Bigger muscles are not always more effective

Bigger muscles are not always more effective

Bigger muscles are not always more effective: The big sculpted muscles of bodybuilders, some movie stars and gym players can make them look like cartoon superheroes. We tend to associate big muscles with more strength and power. But research has found that at the cellular level, the well-defined big muscles of bodybuilders do not perform so well against those of power athletes (such as weightlifters, powerlifters or sprinters, sports that require important forces to be rapidly developed ) And even against individuals who do not train at all.

This research, published in Experimental Physiology, was carried out on individual muscle cells taken from a group of volunteers comprising 12 bodybuilders, six athletic athletes and 14 control subjects (medium, physically active but not training With weights). This directed research, by Hans Degens of the University of Manchester, stimulated the cells and assessed the size and rapidity of the force produced from the isometric contractions (which contract while keeping the same length). By measuring the size of the muscle cells, they were able to calculate the specific strength, which is the force produced for a specific area or muscle unit. The higher the specific strength, the better the muscle.

The authors of the study found that although the individual fibers of muscle cells of bodybuilders were considerably larger than those of the control group, they also had a lower specific force. This shows that their muscles were of poorer quality than those of the control groups. Power athletes, who also use bodybuilding training, weighing less, but faster, had muscles of a similar quality to control subjects, but were able to produce a faster Which means that their muscles were more powerful.

Suggest results

Although the authors' results are of good quality, they must be put in context. Our muscle fibers do not work in isolation but are part of a larger body system. Lifting weights can increase the size of the muscles but it can also improve the connective tissue that supports them and the blood vessels as well as the ability to mobilize the nervous system to use more muscle available.

This means that a lower specific force at the microscopic level is not necessarily equal to poor muscle quality or degraded functioning throughout the body. Thus, we should not be surprised that the former bodybuilders were able to dominate the competitions of strength while maintaining their volume.

Physiologists have known for decades that a solid but imperfect and complex relationship exists between the size of a muscle and the force it can produce. Generally, the bigger the muscle, the stronger it can produce. However, some studies have noted that larger muscles have no equivalent or proportional improvement in specific strength.

This means that when the muscle becomes larger, there is no equivalent increase in muscle quality. This is thought to be due to changes in muscle architecture or dilution of the proteins that do the work of muscle contraction. Similar results appear when muscle size is increased by intake of anabolic steroids or testosterone.

Quality on quantity

It seems that there is an optimal size for a muscle, beyond which any increase in size does not necessarily lead to the same relative improvements in strength. This study shows that this relationship exists at the microscopic, cellular level of the muscles. This also means that neither muscle size nor an individual muscle cell can be used to accurately predict its strength. However, bodybuilders are usually extremely genetically gifted athletes who spend hours every day eating and training for the growth of their muscles. It is unlikely that the average individual who goes to the gym will reach a muscle fiber size that will lead to this dilution of his strength

The situation is different for power athletes who train with lighter weights but quite differently from bodybuilders. As they train to muscle up their genetic potential through diet and sometimes even certain substances, power athletes try to maximize their strength at a specific body weight. Differences in training strategies, combined with a constant need to maintain weight in a given category, are likely to inhibit power athletes from growing muscles the size of bodybuilders.

As an illustration of this difference in strength between athletes with different goals, between an athlete who makes strength and a bodybuilder, one only has to consider Fred Hatfield who was able to lift 90 kg more to the squats A bodybuilder like Tom Platz, who had thighs much larger and more impressive.

These anecdotal accounts, alongside recent research, present bodybuilders as the "paper tigers" of the weightlifting world. They are, however, incredibly strong against average standards, and they have the ability to become champions of athletic strength. When it comes to muscle response to dumbbell weights, size may not do it all, but it is not a bad guide.