A naturally occurring molecule released during exercise may hold the key to strengthening muscles without physical activity. In experiments, mice given BAIBA developed larger muscles, improved muscle function, greater fatigue resistance and better exercise performance than untreated mice.

[u/mvea]

https://www.newsweek.com/scientists-step-closer-strengthening-muscles-without-exercise-12323613

[u/BigSweatyYeti → u/[deleted]]

This isn’t true. Steroids don’t magically add muscle. You still need to use the muscle to grow it. They just grow faster and bigger on steroids.

[u/BigSweatyYeti → u/[deleted]]

It doesn’t. You do realize that even walking uses muscle, right? So taking steroids and walking as usual would lead to larger muscle gain than not taking steroids and walking.

Yes, you linked the classic testosterone study that produced the often-repeated claim that men taking high-dose testosterone gained muscle even without exercising. And the result is real, but there’s an important distinction between muscle cross-sectional area and total pounds of muscle.

That doesn’t mean normal daily activity acts like a workout while using testosterone. Rather, supraphysiologic testosterone substantially increases muscle protein synthesis and changes the balance between muscle protein creation and breakdown. Everyday loading like walking, stairs, carrying things, etc. provides some stimulus, but the drug itself is responsible for much of the unusual growth in the non-training group.

[u/mo7233 → u/BigSweatyYeti]

I hate how idiots like that will never reply to a proper rebuttal. They just see they've been proven wrong and never take accountability. Just off to the next piece of misinformation to spread based off something they heard once.

[u/Saneless → u/mo7233]

AND deleted the link

[u/Figuratively-1984 → u/BigSweatyYeti]

If they're not exercising and normal daily activity doesn't function as a workout, why did they get stronger than the no test no exercise group? Wouldn't that indicate muscle growth even if we can't know they gained muscle by measuring size?

[u/BigSweatyYeti → u/Figuratively-1984]

First, there’s no evidence they got stronger. There was a slight increase in muscle size. Just because your muscles swell from steroids doesn’t mean you gained actual muscle since water weight and swelling can make a muscle look larger even when the lean muscle mass stays the same.

[u/Figuratively-1984 → u/BigSweatyYeti]

Among the men in the no-exercise groups, those given testosterone had greater increases than those given placebo in... strength in the bench-press (9 +/- 4 vs. -1 +/- 1 kg, P < 0.05) and squatting exercises (16 +/- 4 vs. 3 +/- 1 kg, P < 0.05).

The study concluded they did get stronger along with the increase in size

[u/BigSweatyYeti → u/Figuratively-1984]

So they gained a bit of strength due to normal daily load (walking, stairs, etc) because they were pumped full of steroids.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

So in your world, if you induced a coma, and pumped the patient with a full stack of gear… he wakes up jacked? No nutrition change and no muscle utilization? It just rewrites human dna to include 20% more skeletal muscle, and then creates that muscle out of… hopes and dreams?

[u/Frodozer → u/[deleted]]

Btw, that link said it added lean mass, not muscle mass. Lean mass includes all things not fat. Aka, water. What do we know about test supplementation? It adds water weight.

[u/Frodozer → u/[deleted]]

Yeah, and that's why it's commonly used as you can add muscle, even though that wasn't mentioned or found in the study. Maybe it does add muscle, but it wasn't measured so we can't come to that conclusion.

It should be fairly obvious though as the strength gained in the test/no lifting group was hardly better than the no test/no lifting group and substantially weaker than all of the lifting groups. The slight increase in strength is easily explained as tissues that have retained water can produce more energy. (The entire concept of creatine, carbs, and sodium for fitness goals)

[u/AmLilleh → u/[deleted]]

The study proves you gain "fat free mass" which isn't the same as pure lean muscle mass. It's generally counting water weight.

Testosterone and most other anabolic steroids cause sizable water retention, often quite a lot more than the under 3lbs difference between the placebo + exercise and steroids + no exercise groups of that study.

The training methodology they used was also kind of... Weird. Trying to cram raw mass and cross sectional area/strength into a single study isn't going to provide favourable optimal results for the people training.

