Welcome to the House of Hypertrophy. What would you say is the most important training variable for maximizing muscle growth? There's a case to be made that volume is up there. I'm excited to say we have a brand new meta-analysis, including 35 studies with over 1,000 subjects that

has examined the relationship between volume and muscle hypertrophy. It's our best look at it to date. Before diving into the paper, the best way to think about volume for building muscle is simply how many sets you perform. And this is what's meant by volume in the

latest meta-analysis. So, what is the relationship between sets and gains? Do you maximize growth with just a few sets, with no further growth with more sets, or maybe more sets result in more growth? Or, as a lot of people have hypothesized, maybe it's an inverted U shape where

more sets result in more growth up to a point, beyond which eventually results in less growth? Or perhaps it's something else entirely? Let's dive in. We need to understand what exactly a set is and how the researchers measured it. The researchers actually did something never done before in the literature when

considering how to count sets, and it may change the way you think about counting sets for muscle growth. A set refers to a bout of repetitions. We're not counting light warm-up sets here, rather we're counting what we call a working set, which typically has you getting two or

very close to failure to make the set as stimulating as possible. Here were the variables used in the studies behind the newest analysis. Most studies involved around 10 reps per set. Also, most of these sets were likely performed to failure, but the definitions of failure

do vary between studies and my assumption is most involved getting to true momentary failure or stopping at most two reps from this failure point which we know from previous videos is likely the zone we want to be in to maximize the stimulus of a set.

Researchers analyze the relationship between muscle growth and the total number of sets performed for each muscle group per week. What on Earth does this mean and how do you calculate it? There are different ways you could do this and the great thing is the researchers aim to determine if a certain method was

best to understand the different methods we must know the difference between a direct and indirect set. A direct set for a muscle is a set on an exercise where that muscle is the primary force generator. Think of the biceps in any biceps curl, the triceps in any triceps

extension and even the chest in most bench pressing exercises. An indirect set for a muscle, however, is a set on an exercise where although that muscle is still fairly trained, it's not the primary force generator. This could be the biceps in any rowing exercise and the triceps in a wider grip bench press.

Make no mistake, not everyone is going to agree as to what should be a direct and indirect set for each muscle, but here's a table showing what the authors of the latest analysis considered as a direct and indirect set for each muscle. These are the exercises and muscles that were

involved in the data that's why not every muscle and exercise is shown here. The simplest approach used in most previous research is to count both direct and indirect sets as equally contributing to a muscle's total weekly sets. This is called the total method for

For example, if we perform three sets of rows on Monday and three sets of standing barbell curls on Thursday, both of them equally contribute to a total of six weekly sets for the biceps. A more refined approach is to count indirect sets as half of direct sets. This

is the fractional method. Without three sets of rows and three sets of curls, for example, this would total 4.5 weekly sets for the biceps. This isn't necessarily completely objective because you might argue that an indirect set should be less than or more than 0.5 sets in

certain scenarios, but the author stuck with simply counting all indirect sets as half a set. The final, more extreme approach doesn't count indirect sets. This is the direct-only method. Using our example, we just consider there to be three weekly sets for the biceps. The

researchers ultimately found that the fractional method performed the best in explaining the data, with the evidence being strongly or very strongly in favor of this method. I'd say this makes sense. Indirect sets aren't as effective as direct sets for stimulating a muscle,

which might be why it was better than a total method, but indirect sets still provide some degree of stimulus and should therefore still contribute to a muscle's weekly set count, which may be why it was better than the direct-only method. From here, please remember all the

total weekly set counts for a muscle you see are calculated with the fractional method. That brings us to the results, and here was the relationship between weekly sets and muscle growth found. The best-fit model was called the square root model, which indicates that more volume resulted in more hypertrophy, but

there were diminishing returns these results are seriously interesting and perhaps surprising to many this is the most extensive analysis on volume for building muscle to date and it failed to find a plateau or even an inverted u based on the current literature growth continually increased up to 43 weekly

