Christian Finn

You wont need to do more sets or reps than youre currently doing. Nor will you need to completely overhaul your training program, buy any expensive equipment, or splash the cash on fancy supplements. In fact, you wont need to spend any money at all, and you can get started in your very next workout. All you need to do is shift the way you focus when you lift-and the growth will follow.

Heres the story: Back in 2009, a team of US researchers set up a very . They rounded up a group of people who had never lifted weights before and got them to do lat pulldowns.

During each rep, the researchers used electrodes to measure muscle activity in the lats. They wanted to find out if it was possible to make the lats work harder with a shift in something called attentional focus.

Attentional focus refers to what you think about during a particular movement or activity. There are two main types of attentional focus: internal and external. An internal focus involves actively thinking about the target muscle during training, while an external focus involves directing your attention outside the body.

An example of an internal focus during the squat might be to squeeze your glutes on the way up, while an external focus could be to drive the floor away from your body.

Doesnt sound like it would make much difference, does it? But the science shows that it does. After telling subjects to pull with their back, instead of with their arms, by adducting the scapulae and concentrating on the tension in the back musculature, the researchers found that muscle activity in the lats was up by nearly 20 percent.

Internal Focus at Work

African American athlete lifting weights in gym

Other studies report similar results. After telling subjects to use your gluteal muscles to lift your leg while keeping your hamstring muscles relaxed during the prone hip extension, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19478835" id="ee7909dd-9d06-3943-ae7c-7455bb6ffd83"> University of Michigan researchers </a> <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19478835" id="465cba60-5914-35f5-a71b-269807e17f4a"> found that </a> muscle activity in the glutes doubled.

In other words, a simple shift in attentional focus led to a marked increase in muscle activity. Even more interestingly, this shift in focus has also been shown to make a muscle grow faster than normal.

published in the European Journal of Sport Science tracked the results of two groups of men who trained with weights three times a week for eight weeks. Both groups did the same exercises-the barbell curl and leg extension-but with one key difference: Subjects in the first group were told to squeeze the muscle during each rep, while subjects in group two were told simply to get the weight up.

The results were striking. Subjects who were told to squeeze the muscle-an internal focus of attention-there was a 12 percent increase in the size of the biceps.

That was almost double the gains seen in the group who were told to get the weight up, where the average increase in biceps size was just 7 percent. It was a different story with the quads, where there was no significant difference in muscle growth between the two groups.

The researchers think this might have been down to the fact that untrained individuals have a hard time establishing a mind-muscle connection in the quads compared to the biceps. In fact, several subjects said that they found it much easier to focus on their biceps than their quads.

Handsome asian man with dumbbell in the sports gym, bodybuilding concept

Apart from the potential for faster muscle growth, theres another benefit to an internal focus of attention during certain exercises.

When you focus on squeezing the muscle youre working, rather than simply getting the weight up, youll often find that doing so requires the use of a lighter weight. Lighter weight means theres less stress on the joints, which means less potential for injury.

To be clear, using an internal focus of attention is about a lot more than just using good form. Getting your technique right is a basic first step, but its not enough. Developing and maintaining an internal focus takes concentration and discipline.

Heres how Charles Gaines and George Butler describe it in their 1977 book Pumping Iron.

All the best bodybuilders can block out an air war with their concentration. I remember watching [Mr Universe] Ed Corney doing dumbbell curls in Baghdad. He was seated on a stool in the middle of the big, strange gym that the city let the Mr Universe competitors work out in. There must have been thirty or forty Iraqis standing along all four walls, and another fifty or so at the windows looking in. Ed Corney sat in the middle of all those fervid, noisy little people, staring at the sheath of his bicep fill and empty, fill and empty, his face remote and rapt as a Yogis, his mind somewhere down inside the fibers of that arm.

Corney was not doing this after looking at a few studies on the subject of attentional focus and muscle growth. Rather, it was something that came instinctively. After many years of training, he knew he could do a better job of sending the make me bigger signal to his muscle fibers with his mind fully engaged on the task at hand.

<h1> Points of Emphasis for Using Internal Focus </h1>

All of this does come with a few caveats: Most studies that show a benefit to an internal focus of attention involve the use of relatively light weights and moderate rep ranges. Focusing on what a particular muscle is doing isnt a good idea on every exercise, especially if its a compound lift that involves the use of heavy weights.

If youre doing heavy deadlifts, for example, an internal focus of attention isnt a great idea. Instead, you want to shift to an external focus of attention, and concentrate on simply getting the weight up.