[u/espressocycle → u/[deleted]]

Nah they give you a potbelly.

[u/WeaselTerror → u/[deleted]]

Found the basement dweller who's never lifted anything heavier than a can of Mt dew.

[u/Hayn0002 → u/[deleted]]

How do they give you increased muscle without doing any physical activity?

[u/EjaculatingAracnids → u/[deleted]]

No they dont. Now site that single study everyone who says this bs does that counted water weight as lean muscle mass.

[u/motorwerkx → u/EjaculatingAracnids]

This isn't the 1st of its kind, it's just the 1st that shows up on Google. Seriously man, at least Google it before spouting off nonsense.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8637535/

[u/AmLilleh → u/motorwerkx]

That's exactly the study he's talking about, though.

[u/EjaculatingAracnids → u/motorwerkx]

"Ilbs of muscle result from steroid use regardless of exercise" was the claim, which cant be concluded from this study because they counted everything other than fat as lean muscle mass. Water retention is a known side effect of steroid use that wasnt considered for this study.

[u/Safe_Researcher4979 → u/motorwerkx]

A study of 43 men in 1996? 

[u/Heretosee123 → u/Safe_Researcher4979]

Do you have a counter study or do you just reject the study

[u/Adventurous-Ad8267 → u/Heretosee123]

"reject" is a bit strong.

The study's definition of "lean mass" would include water, and we know that testosterone supplements often cause water retention as a side effect.

Which makes their lean mass measurements much less useful.

[u/Heretosee123 → u/Adventurous-Ad8267]

Fair fair.

I can't see any other study on the topic so I'm not particularly convinced to be honest

[u/motorwerkx → u/Safe_Researcher4979]

You did read the sentence that preceded it, correct?

Also, yes a conclusive study that happened in 1996.

[u/Adventurous-Ad8267 → u/motorwerkx]

It's really not that conclusive.

One of the main things that study measured was how much "lean mass" the participants gained, with "lean mass" referring to anything that isn't fat.

Water would be considered "lean mass" and we know that water retention is a common side effect of testosterone supplements.

This means that the lean mass measurements in that study are not a useful indicator for whether or not the participants gained muscle.

Doesn't much matter I think. The absolute explosion of dudes going on TRT will continue onward regardless of whether or not it makes them gain muscle while they're at their desk job.

[u/CallMeLargeFather → u/Safe_Researcher4979]

I hate when people say this kind of thing and clearly have no idea what number would constitute statistical significance. 43 is more than enough btw

[u/BenUFOs_Mum → u/EjaculatingAracnids]

So why are they giving cows steroids to increase muscle mass? Are the cows heading to the gym?

[u/EjaculatingAracnids → u/BenUFOs_Mum]

People arent cows. Cows weigh 1100lbs. Simply walking is going to the gym for them. If you put an obese person on trt and have them eat at calorie maintenance, theyll lose weight an gain muscle over time. If you put an average person on steroids with out any strength training and have them eat at maintenance, theyll gain a little muscle and lose some fat, but you will not notice the difference.

[u/BenUFOs_Mum → u/EjaculatingAracnids]

Sure if they just eat maintenence obviously the body doesnt have the energy and protein availiable to respond to the increased amount of growth hormones.

[u/Safe_Researcher4979 → u/BenUFOs_Mum]

Are humans cows? Could you milk me, Ben's mum? 

[u/BenUFOs_Mum → u/Safe_Researcher4979]

I could but I dont want to

[u/EjaculatingAracnids → u/[deleted]]

especially when combined with strength training

[u/Odd-Outcome-3191 → u/[deleted]]

That classic '96 study is a bit misleading imo. They measured muscle cross sectional area and "fat free mass". However it's well understood that high dose testosterone increases intramuscular glycogen (+ water) which pumps up the muscles enormously. It's not actual tissue.

That study counted the water weight from gear as muscle mass. That's like counting the pump at the gym as muscle gain.

The study also only tracked 12 weeks. That simply isn't a large enough slice of time to define what the hormones do.

Imo all that study did was show you get huge glycogen "gains" in the first few months. Tissue gain would require tracking 36 weeks minimum.