Confusion about muscle confusion

[Robert Z]

Does anyone understand the proper explanation for this? I always see references to something that causes or addresses muscle confusion but I don't understand the meaning in terms of physiology.

 

I thought it might refer to the activation of the different muscle fiber types - slow twitch, medium twitch, fast twich - but other sources seem to imply that it has more to do with exercising different muscle groups.

 

Related and the motivation for asking in the first place, why do we plateau? What is happening to the muscles?

[ctxinfl]

I've always understood muscle confusion to mean changing up exercises so as to ensure muscles don't become too comfortable with a particular movement thereby inhibiting effectiveness.

 

I'm not sure I buy muscle confusion outside of changing up reps and weight. I do think it's a good idea to change up exercises every so often as different exercises work the same muscle group in different ways (e.g. chest press vs. flies), though I probably would stick with one routine for 8-12 weeks or to help with muscle memory.

[ctxinfl]

Meant to include, I think we plateau because we don't push ourselves. We don't want to work through that last push up or pull up. We don't want to squeeze out that extra rep. Or maybe we just don't bother increasing weight or reps.

 

Diet also plays a part. If you aren't eating right then your body won't have the energy to get you through your workout and if you aren't bringing in enough protein your muscle gains will be minimal.

[contact1]

Does anyone understand the proper explanation for this? I always see references to something that causes or addresses muscle confusion but I don't understand the meaning in terms of physiology.

 

I thought it might refer to the activation of the different muscle fiber types - slow twitch, medium twitch, fast twich - but other sources seem to imply that it has more to do with exercising different muscle groups.

 

Related and the motivation for asking in the first place, why do we plateau? What is happening to the muscles?

 

I have never believe in muscle confusion, honestly I feel it is something made up by the P90X program which addresses this. Ctxinfl is correct in that in building up muscles, depending on the goal, pushing past a certain limit is needed.

 

Lets take the simple example of just building up strength and mass of a muscle. Two things need to happen for this to occur. First, your muscles must be trained hard in there you have small tears in your fibers. When this happens, your muscles will repair and grow. Secondly, you must be eating enough calories in order for said muscles to grow. If you are in a deficit (aka losing weight), you can't grow muscle mass, as you don't have the calories to do it. At best you can try to keep the same muscle mass by forcing your body to repair said muscles, but they will not grow.

 

A lot of confusion comes from people dieting and they start to see they are able to life more weight and such as they progress. What is really happen is their muscles are getting more effective at using their fibers. At a certain point, this will no longer apply, hence that plateau people hit. From that point, the only way to gain more strength is to grow your muscles, through heavy weight training, eating enough calories and the right amount of protein.

[jba10582]

If you are in a deficit (aka losing weight), you can't grow muscle mass, as you don't have the calories to do it. At best you can try to keep the same muscle mass by forcing your body to repair said muscles, but they will not grow.

 

lb of fat = 3500 calories (fairly simple)

lb of muscle = 100-120 g of protein, plus water, glucose, nutrients ect (not as simple)

 

So, what you are saying is probably correct for a lot of situation, I do not agree it's IMPOSSIBLE to not gain muscle on a calorie deficit theretically (and practically through a lot of avenues including supplements, even drugs, esp genetics, very clean diets ect).

 

Basically losing a lb of fat means buring 3500 more calories, gaining a lb of muscle does NOT mean adding 3500 calories.

 

Reason for this: if you get stronger on a cut phase, what just happened?

[contact1]

lb of fat = 3500 calories (fairly simple)

lb of muscle = 100-120 g of protein, plus water, glucose, nutrients ect (not as simple)

 

So, what you are saying is probably correct for a lot of situation, I do not agree it's IMPOSSIBLE to not gain muscle on a calorie deficit theretically (and practically through a lot of avenues including supplements, even drugs, esp genetics, very clean diets ect).

 

Basically losing a lb of fat means buring 3500 more calories, gaining a lb of muscle does NOT mean adding 3500 calories.

 

Reason for this: if you get stronger on a cut phase, what just happened?

 

Read the end of my post, I explain this about your muscles getting more efficient at using their fibers, but not growing. This always happens when people start losing weight and go to the gym, their muscles are untrained, hence they get more effective. When you are cutting weight, your body doesn't just burn fat, it will also eat away at your muscles. Burning 3500 calories doesn't equate to burning 3500 calories of just fat, some of your muscle mass will also go down. If you train your muscles as you lose weight, you can preserve your muscle mass as you force your body to repair them, rather than eat away at them. You still lose some muscle mass, but not nearly as much as simply dieting and doing nothing.

 

This is why it is important to exercise when you diet, to help preserve your muscles, otherwise you do end up losing a lot of muscle mass in the process and end up like skin and bones, if you will.

 

Now if you are using steroids or some other type of drug, I don't have any experience to say what would happen, but this is all assuming the OP isn't jacking themselves up with drugs

[jba10582]

It's not impossible on a calorie deficit, just difficult.

[contact1]

It's not impossible on a calorie deficit, just difficult.

 

Alright sure, just because you say it it must be true, with no information as to why that is

 

Anyway, the point of this thread is about muscle confusion, at some point, once you train all your fibers, they will reach a limit to how effective they are, hence that plateau. I mean, your muscles can only move so many different ways, unless you start cracking your bones

[Robert Z]

I've always understood muscle confusion to mean changing up exercises so as to ensure muscles don't become too comfortable with a particular movement thereby inhibiting effectiveness.

 

I'm not sure I buy muscle confusion outside of changing up reps and weight. I do think it's a good idea to change up exercises every so often as different exercises work the same muscle group in different ways (e.g. chest press vs. flies), though I probably would stick with one routine for 8-12 weeks or to help with muscle memory.

 

I think by mixing it up you are referring to activating all of the different fiber types? This is what I keep thinking lies at the heart of the entire concept - no one exercise activates all of the fibers in a given muscle. You need heavy lifts with short term energy demands that are purely glycogen powered, moderate lifts that are somewhat anaerobic, as well as light loads and demands that activate the fast twitch muscles that are aerobic.

Edited March 28, 2014 by Robert Z

[Robert Z]

Read the end of my post, I explain this about your muscles getting more efficient at using their fibers,

 

 

Do you mean efficient in the literal sense of doing more work using the same amount of energy? If so, do you have any idea how this happens... or perhaps the blood supply improves? So even though you haven't added muscle, you can supply more energy to a given muscle?

[Robert Z]

Sidebar: I have also been really impressed with the work zone and max heart rate charts for age and fitness. Based on my age and fitness, I should be red lining at 170 bpm. And sure enough, just when I reach a point where I am gasping for air, where I might pass out if I needed any more air, my heart rate is right at precisely 170.

[contact1]

Do you mean efficient in the literal sense of doing more work using the same amount of energy? If so, do you have any idea how this happens... or perhaps the blood supply improves? So even though you haven't added muscle, you can supply more energy to a given muscle?

 

It's not about energy per say, it's more of how your brain works with the muscles when performing certain moves. This quote here gives a really good explanation as to why you have strength gains, when you are not building in size:

 

"On your first day ever of picking up a weight, your body will not be used to the load and it will not be used to the specific movement because it is not something you do every day, like walking, using a pencil, etc. Your untrained muscles are weak, but your brain also isn't very good at sending electrical impulses to the specific muscle group in question, because it has never been forced to move in the way in which you want to move. Look at a bicep curl:

 

You have most likely bent your elbow up and down at some point, but in every day life it is for little things, such as sheet of paper, maybe a gallon of milk/water or maybe a heavy backpack, but rarely if ever will you have to curl something that weighs 40 lbs from the floor to a full contracted position, so your body is not primed to make this movement.

 

Now lets say you started lifting, and curl 1-3 times a week. Now you are basically going from never curling anything more then 5 lbs, to performing multiple sets and reps with weights over 10 lbs. In order to become efficient at moving this new load, your brain sends electrical signals to a larger amount of your bicep, so say you were using 30% of your total bicep muscle day one, maybe you are now using 50% of the same muscle which you already had to start with, your body is just more efficient at using it because you have made it pretty clear you need your arm to be able to curl heavier weights then you ever have before.

 

This can all take place in a matter of weeks, where significant amounts of actual muscle growth take months. I think the general accepted drug free max amount of muscle growth is somewhere around 1 lb per week, now that's 1 lbs spread throughout your entire body, and there are much larger muscles in your back and legs then your biceps, so it isn't exactly divided evenly. So even if you were able to put on a full 1lb of muscle every week for a month, you still only put on 4 lbs of muscle, and well under 1 lb total on your biceps, but you also are more likely to see big jumps in strength that first 1-3 months then you are later on.