sets per muscle group which is an insane amount of volume here's an example of one way to achieve 40 weekly sets for just your biceps this is an incredible amount of training again just for the biceps so do these results mean you can take your gains to the next level by

increasing your volume it's not a guarantee there are absolutely some crucial things we need to keep in mind so you know what these results may mean for you firstly we shouldn't ignore the diminishing returns that is in the same

way that continually squeezing an orange produces less and less juice but forming more and more sets produces less extra growth in fact here's a graph depicting the diminishing returns we can see those initial sets you perform give you a great return and although there's still

additional growth with more sets it becomes substantially diminished the authors approximate the later sets are one-third as stimulative as the initial sets we can see the credible intervals demonstrate greater uncertainty once we get above 25 weekly sets per muscle indeed as the authors say there aren't

as many studies that have explored more than 25 weekly sets per muscle group moreover I'm actually aware of two studies not officially published yet failing to find more growth with super high volumes for these reasons I believe we would be making a big mistake if we

thought this model was the final word on volume and hypertrophy especially when considering the relationship above 25 weekly sets we may eventually find a plateau somewhere this brings us to a topic that is fiercely debated across the internet swelling some argue the extra growth

seen with very high volumes is not actually real muscle growth rather it's muscle swelling muscles can temporarily increase in size due to fluid buildup that could be related to damage most studies behind this data measured muscle growth 48 to 72 hours after the final

training session but the thing is we do have evidence that after a training session with a decent amount of volume muscle swelling may persist at least up to 72 hours so does this mean swelling clouds the data not necessarily the research that finds swelling can last

for days do so after a single training session that the subjects have never performed before there's evidence that as you continue training with the same program your body produces adaptations that reduce damage and swelling this is called the repeated bout effect some say the repeated bout effect isn't

that powerful but the strongest study to date would suggest otherwise it had previously untrained individuals perform five sets of 15 maximal eccentric only leg extensions once per week for 10 weeks maximal eccentric only training is no joke the data shows this as measures of damage and fatigue remained for at

least 5 days after the first training session swelling was unfortunately not measured nonetheless across 10 weeks of training the measures of damage and fatigue became less and less subjects were recovered around a day or two after the session in the final week thus the

repeated bout effect may substantially reduce the likelihood that researchers are measuring swelling after a training program. Moreover, we currently don't have any studies comparing swelling between different volumes, and it's possible higher volumes do not cause greater swelling than moderate volumes in the first place. For these reasons, I'm not

currently convinced swelling certainly confounds this data. There are actually some studies coming soon that may further shed light onto this. We'll update you at the House of Hypoy if anything changes. We've discussed previously at the House of Hypertrophy how rest intervals possibly impact the

relationship between sets and hypertrophy. Let me explain. Rest intervals are the time you take to rest between sets during training sessions. It may come as a surprise to some, but a few suggest longer rest between sets could be better for building muscle when set numbers are equated. For example, this

study found when performing three sets on the leg press per session, quad hypertrophy was greater when resting for 3 minutes between sets compared to 1 minute. However, performing approximately five sets on the leg press per session with one minute of rest between sets ultimately produced similar quad gains to

the three sets with 3 minutes of rest. In other words, more sets with shorter rest intervals could produce similar hypertrophy to fewer sets with longer rest intervals. Accordingly, it's possible that higher volumes are more beneficial when using shorter rest between sets and not as beneficial when using longer rest

between sets. The latest analysis actually had a moderate analysis that indeed found muscle growth plateaued earlier with fewer sets when 3 minutes of rest between sets was used compared to 1 minute. At first glance, this seems like clear proof that higher volumes are only

beneficial when using short rests. However, as the authors describe, the moderator analysis should be viewed with caution as there's not much strong data behind it. They view it as exploratory. Furthermore, if we accept these results, we would also have to accept that very

high sets with one-minute rest intervals ultimately lead to the best hypertrophy, which is a conclusion hard to currently justify. It is also worth mentioning that the data suggesting longer rest between sets could be superior for building muscle largely used compound exercises with smaller isolation exercises. Some

