You’re right, the ones that exist for a position of hyperplasia being rare/minor/uncommon in natural athletes are the only ones peer reviewed.
My analogy had to do with the concept of someone’s work being dismissed because they did not share the popular opinion.
Popularity of an opinion should be irrelevant, as those people have shown, provided that there is not only significant evidence, but that it is overwhelmingly true, repeatable, etc. Your position does not have that quality.
If you are bent against me using a theoretical/philosophical concept in the context of a scientific discussion then disregard it. It’s not important.
Multiple aspects of it though show a gross misunderstanding of the process and what information your position even has available.
The point is that there’s plenty of opposing view points out there stemming from highly respected scientists. This commonality is shared amongst all fields of science and otherwise.
Your definition of highly respected is different from mine, apparently. Even if someone was highly respected, a position without backing is not worthy of discussion in the context of science. If you want to post or say that you think something may be happening, that is all well and good, but you must acknowledge it goes against all data available and does not have a firm basis in the least.
Looking at some notes I have from Val he states that hyperplasia was originally found in humans via bodybuilding methods and goes on to explain the Paradox-to produce hyperplasia, need hypoxia but they’re oxidative, no hydrogen ions one Can create local hypoxia by pinching capillaries stopping blood flow to muscle and then creating hypoxia and that this leads to hyperplasia of myofibrils
This is 100% consistent with what is stated in the text I own from Zhelyazkov, Tsvetan, and Daniela Dasheva. Training and Adaptation in Sport. Sofia, Bulgaria: National Sports Academy, 2001.
What is it that you do for a living?
I currently teach a graduate level biology course. Multiple forums members can attest to this.
I’m done with this nonsense. Everyone here can see the joke here. When you have some studies that have data to back up your points, come back again. I believe there is a lot left for us to find out, but until then, I’ll stick with the information we do have available and it is that hyperplasia is rare and minor when it comes to skeletal muscle hypertrophy in humans (no chemical influence).