 

 

 

Summary: Your brain gets better at telling your muscles what to do when you make them do the same thing more."

[jba10582]

I'll like things that are simple. So when you burn calories you also break down muscle tissues also. correct. afterwards you eat protein to move away from catabolism of muscles and into protein syntheis. (How efficient protein syntheis is for each individual relies on MANY factors).

 

i.e. in simple terms, what happens is a balance between competing processes.

 

Protein Synthesis > Protein Breakdown = Muscle Gain

Protein Synthesis = Protein Breakdown = No change

Protein Synthesis < Protein Breakdown = Muscle Loss

 

So if a person that hasn't trained in months, decides for example to split cardio and weightlifting. Say their 3000 calorie per day rate.

Say they burn 500 in the morning jog, then eat to get into a neutral or postiive state. Throughout the day they eat clean and funnel their nutrients during their time of training before and after weightlifting and insure they get enough protein post-workout and good meals after.

 

This person consumes approximately 2500 calories THAT day. They had a deficit of 1000 calories from the workout. Remember, a lb of muscle is NOT 3500 calories, a lb of fat is 3500 calories. So depending on that person's efficiency in preventing muscle breakdown versus protein syntheis (many aveunues to increases this), it is possible.

[contact1]

I'll like things that are simple. So when you burn calories you also break down muscle tissues also. correct. afterwards you eat protein to move away from catabolism of muscles and into protein syntheis. (How efficient protein syntheis is for each individual relies on MANY factors).

 

i.e. in simple terms, what happens is a balance between competing processes.

 

Protein Synthesis > Protein Breakdown = Muscle Gain

Protein Synthesis = Protein Breakdown = No change

Protein Synthesis < Protein Breakdown = Muscle Loss

 

So if a person that hasn't trained in months, decides for example to split cardio and weightlifting. Say their 3000 calorie per day rate.

Say they burn 500 in the morning jog, then eat to get into a neutral or postiive state. Throughout the day they eat clean and funnel their nutrients during their time of training before and after weightlifting and insure they get enough protein post-workout and good meals after.

 

This person consumes approximately 2500 calories THAT day. They had a deficit of 1000 calories from the workout. Remember, a lb of muscle is NOT 3500 calories, a lb of fat is 3500 calories. So depending on that person's efficiency in preventing muscle breakdown versus protein syntheis (many aveunues to increases this), it is possible.

 

I very strongly disagree with this and feel it is very misinforming. Given your example, say you burn 3500 calories and only eat 2500, your body is not going to end up building any muscle, it is not possible because your body does not have any excess energy to perform such a feat.

 

Remember your body see's fat, protein (muscle), and carbs (glycogen) as sources of energy. The human body can not really store much carbs, hence what it has available in large amounts is muscle and fat to obtain energy from when food provided is not enough.

 

Think of it this way, if there was a building, and some of it was torn down, and you wanted to repair it, but only had what you started with, how can you make it into a taller building, without any extra materials? It is just not possible, and your body is not going to break down fat in order to build up your muscle and ontop of that, make it grow bigger. At most it will repair those broken fibers to maintain where it was. When you are losing calories, you body will look at both your glycogen stores (very limited), fat, and protein (muscles) as sources of energy to stay alive, that is your bodies main goal, to have enough energy to stay alive, breathing, and such.

 

Also, eating just protein isn't going to make you gain muscle, again to the body, this is just a form of energy, the body is able to convert protein into fat and other such conversations. While yes, eating a certain amount of protein does help you with muscle development, especially when you are training in excess calories, as it makes the process easier.

[jba10582]

lets say for simplicity its

 

200/200/100 carb/protein/fat

 

you body then uses those calories above plus your bodies fat stores AND existing liver glycogen, and muscle tissue.

 

The goal is to burn the fat and to prevent muscle breakdown and to stay in anabolic enviroment.

 

For me it helps to visualize what a pound of fat is (literally think a pound of cow fat or something similiar yellowish nasty stuff)

 

Now think of a pound of human muscle or meat. The two things do not look a like because they are not alike. A pound steak will have less calories than a pound of fat and much more nutrients.