data suggest shorter rest between sets may be no less effective. Ultimately, we need more studies to examine how the relationship between set and hypertrophy differs depending on rest intervals. We'll have some recommendations in a second, but before that, there are a few other moderator analyses that some may

find interesting. The relationship between weekly sets and hypertrophy was fairly similar between trained and untrained individuals as well as between 21 and 35-year-old individuals. And the positive relationship between volume and hypertrophy remained when looking at shorter and longer duration studies, but

once again, view these moderator analyses with caution. Here's what I'd recommend based on this data: Know that hypertrophy can be achieved with lower volumes, so if you dislike or cannot train with more sets for practical reasons, know that it's still possible to achieve a respectable

chunk of gains. If you're happy to train more in attempt to maximize muscle growth, people who take the latest data at face value would say to get as close to 40 weekly sets per muscle group as you can. But given the crucial considerations we've overviewed, I

wouldn't go that far. We also mustn't forget these are averages. You need to consider your individual situation and lifestyle, but this is what I'd suggest. I'd first ensure you're maximizing your training quality. This means selecting exercises that are ideal for growing

muscle, training hard enough, and optimizing your rest between sets. We have videos at the House of Viery that can help you understand what the literature says on these topics, and we are working on free ultimate guides on the exercises that are possibly the most favorable for

training each muscle group with your training quality optimized. I would then suggest performing as much volume as you can personally and practically handle consistently. If I had to guess, I think this will probably be around 10 to 20 weekly sets per muscle group for

most people. Of course, you can always experiment around. If you're making minimal progress and feeling burnt out, try doing less. Alternatively, if you feel your body is ready, you can experiment with performing closer to or more than 20 weekly sets per muscle group. Also remember that you don't necessarily have

to perform identical set numbers for every muscle group. It may be most feasible to experiment with super high volumes with only a few or even one muscle group. This is called muscle group specialization. In fact, one study last year that found a benefit to super high

volumes, even when using longer rest between sets, did so when only training the quads with this volume. I also recommend gradually progressing to super high volumes. I suspect this more effectively prepares your body for handling this high quantity of training before moving on to the summary. Some may

be wondering about training frequency as well as if there's a limit to the number of sets you can perform per session and glad to say we'll have updated videos on these topics as there's new research on them coming [Music] soon. In summary, the most extensive

analysis on volume for hypertrophy today has some pretty intriguing findings. Firstly, using the fractional method to count volume outperforms the total or direct only method. If you skip to the summary and are confused as to what this means, head back to this time point.

Secondly, the analysis suggests more sets result in more growth, but there are diminishing returns. Those initial sets provide a great return, so it's possible to see respectable gains without high volumes. In the spirit of scientific accuracy, these results are based on the current literature, but the current

literature isn't flawless. There are just a few studies exploring more than 25 weekly sets per muscle, and there are questions remaining about the influence of other things such as rest interval durations. This all leads me to be extremely cautious in definitively

concluding that super high volumes are superior. Better quality data is needed, and I know some are on the way currently. My recommendation is to maximize your training quality and then perform as much volume as you can personally and practically handle. Then make adjustments as you see fit. If you're constantly

feeling burnt out with minimal progress, experiment with lower volumes. Or if you're feeling as though you could do more, feel free to experiment with higher volumes. Before in up navigating all the fitness advice out there can be challenging. Bad information can make you

confused and hold your results and enjoyment back. Beyond these videos, at the House of Hypertrophy, if you're looking for effective muscle building training and a way to track your training effortlessly, our partner with over 1 million downloads, the Alpha Progression app, is flawlessly crafted to

maximize your gains. The app has an unrivaled plan generator that can create an evidence-based program completely customized to your needs. It has some cool options, such as allowing you to focus on neglected muscles, with well over a quadrillion input combinations on which

