With one leg, they did a plain-vanilla progressive training program involving four sets of each exercise with a two-minute rest, with the load chosen to reach failure between 9 and 12 repetitions. With the other leg, they did a variable routine that systematically switched up some of the parameters. Some workouts had a lighter load enabling 25 to 30 repetitions before failure; some involved six sets of each exercise rather than four; some involved eccentric contractions only; and some had four minutes of rest between sets rather than two.
[...]
So the main result of the study is that following a complicated variable weight-training routine rather than a simple unvarying one doesn’t seem to make any significant difference to how much muscle you accrue.
[...]
But there’s a further analysis that the single-leg design enables: you can look at the variation in results from two legs in the same person following different training plans, and see how that compares to the variation between two legs in different people following the same training plan. That analysis is pretty eyebrow-raising: there’s 40 times more variability between people than there is between training plans. The people who gain lots of muscle do so regardless of the exact workout routine they follow; and it’s the same for the people who don’t.
This was one of the central premises behind superslow.
Damn. No hope for me then.
What about other variables? Surely diet makes a difference? Protein intake? Does creatine work?
Not sure if the study’s premises are sound. Muscle gain is at least partly the result of hormonal changes from exercise which would be the same for both legs even if you worked them differently.
This is such obvious bullshit. Ever heard of the novice effect? And as a commentator remarked, muscle gain is a result of hormonal changes from exercise which would be the same for both legs even with different exercises. The only valid conclusion one can gain from this is that some people are genetically blessed enough to get away with doing anything while others are not so lucky. But again, you’re only a novice for only so long.
Everyone in the study was an experienced lifter. The point of the study was to compare a complicated, highly varied routine against a simple, less-varied routine, and the difference in results was insignificant.