Q #5: OK, going into pure hypothesis time. One thing we can say about super responders is they don?t appear to have say higher levels of anabolic hormones such as testosterone or IGF-1, etc, nor far superior insulin sensitivity, or other readily apparent differences between them and other people. My point being, whatever it is that differentiates these super responders from the rest of humanity is not what we may consider ?the usual suspects? it seems. In general terms, if science does finally figure what combination of factors makes a super responder, what do you expect to find once they do? What do you think are the primary differences between super responders and the rest of the world?

Alan: According to work by Thalacker-Mercer et al (PMID: 19767798), it doesn?t appear that self-reported habitual dietary intake influences myofiber hypertrophy extreme responders compared to non-responders to resistance training. However, they found that training-induced changes in IL-6 and acute increases, in p70S6K activity and changes in muscle androgen receptor protein content were positively associated with muscle hypertrophy. These findings collectively indicated that intramuscular factors could be more potent mediators of muscle hypertrophy than systemic factors (i.e., pre- or post-training exercise-induced hormonal flux). Other potentially important players in the game are an abundance of microRNA , and as I previously mentioned, greater myonuclear increases via the proliferation or increased activity of satellite cells.

Conrad: It will be a very complex interaction between genes, gene expression and how they affect everything in body relative to response. Nerves and nerve impulse, hormone production, muscle fiber type, brain activity, pain tolerance, etc. etc. etc.

Jose: I think what science will find are the genes that are key for certain kinds of athletic performance. And then perhaps in utero (sounds Frankenstein-ish) alter those genes? Crazy huh!?

Q#6: Totally anecdotal of course, but do you have a story similar to mine in the intro of a person or people you have worked with or know who just astounded you with how little they had to do to be more muscular, or leaner, or stronger than everyone around them?

Alan: One particular client case stands out (we?ll call him JC), who was near the start of prep for a bodybuilding contest, and weighed 170 lbs (77.3 kg), at what I would estimate was 10% body fat. I witnessed him do 12 reps on the barbell bench press with 315 lbs (3 plates per side; 143.2 kg). His final rep was almost as clean and effortless as the first, indicating that he definitely had a few more reps in reserve before failure. This guy never trained for powerlifting. He was just freakishly strong. Healso had one of the most massive backs I?d seen on a non-pro, and even he admitted it felt like having a whole other person attached to his torso. Another example of giftedness is lifetime natural Kelechi Opara (just Google him to see what I mean), who I helped prep for one of the earliest Men?s Physique competitions. All we needed was 5 weeks to get him ready. The judges told him he was too big AND too lean for the division, and was better suited for bodybuilding. I?m not sure those criteria would still stand in the present day, where the physique competitors are just as massive, or even more massive than many of the bodyduilders were at the time.

Conrad: Too many to recount!

Jose: I?ve always been fascinated by speed whether it?s Bruce Lee?s fists or Usain Bolt?s sprint speed. Or even the speed of a person who can run a 2 and few minutes over marathon. That?s fast no matter how you cut it. I?ve worked with elite athletes like that. And the one thing they have in common is a DRIVE to train and excel. I think the gene for ?drive? (or motivation) is inherent as well. Coaches always say they?ll take the average talent that works hard instead of the talent that hardly works.

Q#7: One unfortunate aspect of the super responders in my view, is others tend to look at them as role models as people to emulate, when the super responder often does nothing unique or special for their training, nutrition and so forth. People always look at me sideways when I explain to them the elite bodybuilders for example don?t do anything special nor unique for their training or nutrition, and while PEDs obviously play a part, most can use the exact same PEDs as pro bodybuilders and other athletes, and look nothing like them nor perform as they do. People were shocked when they learned Usain Bolt ate pounds of Chicken McNuggets, obviously expecting him to eat some super strict diet for top athletes they were unaware of. It?s tough for people to understand their responses to exercise and nutrition are genetically determined. How do you deal with that issue when people ask about the value of hard work and consistency when genes are the ?ghost in the machine? they have no control over?
I tend to tell them that no matter where on the spectrum of genetics, consistency of training, nutrition, etc. will optimize their response but we all have to work with the chips we are dealt. Most people have ?average? genetics which means with consistent exercise and decent nutrition will see results for their efforts, but unlikely to be the next Arnold or Bolt, but as we have no genetic test for super responder, the only way to find out is to try! Thoughts?

Alan: This reminds me of Doug Miller?s latest round of bodybuilding contest wins (here?s how he looked, feel free to ?mire). Doug is widely regarded as one of the greatest natural bodybuilders of all time. Many consider him The GOAT. As you can imagine, there are hordes of people who vehemently doubt that he?s natural. Prior to his latest round of wins, there?s wasn?t such a huge buzz & debate over whether or not he?s natty. After he showed up and blew the competition away, there was tons of debate over the idea. People who doubted Doug?s natty status forget to realize that he?s in the low to mid 190?s fully carbed up onstage at a height of 5?9?. That plus during his 4-year hiatus from competition, he only gained 7 lbs. He?s pretty much the perfect storm of genetics & ironclad work ethic. Of course, there are folks who will insist on drugs being part of the picture, but folks who are quickest to blow the drug whistle are typically those who have not worked full-time with athletes and have had the chance to see first-hand the full range of responders, including outliers on both ends of the spectrum. I think it?s an epic waste of time & energy worrying about genetic potential or letting the idea of genetic ceilings demotivate trainees in their quest for optimizing muscular size or strength. I?ve made it a policy of mine to avoid these debates over what boils down to pure speculation. There will always be a continuum of gifted to challenged trainees, but every single one of them can make significant improvements over time with smart programming, and/or good coaching. Also, if you place limits on yourself, then those perceived limits can only work against your ultimate achievements.

Conrad: Yeah, pretty much the same strategy. Moving outside of sport, I and into the general realm I am a bit more sardonic and tell clients that those posing with shirtless avatars or bikini photos are advertising their genetics and not their knowledge. Yeah, I know it?s snarky, but there you go.
Jose: Like I?ve said before, you aren?t a slave to your genes. Everyone can make themselves smarter, faster, stronger, etc. You may not be world class, but compared to yourself, you?ll be damn good. And being consistent is the #1 factor in making improvements.

__________________
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]