your plan is based. The app has you covered. The app's intuitive interface still allows you to swap out exercises by looking at similar options, and of course, you can change any other variable you desire. Progressive overload on autopilot as the algorithm analyzes your performance to suggest how you may

progress to optimize gains. The app automatically tracks your progress on virtually every metric, trick you need, and unlockable achievements help keep things fun. With an exercise database of more than 600 exercises, simple video and text instructions give you confidence in knowing you're performing the exercises

effectively. The reviews speak to its quality, but you don't have to take their word. Try out all these premium features free for 14 days with a link in the comments and description. If you continue, the link also gives you 20% off. I hope

you enjoy testing it out. Feel free to let me know about your experience and feedback. Thank you for making it to the end. Feel free to check out another one of the videos at the House of Hypertrophy.

More Sets, More Growth: This NEW Study is Surprising (& Epic)

House of Hypertrophy

소개 및 연구 개요: 훈련량과 근육 비대의 관계.

주제 소개: 근육 성장을 극대화하기 위한 가장 중요한 훈련 변수입니다.

근육 성장의 맥락에서 볼륨의 정의: 수행한 세트 수입니다.

세트와 근육 성장의 관계에 관한 다양한 가설을 탐구합니다.

'작업 세트'의 정의와 연구에서 이를 측정하는 방법에 대해 알아보세요.

연구에 사용된 변수: 세트당 반복 횟수, 실패 또는 실패에 가까운 세트 수행.

방법론: 근육 성장을 위한 주간 세트 정의 및 계산하기.

직접 및 간접 세트에 대한 설명과 총 주간 세트에 대한 기여도를 설명합니다.

다양한 근육 그룹에 대한 직접 및 간접 세트의 예입니다.

주간 총 세트를 계산하는 세 가지 방법: 전체, 일부분, 직접 전용.

세 가지 방법의 비교와 분수 방법의 우수성.

분수 방식 선택에 대한 정당성.

결과 및 해석: 주간 세트와 근육 성장 사이의 관계.

가장 적합한 모델: 제곱근 모델, 수익률 감소를 나타냅니다.

근육 그룹당 매주 최대 43세트까지 지속적으로 성장했습니다.

중요한 고려 사항: 주간 세트 25개 이상의 수익률 및 불확실성 감소.

수익률 감소를 그래픽으로 표현했습니다.

잠재적 혼선 해결: 근육 부종과 데이터에 미치는 영향.

대량 성장이 실제 근육 성장인지 부기인지에 대한 논쟁을 벌입니다.

근육 성장 측정 타이밍과 부기의 지속성.

반복적인 시합 효과와 시간이 지남에 따라 부기를 줄일 수 있는 잠재력이 있습니다.

최대 편심 전용 다리 신장에 대한 연구에서 얻은 증거입니다.

팽창이 데이터에 미치는 영향에 대한 결론.

추가 요소: 휴식 간격 및 기타 진행자 분석.

휴식 간격이 세트와 비대 사이의 관계에 미치는 잠재적 영향.

세트, 휴식, 비대 사이의 상호작용을 보여주는 레그 프레스에 대한 연구.

볼륨, 휴식 간격 및 비대 사이의 가능한 상호 작용.

휴식 간격과 그 한계에 대한 진행자 분석.

기타 진행자 분석: 교육 경험, 나이, 학습 기간.

권장 사항 1: 더 낮은 볼륨으로 비대를 달성할 수 있습니다.

권장 사항 2: 교육 품질을 극대화한 다음 개인의 반응에 따라 교육량을 조정합니다.

운동 선택, 강도, 휴식 등 훈련의 질에 집중하세요.

권장 운동량 범위: 대부분의 경우 근육 그룹당 매주 10~20세트.

더 높은 볼륨으로 점진적으로 진행합니다.

주요 결과 요약 및 결과의 신중한 해석.

More Sets, More Growth: This NEW Study is Surprising (& Epic)

More Sets, More Growth: This NEW Study is Surprising (& Epic)

스크립트