In fact, studies show that the effectiveness of an internal focus is reduced with heavier weights. In <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22076100" id="70ddba8f-94d4-3851-ac36-f9f6b20429ee"> one study </a> , muscle activity in the pecs was increased by 22 percent when subjects were told to focus on their chest muscles when they benched a weight that was roughly 50 percent of their one-rep max. However, the difference in muscle activity between the two conditions was cut in half when they used heavier weights.

When you go to the gym, you need to decide why you're there. Are you just simply trying to lift weights, or is your aim to use those weights to stimulate your muscles in such a way that they adapt by getting bigger over time? If your answer is the former, youll get better results (in certain exercises at least) by focusing intensely on the muscles youre supposed to be working, rather than just shifting a weight from point A to point B.

What if there was a super simple way to make your muscles grow faster? Even more intriguing, one that doesnt involve spending longer in the gym, doing different exercises, or lifting heavier weights.

Want to Make Your Muscles Grow Faster? Just Focus.

Theres conflicting information coming at you from all directions, and you cant figure out who, or what, to believe. So you end up dabbling in this and that, hopping from one thing to the next, never really taking consistent action on anything. Meanwhile, your gains are nonexistent, your goals feel unreachable, and you're mortified that all of your effort has just been a massive waste of time and effort.

If you feel like youre drowning in a sea of information and you don't know what to do, here are three simple steps you can take to separate fitness fact from fiction. Future-proof yourself against BS, fight back against fitness information overload, and put yourself on the right track for a fitter, healthier you.

Back when I started lifting weights, it seemed like no one could ever agree on the type of training program that worked best for muscle growth. Everyone seemed to have a completely different opinion, and all were adamant that their way was the best way.

Surely they couldnt all be right. Or could they?

In fact, research shows that some folks respond a lot better to certain diets and training programs than others. A shows that roughly three out of 10 subjects saw faster muscle growth when they trained a muscle five times per week. Another four out of 10 got faster results when they trained that same muscle two or three times a week. The others made similar gains irrespective of how often each muscle was trained.

Its a similar story when it comes to diet. In a <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30335720" id="bbc83e58-67a1-3eac-a875-a0d38a270f22"> 2018 </a> <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30335720" id="85d76737-4b5a-3d77-a9f4-5e85c8cebb37"> study </a> , Australian researchers looked at how three months of low-carb dieting affected lifting performance in a group of competitive strength athletes.

Whether the lifters followed a ketogenic or a regular diet, the average gains in strength were virtually identical. However, the problem with looking at averages is that they can mask individual changes in performance. A closer look at the results shows that different people responded in different ways to the same diet.

Three of the 10 subjects made better strength gains on the ketogenic diet. One saw exactly the same results no matter which diet they followed. The other six saw their gains take a dip when they cut back on carbs.

In other words, individuals can respond very differently to the same diet and training program. Thats one of the reasons why theres so much conflicting advice about how to get in shape. The best way for one person to train and eat may be very different to someone elses best way,-and youre only going to discover what works for you is through experience.

Put a rat in a maze, and it will automatically explore a newly opened section of the maze. Thats because most mammals have a strong preference for novelty-and humans are no different.

The brain is built to ignore the old and focus on the new, <a href="https://profiles.stanford.edu/russell-poldrack?tab=bio" id="b052b446-0c8a-3b26-a827-6ba6a4539fc5"> Dr. Russell Poldrack </a> , a professor of psychology and researcher at Stanford, <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/multitasking-the-brain-se_n_334674" id="bf6c9cf0-9239-3c78-abbd-1e72f47e9ab6"> wrote in 2011 </a> . Novelty is probably one of the most powerful signals to determine what we pay attention to in the world. This makes a lot of sense from an evolutionary standpoint, since we don't want to spend all of our time and energy noticing the many things around us that don't change from day to day.

Novelty makes you happy. Fresh experiences of any kind tend to trigger the release of chemicals in the brain that make us feel good. However, novelty also has a darker side. Its easy to become hooked to the chemical high associated with novelty, especially when that rush is so easily accessible through a phone, tablet or computer.

Reading about so-called new and revolutionary ways to get in shape can feel good. And, some of them can (occasionally) come in handy. But the constant hunt for novelty can easily backfire, sending you off in completely the wrong direction.

In the fitness industry, new ideas are often considered superior to those that came before. Not because they are actually better, but simply because they're new. Originality seems to take precedence over effectiveness. Old solutions are sometimes perceived to be less valuable because we already know about them.