 

A pound of steak does not have 200 grams of protein, something you have already eaten that day. So, if you body has the ability to properly synthesis the protein greater than the protein breakdown for that day, you have not only lost fat, but you have increased your muscle mass.

 

The MAIN thing is that protein synthesis must be greater than protein breakdown.

[contact1]

lets say for simplicity its

 

200/200/100 carb/protein/fat

 

you body then uses those calories above plus your bodies fat stores AND existing liver glycogen, and muscle tissue.

 

The goal is to burn the fat and to prevent muscle breakdown and to stay in anabolic enviroment.

 

For me it helps to visualize what a pound of fat is (literally think a pound of cow fat or something similiar yellowish nasty stuff)

 

Now think of a pound of human muscle or meat. The two things do not look a like because they are not alike. A pound steak will have less calories than a pound of fat and much more nutrients.

 

Right, that's a given, 1 gram of protein is 4 calories, and 1 gram of fat is 9 calories.

 

A pound of steak does not have 200 grams of protein, something you have already eaten that day.

 

Either does 100 grams of fat, so I'm not sure your point is here

 

So, if you body has the ability to properly synthesis the protein greater than the protein breakdown for that day, you have not only lost fat, but you have increased your muscle mass.

 

It will not though and that is exactly what I keep explaining. Your body will not be able to repair protein and on top of it build on it to make it bigger if it does not have the energy/calories to do so

 

The MAIN thing is that protein synthesis must be greater than protein breakdown.

 

I agree, but again this can only happen if your body has the required energy to do so.

 

Think of it this way, much more simple, you eat 2000 calories, and you burn 2500 calories for the day.

 

Of those 2500 calories burnt, your body uses the 2000 calories you ate. Your body still needs 500 calories, which it gets from fat, muscles, and carb storage. Your body does not, go repair it muscle, force more energy out of its fat, and than go make the muscles bigger. It does not operate in that fashion. Our bodies main concern is to survive, thus when we don't eat enough calories, it will use some of its energy storage to keep daily bodily functions running. Protein synthesis can not exceed the breakdown because there isn't anything to make it build up further, when you are already using up your own energy just to survive.

[jba10582]

YOu are saying you body is using its fat stores as energy in addition to the calories..so it burns the fat, this same energy with the calories eaten can also be used to aid in the protein syntheis if you body does not waste the protein you are consuming (efficiency and protein sythesis)...

 

Please do a google search to see that it is possible to lose fat and build muscle at the same time and that it does happen.

Edited March 29, 2014 by a LoveShack.org Moderator

[Robert Z]

It's not about energy per say, it's more of how your brain works with the muscles when performing certain moves. This quote here gives a really good explanation as to why you have strength gains, when you are not building in size:

 

"On your first day ever of picking up a weight, your body will not be used to the load and it will not be used to the specific movement because it is not something you do every day, like walking, using a pencil, etc. Your untrained muscles are weak, but your brain also isn't very good at sending electrical impulses to the specific muscle group in question, because it has never been forced to move in the way in which you want to move. Look at a bicep curl:

 

You have most likely bent your elbow up and down at some point, but in every day life it is for little things, such as sheet of paper, maybe a gallon of milk/water or maybe a heavy backpack, but rarely if ever will you have to curl something that weighs 40 lbs from the floor to a full contracted position, so your body is not primed to make this movement.

 

Now lets say you started lifting, and curl 1-3 times a week. Now you are basically going from never curling anything more then 5 lbs, to performing multiple sets and reps with weights over 10 lbs. In order to become efficient at moving this new load, your brain sends electrical signals to a larger amount of your bicep, so say you were using 30% of your total bicep muscle day one, maybe you are now using 50% of the same muscle which you already had to start with, your body is just more efficient at using it because you have made it pretty clear you need your arm to be able to curl heavier weights then you ever have before.

 

This can all take place in a matter of weeks, where significant amounts of actual muscle growth take months. I think the general accepted drug free max amount of muscle growth is somewhere around 1 lb per week, now that's 1 lbs spread throughout your entire body, and there are much larger muscles in your back and legs then your biceps, so it isn't exactly divided evenly. So even if you were able to put on a full 1lb of muscle every week for a month, you still only put on 4 lbs of muscle, and well under 1 lb total on your biceps, but you also are more likely to see big jumps in strength that first 1-3 months then you are later on.

