Muscle size and strength: debunking the “completely separate phenomena” suggestion
- 579 Downloads
Buckner et al. (2017) query the conclusion of our recent article [“Changes in agonist neural drive, hypertrophy and pre-training strength all contribute to the individual strength gains after resistance training”, Balshaw et al. (2017)], which stated that “muscle hypertrophy in the current study…clearly did contribute to the explained variance in strength and further negates the suggestion that strength and hypertrophy are entirely separate phenomena (Buckner et al. 2016)” and therefore refuted a hypothesis of theirs that the changes in muscle size and strength after resistance training (RT) are “separate and unrelated adaptations” (Buckner et al. 2016). Here, we emphasise that: (a) the aim of our study was to investigate whether there was a relationshipbetween putative predictor variables/adaptations after RT, rather than the nature of the relationship (e.g. causal/coincidental); (b) the existence of the relationship we found undermines the hypothesis of Buckner et...
KeywordsResistance Training Elbow Flexor Muscle Size Strength Gain Strength Change
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The author(s) declare that they have no competing interests.
- Buckner SL, Dankel SJ, Mattocks KT et al (2017) Muscle size and strength: another study not designed to answer the question. Eur J Appl Physiol (accepted)Google Scholar