mccoy Posted July 1, 2020 Report Share Posted July 1, 2020 OK, if we stick to the non-etymological definition, but to the one you cite. On the other way, I don't see how it is possible to avoid a decline in strength. Even in currently training athletes, that seems statistically unavoidable. Also, we should define function. If it means suppleness, that's easily provided by stretching and hata-yoga asanas. But again, I don't see how strength and suppleness could improve the intramyocellular absorption of glucose if that's a real asset of larger muscle size. Also, an increase in muscle mass will entail some increase in strength, although not always proportionally. The issue as usual is not a simple one... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.