Muscle hyperplasia

[goergen1]

It's shown up in studies time and time again.

mreik - good point.

That's the beauty of a holding a ' belief ' - no proof or evidence is needed.

Evidence of hyperplasia showing up again and again seems to support the belief that it can happen.

Wrangell - since you refuse to look at all research and only want to believe one persons interpretation of research (Berardi) you can't be reasoned with.

Berardi simply seems to suggest there is no evidence to support the claim.

Since research has been posted, showing evidence that hyperplasia is possible, probably with weight training, you have to question your one source of information.

Or you could continue to ignore all other research.

 

[Wrangell]

Merry Xmas..


For those that don't like to click, here's the last sentence of the abstract,

"The results of this study suggest that in several animal species certain forms of mechanical overload increase muscle fiber number. "

..maybe you should read some journals on your own instead of taking Berardi's word for it. It's shown up in studies time and time again.

Unfortunately, I have never denied the possibility of hyperplasia occurring in cats - overload or otherwise - so I see no need to cite the study of proof of something i have not denied.

I'm simply saying that Berardi cites the fact that - based on the studies done so far - no evidence to suggest weight training will promote hyperplasia - in humans.

To suggest that cat studies are proof / evidence that weight training will promote hyperplasia in humans is a quantum leap at best IMO.

Cat studies simply provide the theoretical and empirical basis for further studies in humans.

( Nice try though )

 

[Hoss]

Are you kidding? If you find happiness in your ignorance, by all means enjoy.

 

[Wrangell]

Are you kidding? If you find happiness in your ignorance, by all means enjoy.

It's not ignorance, but common sense actually.

If you want to make a claim or statement of fact that certain applications of overload ( i.e weight training ) will result hyperplasia in humans, then simply conduct a study on humans to test the hypothesis and see if the claim or statement of fact is valid or not.

As I said before, cat studies simply provide a theoretical and empirical basis for further studies in humans.

Some might suggest that relying solely on cat studies as the basis of proof similar outcomes will occur in humans is equally embracing " happiness in your ignorance " - if anything, cat studies need to expanded upon with studies on humans - that's really all I'm saying.

 

[Hoss]

We can't conduct these tests on humans, it's impossible to do while observing human rights. Did you even read the study? It was done on MULTIPLE ANIMALS, 5 to be exact. And 3 of those 5 were mammalian! The muscular systems in other animals and humans are so closely related, that we even use the same peptides in our fibers.

 

[Karky]

Thank you Karky .......you just made my point for me.

( that was easy )

not really. I believe hyperplasia because there is alot of evidence for it and some evidence against (I think the evidence for is more convincing) thus I believe it's true. With the monster, there is no evidence against it, but there's no evidence for it either, as it is with hyperplasia, so your example doesn't fit this situation.

 

[matt182]

i think the world class professors at my university know a thing or two about skeletal muscle, they dont have the capacity to hyperplasia. Karky, when you go to uni maybe youll start to learn more about the human body and not just rely from a few bits a pieces over the internet as proof for something, otherwise you could find proof for everything in this world.

 

[Hoss]

i think the world class professors at my university know a thing or two about skeletal muscle, they dont have the capacity to hyperplasia.

Oh, good arguement. It's true, 'because they said so'.

 

[Karky]

Matt, why can't you explain what these world class professors have taught you? And keep in mind that the whole hyperplasia thing is new, and world class professors are old.

And how do you explain BBers having the same size muscle fibers as the average joe?

don't think you are so fancy just because you go to a university, your high horse attitude is getting old. And when did I say I had definite proof for hyperplasia? I just said I believe in it. In fact, if you go to a high class university, how come you haven't made a single valid argument except "my professors said so?" If you have a high education, then bring your educated arguments to the table.

 

[Wrangell]

not really. I believe hyperplasia because there is al ot of evidence for it and some evidence against (I think the evidence for is more convincing) thus I believe it's true.

No problem, you certainly can believe whatever you want.

This " lot of evidence " you refer to - are you referring to some key specific ( human ) studies ? If so, which ones are they - wouldn't mind following up.

With the monster, there is no evidence against it, but there's no evidence for it either, as it is with hyperplasia, so your example doesn't fit this situation.

The monster example was in reference to this reply ( below ) in response Berardi's claim that ' no evidence ' exists to suggest weight training will promote hyperplasia......

" where we have to believe that hyperplasia is possible until it is proven no be not possible "​

....as i said before , this is a classic example of fallacious reasoning.

 

[Wrangell]

We can't conduct these tests on humans, it's impossible to do while observing human rights.

So, we simply have to construct some type of ' ethical ' studies that seeks to prove weight training - in humans - will promote hyperplasia....don't we ?

No big deal. Then again, perhaps it is. Why is it impossible to conduct some kind of a study to prove weight training - in humans - will promote hyperplasia ?

And, why are cat studies the only available means of testing this hypothesis and the only means extrapolating it to the human population.

Did you even read the study? It was done on MULTIPLE ANIMALS, 5 to be exact. And 3 of those 5 were mammalian! The muscular systems in other animals and humans are so closely related, that we even use the same peptides in our fibers.

O.K.,......It was done on MULTIPLE ANIMALS, 5 to be exact. And 3 of those 5 were mammalian! The muscular systems in other animals and humans are so closely related, that we even use the same peptides in our fibers....fine.

Again, cat studies simply provide a theoretical and empirical basis for further studies in humans.

To claim weight training - in humans - will promote hyperplasia, you've got to conduct some kind of studies on humans as well....not just cats.

 

[Wrangell]

i think the world class professors at my university know a thing or two about skeletal muscle, they dont have the capacity to hyperplasia. Karky, when you go to uni maybe youll start to learn more about the human body and not just rely from a few bits a pieces over the internet as proof for something, otherwise you could find proof for everything in this world.

matt182 - perhaps you could shed some light on this for me. Welcome your opinion.

Berardi is a recent PHd (2005) exercise biology and nutrient biochemistry - now teaches at the Universioty of Texas. I would think he would be very current and up to date on all the studies that either directly or indirectly have examined if weight training - in humans - will promote hyperplasia.

The excerpt from his article " Cell Volume and Muscle Growth ", he never seems to suggest that there are a lot of studies / evidence that support the weight training / hyperplasia relationship , or even that there are conflicting studies / pieces of evidence. Rather , he uses phrases like " has not even been any evidence that very intense weight training will promote hyperplasia. " and " This ( a recent article ...in the American College of Sports Medicine ) however, is pretty much the first evidence of a mechanism for hyperplasia in humans ".

How would you reconcile the fact that more than a few members on this thread contend that there is a " lot of evidence " weight training in humans will promote hyperplasia, yet Berardi - given his credentials - takes the complete polar opposite view....there has " not even been any evidence " ?

 

[matt182]

Because they have a lot to learn ? There are a lot of great educators in texas, i always see there universities popping up everywhere good stuff though.

Karky, Ask any high regarded...actually anyone in pathology physiology etc about it or check the latest text books. All i need too know is that they are unable to hyperplasia, if you want to continue to argue against than thats fine, or if you actually wanted to know exactly why then look around. I mean its nothing significant really.....

 

[NBS 4life]

Just a side note. Dogs can achieve hyperplasia

 

[Wrangell]

Just a side note. Dogs can achieve hyperplasia

Through weight training ?

 

[Typhon]

dont they teach you at uni to critically anaylse information presented. If anyone actually beleives hyperplasia results from weight lifting then perhaps you shoudl go back to primary school

Just to point out to, its not even a proper journal article let alone peer reviewed...i wonder why

Matt, don't be an ass, the author of this article isn't an idiot;

If you look at the bottom of the page he also has peer reviewed articles on hyperplasia, maybe we should look up those too

And please people, don't be so quick to say something is untrue because it hasn't yet been proven. An opinion is great but should always be accompanied by an open mind

 

[matt182]

Just on a side note to all thee believers, which at least informs me of the generally poor knowledge of poeple in here

So say if hyperplasia did occur, unlike the liver which has a set size, what stops the muscle from continualy growing?

 

[Karky]

if hypertrophy is possible, what stops the muscle cells from continually growing? You obviously need stimuls. To activate sattelite cells you need to really damage your muscle fibers, duuh.

And really, enough with the high horse attitude, calling us stupid and stuff like that. Really, if I was a mod, you'd be banned.

 

[Typhon]

Berardi is a recent PHd (2005) exercise biology and nutrient biochemistry - now teaches at the Universioty of Texas. I would think he would be very current and up to date on all the studies that either directly or indirectly have examined if weight training - in humans - will promote hyperplasia.

The author of this article also teaches at the University of Texas, it just goes to show that great minds don't always think alike

I think it's likely that Beradi and Antonio know each other (they both work at the same place, in the same field and have both written for T-Nation), and if they do I bet my bottom dollar that they give each others opinions a lot more respect then the people on this thread have done.

 

[matt182]

if hypertrophy is possible, what stops the muscle cells from continually growing? You obviously need stimuls. To activate sattelite cells you need to really damage your muscle fibers, duuh.

And really, enough with the high horse attitude, calling us stupid and stuff like that. Really, if I was a mod, you'd be banned.

dw its all fun and games but with a bit of frustration..

A cell can only get so big, whereas theoretically hyperplasia could continually occur through stimulus which is what your implying.

And if in case it wasnt clear, the only minimal capacity of muscle to increase in number is through satellite cells which is indirect and minimal, a totally new ballroom.