5 ms·

There's a reason we try to automate repetitive manual labor - it's dangerous and detriment to long term health. The whole of human existence has been a long mar

There's a reason we try to automate repetitive manual labor - it's dangerous and detriment to long term health. The whole of human existence has been a long march towards minimizing labour though we've definitely overshot to the point where disease of affluence has become our foremost public health challenge. That said, cultivating fitness in modern society should focus on the least amount of labour for maximum individual and public health benefits. An hour of strength training, some cardio per week to build individual durability and cardiovascular health is probably the most sensible prescription. A common anecdote between people who deadlift 600lbs and build houses for a living is how much pain they live with in later life. On the topic of clubs, these are surprisingly good prehab tools for shoulder health.

im3w1l 7y ago
> A common anecdote between people who deadlift 600lbs ... is how much pain they live with in later life I haven't heard those anecdotes and I'm curious. Where is the dividing line between building your body up and wearing it out?
- gerdesj 7y ago
  "Where is the dividing line between building your body up and wearing it out?" From personal experience: roughly aged 50 (give or take, probably give.) That's without farting around with big weights. 600lbs is about 270 kilos. There is no reason for your body to need to deal with moving weights like that unless you are in a competition or trying to save a life. Hence it is not built for loads of that magnitude on a regular basis. Running with an 80-100 lb pack/load on your back and holding a 20 lb lump is a reasonable load to put on a very fit body, aged up to say, around 40. Your local Army, Marines, etc will know better than me what to encourage here. Try this lot: https://www.paradata.org.uk/unit/infantry-training-centre-catterick https://www.paradata.org.uk/unit/infantry-training-centre-ca... for example. I'll just suggest that for most people, messing with weights like that are simply daft. We are not fork lift trucks. In the rest of the world, 25 kilos is considered a normal one man lift. Humans as a species are designed for endurance, not huge loads.
  - oh_sigh 7y ago
    In what natural scenario would a human be running with 80 extra pounds on their back? That seems like a great way to destroy your knees. > Your local Army, Marines, etc will know better than me what to encourage here Nothing about the military is designed to be long lasting. The system simply isn't worried very much about what happens to the knees and joints of its members. You can't even enlist in the army if you're 35. A friend of mine was in the army - his job was artillery. Even though his hearing was perfect before entering the army, he needs hearing aids now because artillery is loud, and the army simply doesn't care about his hearing. This is an anecdote but I can deadlift 550 lbs, probably 600 if I was going for my 1RM, and I've never really had any joint or back pain in my life. Meanwhile, I have similarly aged coworkers who love running but can't even bend over to pick something up due to their bad back or knees.
    - justrudd 7y ago
      While I don’t do it anymore, in my high school and college years I hunted quite a bit. Depending on the terrain, I would routinely have to pack out 100 to 125 pounds of meat uphill. Wasn’t running (sometimes shuffling if getting dark or starting to rain/snow), but that much weight on the back isn’t out if the norm. Another anecdote - Up until this past year (I’m 43 going on 44), I was routinely pulling about the same weight as you. I peaked at 637.5 (which still wasn’t enough for a good placement in a meet). I never had back pains or joint pains like yourself. For me, even though I had no pain, the next day, after pulling 600, was just miserable. I had no energy, was sluggish, etc. And yes. I ate. When peaking, I was always eating between 3500 and 4000 calories at 195bw. So I’ve not dead lifted heavy in 6 months. The stress on my central nervous system just isn’t worth it anymore. I’ll keep my lift at about 350 for 10 singles. That’s more than enough for me at this point in my life.
    - eru 7y ago
