The HyPaultrophy podcast Why 200% more muscle growth doesn't mean anything
20 snips
Aug 16, 2025 In this engaging discussion, Sam Buckner, who runs the USF Muscle Lab, dives into the intricacies of skeletal muscle growth research. He reveals how statistics can be manipulated to exaggerate results and emphasizes the importance of understanding practical significance over sensational figures. Sam critiques common misconceptions fueled by social media and stresses the need for robust scientific communication. The conversation encourages a critical approach to interpreting hypertrophy studies, highlighting the complexities of muscle growth versus strength.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Look At Absolute Change, Not Just P Values
- Sam Buckner urges readers to evaluate absolute change scores and not just significance when reading hypertrophy studies.
- Small mean changes (e.g., 0.05 cm) often lack practical meaning despite being reported as differences.
Lab Replication Of A Notable Volume Study
- Sam describes replicating the Schoenfeld volume study in his lab to test robustness of prior results.
- He emphasizes replication because surprising or large effects deserve cautious follow-up.
Ultrasound Needs Long-Term Reliability
- Ultrasound muscle-thickness results vary widely between labs due to operator skill and limited long-term reliability.
- Sam recommends eight-week reliability and multiple sites rather than single-site, short-term checks to trust growth claims.