Nutrition, Training, Supplementation, and Performance-Enhancing Drug Practices of Male and Female Physique Athletes Peaking for Competition.

ABSTRACT: Escalante, G, Barakat, C, Tinsley, GM, and Schoenfeld, BJ. Nutrition, training, supplementation, and performance-enhancing drug practices of male and female physique athletes peaking for competition. J Strength Cond Res 37(8): e444-e454, 2023-The purpose of this descriptive investigation was threefold: (a) to assess the nutrition, training, supplement, and performance-enhancement drug practices of male and female physique competitors 30 days before competition; (b) to examine the specific water and macronutrient manipulation performed by competitors during the last 3 days before competition; and (c) to assess physiological responses to precontest preparation including body composition, body fluids, resting heart rate, and blood pressure. Competitors reported performing moderately high volume, moderate to high repetition, split-body resistance training programs performed on most days of the week; the programs included the use of a variety of advanced training methods. A majority of competitors included cardio to expedite fat loss, and most reported performing cardio in a fasted state despite a lack of objective evidentiary support for the practice. Competitors substantially restricted calories and consumed protein in amounts well above research-based guidelines (>3 g·kg -1 ·d -1 ); carbohydrate and lipid intake were highly variable. Water was substantially reduced in the final 3 days before competition. Competitors used a variety of dietary supplements throughout the study period, many of which are not supported by research. Both male and female competitors reported using performance enhancing drugs (∼48 and ∼38%, respectively) including testosterone derivatives, selective androgen receptor modulators, and human growth hormone. More research is warranted to elucidate safer and more effective peak week practices for physique competitors.

Can Bodybuilding Peak Week Manipulations Favorably Affect Muscle Size, Subcutaneous Thickness, and Related Body Composition Variables? A Case Study.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this case study was to implement an evidence-based dietary approach to peaking for a bodybuilding competition and monitor its impact on body composition, muscle thickness (MT), intra-to-extra-cellular fluid shifts, subcutaneous thickness (ST), and hydration status. Secondarily, to document any adverse events of this peak week approach in a small, controlled setting. Methods Dietary practices were recorded, and laboratory testing was conducted throughout peak week, including competition morning. Assessments included: dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) for body composition, B-mode ultrasound for MT and ST, bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS) for total body water (TBW)/intracellular water (ICW)/extracellular water (ECW), and raw BIS data (i.e., resistance, reactance, and phase angle), urine specific gravity (USG) for hydration status, and subjective fullness. Sequential dietary manipulations were made (i.e., CHO depletion/fat loading, CHO/water loading, and a refinement phase) with specific physiological goals. This was reflected in changes observed across all assessments throughout the peak week. RESULTS: From the carbohydrate-depleted state (three days out) to competition day, we observed increases in lean body mass, MT, TBW (primarily ICW), and subjective fullness. Kendall's Tau B revealed a strong relationship between carbohydrate intake and ∑MT (τ = 0.733, p = 0.056). Additionally, novel ST data demonstrated a 10% reduction for the summation of all seven sites, with some drastic changes in specific regions (e.g., -43% for triceps ST) from three days out to competition day. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that the prototypical goals of bodybuilders' peak week (i.e., increasing muscle fullness, decreasing subcutaneous thickness) to enhance their aesthetics/muscularity presented can be achieved with a drug-free protocol involving dietary manipulations.

Progressive Resistance Training Volume: Effects on Muscle Thickness, Mass, and Strength Adaptations in Resistance-Trained Individuals.

ABSTRACT: Aube, D, Wadhi, T, Rauch, J, Anand, A, Barakat, C, Pearson, J, Bradshaw, J, Zazzo, S, Ugrinowitsch, C, and De Souza, EO. Progressive resistance training volume: effects on muscle thickness, mass, and strength adaptations in resistance-trained individuals. J Strength Cond Res 36(3): 600-607, 2022-This study investigated the effects of 12-SET, 18-SET, and 24-SET lower-body weekly sets on muscle strength and mass accretion. Thirty-five resistance-trained individuals (one repetition maximum [1RM] squat: body mass ratio [1RM: BM] = 2.09) were randomly divided into 12-SET: n = 13, 18-SET: n = 12, and 24-SET: n = 10. Subjects underwent an 8-week resistance-training (RT) program consisting of 2 weekly sessions. Muscle strength (1RM), repetitions to failure (RTF) at 70% of 1RM, anterior thigh muscle thickness (MT), at the medial MT (MMT) and distal MT (DMT) points, as well as the sum of both sites (ΣMT), along with region of interest for fat-free mass (ROI-FFM) were measured at baseline and post-testing. For the 1RM, there was a main time effect (p ≤ 0.0001). However, there was a strong trend toward significance (p = 0.052) for group-by-time interaction, suggesting that 18-SET increased 1RM back squat to a greater extent compared with 24-SET (24-SET: 9.5 kg, 5.4%; 18-SET: 25.5 kg, 16.2%; 12-SET: 18.3 kg, 11.3%). For RTF, only a main time-effect (p ≤ 0.0003) was observed (24-SET: 5.7 reps, 33.1%; 18-SET: 2.4 reps, 14.5%; 12-SET: 5.0 reps, 34.8%). For the MMT, DMT, ΣMT, and ROI-FFM, there was only main time-effect (p ≤ 0.0001) (MMT: 24-SET: 0.15 cm, 2.7%; 18-SET: 0.32 cm, 5.7%; 12-SET: 0.38 cm, 6.4%-DMT: 24-SET: 0.39 cm, 13.1%; 18-SET: 0.28 cm, 8.9%; 12-SET: 0.34 cm, 9.7%-ΣMT: 24-SET: 0.54 cm, 6.1%; 18-SET: 0.60 cm, 6.7%; 12-SET: 0.72 cm, 7.7%, and ROI-FFM: 24-SET: 0.70 kg, 2.6%; 18-SET: 1.09 kg, 4.2%; 12-SET: 1.20 kg, 4.6%, respectively). Although all of the groups increased maximum strength, our results suggest that the middle dose range may optimize the gains in back squat 1RM. Our findings also support that differences in weekly set number did not impact in MT and ROI-FFM adaptations in subjects who can squat more than twice their body mass.

Loaded Inter-set Stretching for Muscular Adaptations in Trained Males: Is the Hype Real?

The study examined the effects of adding a loaded stretch in the inter-set rest period (ISS) compared to traditional resistance training (TR) on muscular adaptations in resistance-trained males. Twenty-six subjects were randomly assigned into two groups (ISS: n=12; TR: n=14) and underwent an 8-week training regimen. Subjects in ISS underwent an additional loaded stretch for 30 s at 15% of their working load from the prior set during the inter-set rest periods. Muscle thickness of the pectoralis major at the belly (BMT) and lateral (LMT) portions, One-repetition maximum (1RM) and repetitions-to-failure (RTF) on the bench press exercise were measured at baseline and post 8 weeks of training. Additionally, volume load and perceptual parameters for exertion and recovery were measured. Both groups had similar total volume load and average perceptual parameters (p>0.05). There was a main time effect (p<0.01) for all but one dependent variable indicating that both groups responded similarly across time [(∆BMT: ISS=2.7±1.7 mm; TR = 3.0±2.2 mm), (∆LMT: ISS=3.2±1.6 mm; TR=2.8±1.7 mm, (∆1RM: ISS=6.6±3.8 kg; TR=7.5±5.7 kg). Repetitions-to-failure did not change in either group (∆RTF: ISS=0.0±2.1 repetitions; TR=0.0±2.3 repetitions, p>0.05). Our results suggest that addition of a loaded ISS does not affect muscular adaptations either positively or negatively in resistance-trained males.

Does Varying Repetition Tempo in a Single-Joint Lower Body Exercise Augment Muscle Size and Strength in Resistance-Trained Men?

ABSTRACT: Pearson, J, Wadhi, T, Barakat, C, Aube, D, Schoenfeld, BJ, Andersen, JC, Barroso, R, Ugrinowitsch, C, and De Souza, EO. Does varying repetition tempo in a single-joint lower body exercise augment muscle size and strength in resistance-trained men? J Strength Cond Res 36(8): 2162-2168, 2022-This study compared the effects of FAST and SLOW eccentric repetition tempo in a single exercise volume-matched intervention on muscle thickness (MT) and strength in resistance-trained men. Using a within-subject design, 13 subjects had each leg randomly assigned to SLOW (1-0-3) or FAST (1-0-1) repetition tempo. Subjects underwent an 8-week strength-training (ST) intervention performed twice weekly. Unilateral leg-extension one repetition-maximum (1RM) and anterior thigh MT at the proximal (MTP) and distal (MTD) portions were assessed via ultrasound imaging at baseline and after 8 weeks of RT. Rating of perceived exertion (RPE) assessments of the training sessions (i.e., 16 per leg) were averaged for further analysis. Both legs similarly increased MTP (estimated differences: FAST: 0.24 cm, 3.6%; SLOW: 0.20 cm, 3.1%). However, for MTD, analysis of covariance analysis showed a leg effect ( p = 0.02) in which absolute pre-to-post change was greater in FAST compared with SLOW (estimated differences: FAST 0.23 cm, 5.5%; SLOW: 0.13 cm, 2.2%). For 1RM, both legs similarly increased maximum strength (estimated differences: FAST: 9.1 kg, 17.0%; SLOW: 10.4 kg, 22.1%, p ≤ 0.0001). The SLOW group had a higher RPE than FAST (8.59 vs. 7.98, p = 0.002). Despite differences in RPE, our results indicate that both repetition tempos produced similar muscular adaptations. However, they also suggest that the FAST tempo may provide a small hypertrophic advantage at the distal quadriceps. From a practical standpoint, strength and conditioning professionals may implement a FAST tempo at least in one single-joint exercise during an 8-week training period to enhance regional hypertrophic adaptations in trained individuals.