 

Summary: Your brain gets better at telling your muscles what to do when you make them do the same thing more."

 

 

Do you have a better source for this? I see this was just quoted from some guy on a body building forum. How do you know it's accurate?

Neuromuscular Efficiency vs. Muscle Building - Bodybuilding.com Forums

 

 

That explanation doesn't sound very likely to me. And there is definitely a wealth of urban legends with this stuff.

Edited March 29, 2014 by Robert Z

[contact1]

YOu are saying you body is using its fat stores as energy in addition to the calories..so it burns the fat, this same energy with the calories eaten can also be used to aid in the protein syntheis if you body does not waste the protein you are consuming (efficiency and protein sythesis)...

 

I think you're just trolling now. Please do a google search to see that it is possible to lose fat and build muscle at the same time and that it does happen.

 

I didn't say the body only uses fat stores. What I said is that it uses fat, protein, and carb stores, not just fat. You are the one saying that your body only uses fat, which is not true. The point you keep missing is, when you are at a deficit, your body is not going to build bigger muscles. Yes it will repair it, but it is not going to take more fat storage, just to build up even bigger muscles, the body does not work as such. You want to keep believing that, go on ahead, I'm done on the subject that somehow muscles magically get bigger with energy that isn't there.

Edited March 29, 2014 by a LoveShack.org Moderator

[contact1]

Do you have a better source for this? I see this was just quoted from some guy on a body building forum. How do you know it's accurate?

Neuromuscular Efficiency vs. Muscle Building - Bodybuilding.com Forums

 

 

That explanation doesn't sound very likely to me. And there is definitely a wealth of urban legends with this stuff.

 

You'd have to give me some time to find a better source, I've read some research articles on the matter. The idea is as you work a muscle more, there are muscle inhibitors that start to have reduced times, these are things in your muscle with your brain that limit your muscle usage, usually to prevent you from tearing your muscle. I'll have to find it.

[contact1]

Here's two I found that cite about neural adaptation

 

http://www.uml.edu/campusrecreation/staff/EP%20II%20Materials/Neuromuscular%20Adaptations%20to%20Training.pdf

 

Muscle Hypertrophy 2011

 

The second one is in regards to hypertrophy (muscle gains) but it cites this

 

It is important to note that strength gains the first couple of months of training are primarily neural adaptations (Schoenfeld 2010). Gabriel, Kamen and Frost (2000) explain that in the early training phases the muscle is acquiring greater neural input, referred to as neural drive. Underlying this greater neural input are the motor unit recruitment patterns of muscle fiber types. Each motor unit represents a single nerve and the many muscle fibers it innervates.

[EasyHeart]

The idea of muscle confusion goes back to at least Arthur Jones in the '50s. The claim was that by changing exercises (eg, incline BP to decline BP) would increase muscle growth because muscles tend to plateau if you do the same exercises all the time. (And of course, if you want to change exercises you would coincidentally have to buy more equipment from Arthur Jones! )

 

For the 99% of people who lift weights recreationally, I doubt it makes any difference. Anecdotally, I'm sure we've all noticed that after a while of doing any exercise, we tend to plateau. How much of that is muscular vs. other things I don't know. It's probably a good idea to mix up exercises so that you get more even development, you don't strain the same joints over and over and just because you get bored doing the same things all the time. OTH, we're always going to be limited by whatever equipment we have. And there are really no replacements for basic exercises like rows, benches and squats, which I think should always be at the core of everybody's workouts.

 

Muscle confusion absolutely has nothing to do with different kinds of muscle fibers, since the idea pre-dates knowledge of those things.

[jba10582]

We are saying the same thing in what body uses at fuel. food, fat, glcogen, muscle breakdown.

 

The main point is that when protein syntheis is greater than protein (muscle)breakdown over a time period on a calorie deficit then both goals can be accomplished.

 

This happens fairly easy with new weightlifters, obese, high school kids going through growth spurts, athletes coming off long periods of time without training

 

I also believe it can happen on a lower carb diet where the body becomes more adaptive at utilizing fat stores while properly timing carb loads prior to anaerobic exercises and consuming enough protein/nutrients post workout during this extremely important window to utilize the needed protein. Un-used protein is excreted whether on a deficit or excess. The more efficient the ratio of the competing processes is depends on a lot of factors and does happen.