The S&C-related Studies Thread

He wrote another edition of Low Back Disorders, not sure when it will be available for sale though. I was told next year but I don't know it that's set.
 
Olympic Weightlifting and Plyometric Training With Children Provides Similar or Greater Performance Improvements Than Traditional Resistance Training

Full study available for non-members at this time. Worth the read. Number one reason why I like this study is it is yet another piece of evidence supporting weightlifting for youth lifters.

"The present results do not suggest that traditional RT should be precluded from RT programs for children. In light of the common misperceptions that high intensity, high velocity, more complex coordinated activities like OWL and plyometrics may be ineffective and lead to injury in children, this study demonstrates the effectiveness of these training modalities"
-- From Practical Applications
 
I found this study pretty interesting. Time-to-exhaustion (for subjects cycling on fixed pace to exhaustion) was increased when viewing positive subliminal cues/faces vs negative subliminal cues/faces, and the difference was pretty substantial. Not something "groundbreaking" in terms of coaching practice, but certainly interesting to see controlled study findings on this.

Here is the study abstract:

Non-conscious visual cues related to affect and action alter perception of effort and endurance performance (2014)

The psychobiological model of endurance performance proposes that endurance performance is determined by a decision-making process based on perception of effort and potential motivation. Recent research has reported that effort-based decision-making during cognitive tasks can be altered by non-conscious visual cues relating to affect and action. The effects of these non-conscious visual cues on effort and performance during physical tasks are however unknown. We report two experiments investigating the effects of subliminal priming with visual cues related to affect and action on perception of effort and endurance performance. In Experiment 1 thirteen individuals were subliminally primed with happy or sad faces as they cycled to exhaustion in a counterbalanced and randomized crossover design. A paired t-test (happy vs. sad faces) revealed that individuals cycled significantly longer (178 s, p = 0.04) when subliminally primed with happy faces. A 2
Click to expand...
 
I like this:

Marcora believes that this limit is probably never truly reached—that fatigue is simply a balance between effort and motivation, and that the decision to stop is a conscious choice rather than a mechanical failure.
Click to expand...
 
http://facstaff.bloomu.edu/jandreac/Downloads/class_notes/ExPhys-II/Docherty_and_Sporer_2000.pdf
A a lit review of the interference effects and how to avoid them in concurrent training. General conclusions were that interference can be most easily avoided by gearing both strength and cardio training toward central rather than peripheral effects. Largest interference effects were predicted when trying to maximize strength training toward cross-sectional area and cardio toward peripheral adaptations at the same time. Apparently this is not heavily researched
 
Last edited:
selfcritical said:
http://facstaff.bloomu.edu/jandreac/...porer_2000.pdf

A a lit review of the interference effects and how to avoid them in concurrent training. General conclusions were that interference can be most easily avoided by gearing both strength and cardio training toward central rather than peripheral effects. Largest interference effects were predicted when trying to maximize strength training toward cross-sectional area and cardio toward peripheral adaptations at the same time. Apparently this is not heavily researched
Click to expand...

The link isn't working but looks interesting to me. Does peripheral adaptations in cardio mean localized? Like punching endurance type drills would have a lot of interference with hypertrophy type shoulder training? What is a central strength effect?
 
selfcritical said:
http://facstaff.bloomu.edu/jandreac/Downloads/class_notes/ExPhys-II/Docherty_and_Sporer_2000.pdf
A a lit review of the interference effects and how to avoid them in concurrent training. General conclusions were that interference can be most easily avoided by gearing both strength and cardio training toward central rather than peripheral effects.
Click to expand...

That is a 15-year-old paper postulating a hypothesis and proposing a model for further study. Its goal is to provide guidelines for further study (again, that was 15 years ago), it is not to provide training guidelines.

Here are some more recent reviews on concurrent strength and endurance training:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17095931 (2006)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19448698 (2009)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22002517 (2012)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24728927 (2014)

This subject is also briefly touched-upon in the FAQs:
miaou said:
Q: I've heard conditioning inhibits strength gains. Can I do both conditioning and strength training?

A: Short answer: Doing moderate amounts of LISS on your off days should be fine. When it comes to more intense endurance work, you might want to program it within a larger periodization plan.

Long answer: There is a significant number of studies on concurrent strength/endurance training, but the findings are contradictory: many studies find no inhibition, others do (for more, you can start by reading this). It seems that moderate LISS will not significantly harm any strength gains if done separately from strength training (as in 8 hours separately or more). It also seems ATP/PCr power work can be merged with your S&P programming (as was already explained). Other than that, the safest route might be to periodize your training, doing strength maintenance work when engaging in big amounts of endurance training, and visa versa (when your main goal is max squat gains, including 3 sessions of HIIT per week stressing the lower body might not be the best choice). In other words, use your brain: HIIT is typically like multiple high-rep sets to failure for the muscles involved; you wouldn't incorporate multiple workouts of multiple high-rep sets to failure during your max strength phase, would you?
Click to expand...
 
