The Five Biggest Contradictions in Fitness
Latest Article

The Five Biggest Contradictions in Fitness

It’s no secret that when people contradict themselves, it has the effect of making the flaws in their actions or statements seem glaringly obvious. But what about when WE ourselves get caught contradicting ourselves by someone else?

By: Nick Tumminello Added: January 6th, 2014
More Recent Articles
Contrast Training for Size
By: Lee Boyce
An Interview with Marianne Kane of Girls Gone Strong
By: Jordan Syatt
What Supplements Should I be Taking? By: Jay Wainwright
Bench Like a Girl By: Julia Ladewski
Some Thoughts on Building a Big Pull By: Christopher Mason

Facebook Join Facebook Group       Twitter Follow on Twitter       rss Subscribe via RSS
Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1
    Wannabebig Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    68

    gene for swoleness?

    neither of my parents are big (both are very fit though), and i was wondering if that means i can't possibly get that big either. do gene's play a big part in lifting?

  2.    Support Wannabebig and use AtLarge Nutrition Supplements!


  3. #2
    SFW! drew's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    8,129
    Yes and no.

    Genetics will determine the shape of your muscles and body parts, but they won't prevent you from getting big. It may be harder for some people, but not impossible. Just eat a lot, lift heavy, and watch the mass pack right on.

    Listen to what the more experienced people here and elsewhere have to say. Pay attention to your diet. It's definitely not easy, but the results will be worth it.

    Stats: Age: 34 Weight: 205 Height: 5'6"
    Gym PRs: Squat:635 Bench:560 Deadlift:495
    Meet PRs: Squat:575 Bench:520 Deadlift:510 Total: 1605@220

  4. #3
    Senior Member DNL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,808
    it could also be lifestyles and daily activities.

  5. #4
    Back in business WBBIRL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    The Fridge
    Posts
    5,605
    If you place me beside my dad and his brothers your question would be answered. To paint you a picture... im only about 3 inches taller then all of them but my chest is at least 14" bigger then any of theirs, arms are easily 3-4 inches bigger, legs are around 12-15 inches bigger. One is stronger then I am but hes a freak, at 19 he benched 405 for a double and could reverse curl 150lbs. If i got it from anywhere, its him.

  6. #5
    Senior Member DNL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,808
    reversed curl 150? that's crazy. I struggled to may be push out half of that for 2.

  7. #6
    Back in business WBBIRL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    The Fridge
    Posts
    5,605
    He has incredible arm strenght... grip, hand, forearms and biceps.

  8. #7
    I drink your milkshake twm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,852
    WBBIRL, I don't understand how you could have gotten traits from your dad's brother since he did not conceive you. I understand the traits could have been there in your Dad but...

    Well, either way, I'm glad he and you are strong

  9. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Red Deer, Alberta
    Posts
    462
    Genetics work funny like that twm. Some hereditary diseases only happen every 2nd generation in a family etc. Its alot of technicalities and limiting factors. I know almost nothing about genetics, but picked some of that stuff up from my friends that are genetic's majors.

  10. #9
    Senior Member Doobs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Austin
    Posts
    1,182
    Quote Originally Posted by crunch101
    do gene's play a big part in lifting?
    Nah. I weigh 80 lbs. more than my brother, about 50 more than my dad. Don't use genetics as an excuse.

  11. #10
    Back in business WBBIRL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    The Fridge
    Posts
    5,605
    Well not directly, but that means it was a trait that my dads brother got from either of my grandparents. Which obvisouly went dormant in my dad and most of his brothers, and for some reason didnt in me. My moms family also has one or two big people, and my mom isnt one of them.

  12. #11
    Senior Member bigpoppapump979's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    0
    if there is a gene for swoleness, i DAMN SURE got all of it. along with the genes for absurdly great looks, and a few more i cant mention on the board.

  13. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    251

    Genetics

    Human Genetics and Weight Training

    By Keith Wassung

    The subject of genetics and genetic potential has become a mainstream topic in recent years, largely due to the research and publicity of the Human Genome Project as well as publicity about DNA in high profile criminal cases. With all of the available information, there is still a great deal of mis-information among the public regarding the role of genetics for human beings.

    Each of the 100 trillion cells in the human body (except red blood cells) contains the entire human genome-all of the genetic information necessary to build a human being. Inside the cell nucleus, 6 feet of DNA are packaged into 23 pairs of Chromosomes. As a carrier of information, DNA is 45 trillion times more efficient that the silicon computer mega-chip, which is manufactured by highly skilled engineers.

    Each gene is a double-stranded DNA that holds the blueprint for making a specific molecule-usually a protein. These blueprints are spelled out in varying sequences of four chemical bases in DNA, Adenine, Thymine, Guanine, and Cytosine, also known as A, T, G, C. If you could take the tiniest font on your computer, say a Times Roman #7, then decrease the size of that by about two-thirds, then using those letters to fill up an entire sheet (with no spaces) of 8.5 x 11” paper, it would take about one million pages to correctly spell out the sequence of the human genome. A printed manuscript of the human genome would require a stack of paper higher than the Washington Monument.

    It is a misconception to think that our genes are the predominant determining factor in who we are, or what form of accomplishment we are capable of. If our genes were the primary determining factor, then everyone who carried genetic disease traits would eventually develop that disease, but this is clearly not the case. Genes certainly provide a set or parameters, but research clearly shows that the way genes are expressed are far more important in determining our capabilities. This genetic expression is activated by way of hormonal chemicals that are directly controlled by the Central Nervous System. Hormones do not damage or alter genes; rather they cause the gene to act in a certain way, telling it when to reproduce or activate. If the nervous system is working properly, then the correct chemical message is sent to and received by the genes. The notion that genes work in response to the stimuli of the environment, via the CNS has been extensively written about in recent years.