      If yo want to run for the long term, I'd suggest barefoot jogging. That'll teach you proper form for protecting your joints very quickly. And human bodies are literally made to jog longish distances barefoot. I also like deadlifts. They are great as well. As a rule of thumb, I guess, any amount of lifting you can do with only investing a few hours a week at most (and no steroids) is probably not enough to destroy your body.
- dirtyid 7y ago
  The reason I compare it to construction is that at some point, pursing lifting to a high degrees involves putting in the amount of repetitions that amounts to a job with high statistical injury rate. If you follow bodybuilding and powerlifting closely, the amount of people who wash out due to injury is staggeringly high, to the point where an injury free career is anomalous and often credited to great genetics (tendon strength) than smart training. In fact the majority of the injuries happens on routine warm up reps, and because these people are enthusiasts and treat lifting almost like a job, they don't manage healing properly and will often continue training while injured leading to long term detriment. The particularly bone headed people will lift until they break their body and washout, but even smart lifters (who plan stress and fatigue sensibly) will eventually get injured past a certain level. This is like working in construction, people accrue damage over time, small injuries compound or big injuries take them out. The amount of work required in these occupation/hobbies are not calibrated for "health". [1] https://www.strongerbyscience.com/powerlifting-injuries-results/ https://www.strongerbyscience.com/powerlifting-injuries-resu... >The overall number of people injured may surprise you. Of the 160 people who finished the study (either sustained an injury or made it through the whole year uninjured), almost ¾ of them sustained an injury. That seems to conflict with the finding that injury rates in powerlifting are only ~3-5 per 1000 hours of training. Assuming someone trains for five hours per week, that would mean you’d expect a lifter to get injured about once every four years, on average (or, stated another way, you’d expect about ¼ of lifters to get injured per year). However, keep in mind that we used a pretty broad definition of “injury” , compared to the more conservative definition used in other research. In another study on powerlifters using a pretty liberal definition of “injury,” 70% were injured at the single point in time when data was collected, so I’d say the overall injury rate seen in our study is to be expected. Taken collectively, the data suggest that powerlifters sustain minor injuries pretty frequently, but more serious injuries are pretty rare; comparable to triathlon training, but less common than long distance running or most team sports.
  - eru 7y ago
    > The reason I compare it to construction is that at some point, pursing lifting to a high degrees involves putting in the amount of repetitions that amounts to a job with high statistical injury rate. Why? You can increase the weight, and keep the repetitions constant.
troughway 7y ago
An hour per week isn’t going to cut it. More regular physical activity is needed to keep the body and mind in good shape. In speaking with cardiologists, minimum 30 minutes a day. Obviously if you’re strength training and lifting heavy you’re going above and beyond, so this is a loose recommendation for people who don’t. The body acclimatizes to “moderate intensity” quickly when you put it to the test. Let’s not toss the baby out with the bathwater. Awhile back on HN there was an article with a doctor who “prescribes” deadlifting, and I’ll butcher the quote but he says: “I would rather prescribe them an increase in deadlifting weight than an increased dose of blood pressure pills”. Leisure is good. Finding a breath of fresh air in physical activity is better.
- dirtyid 7y ago
