Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
Research Chemical SciencesUGFREAKeudomestic
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsResearch Chemical SciencesUGFREAKeudomestic

Training for fiber type is false

. . .
I would not base my opinions upon internet forums or articles.
I do however believe in the different types (I, IIa, IIx) type of fibers and support the theory.
 
Aeoleon said:
. . .
I would not base my opinions upon internet forums or articles.
I do however believe in the different types (I, IIa, IIx) type of fibers and support the theory.

Normally I'd agree except this article is based on an experiment published in a peer-reviewed medical journal:

Campos GE, Luecke TJ, Wendeln HK, Toma K, Hagerman FC, Murray TF, Ragg KE, Ratamess NA, Kraemer WJ, Staron RS. Muscular adaptations in response to three different resistance-training regimens: specificity of repetition maximum training zones. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2002 Nov;88(1-2):50-60.
 
Tom Treutlein said:
No one had anything to say about this, huh?

Because its BS

And as far as peer reviewed medical studies, there were lots of those in the 70s that stated gear didn't work. Tests can be biased (compromised) in any number of ways.
 
Which means that when it comes to body-stuff, it's as close to the truth as you can get. If you don't accept that as truth, then you can't accept anything.
 
Shark01 said:
Because its BS

And as far as peer reviewed medical studies, there were lots of those in the 70s that stated gear didn't work. Tests can be biased (compromised) in any number of ways.

So what should we take as truth, then, anecdote?
 
The only thing that REALLY works...is what YOU can get to work for YOU.

All this science is worthless unless you can make it work for you.

B True
 
Top Bottom