Thanks. I posted that one because it focused more on the outcomes of specific interventions rather than the chemical signaling mechanisms, but I admit that I'm just personally bad at groking the implications of the ampk stuff for practical training for mixed sport.
 

Real Strength Gains from Mental Imagery


Methodology:

They had 29 volunteers completely immobilize their non-dominant wrist and hand in a cast for four weeks. Half of them (well, 14 of them) did "mental imagery" of strong wrist muscle contractions five times a week, with electrodes on their wrists monitoring to make sure they weren't actually contracting the muscles while they imagined doing so. A third group of 15 volunteers served as control, with no immobilization.
Click to expand...

Results:

mental imagery cut the losses of strength and voluntary activation in half.
Click to expand...


So... May the force be with you?
 
miaou said:
That is a 15-year-old paper postulating a hypothesis and proposing a model for further study. Its goal is to provide guidelines for further study (again, that was 15 years ago), it is not to provide training guidelines.

Here are some more recent reviews on concurrent strength and endurance training:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17095931 (2006)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19448698 (2009)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22002517 (2012)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24728927 (2014)

This subject is also briefly touched-upon in the FAQs:
Click to expand...

We covered a fair amount of this in some of my kin training classes. I'll see if i can dig up the studies and meta analyses of it for your review later on, but the premises was:

1) Strength training on different days than endurance elicited less negative effects on VO2 max gains and strength/Hypertroyphy. In other words, it can be done efficiently given sufficient rest.
2) Plyometric training increased strength gains while maintaining most endurance training effects despite a reduction in endurance training [they substituted 33% endurance work for plyo]. This was done in trained athletes. Neural adaptations played the biggest factor in the endurance aspects as there was greater neural output RFD and less "time on contact of ground" during running; they increased 5km performance time by 4% despite less endurance training.
3) Increase in TSC 1,2 from endurance training reduces mTOR pathways effects for hypertrophy/strength.
For those who don't know, what this means is that TSC 1,2 is activated during low energy availability or high stress (like in endurance training) and then down regulates protein synthesis.
 
Last edited:
Only managed to find one of the studies on concurrent training and TSC 1,2's role on mTOR. This study wasn't entirely on TSC 1,2 but it does mention it as inhibiting mTOR possibly, and from some of my physiology classes, similar notions have been cited (i will update this when i can acquire the other studies).

"Activation of AMPK by endurance exercise may inhibit mTOR signaling via
tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) and suppress resistance-exercise-induced muscle-protein synthesis"
http://www.8weeksout.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/molecular-responses-to-strength-and-endurance-training-are-they-incompatible-2009.pdf
 
"Longer inter-set rest periods enhance muscle strength and hypertrophy in resistance-trained men."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26605807
"The present study provides evidence that longer rest periods promote greater increases in muscle strength and hypertrophy in young resistance-trained men."
 
Just saw that one too. Also one about HR-determined rest intervals producing better hypertrophy
 
Badger67 said:
"Longer inter-set rest periods enhance muscle strength and hypertrophy in resistance-trained men."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26605807
"The present study provides evidence that longer rest periods promote greater increases in muscle strength and hypertrophy in young resistance-trained men."
Click to expand...

I saw this study the other day when it was posted in a fb group. This was my comment:

Opposite results from the current "textbook consensus" , small sample (10 subjects per group), measurements on three muscles and only one muscle showing significant differences, the team with the short breaks didn't have any differential effects on muscle endurance (as one might have expected in "resistance-trained" individuals). I'd call this a preliminary study, I don't think one can draw safe conclusions without replication/further evidence.

My personal opinion, based on the entire existing relevant literature, is that, for contractile protein hypertrophy, the main (if not the only) factor is total long-term training volume performed at or over moderate intensity. Neither rep range, neither exact intensity %, neither between-set break, neither frequency.
 
Good take on it. I saw it on a FB post with Dean Somerset and posted it in here because it doesn't fit the typical narrative. I don't have access to the entire study, but i'd be curious to know if they did a power of validity test or not.

I agree with he long term training volume, i noticed my most significant muscle gains from higher volume during one summer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,980
Messages
55,459,036
Members
174,787
Latest member
Freddie556

Share this page

Back
Top