The Prevention and Treatment of Exercise-Induced Muscle Damage

[Guest guest]

Casler writes:

Train Hard, Stay Hungry and seek DOMS,

Pérez asks:

So you actively seek soreness? Do you think it is linked to muscle growth?

Some people say it's irrelevant, or even undesirable. Me, I definitely like to

be sore after a hard training session, although I do hate it when my hams or

biceps are stiff and weak.

Thanks,

Pérez

Reynosa, Mexico

================================

________________________________

From: Supertraining [mailto:Supertraining ] On

Behalf Of Casler

Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2008 1:56 AM

To: Supertraining

Subject: The Prevention and Treatment of Exercise-Induced Muscle

Damage

Carruthers Posted:

The Prevention and Treatment of Exercise-Induced Muscle Damage.

Sports Med. 2008;38(6):483-503.

Howatson G, van Someren KA.

Conversely, there is unequivocal evidence that prior bouts of

eccentric exercise provide a protective effect against subsequent

bouts of potentially damaging exercise. Further research is warranted

to elucidate the most appropriate dose and frequency of interventions

to attenuate EIMD and if these interventions attenuate the adaptation

process. This will both clarify the efficacy of such strategies and

provide guidelines for evidence-based practice.

Casler writes:

Hi , good stuff and a topic I have looked at quite often.

I am wondering if anyone else finds it interesting that many who write about

DOMS and EIMD always suggest that " future bouts " provide a protective

effect. I find that suggestion NOT realistic. The mechanism is one of

simply adaptation to the stressor and not Protection from it. If you change

the exercises or routine you will again have a nice case of DOMS until the

adaptation to that different or greater stressor takes place.

In fact, since I train a little heavy (for me) I have DOMS/EIMD on more days

than not. (and have for the last 10 years) I don't seem to be getting that

promised protection LOL!!! I have the Torso, Hips Thighs and Calves today.

It also stands to reason that a stronger, more conditioned muscle is still

subject to DOMS/EIMD but at a higher load level. But continued bouts are

not prophylactic to all loads, only loads below the most recent adaptive

threshold.

I guess it is much like saying an adequate intake of nutrients staves off

disease, but it just seems a little strange that it is termed a " protective

effect " .

Maybe I might say that it " increases resistance " to DOMS/EIMD, but does not

protect against it if the load is high enough.

Maybe I have too much time on my hands. I mean don't get me started on the

role of the eccentric action in all this.

Train Hard, Stay Hungry and seek DOMS,

===============================

[Guest guest]

" Sad to say that I do believe periodization would certainly reduce the day

to day DOMS, but it would also likely reduce my conditioning level. "

****

, that's a really fascinating concept. At what age did you personally

see this " change " occur in your training from periodization to

deconditioning?

Todd Langer, MSc, CES, Rolfer

Casler writes:

It is actually a little more complicated, and specific to my training.

However the major implementation of DFT (Dual Factor) as I understand it, is

to employ " loading phases " cycled with recovery/rebound phases. For the

beginner who is making SFT progress it is not really as effective.

The DFT model at the advanced level, is predicated on the " recovery cycle

periods " of the trainee. As we age, we begin to experience a change in some

of the time periods contained in those cycles.

Recovery times " increase " , and peak conditioning (period where the benefits

of the recovery cycle) decrease. Also as the peak conditioning cycles

decrease, the time to deconditioning also shortens, meaning that

deconditioning begins earlier than in younger athletes/trainees.

This is due to many factors such as change in hormonal profiles, reduced

digestive efficiency, less quality sleep, increase in inflammatory response,

rate, and timing, etc.

Now my program is " willfully " rather brutal, (to me) as an experiment in

stimulating higher hormonal response to exercise, maintenance of TYPE II

fibers, stress to skeletal structures, and so on. As a personal goal I also

like to use rather good loads to acheive these goals.

I also experiment with both " high tension and high fatigue " models in a

complexed schematic. That is, I attempt to cause both " high muscle tension "

to strongly recruit all fibers types, including TYPE II, and " high fatigue "

to stimulate significant sarcoplasmic stimulus.

This is accomplished by using a set and rep schedule of either 30/15/7 or

20/10/5 for 3 sets for only 2-3 main exercises each session.

These sets are at an intensity level that would likely yield a PR, or a RM

performance ON EACH SET. Adequate rest is applied between each set to

insure the highest effort capability.

What this yields is 6-9 extremely " high effort/high intensity " efforts,

which might be looked at as CAT like (Compensatory Acceleration Training) in

their performance. This model then, also yields a progression to extremely

high loads, with multiple " high force " exposures, both in concentric and

eccentric actions. Reps are performed as a speed that is congruent with RM

efforts. Form is such as to create the largest force relationships and

maximum efficiency at reaching a higher level of stimulus.

So in a typical exercise, I will have 20/10/5 exposures to large eccentric

loads. (35 total) These are presented also under rather high fatigue

conditions, considering I move from High Reps to low reps.

So this lengthy explanation is to suggest that while I likely could employ a

separate qualities periodization schedule of a period of High Tension, and a

Period of High Fatigue, the Conditioning effect of either would not likely

(I have found) be maintained through to the end of that goal period.

By employing " mixed qualities " in one routine, I am able to retain these,

and use an undulating cycle of intensity with no load cycles or periods

" ONLY " if I feel it is needed, and on an instinctive basis.

As far as when I noticed this, I can only say that it is not a distinct

moment or time, but more of a decade of change. 10 years ago, (49) my Work

Rate and Ability was as good as it had ever been in my life. At 59, I can

certainly entertain the degradation of ability, and recovery, to the point

that to maintain my goals, I need address these changes.

And again, the personal goals of Strength, Power, Hypertrophy, Fitness,

Health and Longevity are all intertwined in my personal situation. If one

was more interested in " Strength " only or " Fitness " only the schedule could

be entirely different, since Strength levels can be maintained with lower

reps schedules, less eccentric exposures, and less DOMS. Fitness too would

not require such intensity. So my comments are " specific " to my own goals

and training experiments.

Regards,

Casler

TRI-VECTOR 3-D Force Systems

Century City, CA