<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/" 
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: How To Know If You Are Really Building Muscle	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://musclehack.com/how-to-know-if-you-are-really-building-muscle/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://musclehack.com/how-to-know-if-you-are-really-building-muscle/</link>
	<description>free workouts to build muscle &#38; lose fat fast</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 11:39:50 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Gain Muscle Mass With Nick		</title>
		<link>https://musclehack.com/how-to-know-if-you-are-really-building-muscle/#comment-50794</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Gain Muscle Mass With Nick]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 11:39:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://musclehack.com/?p=2010#comment-50794</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Excellent post.  A lot of guys obsess over how much they weight and their body fat percentage.  While these measurements together are a great way to make sure you&#039;re on the right track, keeping an eye on your strength gains at the same time is a great idea. Progressive overload is the only way to stimulate consistent and continuous muscle growth, if your strength level decline, it&#039;s sure-fire sign that you&#039;re either losing muscle mass or over training.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excellent post.  A lot of guys obsess over how much they weight and their body fat percentage.  While these measurements together are a great way to make sure you&#8217;re on the right track, keeping an eye on your strength gains at the same time is a great idea. Progressive overload is the only way to stimulate consistent and continuous muscle growth, if your strength level decline, it&#8217;s sure-fire sign that you&#8217;re either losing muscle mass or over training.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Ahmed		</title>
		<link>https://musclehack.com/how-to-know-if-you-are-really-building-muscle/#comment-50627</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ahmed]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Oct 2009 18:08:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://musclehack.com/?p=2010#comment-50627</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Man , you have benefited me a lot , thank you very much :)]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Man , you have benefited me a lot , thank you very much 🙂</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Andrew		</title>
		<link>https://musclehack.com/how-to-know-if-you-are-really-building-muscle/#comment-50626</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Andrew]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Oct 2009 17:35:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://musclehack.com/?p=2010#comment-50626</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I&#039;ve seen this mentioned a bazillion times:  do an exercise &quot;to failure.&quot;  Now, you&#039;ve probably explained what the exact threshold for &quot;failure&quot; is elsewhere (and if so, point me in the right direction), but I figured I&#039;d ask anyway.

How do I know if I&#039;ve reached &quot;positive failure&quot;?  Is it when no matter how hard I try, I can&#039;t get the weight past a certain point?  What is that point?  For example, with lat pull downs, is it when I can&#039;t get the bar past my chin, or when I can&#039;t get the bar all the way to my chest?  Etc.  

OR...is it when it takes me TOO LONG to get a weight all the way to a certain point (whatever that point may be)?  For example, with dumbbell shoulder presses...by the 9th or 10th, it&#039;s taking me a good 10 seconds or more to get it all the way up, but I can.

So...what IS that threshold?

Also, in regards to Pes&#039;s post, I&#039;ve seen so many schools of thought as to what constitutes how many reps you should do per set.  One site said 4-6 reps of very high weight, while I&#039;ve seen 8-12 here (which is what I do).  4-6 seems to work for some people better than 8-12 (otherwise why would they be claiming that it&#039;s the way to go), while 8-12 OBVIOUSLY works for others (like you, Mark).  Are the # of reps dependent on the physiology of each individual person?  Or is it cut-and-dried (i.e. 8-12 is always right, while the people who suggest 4-6 are absolutely wrong)?

Yes, that&#039;s a lot of questions.  Sorry. ;)

