Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 33

Thread: What's More Important - Strength or Mass? page

  1. #1
    john_solo's Avatar
    john_solo is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    242

    What's More Important - Strength or Mass?

    From a longevity standpoint, is it more important to have muscle strength, or must you also have strength and muscle mass? I want to make gains in muscle strength and definition, but I really don't care about building mass (as in bulking up). I thought of this question while reading the thread about building muscle while going VLC.

    The Primal Blueprint doesn't speak of carb refeeds on strength or anything like that...
    Last edited by john_solo; 07-30-2011 at 11:44 AM.

  2. #2
    RezH's Avatar
    RezH is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    394
    Strength.

  3. #3
    szorn's Avatar
    szorn is offline Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    72
    Quote Originally Posted by john_solo View Post
    From a longevity standpoint, is it more important to have muscle strength, or must you also have strength and muscle mass? I want to make gains in muscle strength and definition, but I really don't care about building mass (as in bulking up). I thought of this question while reading the thread about building muscle while going VLC.

    The Primal Blueprint doesn't speak of carb refeeds on strength or anything like that...
    Mass won't help with performing everyday physical activities or with sports performance. If you aren't looking to be a bodybuilder I wouldn't worry about it too much. As long as you eat and train properly you will add some muscle, just not to the extent of a bodybuilder.

    The TNT Diet is a good companion to PB. They include the hows and whys of post workout refeeds.

    Steve

  4. #4
    primalrob's Avatar
    primalrob is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Manchester, NH
    Posts
    2,142
    absolutely strength. muscle mass is great for making a bigger splash in a swimming pool; strength is good for doing shit.

  5. #5
    bcbcbc2's Avatar
    bcbcbc2 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    597
    They're too correlated for any feasible study to show differential benefit.

    There was a study that showed health and I think longevity benefits for the people in the top 3rd of 'strength'.
    Given current standards that probably just means not horribly weak.

    Doug Mcguff and other M.D.s say muscle mass is beneficial in surviving accident and injury.
    Again, I suspect that really means not frail.

    I've surfed the net pretty hard trying to figure out if bulking is good bad or neutral and haven't come up with anything convincing.

    Calorie restriction is pretty well supported for health benefits and big longevity benefits in animals and that's pretty opposite to bulking.

    Research on long lived populations seems to show activity is important but notable strength or performance not at all.

  6. #6
    Captain Archer's Avatar
    Captain Archer is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    556
    The Primal Blueprint doesn't speak of carb refeeds on strength or anything like that...
    It mentions lift heavy things.
    Carbs: 50-100 grams/day (or less) = accelerated fat loss. 100-150 grams/day = effortless weight maintenance. Heavy exercisers can increase carb intake as needed to replace glycogen stores.
    How to Succeed with the Primal Blueprint | Mark's Daily Apple
    Moderation: Certain high glycemic fruit, coffee, high-fat dairy products, starchy tuber vegetables, and wild rice.
    Those items help with weight lifters of the "heavy exercise" primalist.

  7. #7
    iniQuity's Avatar
    iniQuity is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Northern NJ
    Posts
    5,718
    The PB book doesn't mention refeeds, but Mark has written (approvingly) about them.

    keep this in mind, while I absolutely respect the work that Mark is doing, he's trying to appeal to a broad audience he has said time and time again his goal is to "bring people to a homeostasis" NOT to make people into fitness models or help them achieve super-lean levels. This is why the book doesn't mention refeeds but Mark acknowledges that they are helpful for those that are trying to do what I described.
    Last edited by iniQuity; 07-30-2011 at 05:29 PM.

  8. #8
    iniQuity's Avatar
    iniQuity is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Northern NJ
    Posts
    5,718
    Read this, from Mark himself: Carb Refeeding and Weight Loss | Mark's Daily Apple

    This isn’t enough for everyone, though. To go back to yesterday’s “hormones as software” analogy, some people are hackers who relish digging deep into the fine print of software manuals discussing human nutrition and hormonal responses. Others – the bulk of my readership – are cool with using their standard-issue, factory Mac or PC to reap the basic benefits of Primal living, while others prefer learning Unix and taking night classes in comp sci down at the local community college after work. They’re the ones who spend the time to fiddle with the programming language of our bodies in order to become real hormonal hackers. I get that. I love that stuff, too, if only to able to take the information and distill it for a large audience. Though one can see tremendous results with minimal effort following the simple principles of the Primal Blueprint (i.e. how I approach my own eating habits and how I recommend others do as well) digging deeper into the science of leptin and how carb refeeds impact leptin levels can unlock an entirely new level of fat loss (and understanding of why that fat loss is occurring).
    Now can we please put all this stupid back and forth over eating fucking potatoes to fucking rest? Fuck.

  9. #9
    MikeEnRegalia's Avatar
    MikeEnRegalia is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Germany (near Nuremberg)
    Posts
    825
    I think that improving your strength/weight ratio should be your ultimate goal at all times. When I joined a gym about two years ago my goal was hypertrophy, but what good do those muscles do me when I can't even do a real pull-up?

    I'd recommend that you train for strength and see what happens. Some people will become more bulky, some less ... that' mostly in the genes (specific genes have been identified that can result in people being very skinny, but strong, or quite bulky, but not so strong relative to the muscle mass).

  10. #10
    Laconophile's Avatar
    Laconophile is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    MN
    Posts
    431
    Primal Blueprint Expert Certification
    Strength and mass depend on each other to a great extent, so you should develop both.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •