More About Myostatin and Muscle Growth

Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • October 9, 2004 at 10:27 pm #1726
    luvmuslgirls
    Participant

    Here are links to fairly recent articles on further myostatin research and possible outcomes of said research:

    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/09/040915113111.htm

    http://sport.guardian.co.uk/athletics/comment/0,10083,1303321,00.html

    October 19, 2005 at 7:01 am #1727
    Anonymous
    Guest

    I am hoping that this gene technology becomes available to FBBs soon,,,with 70% more muscle mass,,,they would be huge and gorgeous 😀

    October 20, 2005 at 3:05 am #1728
    ratlaf
    Participant

    70%!!!!!!!!!!!  That would make a 175 pound muscle-woman almost 300 pounds (297.5)!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Actually…
    Exploring this further, take a female bodybuilder of average height 5'6" and 175 pounds.  Assume the average weight of a normal woman is 120 (?) that would give the bodybuilder 55 pounds of muscle.  Now add 70% to her muscle mass: 93.5 pounds of muscle, so after the gene therapy she would have the potential to build herself up to 213.5 pounds, her strength and size, however, would be hugely increased…

    take for example the average bodybuilders' arm of 17", add 70% and she gets a 28.9" arm!!  A bench press of 300 pounds becomes a bench of 510!!!  Soulder press with 55 pound dumbells becomes 93.5 pounds!  One arm curls with 50 pound dumbells becomes 85 pounds!!!

    In other words Myo Women would out muscle us normal people by a substantial amount, I can't wait!!!

    October 21, 2005 at 3:18 pm #1729
    Rob W
    Participant

    take for example the average bodybuilders' arm of 17", add 70% and she gets a 28.9" arm!!

    Ah, but you're talking circumference, not volume. A 17" arm circumference (assuming a circular arm cross-section for the sake of simplicity) would give a cross-sectional area of 23 square inches. (work it out yourself if you don't believe me)

    Increasing that by 70% gives us an area of 39 square inches, which when run back through the formula gives us an arm circumference of a bit over 22 inches.

    Impressive and damn near mind-blowing on the smaller frame of most fbbs, but not quite as extreme as you calculated.

    RobW the party pooper.

    October 21, 2005 at 10:01 pm #1730
    ratlaf
    Participant

    that's fine by me, i never claimed to be the authority, just trying some interesting math…

    October 22, 2005 at 1:30 pm #1731
    Rob W
    Participant

    that's fine by me, i never claimed to be the authority, just trying some interesting math…

    Heh. I'm just a sad maths geek.  🙂

    October 24, 2005 at 8:20 am #1732
    Lingster
    Keymaster

    I doubt that practical myostatin blockers would have their most dramatic effect on elite bodybuilders – for the most part such people already have low myostatin levels as part of their genetic "gift".  Where you'd see real change is in the frequency of muscular women in society.  Lots of people (men and women) would like to have bodybuilder-sized muscles without putting in the time and attention to diet that's required.  Practical myostatin blockers would make it possible for average people to develop much more muscular physiques.  (It would also likely shorten their lifespans.)

    November 12, 2009 at 6:46 am #1733
    leaf
    Participant

    Sorry for replying to a thread that is…um…4 years old, but I heard a story on NPR today on this topic that I assumed had been written by one of us.

    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=120316010

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.