  I think an hour a week is sufficient. For me the guideline for general population should be basically intermediate strength standards like the prescriptions by NASA, which are hilariously low but calibrated to maximize muscle retention, mission capability and most significantly reduce injury. Mission capability for gen pop is just to have enough muscle so you don't shatter your hips during a bad fall or injure yourself on rudimentary tasks (carrying your kids) that lead to expensive long term care. The NASA standard was something like bodyweight squats for 6-10s that most people should be able to cultivate quickly and maintain with minimal effort. The difference in space is they have to exercise for 2 hours a day to maintain muscle mass, but on earth you can crack out BW or 1.5xBW squats/deadlift and insipidly low bench/ohp for homework 3x10s in 30m sessions twice a week to maintain. The bar is exceedingly low. Of course that varies depending on genetics, but it's one of those situations where pareto principle comes into play. Cardio vascular health is different, but mostly it's a balance between NEAT, actual cardio and maintaining a healthy BMI, while strength training maintains an useful amount of muscle mass. Barbell Medicine podcast has a lot of good info on strength training + rehabilitation. It's geared towards the powerlifting crowd, but along your point, one of the broader prescriptions is that frequently movement and exercise is better at healing than pills or other medical interventions, but movement is very infrequently prescribed.
  - eru 7y ago
aww_dang 7y ago
What are the health effects of looking at a computer all day? Personally, I enjoy physical activity as a leisure. Yes, I've obtained some injuries along the way. Automating my presence away from the computer has been a priority. The goal has always been to spend more time doing the things I enjoy.
throwlaplace 7y ago
You're completely wrong about deadlifts https://www.livestrong.com/article/450195-do-deadlifts-wear-out-the-spine-discs/ https://www.livestrong.com/article/450195-do-deadlifts-wear-... And in fact deadlifts are very often prescribed for those suffering from lower back pain (even if not 600lb deadlifts) https://www.livestrong.com/article/450195-do-deadlifts-wear-out-the-spine-discs/ https://www.livestrong.com/article/450195-do-deadlifts-wear-... If you're going to claim that poor form leads to problems well then I guess we shouldn't be walking around either for fear of tripping. And since we're dealing in anecdotes here: I have two bulging discs and the only thing that keeps me from throwing out my back is my heavy deadlift routine (not 600 but regularly 425-450).
- dirtyid 7y ago
  I wasn't arguing against deadlifting. I was arguing that the correct strength training recommendation for general population is a baseline that optimizes for useful amount of strength, protective amount of muscle and minimal amount of injury. And for me that level is shockingly low, i.e the NASA low BW multiplier prescription. Everything beyond that is basically for enthusiasts with elevated injury risk over a long enough time scale. There's nothing wrong with enjoying lifting as a hobby so long as it's understood that training for strength past a certain point is the opposite of exercising for health. See my Barbell Medicine endorsement above, I mentioned that strength training, i.e. deadlifts is a good rehabilitation tool that's often under-prescribed as medical incentives doesn't align with cheap gym memberships. Though ironically for me, deadlifts is the best rehab for deadlift injuries. My best gym pull is 660 @ 185. My observations in powerlifting is that injuries in squats/deadlifts doesn't start to mount until "enthusiasts" start trying grinding past their intermediate plateau because they're motivated but also reckless. This typically occurs between 2x-2.5x BW. Sometimes it's hot headed kids on stupid programs who thinks they're invincible, and sometimes it's just diligent trainees who misgrooves one rep on a 90% topset after 5 years of training. It's not a question about poor form but high statistical likelihood when regularly dealing with heavy weights over many reps for many years. The heavier one lifts relative to whatever individual genetics allow, the more catastrophic a misgroved rep becomes. It's simple leverages. Force/stress from 405lb vs 225lb on a misgrooved moment-arm doesn't scale proportionally to load. 1/3 of lifters about above novice skill experience lower back injury of some sort (see stronger by science link I posted) which makes heavy training not something I would endorse for people just looking for to exercise for health. >we shouldn't be walking around either for fear of tripping. My endorsement is the minimum amount strength train necessary so a trip doesn't shatter your hips (particularly older populations), which is very low but sufficient bar.

