The many studies done on this subject show that testosterone makes a huge impact on muscle growth. Take this 10 week study for instance, http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199607043350101. The placebo group working out didn't experience nearly as much muscle gain as those taking testosterone did when they were not working out.
Genuine question: Why this emphasis on increasing "muscle growth"? What benefits does it bring us (men)?
- More attention from people I'd want to find me attractive (and from some I don't...). E.g. after I started lifting weights I got my first "wow" responses when people saw pictures of me. I also saw a massive difference in how people responded when I went out to bars/nightclubs, ranging from comments to people suddenly opting to slider their hand on my stomach or chest when they wanted to get past me instead of tapping me on the shoulder, as well as getting my butt pinched. For the first time I had a woman pick me up from a club.
- Being able to do a lot of movements that I'd struggle with before without thinking about it, and lifting heavy stuff, whether it is sliding that 40kg sever into rails above head height without having to get someone to help me keep it stable, or casually lifting my son up or playing with him in ways that I couldn't have if I didn't have the strength I do (he's nearly 6 - he likes to climb onto my back when I'm sitting on the sofa and stand on my shoulders and jump down; people think both of us are crazy and that he'll hurt me, but it feels nice).
- Far fewer situations makes me feel tired or makes my muscles feel fatigured. E.g. I sprint up stairs where I used to walk up slowly (in fact, when I first started exercising, my knees were so weak that it had started to become painful for me to walk up a single flight of stairs, at age 25, because I was sitting all day and used elevators both at work and at home).
- Feeling safe in a lot of situations I'd have been scared in before. Just a few weeks ago someone was assaulted near our house, and I felt safe enough to run out and confront the guy while we waited for police (I'm in the UK, guns are not a concern; I was aware of the risk of knives, though, and made sure to keep my distance until I felt sure)
Basically for the cost of a few hours a week you can +1 or +2 you strength and consitution scores.
as for strength - I find it much better to have real world-usable one, combined with endurance. Examples you describe are OK, but better use cases for me are - being able to climb that mountain (or just hike it), full day of of-piste skiing (its damn hard on quads) etc. In many sports, too much muscles has negative impact. For high altitude, common knowledge is that gym type muscular types struggle more up there. For climbing same. But that's me. It also brings freedom in eating - keeping huge amount of muscles while doing some 3-week effort on Aconcagua... not really possible.
With regards to fitness, I definitely agree that I prefer a practical definition of fitness level. I may not look gigantic compared to some of the guys in the gym, but I can both lift a lot of weight, run fast sprints and long distance runs. Its that type of fitness that is great for rugby.
This is setting up a false dichotomy. Women (and men) generally don't find an inflated look attractive.
The parent was talking more about strength, rather than muscle volume "I'm not nearly at peak muscle volume nor do I look nearly as big as body builders much smaller than me".
I'm 150 pounds, but I can lift 250. I look strong, sure, but I'm even stronger than I look. I do barbell training, which I'm guessing is what the original comment's author does too.
Women seem to find this lean strength primally attractive. It's true the female attention could cause a problem, but this kind of strength will also make you more attractive to your partner, which is hardly a bad thing.
Strength is versatile too. I can hike a mountain, ski, run, and do pretty much any physical activity you can name. Chronic pain disappeared too. I'm sure I'd lose a bit of strength on a three week trip, but who cares? You can always get that back.
I can't comment on high altitude performance, but it sounds like you're referring to the inflated types there too.
Even if you ignore the muscle building, it can help with recovery which leads to being able to recover from harder (endurance) training sessions.
That's often the reason that endurance cyclists use it (illegally of course).
See http://www.outsideonline.com/fitness/Drug-Test.html for a amateur cyclist and journalist who took testosterone (along with HGH and EPO) to see what it would do.
- decreases stress on tendons and ligaments
- protect delicate or complicated joints from injury
- help maintain healthy weight and body fat levels
- improve bone density, and help maintain bone density
- increase stamina / reduce fatigue
- support attention
- get up out of the bathtub or off the couch when you're older
- improve sleep
- improve mental health
[1]: http://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-living/fitness/in-depth/st...
[2]: http://www.cdc.gov/physicalactivity/growingstronger/why/
On the other hand, I know most of the guys at the gym with me were just addictive personalities. Rather than wanting that lvl80 in WoW, or feeling the uncontrollable desire to get drunk, they wanted to bench 300. There certainly are worse grind addictions than lifting.
So the tongue-in-cheek 'strong people are harder to kill' has some actual data behind.
The problem is of course stats 101, correlation =/= causation. It could simply be that genetics or some other factor X increases lean mass and decreases all-cause mortality.
Pragmatically speaking though, quality of life in old age is a big deal that benefits from more lean mass.
[edit: http://www.reddit.com/r/AdvancedFitness/comments/1bo5xm/asso... this has a study link and comments and links to previous HN discussion]
1 - Exercise
2 - The dosage. Having a slight amount over the normal dosage won't cause a big gain in muscle mass. (600mg is a significant dosage, see Table 3 on the article for the sorological difference)
As for the dosage, yes, this study had really high dosage and reports no negative side effects for the 10 week period it was used.
Of course, we're comparing animals with large genetic differences to each other, but my point is that exercise does not seem to be the primary cause of muscle, in general. It just happens to be the main parameter we're in control of.
//edit// Or rather would help the OP a lot.