ArinnSo all this weight or bodyweight training with progressive overload is kind of just a way to communicate to our body and tell it to grow more muscles and strength?
Muscles are incredibly inefficient.
That’s why people that work 12 hour days doing manual labor were “skinny strong”.instead of jacked.
To get huge muscles, we need to trick our bodies into thinking we randomly have to move heavy weights every once and a while.
Part of that is slowly increasing the weight so they muscle rebuilds even bigger otherwise it would just stay the same. If you stop, your body stops wasting the energy for those huge muscles and they get smaller.
inefficient
Shouldn’t that be “efficient”? They will adapt to the minimal required strength for whatever the standard is.
No, because it always uses more energy to move.
Tendon strength is more efficient, so that’s what your body wants
What? If a muscle was inefficient, it would use more resources than it needed to no matter what its task was. This would result in larger muscles than needed - simply because “why not?” Use the resources.
By being as small and effective as possible for their normal tasks, they are as efficient as possible. That’s why if you stop working out - their normal tasks reduce - they get smaller and weaker.
Muscles rise to the lowest amount of strength possible. I’d argue that all parts of a body are as efficient as possible, because that’s how life usually works.
redfellowSimply by existing, large muscles waste a lot of energy vs. having so called skinny strength. That’s what the dude was referring to, and a well known fact that gaining muscle increases TDEE, so from the pov that many people work out to get jacked purely for aesthetical reasons, then muscles also are inefficient.
So from what context are we using the word “efficiency”?
Because from a muscle’s view, it is as efficient as possible. It grows and atrophies based on what is required of it. This is my problem with the main post: muscles are inefficient.
They aren’t, full stop. A muscle will be as efficient as possible - be as small and use as little energy as possible - to handle the regular tasks given.
If you are speaking from a holistic view of a human who decides what goals to set, whether it is useful to simply have large muscles for aesthetic reasons, then sure. Yeah. Big muscles burn more energy and aren’t needed to survive. I’d still say that’s not what efficiency is, but I’d concede there.
Energy consumption context. Not sure how that wasn’t apparent.
Then muscles are as efficient as they can be. They use as little energy as they need. They require energy to do things, just like everything else in your body. But they will only be as big/strong as required, nothing more - which is, believe it or not - efficiency.