Peak week recommendations for bodybuilders: an evidence based approach.

Bodybuilding is a competitive endeavor where a combination of muscle size, symmetry, "conditioning" (low body fat levels), and stage presentation are judged. Success in bodybuilding requires that competitors achieve their peak physique during the day of competition. To this end, competitors have been reported to employ various peaking interventions during the final days leading to competition. Commonly reported peaking strategies include altering exercise and nutritional regimens, including manipulation of macronutrient, water, and electrolyte intake, as well as consumption of various dietary supplements. The primary goals for these interventions are to maximize muscle glycogen content, minimize subcutaneous water, and reduce the risk abdominal bloating to bring about a more aesthetically pleasing physique. Unfortunately, there is a dearth of evidence to support the commonly reported practices employed by bodybuilders during peak week. Hence, the purpose of this article is to critically review the current literature as to the scientific support for pre-contest peaking protocols most commonly employed by bodybuilders and provide evidence-based recommendations as safe and effective strategies on the topic.

Auto-Regulated Exercise Selection Training Regimen Produces Small Increases in Lean Body Mass and Maximal Strength Adaptations in Strength-trained Individuals.

Rauch, JT, Ugrinowitsch, C, Barakat, CI, Alvarez, MR, Brummert, DL, Aube, DW, Barsuhn, AS, Hayes, D, Tricoli, V, and De Souza, EO. Auto-regulated exercise selection training regimen produces small increases in lean body mass and maximal strength adaptations in highly trained individuals. J Strength Cond Res 34(4): 1133-1140, 2020-The purpose of this investigation was to compare the effects of auto-regulatory exercise selection (AES) vs. fixed exercise selection (FES) on muscular adaptations in strength-trained individuals. Seventeen men (mean ± SD; age = 24 ± 5.45 years; height = 180.3 ± 7.54 cm, lean body mass [LBM] = 66.44 ± 6.59 kg; squat and bench press 1 repetition maximum (1RM): body mass ratio 1.87, 1.38, respectively) were randomly assigned into either AES or FES. Both groups trained 3 times a week for 9 weeks. Auto-regulatory exercise selection self-selected the exercises for each session, whereas FES was required to perform exercises in a fixed order. Lean body mass was assessed via dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and maximum strength via 1RM testing, pre-, and post-training intervention. Total volume load was significantly higher for AES than for FES (AES: 573,288 ± 67,505 kg; FES: 464,600 ± 95,595 kg, p = 0.0240). For LBM, there was a significant main time effect (p = 0.009). However, confidence interval analysis (95% CIdiff) suggested that only AES significantly increased LBM (AES: 2.47%, effect size [ES]: 0.35, 95% CIdiff [0.030-3.197 kg]; FES: 1.37%, ES: 0.21, 95% CIdiff [-0.500 to 2.475 kg]). There was a significant main time effect for maximum strength (p ≤ 0.0001). However, 95% CIdiff suggested that only AES significantly improved bench press 1RM (AES: 6.48%, ES: 0.50, 95% CIdiff [0.312-11.42 kg]; FES: 5.14%, ES: 0.43, 95% CIdiff [-0.311 to 11.42 kg]). However for back squat 1RM, similar responses were observed between groups (AES: 9.55%, ES: 0.76, 95% CIdiff [0.04-28.37 kg]; FES: 11.54%, ES: 0.80, 95% CIdiff [1.8-28.5 kg]). Our findings suggest that AES may provide a small advantage in LBM and upper body maximal strength in strength-trained individuals.

The Effects of Varying Glenohumeral Joint Angle on Acute Volume Load, Muscle Activation, Swelling, and Echo-Intensity on the Biceps Brachii in Resistance-Trained Individuals.

