Key Moments

Partial ROM Training for Strength, and Protein Requirements for Muscle Growth (Ep 102)

Stronger By ScienceStronger By Science
Sports3 min read110 min video
Oct 31, 2022|4,968 views|175|25
Save to Pod
TL;DR

Explore novel academic publishing, partial ROM training benefits, and nuanced protein intake recommendations.

Key Insights

1

The academic publishing industry is experimenting with new models, like e-Life's commitment to publishing all reviewed papers with transparent reviewer feedback, aiming to increase publication avenues and break inertia.

2

Historically, the shift to outsourced peer review wasn't solely for quality but also to lighten editorial workload, with evidence suggesting peer review itself is not a perfect quality control mechanism.

3

Partial range-of-motion (ROM) training, especially when combined with full ROM training, shows promising, though not always statistically significant, results in enhancing overall strength gains.

4

While full ROM training is superior for developing strength through the entire range of motion, combining it with partial ROM work may offer slight advantages and can address specific weaknesses.

5

Current research suggests that while protein intake is crucial for muscle growth, overestimating the negative consequences of falling slightly below the 1.6-2.2 g/kg range is common; the benefits plateau.

6

The exact optimal protein intake range (1.6-2.2 g/kg) is not as precisely defined as often assumed, and intakes around 1.3-1.5 g/kg still provide a significant portion of the potential benefits, especially for muscle hypertrophy.

INNOVATIONS IN ACADEMIC PUBLISHING

The podcast discusses the evolving landscape of academic publishing, highlighting e-Life's experimental model where all papers sent for review are published, accompanied by transparent reviewer feedback. This approach aims to increase publication avenues and reduce the inertia within the traditional system, moving away from a strict accept/reject dichotomy towards a more nuanced evaluation of research.

THE HISTORY AND RATIONALE OF PEER REVIEW

A historical perspective on peer review is offered, revealing that the shift to external review wasn't solely due to a pursuit of rigorous quality control. Journals increasingly outsourced reviews to manage workload and reduce editorial burden. Research indicates that peer review, despite its widespread acceptance, doesn't always live up to its perceived standards of quality assurance.

PARTIAL RANGE OF MOTION TRAINING FOR STRENGTH

The discussion delves into partial range-of-motion (ROM) training, particularly its combination with full ROM training for strength development. While full ROM training remains supreme for overall strength, studies suggest that incorporating partial ROM exercises, especially for lockout weaknesses, can yield comparable or slightly superior strength gains compared to full ROM training alone.

RESEARCH ON COMBINING RANGES OF MOTION

Several studies are reviewed that compared full ROM training against combined or progressive ROM training. Although statistical significance varied, a consistent trend favored the combination approaches, showing nominally larger gains in full ROM strength and specific partial ROM strength. Potential mechanisms include added training variety and addressing specific weak points.

NUANCES IN PROTEIN INTAKE FOR MUSCLE GROWTH

The segment critically examines protein intake recommendations, particularly the widely cited range of 1.6-2.2 grams per kilogram of body weight. While essential for muscle protein synthesis, the data suggests that the benefits plateau, and the negative consequences of falling slightly below this range (e.g., 1.3-1.5 g/kg) are often overestimated, especially for hypertrophy.

PRACTICAL PROTEIN INTAKE GUIDELINES

The presenters advocate for a more flexible approach to protein intake, suggesting that 'pretty damn good' levels might be 1.2-1.6 g/kg (total body mass) or 1.5-2.0 g/kg (fat-free mass). While optimal levels (1.6-2.2 g/kg total body mass, or 2.0-2.75 g/kg fat-free mass) are still recommended for maximizing gains, the cost-benefit of meticulously hitting them versus slightly lower, more achievable intakes is highlighted.

Lean Body Mass Gains vs. Protein Intake (Nunes et al. Meta-Analysis)

Data extracted from this episode

Protein Intake (g/kg/day)Effect Size (Standardized Mean Difference)
< 1.2-0.14
1.2-1.590.17
>= 1.60.3

Common Questions

E-Life's new model involves publishing papers upfront after an initial editorial check, then attaching peer reviewer comments transparently. This shifts from a binary accept/reject decision to one that allows for more fluid evaluation of research quality by readers.

Topics

Mentioned in this video

organizationNSF (National Science Foundation)

US organization that funds scientific projects; its funding decisions became a point of contention during the 1970s recession, leading to a shift towards a peer review model for grants.

organizationE-Life

A journal described as changing its publication model to publish papers with transparent peer reviewer comments, rather than making binary accept/reject decisions.

locationCold War United States

Historical context during which the peer review process for grant funding evolved in the US, driven by a desire to avoid direct Congressional oversight of scientific projects aligned with national security.

personBrad Gillingham

A powerlifting legend with six World Championships and multiple 800+ pound deadlifts, who also contributed to exercise science research.

studyMorton and colleagues (2018)

A meta-analysis and meta-regression project that established the widely cited optimal protein intake range of 1.6 to 2.2 grams per kilogram per day for muscle growth.

studyGillingham and debaliso

A study co-authored by Brad Gillingham, investigating full range of motion deadlifts versus a combination of full and partial deadlifts (rack pulls), showing nominal increases in deadlift strength for the combined group.

studyWhaley and colleagues (2020)

A paper that investigated progressive range of motion training (pin squats) versus full range of motion squats, showing nominal advantages for the progressive ROM group in squat strength and jump height.

personRobert Harrington

Author of an interview article from 2018 providing a good history of peer review.

personPaul Anderson

A legendary squatter known for innovative training methods like digging a hole for progressive partial squats and unique conditioning routines involving squats, overhead presses, and golf.

studyBasler and colleagues (2014)

A study that compared full range of motion squats with a combination of full and partial squats, finding nominal but not statistically significant differences favoring the combined approach for strength gains.

studyPedrosa and colleagues (2021)

A study comparing full range of motion knee extensions to a combination of two different partial ranges of motion, finding larger strength gains for the partial ROM approach.

supplementCitrulline Malate

A supplement mentioned as potentially having a small beneficial effect on training variables, with one host jokingly taking a 'shot' at it.

personMelinda Baldwin

Author of the journal article 'Scientific Autonomy, Public Accountability, and the Rise of Peer Review in the Cold War United States', which discusses the historical context of peer review.

personMilo Wolff

Collaborator who recently pre-printed a meta-analysis on the impact of range of motion on strength and muscle growth.

personBob Peoples

A pioneer of American strength training, credited as the first person to ever deadlift over 700 pounds, who utilized rack pulls to build his deadlift strength.

studyFonseca and colleagues (2014)

A study suggesting that variety in exercise selection can lead to greater squat strength gains compared to exclusively doing squats.

More from Stronger By Science

View all 144 summaries

Found this useful? Build your knowledge library

Get AI-powered summaries of any YouTube video, podcast, or article in seconds. Save them to your personal pods and access them anytime.

Try Summify free