{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","provider_name":"Transistor","provider_url":"https://transistor.fm","author_name":"Hypertrophy Past and Present","title":"072 Why you’re probably reading hypertrophy studies wrong","html":"","width":"100%","height":180,"duration":7471,"description":"In this episode of Hypertrophy Past & Present, Jake and Chris start with a bizarre 1950s workout from Barton Horvath before breaking down how to actually understand hypertrophy research. They discuss what common measurements such as muscle thickness, cross-sectional area, EMG and strength testing really tell us, where they can mislead us, and why understanding the physiology behind a study matters as much as reading its results.\nKey topics include:\nBarton Horvath’s 1950s “unusual” routine\nWhat researchers actually mean when they measure “hypertrophy,” and the differences between muscle thickness, cross-sectional area, muscle volume and muscle biopsies\nWhat EMG can and cannot tell us about muscle activation, recruitment and exercise selection\nWhat researchers actually mean by “recovery\"\nWhy vertical jump performance can be more sensitive to fatigue than maximal isometric strength\nThe difference between a large numerical effect and a statistically significant effect\nWant to train like a Silver-Era bodybuilder? Join our Hypertrophy Past and Present Training group on TrainHeroic.com","thumbnail_url":"https://img.transistorcdn.com/CJhjWFKhcK0h4C11sAyS9S4btLA7VgbHkoTw7LPZHTk/rs:fill:0:0:1/w:400/h:400/q:60/mb:500000/aHR0cHM6Ly9pbWct/dXBsb2FkLXByb2R1/Y3Rpb24udHJhbnNp/c3Rvci5mbS8wNDVi/MjE1YzM4ZmVlYzZj/OWEwMTA1Y2QwOGY2/ZDU0ZS5wbmc.webp","thumbnail_width":300,"thumbnail_height":300}