Muscle Myths

[bonebreaker]

I got this off MSN and I'm sure that some of you may have seen it. In case you didn't, it's a pretty informative piece. Ejoyn. BB

The guy lifting beside you looks like he should write the book on muscle. Talks like it, too. He's worked out since the seventh grade, he played D-1 football, and he's big. But that doesn't mean he knows what he's talking about. Starting now, ignore him.
The gym is infested with bad information. Lies that start with well-intentioned gym teachers trickle down to students who become coaches, trainers, or know-it-all gym-rat preachers. Lies morph into myths that endure because we don't ask questions, for fear of looking stupid.
Scientists, on the other hand, gladly look stupid—that's why they're so darn smart. Plus, they have cool human-performance laboratories where they can prove or disprove theories and myths. Here's what top exercise scientists and expert trainers have to say about the crap that's passed around in gyms. Listen up and learn. Then go ahead, question it.
MYTH #1
Lifting incredibly slowly builds incredibly big muscles. Lifting super slowly produces superlong workouts—and that's it. University of Alabama researchers recently studied two groups of lifters doing a 29-minute workout. One group performed exercises using a 5-second up phase and a 10-second down phase, the other a more traditional approach of 1 second up and 1 second down. The faster group burned 71 percent more calories and lifted 250 percent more weight than the superslow lifters.
The real expert says: "The best increases in strength are achieved by doing the up phase as rapidly as possible," says Gary Hunter, Ph.D., C.S.C.S., the lead study author. "Lower the weight more slowly and under control." There's greater potential for growth during the lowering phase, and when you lower with control, there's less chance of injury.
MYTH #2
If you eat more protein, you'll build more muscle. To a point, sure. But put down the shake for a sec. Protein promotes the muscle-building process, called protein synthesis, "but you don't need exorbitant amounts to do this," says John Ivy, Ph.D., coauthor of Nutrient Timing. If you're working out hard, consuming more than 0.9 to 1.25 grams of protein per pound of body weight is a waste. Excess protein breaks down into amino acids and nitrogen, which are either excreted or converted into carbohydrates and stored.
The real expert says: More important is when you consume protein, and that you have the right balance of carbohydrates with it. Have a postworkout shake of three parts carbohydrates and one part protein. Eat a meal several hours later, and then reverse that ratio in your snack after another few hours, says Ivy. "This will keep protein synthesis going by maintaining high amino acid concentrations in the blood."
MYTH #3
Leg extensions are safer for your knees than squats. And cotton swabs are dangerous when you push them too far into your ears. It's a matter of knowing what you're doing. A recent study in Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise found that "open-chain" exercises—those in which a single joint is activated, such as the leg extension—are potentially more dangerous than closed-chain moves—those that engage multiple joints, such as the squat and the leg press. The study found that leg extensions activate your quadriceps muscles slightly independently of each other, and just a 5-millisecond difference in activation causes uneven compression between the patella (kneecap) and thighbone, says Anki Stensdotter, the lead study author.
The real expert says: "The knee joint is controlled by the quadriceps and the hamstrings. Balanced muscle activity keeps the patella in place and appears to be more easily attained in closed-chain exercises," says Stensdotter. To squat safely, hold your back as upright as possible and lower your body until your thighs are parallel to the floor (or at least as far as you can go without discomfort in your knees). Try front squats if you find yourself leaning forward. Although it's a more advanced move, the weight rests on the fronts of your shoulders, helping to keep your back upright, Stensdotter says.
MYTH #4
Never exercise a sore muscle. Before you skip that workout, determine how sore you really are. "If your muscle is sore to the touch or the soreness limits your range of motion, it's best that you give the muscle at least another day of rest," says Alan Mikesky, Ph.D., director of the human performance and biomechanics laboratory at Indiana University-Purdue University at Indianapolis. In less severe instances, an "active rest" involving light aerobic activity and stretching, and even light lifting, can help alleviate some of the soreness. "Light activity stimulates bloodflow through the muscles, which removes waste products to help in the repair process," says David Docherty, Ph.D., a professor of exercise science at the University of Victoria in Canada.
The real expert says: If you're not sore to the touch and you have your full range of motion, go to the gym. Start with 10 minutes of cycling, then exercise the achy muscle by performing no more than three sets of 10 to 15 repetitions using a weight that's no heavier than 30 percent of your one-rep maximum, says Docherty.
MYTH #5
Stretching prevents injuries. Maybe if you're a figure skater. Researchers at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reviewed more than 350 studies and articles examining the relationship between stretching and injuries and concluded that stretching during a warmup has little effect on injury prevention. "Stretching increases flexibility, but most injuries occur within the normal range of motion," says Julie Gilchrist, M.D., one of the study's researchers. "Stretching and warming up have just gone together for decades. It's simply what's done, and it hasn't been approached through rigorous science."
The real expert says: Warming up is what prevents injury, by slowly increasing your bloodflow and giving your muscles a chance to prepare for the upcoming activity. To this end, Dr. Gilchrist suggests a thorough warmup, as well as conditioning for your particular sport. Of course, flexibility is a good thing. If you need to increase yours so it's in the normal range (touching your toes without bending your knees, for instance), do your stretching when your muscles are already warm.
MYTH #6
You need a Swiss ball to build a stronger chest and shoulders. Don't abandon your trusty bench for exercises like the chest press and shoulder press if your goal is strength and size. "The reason people are using the ball and getting gains is because they're weak as kittens to begin with," says Craig Ballantyne, C.S.C.S. You have to reduce the weight in order to press on a Swiss ball, and this means you get less out of the exercise, he says.
The real expert says: A Swiss ball is great for variety, but center your chest and shoulder routines on exercises that are performed on a stable surface, Ballantyne says. Then use the ball to work your abs.
MYTH #7
Always work out with free weights. Sometimes machines can build muscle better—for instance, when you need to isolate specific muscles after an injury, or when you're too inexperienced to perform a free-weight exercise. If you can't complete a pullup, you won't build your back muscles. So do lat pulldowns to develop strength in this range of motion, says Greg Haff, Ph.D., director of the strength research laboratory at Midwestern State University in Wichita Falls, Texas.
The real expert says: "Initially, novice athletes will see benefits with either machines or free weights, but as you become more trained, free weights should make up the major portion of your training program," says Haff. Free-weight exercises mimic athletic moves and generally activate more muscle mass. If you're a seasoned lifter, free weights are your best tools to build strength or burn fat.

[meat12]

good read

[shortz]

^^^actually, the article is absolutely right. It is not to say we should not eat high protien. I don't think that's what he meant. The point is that we are trying to get a positive nitrogen balance by eating more than we need. The key is to eat more than you need to ensure you are not eating less then you need. Do you know exactly how many grams of protien you need? Neither does anyone else. The article is saying that if the body needs to 150g, that eating 600g is going to make you get bigger. The muscles can only use so much.

[njlovehandles]

i was going to post this, good read. Although a few things were a little off!

[shortz]

Originally posted by NYCmitch25

I hope this doesnt come off the wrong way. I just debating with you - no disrespect of flaming.

Thanks bro.

Not at all. Your post is reasonable and I also agree with what you say.

[NYCmitch25]

*This another I had article about myths.

Debunking Exercise Myths, Part I
by Eric Cressey

We live in a society that doesn't want gray areas. People want right or wrong, up or down, and left or right. This mindset carries over to the gym, too; lifters want to be able to say that Exercise A is evil, and Exercise B is safe.

Unfortunately, it's not that simple, so with that in mind, I'm devoting this article to killing off some myths, establishing some more well-defined gray areas, and making recommendations on who can do what.

I'm going to come right out and say it: in the absence of musculoskeletal pathology, no movement is fundamentally bad. Sure, there are exercises like kickbacks and leg extensions that don't give you as much bang for your buck as their multi-joint counterparts (e.g. dips and squats), but that's not to say that these pansy exercises are "bad" for you. Likewise, it's rare that I write any sort of machine lift into my programming, but there are rehabilitation patients that benefit greatly from certain machine training.

In my opinion, there are only five scenarios in which exercise is ever truly bad for you from a health standpoint:

1. When that exercise is performed in excessive volume.

2. When that exercise is performed with poor technique.

3. When that exercise is performed in a manner that puts it out of balance with the rest of the programming that is in place.

4. When that exercise irritates an existing injury or condition.

5. When that exercise is performed with excessive loading (relative to the lifter's capabilities).

Now, it's not feasible for me to outline every specific instance where every exercise is safe or unsafe, but I can address some common adages we frequently hear in our gyms.


Adage #1: Your knees shouldn't pass your toes when you squat.

First off, you need to consider whether you're a powerlifter or a bodybuilder. In other words, are you planning on hammering your posterior chain by using predominantly the hamstrings, glutes and lumbar erectors to complete the movement? Or, are you looking to overload the quads?

It goes without saying that the movements are significantly different, so it's important to first differentiate between the two. In the powerlifting squat, you'll be sitting back, arching hard, and attempting to keep the shins perpendicular to the floor; in other words, there will be more trunk flexion, thus facilitating recruitment of the hip extensors and enabling you to get to parallel easier.

While the knee extensors are going to be involved to some extent (as there is knee flexion occurring on the eccentric), it's the muscles acting at the hip that account for the majority of the force that brings you out of the hole. It is, however, virtually impossible to squat rock bottom with a powerlifting style squat; your chest would be on top of your thighs far before your hamstrings hit your calves (unless you have freaky big hamstrings and calves).

In the Olympic version of the squat, initiating the movement is still about sitting back, but not nearly to the same degree as the former example. Essentially, we're looking for a happy medium between sitting back and sitting down. The knees are going to come in front of the toes simply because this is the only way to get deep when the trunk is more upright; if the knees stay directly above the toes on an Olympic squat, your base of support is too narrow, your center of gravity is shifted backward, and you fall backward (and still don't get your depth). You see this all the time in beginners. It's almost as pathetic as when they talk on their cell phones in the gym.

So, the question arises of whether or not the knees coming in front of the toes during the Olympic squat is dangerous. Fry, Smith, and Schilling (2003) examined joint kinetics during back squats under two conditions.(1) In the first condition, a board placed in front of the participants' shins restricted the forward displacement of the knees. In the second condition, movement wasn't restricted at all; they squatted normally, and the knees passed the toes (gasp!).

The researchers found that restricting the forward excursion of the knees during the squat increased anterior lean of the trunk and promoted an increased "internal angle at the knees and ankles." The results were a 22% decrease in knee torque and a 1070% increase in hip torque!

Sure, they "saved" the knees by limiting stress on them, but those forces were transferred more than tenfold to the hips and lower back! The researchers concluded that "appropriate joint loading during this exercise may require the knees to move slightly past the toes". "May?" Ugh. I mean honestly; look at these photos that the authors included. Isn't the lumbo-pelvic position in "B" just lovely?



Source: Fry and Smith, 2003, J Strength Cond Res.

In consideration of this study and photo "B," some might wonder whether powerlifting squats are safe on the hips and lower back. My answer is a resounding "YES" for several reasons. First, powerlifters attempt to minimize, not eliminate, the knees coming in front of the toes. There is always going to be at least subtle anterior excursion of the knees relative to the feet.

Second, powerlifters know to sit back and not down when they squat; the participants in this study were still attempting to do the latter when they performed the restricted squats. If you try to Olympic squat with the shins perpendicular to the floor; your lower back is going to round... period. Engaging in this debate would amount to comparing apples and oranges.

Third, powerlifters are proficient at establishing and maintaining a tight arch of the lumbar spine; this position is crucial to keeping the chest up and, in turn, the center of gravity within the base of support (or else the movement becomes a good morning). This position also places the hamstrings at a mechanical advantage.

Fourth, powerlifters assume a squatting stance that is at least a little wider than that of Olympic lifters; this repositioning "opens up" the hips and enables one to get deeper without considerable forward excursion of the knees.

Fifth, photo "B" is not a powerlifting squat; it's just a mess of torso and limbs with a bar on top.


Adage #2: You should not squat below parallel.

