| --> |
|
Originally Posted by Dale Mabry
They must be on to us...
I always thought using larger muscle groups lead to greater release myself. |
|
Originally Posted by CowPimp
I think that volume is certainly part of the equation in the second study. However, I think it would have been interesting to see a third group where the exercises were performed in a circuit fashion, but at the same level of volume. All we can do is speculate, and I think it's nearly impossible to do so accurately.
|
|
Originally Posted by Yanick
fuckin nerds.
|
|
Originally Posted by shiznit2169
I'm always glad to have the opportunity to speak openly, without fear of Mr. Yanick twisting our words in a vile attempt to control your bank account, your employment, your personal safety, and your mind. But before I continue, allow me to explain that we've never bothered him. Yet he wants to censor any incomplicitous fairy tales. Whatever happened to "live and let live"? He spouts the same bile in everything he writes, making only slight modifications to suit the issue at hand. The issue Yanick's excited about this week is priggism, which says to me that he may have access to weapons of mass destruction. Then again, I consider Yanick to be a weapon of mass destruction himself. The credentialism "debate" is not a debate. It is a harangue, a politically motivated, brilliantly publicized, insincere attack on progressive ideas. Anyway, I hope I've made my point, which is that Mr. Yanick has long served as a cheerleader for snobbism.
|
|
Originally Posted by Dale Mabry
My thinking is that the amplitude of the local stress is what causes the GH release, prolly via GHRH activity, not just the presence of lactate.
|
|
Originally Posted by CowPimp
I'm not really suggesting you are wrong, that's definitely a strong possbility. I'm just saying I don't want to jump to any conclusions yet myself.
|
vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2008,
Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.