concise video on hypertrophy. I love the references you use at the end with the various bodybuilders from the 1970s and 1980s and their various bodyparts.
The two things that your references made me remember from years ago on various online forums were:
Someone was saying that Jacques Neuville clearly knew more about abdominal training than Boyer Coe. I countered with the point that Boyer clearly knew more about bicep training than Jacques and then the discussion derailed from there.
The other one I didn't get involved in but I remember reading on Ellington Darden's old forum which no longer exists.
The same person on the same discussion thread was desperately asking David Landau what his arm routine was but at the same telling him that he clearly didn't know how to train his legs.
These people were contradicting themselves an they didn't even know it.
I bought your book years ago when it was first published and I was a member of a big-box gym. I now live in a rural area with limited access to gyms with weight machines. I do have a home gym with barbells, dumbbells and kettlebells. I also incorporate bodyweight training. How can I do this style of training safely alone at home or find more information to do so? Thank you for your great content.
Wow. I remember this guy from many years ago. That was some speech. And he probably spoke the truth!
The same things can be said about intelligence, personality, etc.
Genes overwhelmingly dictate what's possible, accepting this fact is crucial to not fall for utopian dreams
wats ur recomendation for nutrition
i can't find any video of yours on that Please
mike menzter , Arthur Jones said high carb
some modern doc says Intermittent Fasting with Low carb high fat like Dr Micheal Van
Dr Eric berg
Please make a detailed video on Nutrition or give a
video you recommend
from eating frequency to macro split
Tnx Dr. Doug very very much
I regularly do only 3 exercises per workout. Not always, sometimes even 2, sometimes 5.
When Doug talks I listen.
i totally agree with you here 8:56
I don't understand. What does he mean by hypertrophy being negatively regulated?
Great video
Yeah i cant scratch my delts, my biceps are too big. I wish
How many reps is best for hypertrophy