im3w1l 7y ago

> A common anecdote between people who deadlift 600lbs ... is how much pain they live with in later life I haven't heard those anecdotes and I'm curious. Where is the dividing line between building your body up and wearing it out?

gerdesj 7y ago
"Where is the dividing line between building your body up and wearing it out?" From personal experience: roughly aged 50 (give or take, probably give.) That's without farting around with big weights. 600lbs is about 270 kilos. There is no reason for your body to need to deal with moving weights like that unless you are in a competition or trying to save a life. Hence it is not built for loads of that magnitude on a regular basis. Running with an 80-100 lb pack/load on your back and holding a 20 lb lump is a reasonable load to put on a very fit body, aged up to say, around 40. Your local Army, Marines, etc will know better than me what to encourage here. Try this lot: https://www.paradata.org.uk/unit/infantry-training-centre-catterick https://www.paradata.org.uk/unit/infantry-training-centre-ca... for example. I'll just suggest that for most people, messing with weights like that are simply daft. We are not fork lift trucks. In the rest of the world, 25 kilos is considered a normal one man lift. Humans as a species are designed for endurance, not huge loads.
- oh_sigh 7y ago
  In what natural scenario would a human be running with 80 extra pounds on their back? That seems like a great way to destroy your knees. > Your local Army, Marines, etc will know better than me what to encourage here Nothing about the military is designed to be long lasting. The system simply isn't worried very much about what happens to the knees and joints of its members. You can't even enlist in the army if you're 35. A friend of mine was in the army - his job was artillery. Even though his hearing was perfect before entering the army, he needs hearing aids now because artillery is loud, and the army simply doesn't care about his hearing. This is an anecdote but I can deadlift 550 lbs, probably 600 if I was going for my 1RM, and I've never really had any joint or back pain in my life. Meanwhile, I have similarly aged coworkers who love running but can't even bend over to pick something up due to their bad back or knees.
  - justrudd 7y ago
    While I don’t do it anymore, in my high school and college years I hunted quite a bit. Depending on the terrain, I would routinely have to pack out 100 to 125 pounds of meat uphill. Wasn’t running (sometimes shuffling if getting dark or starting to rain/snow), but that much weight on the back isn’t out if the norm. Another anecdote - Up until this past year (I’m 43 going on 44), I was routinely pulling about the same weight as you. I peaked at 637.5 (which still wasn’t enough for a good placement in a meet). I never had back pains or joint pains like yourself. For me, even though I had no pain, the next day, after pulling 600, was just miserable. I had no energy, was sluggish, etc. And yes. I ate. When peaking, I was always eating between 3500 and 4000 calories at 195bw. So I’ve not dead lifted heavy in 6 months. The stress on my central nervous system just isn’t worth it anymore. I’ll keep my lift at about 350 for 10 singles. That’s more than enough for me at this point in my life.
  - eru 7y ago
    If yo want to run for the long term, I'd suggest barefoot jogging. That'll teach you proper form for protecting your joints very quickly. And human bodies are literally made to jog longish distances barefoot. I also like deadlifts. They are great as well. As a rule of thumb, I guess, any amount of lifting you can do with only investing a few hours a week at most (and no steroids) is probably not enough to destroy your body.
dirtyid 7y ago
The reason I compare it to construction is that at some point, pursing lifting to a high degrees involves putting in the amount of repetitions that amounts to a job with high statistical injury rate. If you follow bodybuilding and powerlifting closely, the amount of people who wash out due to injury is staggeringly high, to the point where an injury free career is anomalous and often credited to great genetics (tendon strength) than smart training. In fact the majority of the injuries happens on routine warm up reps, and because these people are enthusiasts and treat lifting almost like a job, they don't manage healing properly and will often continue training while injured leading to long term detriment. The particularly bone headed people will lift until they break their body and washout, but even smart lifters (who plan stress and fatigue sensibly) will eventually get injured past a certain level. This is like working in construction, people accrue damage over time, small injuries compound or big injuries take them out. The amount of work required in these occupation/hobbies are not calibrated for "health". [1] https://www.strongerbyscience.com/powerlifting-injuries-results/ https://www.strongerbyscience.com/powerlifting-injuries-resu... >The overall number of people injured may surprise you. Of the 160 people who finished the study (either sustained an injury or made it through the whole year uninjured), almost ¾ of them sustained an injury. That seems to conflict with the finding that injury rates in powerlifting are only ~3-5 per 1000 hours of training. Assuming someone trains for five hours per week, that would mean you’d expect a lifter to get injured about once every four years, on average (or, stated another way, you’d expect about ¼ of lifters to get injured per year). However, keep in mind that we used a pretty broad definition of “injury” , compared to the more conservative definition used in other research. In another study on powerlifters using a pretty liberal definition of “injury,” 70% were injured at the single point in time when data was collected, so I’d say the overall injury rate seen in our study is to be expected. Taken collectively, the data suggest that powerlifters sustain minor injuries pretty frequently, but more serious injuries are pretty rare; comparable to triathlon training, but less common than long distance running or most team sports.
- eru 7y ago
  > The reason I compare it to construction is that at some point, pursing lifting to a high degrees involves putting in the amount of repetitions that amounts to a job with high statistical injury rate. Why? You can increase the weight, and keep the repetitions constant.

troughway 7y ago

An hour per week isn’t going to cut it. More regular physical activity is needed to keep the body and mind in good shape. In speaking with cardiologists, minimum 30 minutes a day. Obviously if you’re strength training and lifting heavy you’re going above and beyond, so this is a loose recommendation for people who don’t. The body acclimatizes to “moderate intensity” quickly when you put it to the test. Let’s not toss the baby out with the bathwater. Awhile back on HN there was an article with a doctor who “prescribes” deadlifting, and I’ll butcher the quote but he says: “I would rather prescribe them an increase in deadlifting weight than an increased dose of blood pressure pills”. Leisure is good. Finding a breath of fresh air in physical activity is better.