There is a paucity of data on how manipulating joint angles during isolation exercises may impact overall session muscle activation and volume load in resistance-trained individuals. We investigated the acute effects of varying glenohumeral joint angle on the biceps brachii with a crossover repeated measure design with three different biceps curls. One session served as the positive control (CON), which subjects performed 9 sets of bicep curls with their shoulder in a neutral position. The experimental condition (VAR), varied the glenohumeral joint angle by performing 3 sets in shoulder extension (30°), 3 sets neutral (0°), and 3 sets in flexion (90°). Volume load and muscle activation (EMG) were recorded during the training sessions. Muscle swelling and strain were assessed via muscle thickness and echo-intensity responses at pre, post, 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h. There were no significant differences between conditions for most dependent variables. However, the overall session EMG amplitude was significantly higher (p = 0.0001) in VAR compared to CON condition (95%-CI: 8.4% to 23.3%). Our findings suggest that varying joint angles during resistance training (RT) may enhance total muscle activation without negatively affecting volume load within a training session in resistance-trained individuals.

Repeated Bouts of Advanced Strength Training Techniques: Effects on Volume Load, Metabolic Responses, and Muscle Activation in Trained Individuals.

This study investigated the effects of advanced training techniques (ATT) on muscular responses and if performing a second training session would negatively affect the training stimulus. Eleven strength-trained males performed a traditional strength training session (TST) and four different ATT: pre-exhaustion A (PE-A), pre-exhaustion B (PE-B), forced repetitions (FR), and super-set (SS). On day 1, SS produced lower volume load than TST, FR, and PE-B (-16.0%, p ≤ 0.03; -14.9, p ≤ 0.03 and -18.2%, p ≤ 0.01, respectively). On day 2, SS produced lower volumes than all the other ATT (-9.73⁻-18.5%, p ≤ 0.03). Additionally, subjects demonstrated lower perceived exertion on day 1 compared to day 2 (6.5 ± 0.4 AU vs. 8.7 ± 0.3 AU, p = 0.0001). For blood lactate concentration [La-] on days 1 and 2, [La-] after the tenth set was the highest compared to all other time points (baseline: 1.7 ± 0.2, fifth-set: 8.7 ± 1.0, tenth-set 9.7 ± 0.9, post-5 min: 8.7 ± 0.7 mmol∙L-1, p ≤ 0.0001). Acute muscle swelling was greater immediately and 30-min post compared to baseline (p ≤ 0.0001). On day 2, electromyography (EMG) amplitude on the clavicular head of the pectoralis major was lower for SS than TST, PE-A, and PE-B (-11.7%, p ≤ 0.01; -14.4%, p ≤ 0.009; -20.9%, p = 0.0003, respectively). Detrimental effects to the training stimulus were not observed when ATT (besides SS) are repeated. Strength trained individuals can sustain performance, compared to TST, when they are using ATT in an acute fashion. Although ATT have traditionally been used as a means to optimize metabolic stress, volume load, and neuromuscular responses, our data did not project differences in these variables compared to TST. However, it is important to note that different ATT might produce slight changes in volume load, muscle excitation, and fluid accumulation in strength-trained individuals from session to session.

Similar Strength and Power Adaptations between Two Different Velocity-Based Training Regimens in Collegiate Female Volleyball Players.

This study investigated the effects of two different velocity-based training (VBT) regimens on muscular adaptations. Fifteen female college volleyball players were randomly assigned into either progressive velocity-based training (PVBT) or optimum training load (OTL). Both groups trained three times a week for seven weeks. PVBT performed a 4-week strength block (e.g., 0.55⁻0.70 m·s-1) followed by a 3-week power block (e.g., 0.85⁻1.0 m·s-1), whereas OTL performed training at ~0.85⁻0.9 m·s-1. 1RM and peak power output (PP) assessments on the back squat (BS), bench press (BP) and deadlift (DL) exercises were assessed pre and post training. There was a main time effect (p ≤ 0.05) for BS and BP 1RM, (PVBT: 19.6%, ES: 1.72; OTL: 18.3%, ES: 1.57) and (PVBT: 8.5%, ES: 0.58; OTL: 10.2%, ES: 0.72), respectively. OTL increased DL 1RM to a greater extent than PVBT (p ≤ 0.05), (OTL: 22.9%, ES: 1.49; PVBT: 10.9%, ES: 0.88). Lastly, there was a main time effect (p ≤ 0.05) for BS, BP and DL PP, (PVBT: 18.3%, ES: 0.86; OTL: 19.8%, ES: 0.79); (PVBT: 14.5%, ES: 0.81; OTL: 27.9%, ES: 1.68); (PVBT: 15.7%, ES: 1.32; OTL: 20.1%, ES: 1.77) respectively. Our data suggest that both VBT regimens are effective for improving muscular performance in college volleyball players during the offseason period.