Truth is, much of what passes for "new and revolutionary" in the nutrition and exercise arena is either not new at all, or extremely controversial and highly speculative. Exposed to the scrutiny of research, some of it will inevitably turn out to be wrong.

You dont necessarily need anything new or unique to get in better shape than you are now (outside of the methods being new to you, of course). Thats because tried-and-true methods will often do the job just as well. There's really nothing new under the sun, as the old saying goes, just the history you don't know yet. That applies to fitness, too, to a degree.

Progress often hides behind boring solutions and underused insights, writes Atomic Habits author . You dont need more information. You dont need a better strategy. You just need to do more of what already works.

<h1> Focus on Relentless Execution of the Fundamentals </h1>

When people look for a new diet and exercise program to follow, they tend to search for the best workout for this or the best diet for that, which is itself not a problem. Why waste time doing something that takes longer and is less effective than what you could be doing?

The problem lies in what happens next:

<ol><li> Spend hours searching for the "best" way. </li><li> Try the methodology for a week or two, then stop because a new "best" way shows up. </li><li> Repeat the process, with little or nothing to show for it. </li></ol>

Choice, in general, is a good thing. You want to make sure that every decision is the best decision that could possibly be made, and the only way to do that is to check out all the alternatives.

Even after youve done that, however, there might still be nagging doubts in your mind that there something better is out there that you didnt investigate properly. Eventually, choice overload kicks in, where the sheer number of options, combined with the fear of making the wrong choice, leaves you unable to make a decision about what to do next.

Instead, take a tip from billionaire Warren Buffett, one of the most successful investors of all time. An investor needs to do very few things right, <a href="https://www.thebalance.com/warren-buffett-quotes-356438" id="a5c03b5d-bca2-3e00-ab7d-3ff95fd09084"> says Buffet </a> , as long as he or she avoids big mistakes.

Its much the same story when it comes to diet and exercise. If you want to build a better body, you need to do a few simple things right, do them consistently, and avoid big mistakes. Multiple paths can lead to the same destination, and its the consistent and relentless execution of the fundamentals that will get you where you want to go.

What to Do When You Get Conflicting Fitness Advice

Google around for tips on how to get in shape, and youll come across thousands of videos, articles, posts, and tweets-and most of them will be offering out completely different advice.

Hed cleaned up his diet, and had been hitting the gym hard for about three months. Hed lost weight, and his clothes fit better, especially around the waist. He was stronger in the gym, and could see signs of new muscle across his chest, shoulders and back.

But, he was in a state of some distress. Thats because the body fat test (which hed just plunked down $125 for) showed that he was in worse shape now than he was three months ago.

Im fatter now than at my last scan! he said. How can I have lost muscle? Can you take a look at my diet and training program to see what Ive been doing wrong?

Heres what I told him: The problem may well lie with your diet. Perhaps your training program is in need of some revision. However, theres also a third possibility-the results from the body fat test are way out.

In fact, most body fat tests, be they body fat scales, underwater weighing, or <a href="https://radiology.ucsf.edu/blog/dxadexa-beats-bmi-using-x-ray-exam-measure-body-composition-fat-loss" id="f295dd28-4711-3f57-a909-5ffc9e7808af"> even DEXA </a> (an x-ray scan typically used to measure bone mineral density), cant be relied on to track changes in body composition over time. Using the results to guide your training and diet decisions may well send you off in completely the wrong direction.

<h1> Why You Should Be Wary of Body Fat Tests </h1>

First, no body fat test can tell you exactly how much muscle and fat you have. The only way to truly measure your body fat is to have all of it stripped out, placed on a scale, and weighed. This method is highly accurate. The only downside is that you have to be dead in order for it to happen.

To paraphrase <a href="https://weightology.net/" id="1fb04495-285f-3829-af44-e4eff6ae05fe"> Weightology </a> founder James Krieger, a body fat test is not really a test at all. Think of it as more of a prediction than a measurement.

When a weather reporter gives you a forecast, they dont measure the weather, Krieger explains. They are predicting the weather. And that's exactly what is happening when you have your body fat tested. Just as the weather reporter cannot predict the weather with 100 percent accuracy, we cannot predict your body fat levels with 100 percent accuracy.

Lets take body fat scales as an example. Theyre one of the most popular ways to track fat loss and muscle growth over time, mainly because theyre cheap, quick, and easy to use.

