>not restricting blood flow rate ain't gonna make it

>>40801378
you should wrap some cloth around your neck and "blood flow train" yourself by hanging from the ceiling

>restricting blood flow
>not completely removing all blood from your body while lifting and then filling your vessels with young healthy blood

>>40801411
>11
Do it now OP

Someone explain what Nuckols thinks these do.

>>40801411

fucking kek

This is outright retarded.

>>40801378
I did this and I hit 2/3/4/5 in 1 month after reaching 1/2/3/4, shit's sick.

>>40801378
it amazes me that poeple have so much time to try out and argue over some stupid bro science like it's gonna give you 1inch extra

>>40801411
+1

File: 0001.jpg (1MB, 2550x3300px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2550x3300px

>>40801530
Hi medical journals would like to speak with you. I'mma post 4 article abstract, you pick the one that seems the most legit and ill post the whole article

File: 004.png (171KB, 1452x871px) Image search: [Google]

171KB, 1452x871px

I swear, most people on /fit/ get mad about the assumption that those who workout are dumb yet they fit right in the stereotype.

>>40802522

You do realize that the conclusion of almost all of these articles is that blood flow restriction training is almost the equivalent of regular high intensity training right?

>>40801378
>Reading T-Nation
>Ever making it

>>40801411
kek

>>40802620
Yes same as doing 2 sets instead of 3 while result in the same hypertrophy ''without significant difference''.
You need to know that random controlled trials give accurate results but are VERY conservative to measure differences between groups. That is because most of the time you variance inside your groups is so large it blurs the size of the outcome.

>>40801378
Can't that shit cause tissue necrosis and stuff ?

so what's the verdict /fit/? too dumb to read, or maybe this is just another meme i'll fall for

>>40801411
>you should wrap some cloth around your neck and "blood flow train" yourself by hanging from the ceiling

What did he mean by this?

>>40802801
>too dumb to read
you must like getting fucked over. educate yourself. others have no reason to do the learning for you.

File: 1334199544393.jpg (17KB, 472x472px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 472x472px

>>40802801
I'll tell you what I've gathered:
BFR hurts like crap (I've tried a few times) and I'm not planing on entering any bodybuilding contests ever so it's not worth it for me.

When recommending an intervention based on emerging facts there is a) the strength of the proof b) the size of the effect. If we consider BFR as an intervention for hypertrophy you get a strong proof that there is SOME effect (a lot of (a) and a bit of (b)). So you do you.

If I were to tell you your twin brother started doing it and you had the same crush, would you be comfortable not trying it out?

>>40802721

That's exactly my problem with it, as a whole if the method was superior the larger the number of similar participants the more consistent the results become especially between the control groups and test groups. If the variance within the group is "so large" how can you correlate the results with the hypothesis you're testing? I'm not necessarily against it because resistance is resistance but the only thing I see from restricting venous blood flow is a build up of lactic acid within the muscle tissue.

>>40802932
That's the point. Evidence shows that muscle damage induces growth, which we knew, but it was believed it only applied to damage caused by mechanical use. Now we know other types of muscular damage can also induce growth.

File: group size.png (17KB, 1018x749px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 1018x749px

>>40802932
>the larger the number of similar participants the more consistent the results become especially between the control groups and test groups. If the variance within the group is "so large" how can you correlate the results with the hypothesis you're testing?

With larger groups you get results that are usually more pronounced (right side) but the variance from person to person inside the group (since not everyone will see the same effects) make the two bars on the right statistically indistinguishable even though they show a bigger effect than the smaller groups (on the left)

>>40802769
damage causes growth, unless you stick a knife in you thigh, then it wont regrow bigger like in your animes

>>40801378
You become desensitized to this in 2 to 3 weeks. Then you need to move back to regular training for a few months before it starts working again.

>>40801530
Then why does Steve Cook do it?

>>40804280
Now THAT is baseless broscience