dirtyid 7y ago
I think an hour a week is sufficient. For me the guideline for general population should be basically intermediate strength standards like the prescriptions by NASA, which are hilariously low but calibrated to maximize muscle retention, mission capability and most significantly reduce injury. Mission capability for gen pop is just to have enough muscle so you don't shatter your hips during a bad fall or injure yourself on rudimentary tasks (carrying your kids) that lead to expensive long term care. The NASA standard was something like bodyweight squats for 6-10s that most people should be able to cultivate quickly and maintain with minimal effort. The difference in space is they have to exercise for 2 hours a day to maintain muscle mass, but on earth you can crack out BW or 1.5xBW squats/deadlift and insipidly low bench/ohp for homework 3x10s in 30m sessions twice a week to maintain. The bar is exceedingly low. Of course that varies depending on genetics, but it's one of those situations where pareto principle comes into play. Cardio vascular health is different, but mostly it's a balance between NEAT, actual cardio and maintaining a healthy BMI, while strength training maintains an useful amount of muscle mass. Barbell Medicine podcast has a lot of good info on strength training + rehabilitation. It's geared towards the powerlifting crowd, but along your point, one of the broader prescriptions is that frequently movement and exercise is better at healing than pills or other medical interventions, but movement is very infrequently prescribed.
- eru 7y ago

aww_dang 7y ago

What are the health effects of looking at a computer all day? Personally, I enjoy physical activity as a leisure. Yes, I've obtained some injuries along the way. Automating my presence away from the computer has been a priority. The goal has always been to spend more time doing the things I enjoy.

throwlaplace 7y ago

You're completely wrong about deadlifts https://www.livestrong.com/article/450195-do-deadlifts-wear-out-the-spine-discs/ https://www.livestrong.com/article/450195-do-deadlifts-wear-... And in fact deadlifts are very often prescribed for those suffering from lower back pain (even if not 600lb deadlifts) https://www.livestrong.com/article/450195-do-deadlifts-wear-out-the-spine-discs/ https://www.livestrong.com/article/450195-do-deadlifts-wear-... If you're going to claim that poor form leads to problems well then I guess we shouldn't be walking around either for fear of tripping. And since we're dealing in anecdotes here: I have two bulging discs and the only thing that keeps me from throwing out my back is my heavy deadlift routine (not 600 but regularly 425-450).

dirtyid 7y ago
I wasn't arguing against deadlifting. I was arguing that the correct strength training recommendation for general population is a baseline that optimizes for useful amount of strength, protective amount of muscle and minimal amount of injury. And for me that level is shockingly low, i.e the NASA low BW multiplier prescription. Everything beyond that is basically for enthusiasts with elevated injury risk over a long enough time scale. There's nothing wrong with enjoying lifting as a hobby so long as it's understood that training for strength past a certain point is the opposite of exercising for health. See my Barbell Medicine endorsement above, I mentioned that strength training, i.e. deadlifts is a good rehabilitation tool that's often under-prescribed as medical incentives doesn't align with cheap gym memberships. Though ironically for me, deadlifts is the best rehab for deadlift injuries. My best gym pull is 660 @ 185. My observations in powerlifting is that injuries in squats/deadlifts doesn't start to mount until "enthusiasts" start trying grinding past their intermediate plateau because they're motivated but also reckless. This typically occurs between 2x-2.5x BW. Sometimes it's hot headed kids on stupid programs who thinks they're invincible, and sometimes it's just diligent trainees who misgrooves one rep on a 90% topset after 5 years of training. It's not a question about poor form but high statistical likelihood when regularly dealing with heavy weights over many reps for many years. The heavier one lifts relative to whatever individual genetics allow, the more catastrophic a misgroved rep becomes. It's simple leverages. Force/stress from 405lb vs 225lb on a misgrooved moment-arm doesn't scale proportionally to load. 1/3 of lifters about above novice skill experience lower back injury of some sort (see stronger by science link I posted) which makes heavy training not something I would endorse for people just looking for to exercise for health. >we shouldn't be walking around either for fear of tripping. My endorsement is the minimum amount strength train necessary so a trip doesn't shatter your hips (particularly older populations), which is very low but sufficient bar.