The Longest Q&A Ever About Long-Term Hypertrophy and People Extrapolating from Limited Data

So this is a stupid long Q&A with a stupider long answer. The gist of the question being "Is it safe to extrapolate from short-term studies in terms of the 'supposed growth advantage' of higher volumes to the longer term? Won't you still reach your genetic potential using more moderate volumes?"
Not only will I explain why the answer to this question is yes, I'll argue why using these moronic high volumes are more likely to SLOW your progress to your goals.
The rest of the answer won't shock you. But it may bore you to f'ing tears.
Preorder Sumi's Book at amazon.com. DO IT NOW!!
a.co/d/0mKGBXT
store.bodyreco...
bodyrecomposit...
IG: @mcdonaldlyle
My awesome Facebook group: / 810890695609053
Questions for me to ignore: [e-mail]
I also do Zoom consultations now if you want me to tell you how to live your life:
store.bodyreco...

[@DevilsRejection]

"there are 49 other fucking weeks left in the year" i nearly spit out my protein shake i was laughing so hard

[@TravisHowrish-v2c]

People are also massively exaggerating the difference between what’s optimal and what works. Sure, if you are an elite athlete training for the olympics or a professional bodybuilder spending twice as long in the gym to make 5% more gains might be worth it. But as an average Joe you have no business worrying about this stuff.

[@BuJammy]

The greatest unsaid by the science gurus is: The differences between the 50 set group, and the 10 set groups are measured in millimetres, not inches, and usually via ultrasound, the dowser's wand of 21st century sport science.

[@davidkeller3618]

hypo-responder vs hyper-responder, great point no one else talks of this ( we are not averages as an individual )

[@HermieMunster]

Moderate volumes, higher intensity has been giving me my best gains.

[@superhuman991]

i f**** love Lyle. The best for ever, thank you lyle. I cant thank you enough for making videos and always telling the truth

[@senhuawu9524]

Awesome video as always, super insightful

[@DennisMenjivar-ym8bl]

this video is absolute gold, thank you Lyle

[@-b-sharp]

"Oh wow, has that big ass elephant been here the whole time?" -The "Scientists"

[@ekolder]

Love the attitude from Lyle. Nothing ambiguous for sure. The point in this video is a dirty secret that would kill the hypertrophy-based peddlers if commonly known. Thanks for posting.

[@cszabo8899]

Much appreciated, Lyle, thank you!

[@entivreality]

Appreciate you Lyle!

[@LTPottenger]

It's a big bias for trainers to do stupid things in order to 'prove' how awesome they are by giving fast results. Especially when they know that 99% of the time they have 3 months to see a client and then it's over so they just do whatever bs in that time but if you try it for 5 years you are probably done.

[@RobThomas-tp2pl]

Lyle extra angry in this one 😂😂 Some like caffeine or ephedrine to amp up 😢😂 Not Lyle he likes anger 😂😂 but always great content. Lyle and Broderick on a weekly pod cast 😂😂 the " angry podcast" 😂

[@Oi-mj6dv]

When experts of a given field, even worse for SPORTS SCIENCE, where they supposedly have first hand experience on how something FEELS like instead of just looking at a random piece of paper and try to reason about them, just concludes that 52 sets seems about right, totally doable and its legit, calls it a day and proclaims that there seems to not be any ceiling for weekly volume, i cannot help but laugh my ass off man.

[@TravisHowrish-v2c]

When you watch their sets to “failure” it all makes sense. These guys leave 5+ reps in the tank on every set. They train like wimps.

[@pamperedmaster8690]

52 sets per week, to TRUE failure, for every muscle group sounds so, insanely dumb. The only way I see anyone doing that for longer then 2 weeks is by taking so much compounds they are not human anymore.

[@TheRedJohnn]

If feeling was the ultimate proxy for what's right, we would be to this day training for the pump like gymbros before Internet. Agreed, however, 52 sets weekly is ridiculously high. Especially for people with normal lifes and responsibilities.

[@Oi-mj6dv]

@@TheRedJohnn yes, exactly. I agree feeling is not the ultimate proxy but it can put you in the ballpark. The only way i can begin to make sense of a 52 set weekly volume is an uber specialized meso where you just drop everything and blast a muscle 5-6 days a week with 10-8 sets withwolding signifficantly from failure. Otherwise i just dont even see how It is feasible. Its essentially asking someone to so german volume on a stupid high frequency and "lol endure this hell, youll grow". Excuse me, are we nuts?

[@LorenzKamo]

Writing for the algorithm

[@ashmorosin]

6-10 sets to failure per week per muscle split over 2-3 sessions a week and your golden

[@Theo_Soul]

Excellent video

[@nocturne3455]

The anger is so funny and dope. Real shit

[@jfmorache]

Lyle !! Lets goooo

[@vado1st]

Where is the super hero who time stamps the video😂?

[@derickharman9820]

Lyles getting on there ass 😂

[@jonitalia6748]

No diddy, he has them wailing like Meek Mill.

[@Tjwheat903]

I see lyle, i click

[@Jack-e5t]

❤

[@justusfaustus8696]

29:15 "if you're looking at four years of training, it takes about three to four years, assuming you train perfectly from day one, and nobody does, to reach your genetic limit" Based on what data do you make this claim? I'm sure you mean "80-90% of your genetic limit" rather than a 100%. Even if you trained "perfectly" (whatever that means), you don't suddenly stop progressing at all after four years just because you're nearing your "genetic limit".