Body fat scales employ a method known as bioelectrical impedance, which involves running a light electrical current through your body, and measuring the degree of resistance (or impedance) to the flow of the current.

The first and perhaps most obvious problem with body fat scales is that they miss out large segments of your body. Stand on a set of foot-to-foot body fat scales, for example, and the current will simply go up one leg and down the other. Which means that youre only measuring how fat your legs are.

<h1> What the Research Shows About Body Fat Testing </h1>

The argument in favor of body fat testing is that even if a given test isnt accurate, at least its consistent. Put differently, it doesnt matter if a body fat test is out by a few percentage points here or there. As long as its consistent, you can use it to track your progress over time.

However, when researchers have put this idea to the test, the results have been less than impressive.

In <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15076792" id="b6516ede-7111-37da-a981-856c661b9781"> a study published in </a> <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15076792" id="d19e7989-1516-3519-aa6c-3759eff9d491"> Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise </a> , scientists looked at changes in body composition in a group of male bodybuilders. They compared several body fat tests-including bioelectrical impedance, the technology used in body fat scales-with something called the 4-compartment model, which is the currently benchmark test for body composition and the standard against which other body fat tests are measured.

The researchers found that bioelectrical impedance was the least accurate of all the methods. In fact, the error rate got as high as eight percent. Lets say you step on some body fat scales, and they tell you that your body fat percentage is 20 percent. You eat right and train hard for a couple of months, and cut your body fat by around five percent. But when you go back for another test, the scales might show that your body fat percentage hasnt changed at all.

Much the same thing holds true for muscle growth. You could gain 5 to 6 pounds of muscle over a period of several months. But the scales might show that you hadnt gained any muscle at all.

Youd come away with the impression that whatever youd been doing to generate those results didnt work, when actually it did. And you run the risk of ditching a training and nutrition program thats working and replacing it with one thats less effective.

<h1> Do X-Rays Work Better for Body Fat Testing? </h1>

Doctors examining x-ray of chest and ribs on digital tablet

What about other body fat tests, like DEXA scans? Do they work any better?

DEXA, short for dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, does a reasonable job at . But, its not as good at tracking individual changes in body fat and muscle mass over time.

Why is that? DEXA might overestimate body fat percentage in half your group by five percent, and underestimate it in the other half by five percent. When looking at the group results, the average error size is zero. But the individual results are way out.

The fact that a body fat test does a good job at estimating group averages doesnt necessarily mean that its equally as good at tracking individual progress over time. When compared DEXA with the gold-standard 4-compartment model, the results were a mixed bag. In some individuals, the results were a close match. But in others, they were way out.

One subject gained five percent body fat according to the 4-compartment model, but DEXA showed that it had dropped by five percent. Another lost nearly 10 percent body fat according to the 4-compartment model, but DEXA showed only a three percent drop.

And DEXA isnt cheap, with a single scan costing upwards of $100. If you go back for a second scan after a few months, thats another $100. Thats a lot of money to spend if the results arent telling you anything useful.

Some argue that doing back-to-back DEXA scans proves theyre accurate. That is, if you get yourself scanned, then return to the same machine the next day and get another scan, the results will be almost identical. However, this doesnt tell you that the scan has done a decent job of estimating your body composition. All it tells you is how close the estimates are when repeated measurements are made. It doesnt tell you how accurate those estimates are in the first place.

The technology involved in body fat testing still has some catching up to do. Commercial body fat testing devices are not accurate enough for you to use the information to make better decisions about what to eat and how to train. Put your faith in only the results of a body fat test, and you might end up thinking that your diet and training program isnt working, when really it is-or that it is working when it isnt.

Once, I was talking to a guy whod just had his body fat tested.

Why You Should Be Wary of Body Fat Tests

Politics

Local

World

News

Celebrities

Music

Movies

Entertainment

Sports 

Fashion

Beauty & Health

Relationships & Weddings

Food & Travel

Lifestyle

Domestic

International 

Business

About

Highlights

Selection Criteria

Jury

Terms And Conditions

FAQs

Pulse Influencer Awards

Courses

Careers

Explore categories

Pulse Kenya is the most followed news and entertainment platform in Kenya. It informs and engages young Kenyans around the clock and provides updates by the hour.

Christian Finn

Articles written by the author

Want to Make Your Muscles Grow Faster? Just Focus.

What to Do When You Get Conflicting Fitness Advice

Why You Should Be Wary of Body Fat Tests