From 150+ Studies. Enjoy.....
http://sci-fit.net/2017/scientific-recommendations-1/
Here is a PDF of the referenced studies that were used to form the conclusions-
[[{"fid":"35407","view_mode":"default","fields":{"format":"default"},"type":"media","attributes":{"class":"file media-element file-default"},"link_text":"150 studies from Scientific recommendations for strength and hypertrophy training.pdf"}]]
SEMPER FI
[[{"fid":"35408","view_mode":"default","fields":{"format":"default"},"type":"media","attributes":{"alt":"The B-52's - \"Good Stuff\" (Official Music Video)","class":"media-element file-default"},"link_text":null}]]
Did anyone happen to catch this?
"Here we see more studies supporting the notion that higher training frequencies (2-3x per muscle group per week) are better for strength development. This shouldn’t be surprising given that more volume usually means more gains, whether it is strength or hypertrophy."
SEMPER FI
I currently do 3 full body sessions per week around 2hr a time mostly free weights. I squat every Mon and Fri but I do take 2-3 min break between different exercises. And 20-30 sec between each set unless I am doing a drop set all exercises are 5 sets long. Aiming for 12 or more slow controlled reps at least one to failure. A lot of that is chest arms and shoulder work. I have even started adding in 120 press ups after my bench press just to push as much blood as possible to my upper body trying to get more growth seems to be working ok for me. Except I am fighting a battle with my cutting cycle and trying to keep/build muscle mass. My weight on scales has held pretty firm at around 16.7st while losing weight around waist line. Also getting my biceps past 16.2" is not happening but this could be just that I am shedding body fat at the same pace as the bicep is growing?.
I personally (and I am no expert) think some people can benefit from full body workouts but you do need to be able to get the rest and protein intake that is needed for the full body to fully repair every other day. It is a lot of strain on the whole body. And even I notice the difference from Mondays to Fridays workout by the end of Fridays workout I feel like the start of the flu for a few hours my tank is totally empty. But I do get that lovely another week done buzzy feeling.
I agree with you JK concerning full body training but I will take it one step farther and say EVERYONE can benefit from a full body workout. It doesn't matter if you are training for bb'ing, athleticism, or endurance we all can benefit in some way from a full body workout.
SEMPER FI
I did see that statement, and wondered if Mike Israetel was in the references. He is big on high volume and frequency of 2-4 times per week per large muscle group. He, among others inspired my new approach to training volume and frequency, While the frequency is only two times per week for big muscle groups, others are saying 3 times. Squatting twice weekly 8-10 sets (the second session is rough, but it will get easier as time goes by). Of course, progressive overload is in the equation. Not only does total strength increase (the 1RM should increase) but more importantly strength density is increased, the ability to work higher volume with ever increasing loads. My split in a nutshell is Chest hams, back quads twice per week with one arm/shoulder emphasis day, and one day for lagging parts plus more arms and shoulders. After these session, I feel more energetic, and when I hit the target muscles again in the week, I feel I can work them just as hard for the most part.
I totally agree with you
Here is a research study comparing TOTAL body training vs. a SPLIT training routine applied to frequency -
"data provide evidence that well-trained individuals benefit from including periods of training muscle groups 3 days-per-week when the goal is to maximize muscle hypertrophy."
Influence of Resistance Training Frequency.2015.pdf
SEMPER FI
Nice! I noticed Brad Schoenfeld and Brett Contreras are listed as authors. I am more familiar with Brad and really love his work. Thanks for the pdf. Duly downloaded 
aas change the game entirely so when I look at studies not involving anabolics at the doses or protocols we use I take it with a grain of salt. Training a body part 1x a week is wpro
most bodybuilders do your protein synthesis last a much longer duration enhanced and recovery is the name of the game. I have tried many splits and styles and 1x a week on steroids high intensity is truly all you need what should vary is not the weekly split but the intensity and techniques/ weights
used tapping into slow and fast twitch fibers taking advantage of sarcoplasmic hypertrophy which when natural is no where near as good compared to enhanced just my 25 cents
Thanks for sharing and I would have to agree with you to a point but I disagree with the idea that one size fits all. You are right on about intensity and technique in my opinion. But you cannot train specifically for sarcoplasmic hypertrophy but training certainly has an influence on it. More than anything it is a side effect of muscle growth so your statement could be true. There are no known studies that I am aware of that show that steroids increase the amount of SH either so we are just guess working. A great book to read is “The Science and Practice of Strength Training” by Zatsiorsky and Kraemer which includes the ideas of SH and MH (myofibrillar). I provided a copy to the members to download a few months ago. I will dig the digital version back up a post it again in the near future.