Thanks!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve seen this mentioned a bazillion times:  do an exercise &#8220;to failure.&#8221;  Now, you&#8217;ve probably explained what the exact threshold for &#8220;failure&#8221; is elsewhere (and if so, point me in the right direction), but I figured I&#8217;d ask anyway.</p>
<p>How do I know if I&#8217;ve reached &#8220;positive failure&#8221;?  Is it when no matter how hard I try, I can&#8217;t get the weight past a certain point?  What is that point?  For example, with lat pull downs, is it when I can&#8217;t get the bar past my chin, or when I can&#8217;t get the bar all the way to my chest?  Etc.  </p>
<p>OR&#8230;is it when it takes me TOO LONG to get a weight all the way to a certain point (whatever that point may be)?  For example, with dumbbell shoulder presses&#8230;by the 9th or 10th, it&#8217;s taking me a good 10 seconds or more to get it all the way up, but I can.</p>
<p>So&#8230;what IS that threshold?</p>
<p>Also, in regards to Pes&#8217;s post, I&#8217;ve seen so many schools of thought as to what constitutes how many reps you should do per set.  One site said 4-6 reps of very high weight, while I&#8217;ve seen 8-12 here (which is what I do).  4-6 seems to work for some people better than 8-12 (otherwise why would they be claiming that it&#8217;s the way to go), while 8-12 OBVIOUSLY works for others (like you, Mark).  Are the # of reps dependent on the physiology of each individual person?  Or is it cut-and-dried (i.e. 8-12 is always right, while the people who suggest 4-6 are absolutely wrong)?</p>
<p>Yes, that&#8217;s a lot of questions.  Sorry. 😉</p>
<p>Thanks!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Tristan		</title>
		<link>https://musclehack.com/how-to-know-if-you-are-really-building-muscle/#comment-50397</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tristan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2009 10:07:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://musclehack.com/?p=2010#comment-50397</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I know a guy who weighs about 65kg but can bench press 95kg, I weight 85kg and can only bench about 65kg! I know that there are big differences in neuro-muscular efficiency, but that just seems ridiculous! Unless of course he&#039;s full of BS!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I know a guy who weighs about 65kg but can bench press 95kg, I weight 85kg and can only bench about 65kg! I know that there are big differences in neuro-muscular efficiency, but that just seems ridiculous! Unless of course he&#8217;s full of BS!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Pes		</title>
		<link>https://musclehack.com/how-to-know-if-you-are-really-building-muscle/#comment-50319</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Pes]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2009 18:10:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://musclehack.com/?p=2010#comment-50319</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I agree that the best way to build muscle is to get stronger. In that sense, getting stronger is a great indicator of muscle gain.

However, muscular hypertrophy is due to increase both in the number of myofibrils AND mitochondrial density. Lower reps increase the amount of the myofibrils the most effectively (and thus strength), whereas higher (8 - 12 and more) reps challenge the endurance elements of the muscle, resulting in a greater relative increase in the amount of mitochondrion. With this in mind, the muscle gains are not directly proportional to strength gains between different types of training. With strength training the muscle gain is slower. This is why someone can get up to say 200 kg squat with pure strength training but still have relatively small legs. However, all of this is only to point out the minute fact that there is definitely variation to take into consideration. Strength is nonetheless one of the best ways to gauge muscle gain and should always be applied! I would not even train without a workout log nowadays.

Also, it was interesting to see that when I was on a diet, to my surprise, I was able to increase my strength by about 1 rep per session but regardless, my lean body mass decreased according to total body weight and fat percentage, measured by calibers. This was a real-life reminder for myself that strength isn&#039;t always proportional to muscle mass gained - or retained.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree that the best way to build muscle is to get stronger. In that sense, getting stronger is a great indicator of muscle gain.</p>
<p>However, muscular hypertrophy is due to increase both in the number of myofibrils AND mitochondrial density. Lower reps increase the amount of the myofibrils the most effectively (and thus strength), whereas higher (8 &#8211; 12 and more) reps challenge the endurance elements of the muscle, resulting in a greater relative increase in the amount of mitochondrion. With this in mind, the muscle gains are not directly proportional to strength gains between different types of training. With strength training the muscle gain is slower. This is why someone can get up to say 200 kg squat with pure strength training but still have relatively small legs. However, all of this is only to point out the minute fact that there is definitely variation to take into consideration. Strength is nonetheless one of the best ways to gauge muscle gain and should always be applied! I would not even train without a workout log nowadays.</p>
<p>Also, it was interesting to see that when I was on a diet, to my surprise, I was able to increase my strength by about 1 rep per session but regardless, my lean body mass decreased according to total body weight and fat percentage, measured by calibers. This was a real-life reminder for myself that strength isn&#8217;t always proportional to muscle mass gained &#8211; or retained.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: cherubino		</title>
		<link>https://musclehack.com/how-to-know-if-you-are-really-building-muscle/#comment-50313</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[cherubino]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2009 17:19:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://musclehack.com/?p=2010#comment-50313</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Hi Mark, i recently came out of a diet (i lost nearly 25 kg!) and my doctor used a very accurate method to monitorate body fat and lean mass percentage. It&#039;s called bioimpedance and it is great also to know extracellular water, water retention. In some weeks i lost 0.2 kg but i could see with bioimpedance that i lost 1 kg of fats and gained 0.8 kg of muscles. I think it&#039;s the best way to know if you&#039;re building muscles, even if it&#039;s difficult to find bioimpedance machines.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Mark, i recently came out of a diet (i lost nearly 25 kg!) and my doctor used a very accurate method to monitorate body fat and lean mass percentage. It&#8217;s called bioimpedance and it is great also to know extracellular water, water retention. In some weeks i lost 0.2 kg but i could see with bioimpedance that i lost 1 kg of fats and gained 0.8 kg of muscles. I think it&#8217;s the best way to know if you&#8217;re building muscles, even if it&#8217;s difficult to find bioimpedance machines.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
