We do 12 LC threads a year, so why don't we have an outlet for actual H&F related link sharing and discussion? The "Intermediate Programming" thread is dead, and actual H&F related content seems to garner interest from a small group of LCers, but the other inane topics always wind out drowning out the signals.

Enter the 2014 High Content Thread. A place for the curious to escape the group think of the rest of H&F and post legitimate health related hypotheses and scientific research.

To get the ball rolling, here's a link I saw on mopeilitywod that I thought was interesting, mostly because it supports an opinion I've had for a few years but have done very little to implement until recently: http://gregnuckols.com/2014/03/03/ca...-the-long-run/

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/

I keep referring to this thread in LC. I really like it. It's a site that does a decent job of pulling together modern scientific information on trends and fads that may be popping up on your Facebook, that coworkers may be trying, your mom told you that her friend said you should do XYZ, etc. Oil pulling? Chiropractic? Acupuncture? Voodoo wizard magic pills?

It's well referenced. While it doesn't replace studies, it generally points toward what studies to look at, what is known, what is not known. It's a good starting point for those who prefer to look at things skeptically and/or through a critical lens. If you're interested in real science on many health-related (and especially trending) topics, it's a good place to start.

http://examine.com/

By far and away the most comprehensive website dedicated to supplements and nutrition. Basically if you ever have a question about anything some bro said about Miracle Supplement X at the gym, just look it up here and you'll get quality information. They reference scientific journal articles as their sources to create pages dedicated to answering many common broscience beliefs regarding supplements and nutrition.

this is a good idea

So is thread just to post links with studies and stuff or can we discuss actual lifting/programming stuff that might not go over well in the LC thread?

Would be surprised if anything that counts as being within the H&F domain is off the table. Great idea DF, hopefully it won't die. Might need to actually use the subscribe function for this one (or maybe just bookmark it).

Subscribed. Love the idea of a thread where no trolling is allowed, only serious discussion.

+

Why not discuss programming & whatever else is interesting?

yeah

I think a lot of people think that for high frequency programs you need to be on PEDs or else you will get injured, wont make gains etc. What do you guys think of this theory? It is a post from Mike Tuschererer on his forum.

"If you notice, the iconic powerlifters who are successful on very low frequency programs are also on pretty heavy drug regimens. This is just a pet theory and I don't have anything to back it up other than observation, but here it goes: You'll notice highly successful powerlifters using high doses of anabolics tend to train with lower frequencies. Highly successful powerlifters who are drug free tend to use higher frequency programs. Of course this isn't a hard fast rule because there are examples of people who don't fit those molds. But it seems to be a general observation. Again, I have no proof to offer other than the observation."

This is an excellent resource. Does a good job of cataloging and reviewing many forms of claims and nonsense. Much of the woo on this forum is soundly discredited based on the available evidence.

Also, a number of the contributors on there have other information outlets (blogs like Neurologica, Novella has a podcast, and Paul Offit's books like the latest "Do You Believe in Magic?")

If this thread works, I can sticky it and moderate it lightly (trolling, hijacking, etc)

Weasel,

I'm confused. You say that people think lifters making gains on a high frequency program are on PEDs, but the quote says people who are on low frequency programs and are making gains are on PEDs while the people making gains without PEDs are on high frequency programs.

AB,

Agreed. Thanks for the followup recs, too.

What forum woo are you referring to that the blog discredits? I understand if the examples are too many to give a complete list. I would appreciate a couple of examples.

Based only on my own experiences, I've never done high frequency training in my adult life. I never used any drugs until the TRT that I started about 6 weeks ago, and while I'm nowhere near an elite powerlifter, I do most lifts less frequently than most lifters I know, & I got stronger than most of them. I cant be positive that lower frequency training worked better for me, but I think it did.

I know it's boring to say 'everyone's different' but it's going to be true for advanced athletes. Some will thrive on low volume, others will produce their best off well structured two a days, etc.

Weasel,

there was a study conducted on high vs low frequency training in Norway a couple of years back - you can google "Raastad T., Kirketeig, A., Wolf, D., Paulsen G. Powerlifters improved strength and muscular adaptations to a greater extent when equal total training volume was divided into 6 compared to 3 training sessions per week. 17th annual conference of the ECSS, Brugge 4-7 July 2012." (don't have time to find it right now).

Cliffs: high frequency guys were more successful over a x week period even if total stimuli was the same among the group. Some limitations on the study obviously (younger lifters, not advanced etc). Read about it in a magazine today at my gym.

Sorry, what I was trying to say is that most avg/intermediate lifters like around here think you cant do high frequency programming on PEDs. Mike T. is an elite level lifter and his anecdotal evidence points to the opposite and he's the only person I've seen say something like this. I was just seeing if anyone else has seen the opposite. BPA has told me that he feels that i squat,bench, and DL too much since Im not on PEDs.

I think that is a reason most people like 5/3/1 since it is only each lift once per week and they think that is better for non PED people. Mike T is saying the opposite so I wanted to see if anyone had any thoughts.

Is PED discussion too far reaching? Or maybe too taboo for the forum?

DF, I've actually been thinking about making a thread like this for a very long time, since most of the time I participate in LC I feel like is when actual content starts up. Thanks for making this. Very much in.

I definitely agree with Mike T. Jason Blaha talks about frequency quite a bit actually. I've come to understand that one of the biggest differences between drug free/PEDs is the length of elevated protein synthesis. Natural guys are done in 48 hours, so hitting muscles every other day or 3x/week is going to keep bumping that back up. PED guys get away with once/week. This is partially why the bro split type workouts are dumb, unless they're constructed in a highly overlapping way.

I was actually going to post in LC sometime in the past month about how I'd been losing interest in my old standard upper/lower 2/2 times/week type programming, because I always had in the back of my mind that working out once every 3.5 days just can't be optimal. I guess a problem I have is that I love lifting so much that going 3x/week feels painfully sparse. I'd like to find a 4x/week full body program or something... haha. Every other day is kinda cool (3.5x/week), but I like repeating on a weekly schedule.

Depends how far it goes. I don't think it's too taboo, but I think there's definitely a point where it should have its own thread. It applies to such a small number of people and is such a self-contained topic.

I thought CR's old thread was the PED containment thread?

I can see multiple ongoing conversations on disparate topics making it somewhat hard to follow, but should be a great resource. Hopefully we can keep BQs in the correct thread.

By reading the thread title only I assumed this was a music thread for KC and DT.

ETA: A good idea tho (subbed).

Re: PEDs
I took ritalin once during a work out. That day I realized how much a fully energized CNS can help you lift. Took about 50mg over a 2hr period. First 10mg was insufflated because I had already had a big pre-work out meal and ritalin's bioavailability is pretty bad since we have enzymes that can digest it for us.

It was a great work out. I broke through stalls in every lift. The only side effect I noticed was a slight 3-4s dizziness after heavy each set (in the last 1-2 exercises) from high blood pressure presumably (but back then my breathing patterns during lifting were really bad) and the fact that ritalin affects all 3 areas of the ANS, it makes your appetite disappear and also generates unwanted empathy when you are coming down.

Didn't try it again but always wondered how powerfully effective it can be on a cut when you are trying to lift as heavy as possible and still keeping a big deficit. I also believe I took too much and a 50% lower dosage would not only suffice but be more effective. The problem that day was the amount of food I had already eaten so I had to up the dosage. The peak concentrations of ritalin in your blood also varies quite a bit relative to the time of ingestion. It would be a hard act to get right every time and only insufflation can guarantee the right hit at the right time.

Do you mean apathy by empathy there?

Popping Ritalin/Adderall etc while cutting should be quite effective on a multiple levels indeed.

But also quite risky (depending ofc) due to elevated heart rate and blood pressure and such.

Couldn't anecdotal evidence like that be misleading? eg. maybe those who are genetically most gifted just tend to be the type to respond well to high volume training? That wouldn't necessarily have to mean it's optimal for majority. I'm following two world class junior natty powerlifters' logs, they both seem to do volume that would be considered idiotic by most posters here, so this seems like an interesting discussion to me. Although as a beginner I really don't have anything meaningful to add to it.

I meant empathy. What I really meant was you tend to feel a bit depressed, empathetic towards others and a general lack of confidence when the ritalin is wearing off. Its mostly not that it has disposed you to think that way, but it's the relative drop from the 'good' feelings you had during the peak to the 'normal' power those circuits in your brain have regressed back to. It lasts a very short duration, probably like an hour or two at most and even during this period you can somewhat modulate your negative thoughts just from the self awareness of why it's happening . Ritalin half life is also very short.

Oh, I see.

I just associate being under the influence of amphetamines (especially MDMA, mmmm... mdma) with feeling good in general and also feeling empathetic towards other people.

And once the influence wears off, then kinda empty and apathetic (for a while at least).

But while wearing off doesn't equal after wearing off ofc so there's that.

ETA: Ritalin ofc isn't techincally an amphetamine but rather a Methylphenidate, but basically close to same ****.