If I can answer this question with certainty I would be incredibly rich.....does sarcoplasmic hypertrophy happen and does it effectively contribute to muscle growth?
This has been an argument for as long as I have been in the game and it is mostly used when comparing BB'ers to powerlifters. The argument goes like this..... MH is where the strength comes from and SH is where the size comes from and that is the reason BB'ers have better muscle development than powerlifters and why powerlifters are stronger than BB'ers. We can keep going around in this circle forever but is still doesn't answer the question. On the flip side... I could cite dozens of published studies that specifically show that strength is pattern specific and load specific. Just look at Stan Efferding... Stan is very intense and he made a seemingly easy (his words) transition from BB to powerlifting by simply changing his technique and loads.
The fact is that both arguments remain unsubstantiated so the only reasonable thing for me to do is to gain knowledge and apply that knowledge and see if it has a positive effect on my results.
There is no one size fits all scheme, diet or protocol. I gather as much information as I can and I use it to my advantage. Just like a doctor practices medicine.... we are practicing on improving our physique, strength, endurance and/or performance. Almost everything we do is based on a theory and limiting our view will limit our ability to adjust to advancement if and when needed.
Not all aas users are bodybuilders.... that is just the assumption. Gear doesn't change the game entirely. It may rewrite some rules but the human body still functions as a human. Hormones still interact as they always have with other hormones.... cellular structures still communicate with cellular structures... there is just a new dominant contributing force.
If I took every study that did not include anabolics with a grain of salt there would be only a handful of studies at my disposal. I prefer to maintain a very open minded approach and in many cases I take a very strong contrarian approach to my own personal training because I have found what works best for me. Heck I am so contrarian I do not even agree with half the information I post. I just firmly believe in providing useable content that may be a benefit to others.
Holy smokes that was long winded even for me.... trensomnia.
SEMPER FI
For me, a hybrid approach has been working quite well. For some time, high volume with progressive overload worked great, so I decided to add more frequency my approach to see if I can improve even more. Maybe build muscle faster, or at least more effectively. Intensity seems to have a few meanings or at least ways to have more intensity in the workouts. For me, I believe intensity can be accomplished through use of drop sets, rest pause sets, and adding sets that are around 90% of my 1RM. Thus, high volume, frequency, and intensity is achieved. I also believe that each individual will respond differently to mode of attack, some may grow fine and well just doing one of these. I get a lot of enjoyment from working hard, so I like using all three modes. I also respond well to high volume.
I take all studies with a grain of salt until you know who's financing it, and their agenda. Also as you said that most studies are performed on natural as opposed to enhanced lifters. However I know what has worked best for me, but I'm also not opposed to trying new things either. Everyone responds different to various methods. Me personally I like the single body part per day. Some guys like opposing body parts. Others GVT, and various other techniques. Whatever keeps you motivated and in your mind works best for you is what I'm for.
This article gets pretty deep into muscular development (not the online mag). I skimmed the article briefly and read some good meaty topics within the article. A good addition to the above in my opinion. Hope you have some time on your hands, and some damn good focus. Brad gets quite technical
http://www.ucam.edu/sites/default/files/Oct_13/mechanisms_of_muscle_hypertrophy.pdf
Im curious too as to how to put a training program together using the full body notion from the article. I think i need to read it more closely, and perhaps dig around the net a bit to get my head wrapped around the concept. Looks like there are meaningful differences in hypertrophy between the split and full body.