I'm on a roll with the squatting issue, so I might as well stick with it. Let's get something straight right off the bat: the "parallel" designation is something that was not borne out of any biomechanical rationale whatsoever. Rather, it is a product of needing a way to determine if the squat is completed in lifting competition. Where people lost sight of this fact is beyond my comprehension, so I'll simply ask this: would you use partial range of motion on other exercises in a healthy individual without any exercise contraindications? I didn't think so. Although this reasoning ought to be enough for most of you, how about a little literature to back this up?

Salem and Powers (2001) looked at patellofemoral joint kinetics in female collegiate athletes at three different depths: 70 degrees (above parallel), 90 degrees (at parallel), and 110 degrees (below parallel) of knee flexion. The researchers found that "Peak knee extensor moment, patellofemoral joint reaction force and patellofemoral joint stress did not vary significantly between the three squatting trials (2);" there was no support for the idea that squatting below parallel increases stress on the patellofemoral joint.

It's important to also note that squatting depth should be determined by the athlete's flexibility and goals, as well as the nature of his sport. If one doesn't have the flexibility to get below parallel safely, then the rock-bottom squat shouldn't be part of his arsenal; this athlete's attention would be better devoted elsewhere and possibly supplemented with squats at or above parallel.

It stands to reason that different athletes will have different goals in light of the demands of their sports, too. For instance, Olympic lifters and rock climbers would require positions of deep closed-chain knee flexion more often that offensive linemen and marathoners. Then again, the nature of some sports requires that deep squatting be used to offset the imbalances that result from always working the knee extensors in the 1/4 and 1/2 squat positions; this is one reason that cyclists, hockey players, and athletes who do significant amounts of running (e.g. soccer players, marathoners) ought to prioritize deep squatting and single-leg movements early in the off-season.

Finally, it's important to remember that while a full range-of-motion squat will offer noticeable carryover to top-end strength, 1/4 squats will not yield strength increases in the lower positions. Effectively, you get more bang for your training buck by squatting deep, which is one reason why this modality is the best option for those purely interested in looking good nekkid.


Adage #3: Your toes should point straight-ahead when squatting.

"Should" and "Can" are two completely different stories. In order to squat, leg press, or do any other closed-chain movement involving considerable knee flexion, we need a certain amount of dorsiflexion range of motion at our ankles.

Unfortunately, as Mike Robertson and I pointed out in our Neanderthal No More series, a large percentage of the population has tight calves and tends to over-pronate at the subtalar joints (leading to flat feet). As a result, dorsiflexion ROM is compromised, and if the lifter tries to squat deep with the toes pointing straight ahead, he must compensate by a) rising up on the toes, b) increasing the amount of hip flexion, or c) combining the two in what makes for an extremely ugly squat.

Fortunately, you can alleviate these problems by simply externally rotating the feet (pointing the toes outward); doing so "unlocks" the ankles and gives you the requisite amount of dorsiflexion you'll need to squat. You should still, however, work toward a point where you can squat with the feet pointing nearly straight ahead; this "work" should consist of loosening up the hip flexors and plantarflexors.


Adage #4: Good mornings are bad for your back.

Generalizations are a very dangerous thing. I think it's fair to say that the ordinary folks who criticize you for doing GMs assume that you're using the exercise to train the lumbar erectors and not the entire posterior chain, specifically the glutes and hamstrings. Essentially, these individuals fail to differentiate between lumbar and pelvic motion.

I'll be blunt; rounding the lumbar spine under compressive loads is not a good thing. In the position of full forward flexion, the passive structures (discs, ligaments and thoracolumbar fascia) and NOT the muscles bear the overwhelming majority of the load. This occurrence is referred to as the "flexion relaxation response of the erector spinae."(3,4) This position is bad enough for the ordinary trainee, but even worse for folks with shear instability conditions like spondylolisthesis.

In fact, this group of individuals should avoid lumbar flexion exercises such as sit-ups (more on that in Part II) and even reverse hypers, which have received much praise in rehabilitating lower back injuries of different sorts.

So what can we do to make good mornings safe? How about a little of modern-day natural selection in a resistance training context where only the strongest survive? Let's say that we have 100 trainees that represent the gym-going population as a whole. Roughly 65 of these individuals will be deconditioned with a complete lack of proficiency in any realm of fitness; we can eliminate them from the good morning pool immediately. For the sake of this argument, based on all the emails I receive and my experience on the T-Nation forums, I'm going to estimate that the majority of our readers are in the "Upper 35" echelon.

I'd estimate that 20 of this echelon's trainees, although possessing an average level of general fitness, need to be focusing on other core exercises before moving to those (like good mornings) that sit a little higher-up on the risk continuum. Exercises like deadlifts, squats, various presses, rows, dips and a boatload of prehab work are what they need. Good mornings may come eventually, but they don't need to worry about crossing that road just yet.

That's not to say, however, that there aren't steps to be taken in anticipation of crossing that road. Specifically, it's important that they learn the concept of abdominal bracing to optimize spinal stability. As Stuart McGill has vehemently advocated, you should imagine "locking the rib cage to the pelvis."(5) A ton of core work is just what the doctor ordered, in these cases.

Serious postural issues and substitution patterns in the lumbo-pelvic area are contraindications to really hitting GMs hard. An accentuated lordotic curve is the most concerning issue on this front; if your lumbar erectors are overactive to compensate for a lack of glute and hamstring contribution, the only way to pre-stretch the "faulty" prime movers and potentiate force generation is lumbar flexion. As I noted above, the flexion relaxation response phenomenon makes this a very bad idea.

The remaining 15 are in a position where they can properly execute GMs, -that is, unless they have a significant (either cumulative or single traumatic) history of lower back injuries. If they're part of this at-risk population, I recommend that they stay away from GMs altogether. Last I heard, it's estimated that about 80% of people have some sort of lower back pain during their lives, so this issue obviously carries over to the aforementioned trainee groups, too. I'd estimate that this eliminates another three trainees, 20% of our hardcore crew.

We're down to twelve legitimate candidates, eight of whom can safely perform the GMs in 5+ range, but their form goes down the tubes when the weight gets too heavy and they panic. In my experience, form is far more likely to crap out under heavy loading than it is under accumulated fatigue in the last few reps of a set.

This leaves us with the Final Four. What can I say? I'm writing this from the college basketball capital of the universe during March Madness, and I went with the mood. These four T-Men are ready for "chaos training" as outlined by Dave Tate here.

Brace the core, maintain a neutral spine, and you're good to go. Potvin et al. (1991) asserted that "the risk of injury may be influenced more by the degree of lumbar flexion than the choice of stoop or squat technique."(4) If you only take one thing away from this article, let it be that the spine should not flex under heavy load.

So, out of 100 trainees, I estimate that twelve are actually able to handle GMs in their programming, and only four of them can get really hit them heavy. In T-Man terms, it works out to about a third of you doing them, but only one-tenth of you doing them balls-to-the-wall. Then again, even that is going to be dependent on your goals.

In consideration of the good morning debate, I'm reminded of something Dr. Jeff Anderson, Director of Sports Medicine at the University of Connecticut, said to me once: "If you live your life the right way, you'll likely find yourself in an orthopedist's office at some point. If you live it the wrong way, you'll likely end up in cardiologist's office instead."(6).

Need proof? Granhed and Morelli (1988) found that retired heavyweight lifters demonstrated a markedly greater reduction in disc height on x-rays when compared with age-matched controls.(7) You simply need to find how far toward one end of the spectrum you want to be. If you want to do something incredible, you need to be willing to take risks while maximizing safety.


Adage #5: You should wear a belt.

This issue has been addressed quite a bit, but for some reason, the message never seems to hit home with people. Perhaps the problem is that a lot of the research cited only investigates the use of belts in workplace safety scenarios and not resistance training contexts.

As is the case with a lot of these adages, the decision to use or not use a belt is goal-dependent. First, let's make it clear that you should not be using a belt for anything below 90% of 1RM; for most, this comprises sets of more than three reps.

