A NASA study.

NASA studies
NASA has researched the use of isometrics in preventing muscle atrophy experienced by astronauts as a result of living in a zero gravity environment. Isometrics, muscle lengthening and muscle shortening exercises were studied and compared. The outcome showed that while all three exercise types did indeed promote muscle growth, isometrics failed to prevent a decrease in the amount of contractile proteins found in the muscle tissue. The result was muscle degradation at a molecular level. As contractile proteins are what cause muscles to contract and give them their physical strength, NASA has concluded that isometrics may not be the best way for astronauts to maintain muscle tissue.<SUP id=cite_ref-8 class=reference>[9]</SUP>
<SUP></SUP>
<SUP></SUP>
<SUP>sounds to me like if somebody trained with nothing but static training that they would build muscle , but the muscle would eventually lose the ability to produce a muscle contraction???????? Which would then lead to failure of that muscle tissue and equal to loss of it.</SUP>
<SUP></SUP>
<SUP>Or maybe I completely misread that...... Please give me an agree or disagree , and or explain?</SUP>

nobody?????????

i got this most likley in the same place that you did. but i figured it would help us get to the answer. Its just the definition of isometrics:

Isometric exercise is a form of exercise involving the static contraction of a muscle without any visible movement in the angle of the joint. This is reflected in the name; the term "isometric" combines the prefix "iso" (same) with "metric" (distance), meaning that in these exercises the length of the muscle does not change,[1] as compared to isotonic contractions ("tonos" means "tension" in Greek) in which the contraction strength does not change but the joint angle does.

Maybe it just shows how inferior isometrics is to dynamic training? Id like to compare the two at zero gravity and see what happens.

It seems a little weird. That if you use an object that you cant move , muscles acting against themselves in a way that its a good movement for you , alot of muscles working together. That you should be training pure strength fibers until they fatigue , Their still contracting , their trying to move.

But they just arent strong enough to so they get microtears though even without movement due to stress. So I just wanna know more about why contractile proteins build up and cause molecular degration of the muscle.

Seems a little vague , even though NASA did the study im not sure they spent really enough time on the research.

But on the other hand I do get that if you train your body to do static movements and you never actually make movement , you'll generate contraction force , but you'll train your body and mind to where the strength will be impractical except for during a hold , OR well 20 degrees , plue and minus of the static position. But not full functional. But I guess long term could lead to tricking your body to failed functioning.

I say some information that a static movement would only give strength benefits at 20 degrees positive and negative from the static angle.

another thing, i would like to see the actual research. I mean, diet and rest are a major factor to.

When you get access to zero gravity I volunteer for the test. LOL. I think it would be crazy to experience that. I always wonder in studies like this how solid the research is. Without being able to read the abstract and methods its hard to know what they controlled and what they didn't. Diet and rest would make a huge difference as norm said.