<!-- google_ad_section_start -->Isometric burn II<!-- google_ad_section_end -->
Health Forums

Go Back   Health Forums > Fitness and Nutrition > Fitness > misc.fitness.weights

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-09-2006, 08:35 AM
Proctologically Violated©®
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Isometric burn II

All--

Apropos of jmw's correct assertion about rigor mortis elsewhere, here's a
thought:
IF
1. ATP indeed powers the *release* of the myosin head from actin;
2. Which means a flaccid un-tensed muscle is actually burning ATP (part of
your BMR)
3. An isometric represents a near-maximum number of actin-myosin bridges,
ie, NO ATP hydrolysis as long as they are stuck together,
THEN
An isometric contraction actually consumes a *minimal* amount of energy--and
that the imminent fatigue is *not* lactic acid induced, but purely
neural--as I think jmw was suggesting, and as his cite was suggesting.

Said minimal amount of consumed energy is proly not as low as in flaccid
muscle (as this argument might tend to imply), but it might be
*disproportionately close*!

Which, from an evolutionary/survival point of view, is absolutely brilliant:

Think of animals surviving via isometric-type exertions: primates swinging
(lock-jointed) in trees, cats holding themselves in trees by claws alone,
other examples of "motionless force", such as three-toed sloths feeding
endlessly while clinging w/ their full bodyweight, etc, all accomplished
with a minimal consumption of ATP, as there is no ATP needed for a "rigor
mortised" type contraction--ie, contractions w/o motion!

For which there is excellent experimental evidence, right within us, that I
was going to get to earlier in the other isometric thread:
Even after an intense isometric workout, one's breathing rate is
*surprisingly low*, despite very large-muscle contractions, ergo little VO2,
ERGO very little calorie burn, as compared to vigorous lifting or running.
Very little.

IOW, it is the nature of muscle to isometrically contract w/ very little
chemical/metabolic energy consumed! *Adjusting* said contraction is where
the energy consumption comes in.

Man, ahm tickled, just fukn tickled! I think....
--
Mr. P.V.'d (formerly Droll Troll), Yonkers, NY
Stop Corruption in Congress & Send the Ultimate Message:
Absolutely Vote, but NOT for a Democrat or a Republican.
Ending Corruption in Congress is the Single Best Way
to Materially Improve Your Family's Life.
entropic3.14decay at optonline2.718 dot net; remove pi and e to reply--ie,
all d'numbuhs


Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Isometric cal burn vs wt lifting cal burn Proctologically Violated©® misc.fitness.weights 0 11-09-2006 08:33 AM
Burn the Fat, Build the Muscle jayden misc.fitness.weights 2 11-09-2006 08:33 AM
Catapult Your Muscle Gains With Partial Reps and Isometric Contraction Gary Matthews alt.support.diet 0 11-09-2006 08:15 AM
Burn the Fat Feed the Muscle bhlqogwbfwka@yahoo.com alt.support.diet 0 11-09-2006 08:11 AM
How much do I burn per day? One alt.support.diet 7 11-09-2006 08:10 AM


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:26 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.2.0
     
   
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41