One of the most common misconceptions regarding belt use in a resistance training context is that simply because the belt assists in increasing intra-abdominal pressure (IAP), it must automatically reduce the compressive load on the spine. This is completely false; the belt certainly doesn't have a favorable impact on compressive forces, and may even increase the compressive load! (5)

It's readily apparent that wearing a belt has helped many lifters to move heavier weights than they would under "raw" conditions, but the question remains: do they decrease the risk of injury? Well, in consideration of the fact that they restrict the end of the range of motion in lumbar spine flexion, one would have to agree that they do, especially in those who cannot maintain a neutral spine.

Interestingly, this is one of the reasons belts can add pounds to your total; they facilitate the elastic response to torso flexion; the more neutral the spine is (as it should be), the less profound this effect is. Oddly enough, as McGill puts it, "to obtain the maximal effect from a belt, the lifter must lift poorly and in a way that exposed the back to a much higher risk of injury."(5)

An additional mechanism by which belts increase one's ability to move big weights are via expansion of the base of support to increase torso stiffness when placed under heavy loads. This stiffness helps to prevent the spine from buckling. (As someone with a pretty sound knowledge of biomechanics, I can assure you that buckling is a bad thing.) Belt use and "natural" methods to increase IAP are both effective in enhancing stability, both individually and in tandem.(8)

So what's the problem with belt use? It alters firing patterns such that the belt becomes a crutch, and important core musculature is not called upon to stabilize the spine. Considerable evidence exists to suggest that wearing a belt causes individuals to unknowingly alter their motor patterns.

Cholewicki et al. (1999) compared belt use and increasing intra-abdominal pressure "naturally" under situations where lumbar spine stability was challenged via a sudden load release (in either trunk flexion, extension, or lateral flexion). The investigators found that belt use caused activity to decrease for the thoracic erector spinae in extension and the lumbar erector spinae in flexion (8).

With all this in mind, here are four broad recommendations for belt use:

1. Gym-goers with purely physique benefits in mind have little to no use for belts.

2. Powerlifters and those most interested in optimizing strength should use belts as a means of increasing spinal stability only on their heaviest attempts. A noteworthy exception is when the belt is used to hold other equipment (e.g. squat suit, bench shirt) in place.

3. When used, belts should be coupled with natural methods of increasing IAP.

4. Use belts for winning competitions, not improving core strength.


Digest!

These five adages should give you something to chew on until Part II, when you'll get some more food for thought!


About the Author

Eric Cressey, BS, CSCS is currently pursuing a Master's Degree in Kinesiology with a concentration in Exercise Science at the University of Connecticut. A competitive powerlifter, Eric has written over fifty articles for publication in various online and print magazines. He has experience in athletic performance, rehabilitation, human performance laboratory and general conditioning settings. You can contact him at [email protected].


References

1. Fry AC, Smith JC, Schilling BK. Effect of knee position on hip and knee torques during the barbell squat. J Strength Cond Res. 2003 Nov;17(4):629-33.

2. GJ Salem and CM Powers. Patellofemoral joint kinetics during squatting in collegiate women athletes. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon), June 1, 2001; 16(5): 424-30.

3. McGill SM. The mechanics of torso flexion: situps and standing dynamic flexion manoeuvres. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 1995 Jun;10(4):184-192.

4. Potvin JR, McGill SM, Norman RW. Trunk muscle and lumbar ligament contributions to dynamic lifts with varying degrees of trunk flexion. Spine. 1991 Sep;16(9):1099-107.

5. McGill, S. Ultimate Back Fitness and Performance. Stuart McGill, PhD, 2004.

6. Anderson, J. Personal Communication. November, 2003.

7. Granhed H, Morelli B. Low back pain among retired wrestlers and heavyweight lifters. Am J Sports Med. 1988 Sep-Oct;16(5):530-3.

8. Cholewicki J, Juluru K, Radebold A, Panjabi MM, McGill SM. Lumbar spine stability can be augmented with an abdominal belt and/or increased intra-abdominal pressure. Eur Spine J. 1999;8(5):388-95.


© 1998 — 2005 Testosterone, LLC. All Rights Reserved.