    “The environment in which you grow up is as important as your DNA in determining the person you ultimately become. You cannot dissociate genes from the environment that turns genes on and off: and you cannot dissociate the effect of genes from the environment in which proteins exert their effects. Certain genes lead to vulnerability, but not inevitability”.1

    NEWSWEEK, April 20, 2000

    "For example, when geneticists say that have found a gene for a particular trait, what they mean is that people carrying a certain "allele" --a variation in a stretch of DNA that normally codes for a certain protein--will develop the given trait in a standard environment. The last words "standard environment”, are very important because what scientists are not saying is that a given allele will necessary lead to that trait in every environment. Indeed, there is mounting evidence that a particular allele will not produce the same result is the environment changes significantly; that is to say the environment has a strong influence on whether--and how--a gene gets "expressed" 2

    U.S. News and World Report 4-21-1997


    "Genes are unquestionably the fundamental units by which our bodies are constructed. However, pure genetic determinism does not adequately explain the varied capabilities of our biology. A more accurate view of the role of the genome is to see the genes as providing the overall plan for the developmental pathways. The actual pathways will be modified by the environment to which the individual is exposed" 3

    Dr. Peter Nathaniels, "Life in the Womb"


    The above citations lend credence to the notion that out genetics, though providing distinct parameters for our potential, pretty much respond to the stimulus and demand that we place on them. I frequently hear weight trainers make excuses for their progress by claiming that they do not possess good genetics. I often see this used as some sort of disclaimer in written articles. My question for them is “how do you know you do not have good genetics in advance”? There is not yet a single diagnostic test in existence that can accurately predict genetic capability. Many will cite “bone structure” as being genetically determined. Genetics may dictate length, ratios and skeletal insertions, but bone is living tissue that constantly remolds or reshapes itself in direct relation to the stress placed on it.

    According to Wolfs Law “Every change in the function of a bone is followed by certain definite changes in internal architecture and external conformation in accordance with mathematical laws. Wolf’s Law simply means that bones will change their shape and structure in response to how much or how little mechanical stress is applied.

    I know of literally thousands of people who built phenomenal and powerful physiques, and yet when they started they were the proverbial “98lb weakling” (including myself weighing 93lbs as a high school freshman). I believe that the majority of people who get involved in weight training do so because they are smaller or weaker than their peers. Having superior genetics can also be a disadvantage, though it is often self-inflicted. I grew up in Nebraska, whose college football team has a tremendous walk-on program. Each year hundreds of freshman athletes show up for the first day of practice. Every year there are numerous players who were 2 and 3 time All-State types, the type who was probably always bigger, faster and stronger than their peers, and probably had not worked nearly as hard in training. For the first time in their lives, they are not the top dog and many of them quit within the first week or so. I have seen countless number of athletes in the gym that seemed to possess all the physical traits needed to develop world-class strength and or physiques, but they rarely do it. The same is true for athletes in all sports and in the business world as well. (Do you really think Allan Iverson has a whole lot going for him in the way of genetics?) I will take the athlete with the “Rudy” type attitude, who has heart, soul and guts, than an athlete with all of the genetic advantages in the world whose personal drive and motivation was not as strong. Nature has a unique way of balancing things out. A taller person may not gain weight and strength nearly as rapidly as a shorter, stockier man, but when they do make the gains they look a lot better and more graceful. A taller person with long limbs rarely set bench press records, but they are usually excellent dead lifters. It would be foolish to state that genetics play no part in our developmental potential, they do, but they are so many other factors that come into play that it is not difficult to overcome most genetic situations. Work ethic, technique, intelligence, strategy, attitude, heart, persistence, discipline can all be maximized to achieve strength and development goals.

    I truly believe that we become whatever we set our minds to become. The majority of people who achieve great things do so because they had the drive, persistence, vision and dedication to do so. This is not only true in weight training but in all areas of our lives. Normal people just do not achieve great things, if they did, they would probably not be normal. There are not many long-term rewards in weight training and this may inhibit many from pursuing it at a level that would produce excellent strength or physique gains. I do believe that the vast majority of athletes who ever end up training in a gym have the capability of creating a body that would be absolutely mind-blowing to the average person. Their only limit is their own person drive, vision and dedication. As Henry Ford liked to say. “If you think you can, or think you can’t, either way you will be right”..



    REFERENCES

    1. Sapolsky, Robert ( 2000, April 20) “All in the Genes” Newsweek
    2. Wray, Herbert (1997, April 21) “The Politics of Biology” US News & World
    Report
    3. Nathaniels, Peter, MD (1999) “Life in the Womb”. Ithaca, NY:Promethean

  14. #13
    SFW! drew's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    8,129
    Dangit Keith, you pimp, how'd you get to be so smart? lol

    Stats: Age: 34 Weight: 205 Height: 5'6"
    Gym PRs: Squat:635 Bench:560 Deadlift:495
    Meet PRs: Squat:575 Bench:520 Deadlift:510 Total: 1605@220

  15. #14
    Senior Member RussianRocket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    2,358
    classicaly done Keith
    Milk is the best Supplement

    Well my friends think I'm ugly
    I got a masculine face - Tom Waits.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •