The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
And generally, you do this with very light loads. They've tried it with heavier loads but it doesn't seem to work as well. Even very light, 20% to 30% 1RM. But when you're using these very light loads, you fatigue much more quickly than if you just did the light load without the cuff.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
Strength is similar to light-load training without blood-flow restriction, your strength is not going to be...it's good for hypertrophy but strength is somewhat compromised, which is always going to happen.
Is it necessarily better, from a result standpoint, than lighter-load training? There's been no evidence that we've had, certainly that I've seen on that. But there is some hypotheticals...I can make cases for certain, like, the hypoxia-inducible factor is a substance that is thought to increase the hypertrophic response, intracellular hypertrophic response. So, there are some logical rationales but we don't have any longitudinal evidence showing it's better.