Assertion
Training a muscle more frequently does not necessarily lead to better muscle hypertrophy.
Explained
The assertion is made in the context of discussing the optimal frequency for training a muscle in a week. The text explains that while some may believe training a muscle more frequently allows for more frequent elevations in muscle protein synthesis and more time spent in a muscle-building state, the scientific literature does not strongly support this claim. The assertion is relevant because it challenges a common belief in the fitness community and highlights the importance of considering the total number of weekly sets when evaluating training frequency.
Context for Assertion
The context of this assertion is the discussion of training frequency and its impact on muscle hypertrophy. The text provides an overview of different training splits, such as bro splits, lower splits, and full body, and explains how the total number of weekly sets is a critical factor in determining the effectiveness of a training program.
Concepts for Assertion
Tags
Evidence for Assertion
Why relevant:
Why true:The meta-analysis found that the relationship between training frequency and muscle hypertrophy is not significant, which supports the assertion.
How it is true:The meta-analysis conducted a comprehensive review of existing studies and found that the evidence does not support a significant relationship between training frequency and muscle hypertrophy.
ELI5
- The study combined the results of many previous studies to examine the relationship between training frequency and muscle hypertrophy.
- The analysis found that the relationship between training frequency and muscle hypertrophy is not significant, which means that training a muscle more frequently does not necessarily lead to better muscle hypertrophy.
- This finding is important because it challenges a common belief in the fitness community and highlights the importance of considering the total number of weekly sets when evaluating training frequency.