Also, as an FYI, there are very few people on this board who care about muscle growth per se. Most people here are performance-oriented. High reps or low reps for muscle growth?
I guess you are right.
I should have read carefully the forum subsection which says: Mass Gain:
“Discussions of training for functional muscle mass and other weight gain topics”.
The people here grow our muscles by getting strong because most of us care most about getting strong (or improving performance in some sport, often by getting strong) So we would probably, at the end of the day, say low reps, damn the science.
And the study shows exactly that. There is no difference between 1-5 or 8-12 reps for muscle growth because protein synthesis for both rep ranges is the same. Though everyone says 8-12 reps is the best range.
I only posted that link because someone some posted a link to another article here and there was some discussions on it and I came across it. And accidentally read the title” Advancing the Science of Athletic Performance” and Mass Gain subsection and felt the scientific study would be interesting thread.
Honestly, not sure why there is so much hostility against me. I am not trying to sell anything . I don’t even have a freaking ad on my website. And I am here on a site littered with products and ads.
All I said was science is better than anecdotes and evidence-based approach does include individual judgment and experience. And you can have the best of both worlds.
I remember in Dante's forum( Diggcrap) argued I against their no carbs after 6 pm rule. I instantly got pummeled with "we are bigger and stronger and we have results". Sounds a lot similar here too.
And what really does that mean on your header "Advancing the science of athletic performance".