Might Is Right

Today's NY Times had a nice article on the importance of strength training.

Here's a snippet from the article that I liked:

"Healthy muscles, researchers say, are  those that have been worked, stressed and pushed to their  limit..."

Here's one I sort of didn't like:

"And keeping muscles fit takes effort, which means regular training with weight lifting and cardiovascular exercise..."

Regular training sounds somewhat misleading. It sounds like weight lifting is something you should do nearly everyday. Research indicates that twice weekly strength training for 15-20 minutes a pop is all you need.

By and large, cardiovascular exercises do NOT keep muscles from atrophy (weakening) and are usually orthopedicaly compromising, meaning, bad for you. Strength training all by its lonesome improves cardiovascular health and aerobic capacity.

Strength training also allows you to perform cardio or aerobic sports better and with less chance of injury. So if you enjoy these types of things,  you'll be able to keep up with them into your later years.

The concept of keeping 'fit' is an odd one. Fit for what exactly? Just becasue you are a good runner doesn't mean you can swim well. Being fit for soccer doesn't make you fit for racquet ball. 'Fit' is a catchphrase used to describe a general condition of the body when it really describes a specific condition.

The article goes on to say:

"If you don’t work your muscles, they will atrophy, especially as you grow older."

This is not entirely true. It isn't just work that strengthens muscles and keeps them from atrophy. Walking is work. Jogging is work. Badminton is work. But these activities will NOT keep muscles from weakening as we age. Remember  what was said above:

"Healthy muscles, researchers say, are  those that have been worked, stressed and pushed to their  limit..."

And they're right. Sadly, most people have no idea what this means - or takes.

This statement:

"To maintain endurance, you  should engage in activities that  pump blood to the muscles, like walking."

Sure - walking is fine. But strength training pumps blood into the muscles better than anything.  Improvements in strength lead directly to improvements in muscular and cardio endurance. So strength training once again fills the bill all by itself.

Lastly, Dr. Kramer's comments:

"The most effective way to stimulate muscles is with a system known as progressive resistance. This approach can take about three hours a week and includes days, once a week or so, when you lift weights so heavy that you can do only three to five repetitions before your muscles are too tired to lift again. Other days are devoted to moderate resistance, with weights you can lift 8 to 10 times. And then you should have some light days, with weights you can lift 12 to 15 times before your muscles tire."

Actually this is not what is meant by progressive resistance. Progressive resistance involves making weights in an exercise heavier, little by little, as time goes on.

What Dr. Kramer is describing (and wrote a book about) is known as periodization. There is absolutely no evidence to support Dr. Kramer's opinion that periodizing your weight lifting (as he describes it above) is a necessary method for building strength.

In fact, we already learned from this article - by Dr. Kramer himself - that light lifting days where you use weights so light that you can do 12-15 reps is a waste of time.

Dr. Kramer said:

"Those who do try to lift at the gym  can end up  using weights that are not heavy enough to fully stimulate their muscles."

Using weights that allow you to do 12-15 reps in a controlled (proper) fashion would be a fairly good definition of weights that are not heavy enough to fully stimulate the muscles.

All in all it's a good article praising the benefits of strength training but it also keeps some long standing myths alive.

And truth be told, strength training offers a lot more benefits than the article mentions!

Comments

[Lynn]

Fred -

Slow Burn is fantastic! It is the most productive training method I've used and I've tried quite a few over the last 40 years. As to frequency, I've got a question.

I used to do twice weekly sessions when I first started the Slow Burn method. That was six years ago. After several years I went to once a week. Then 7-10 days. For the last seven months it is has been every 12-14 days. My weights continue to go up. Less continues to equal more.

In your experience, have you run across individuals who train very infrequently, but still progress?

I should add that my routine consists of 6-8 exercises @ 3-4 reps each @ approx. 7 seconds up/7 seconds down. I'm a 59 year old male. Before Slow Burn I used the Nautilus/Jones method for about 24 years.

Thanks so much.

Lynn

[fred hahn]

Hi Lynn - Thanks for the kind words!

I have heard of this before - it is possible that you require more recovery than other people. It is rare however. But if it is working for you then great that you discovered this.

Research DOES show that recovery times vary a lot in some people. It may well be that you need as much time as you do to recover. Are you a vegan or a vegetarian?

If I was to train this infrequently I know I would lose strength. I've tried this before. But I am only 46 so. For me 2 sessions a week works best sometimes I'll do three or just one.

All the best,

Fred

[Chip]

I'm the same way Lynn. I'm 53 and have been doing Slow Burn for about 3 years. I've done twice a week then switched to once a week. I'll be stuck on the same rep for 2 months but then for some reason I'll miss a week and on my next workout I'll go up a rep. So maybe I need more recovery to. There is so much good information and bad information about weight training I guess you have to find what best suits you.

[Anne]

Hi Fred,

You wrote:

[Quote]If I was to train this infrequently I know I would lose strength. I've tried this before. But I am only 46 so. For me 2 sessions a week works best sometimes I'll do three or just one. [Quote/]

You must have been training for so long that you must have reached the maximum weights it's possible for you to lift. How does your training change when you reach this point ?

bw's
Anne

[Leo]

There was a veiled suggestion that vegans may need more recovery time? This may explain why I feel like a chewed jumper the day after training? Is there any information on the length of time before de-training sets in? Isn't consistency important? Very encouraging to see others having success with slow training.

[fred hahn]

Anne - I micro load sometimes adding a mere 1/4 pound more to my lifts. At this point it takes several bouts of an exercise for me to make improvements. So I might only add an additional 10-20 pounds in a year to my lifts.

Leo - vegans and to a much lesser degree vegetarians - do not take in enough of the proper nutrients to recover and build properly. Plants and grains are not complete proteins nor can the body derive all it needs from these sources alone. Adding eggs and fish help greatly but should be eaten everyday and especially directly after training.

[Lynn]

Fred - In response to your question, I'm not a vegan nor a vegetarian. Never have been. In fact, taking your advice, I scaled back my carbs earlier this year and lost six pounds, getting leaner without changing anything with my workout while my weights and strength increased.

As Chip noted, it's a swamp of misinformation out there. Even worse, no one believes me when I tell them I only work out a couple times a month. Nor did they believe me back when I worked out once a week. They don't believe me when I say that I haven't done any "cariodvascular" exercise in almost a decade, but bound up stairs without getting winded and do the "Fitness Test" on the LifeCyle once in a blue moon just for a laugh and get the same or better rating I got when I was actually using the damn thing several times week for 20-30 minute routines.

Fred you've got a tough job trying to convince people about the Slow-Burn method as it seems most people lack critical thinking skills and have a difficult time trying a new way to exercise.

Plus, the established "fitness industry" has a vested economic interest in maintaining the status quo.

Thanks for your efforts in trying to introduce some sanity into a sad situation.

Lynn

[Leo]

This is very helpful - there are people who get hot under the collar at the mention of slow burn training - so it is supportive to realise that I am not the only one .One reason for the contumely? It is a VERY intense way to train. It hurts. I have adapted it to free weights.
More rubbish about training( on the net) than anything else

[Frank Trane]

There are man many styles bodybuilding incorporates. Over the last 28 years of lifting I have experienced, super slow reps do have there place. Great post. Cool site! I have been researching high and low for some of the "best bodybuilding routines"? This post has helped me a great deal.