Ep 385 - Do Studies on Untrained Lifters Apply to Trained Lifters?

<p>Trexler and Helms dig into Helms&#39;s new MASS article, &quot;Are studies on untrained lifters irrelevant to trained lifters?&quot; It&#39;s built around a new umbrella review by Andy Fry and colleagues. The recurring internet claim is that most exercise research is done on untrained people, so a trained lifter is &quot;built different&quot; and the findings don&#39;t apply. The hosts unpack why that&#39;s mostly wrong. They start with the messy problem of defining how &quot;trained&quot; someone is. Then they discuss Fry&#39;s review, which reports that roughly 70% of resistance training study participants are sedentary or untrained, with fewer than 500 out of nearly 19,000 participants counting as genuinely well-trained. But the key focus of the episode is that this doesn&#39;t invalidate the research: what makes a beginner grow more will also make an advanced lifter grow more — the difference is rate, not mechanism.</p><p><br></p><p>Iron Culture is proudly presented by the MASS Research Review. Mostly because Helms and Trex are co-owners.</p><p>massresearchreview.com</p><p><br></p><p>If you&#39;re in the market for some new (ultra-high-quality) gym gear or apparel, be sure to use code &quot;MRR10&quot; for a 10% discount over at elitefts.com</p><p><br></p><p>If you&#39;d like to submit a question for a future episode, head over to:</p><p>massresearchreview.com/ironculture</p><p><br></p><p>Chapters</p><p>0:00 Intro</p><p>8:25 The article: do untrained studies apply?</p><p>11:31 What does &quot;trained&quot; even mean?</p><p>22:26 How researchers try to define training status</p><p>25:51 Fry&#39;s approach &amp; the McKay tiers</p><p>28:07 A review of reviews: mapping the literature</p><p>32:24 The finding: 70% untrained</p><p>37:46 Is that actually a problem?</p><p>43:44 Where meta-analyses fall short</p><p>51:27 Dose, stimulus &amp; the maintenance threshold</p><p>58:27 Realistic rates of progress &amp; goal-setting</p><p>1:14:51 Wrap-up: you don&#39;t need perfect</p>