13 ms·

Less gym time, same results: Why ‘lowering’ weights is all you need to do

• mjfl 4y ago
  As someone who has lifted for a long time, negative reps are great. I primarily do negative reps in my lifts for both safety and locking in gains - if you can do negatives in reps of 10 it's hard to lose that ability even if you take a long break.
• samuell 4y ago
  Is this new? Heard this from my exercise savvy friend some year ago. Still great to have it more confirmed if course.
  • amalgamated_inc 4y ago
    Science is always 30 years behind practitioners in diet/exercise
  • ravenstine 4y ago
    Yeah I'm pretty sure this was something bodybuilders doing HIT knew about decades ago.
• recursive 4y ago
  If you have to use both arms for the lifting phase, then only use one for the lowering phase, you may cut the time in half, but you're also cutting in half how many halves of your body you can exercise simultaneously. Is there a net benefit somewhere?
  • snicky 4y ago
    Isn't the burden on that working body half 2x then?
    • ckardat123 4y ago
      It would be the same burden. You're still using the same dumbbell, you're just working one arm at a time instead of two.
      • bigDinosaur 4y ago
        While it's the same amount of mass, the distribution of force on your body will change as will the muscles engaged etc. no?
        • ckardat123 4y ago
          The mass would halve, because you are now only lifting one dumbbell with one arm instead of two dumbbells with two arms.
          • bigDinosaur 4y ago
            The issue at hand I believe is how the descent of your lift (eccentric muscle contraction) is more beneficial than the opposite, so to optimise for this you'd lift one dumbbell with two arms and then bring it down with one (i.e. minimise the effort required to lift, maximise effort required to descend).
  • ckardat123 4y ago
    This is what I was wondering as well. I suppose it cuts down on rest time between sets, because you can rest one arm while lifting with another.
• deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
• kingkongjaffa 4y ago
  Bodybuilders have known this for decades, the term is “negative reps”. They are effective for building muscle memory when learning new exercises, and they are also incredibly beneficial for general muscle building. Most major muscle groups operate in either push or pull, when it comes to weight training. By focusing on the negative/inverse movement you activate more of the secondary stabilisation muscles.
• xwowsersx 4y ago
  It is well known that the eccentric contraction is the greater driver of hypertrophy, but I really don't think this means you should get rid of the concentric.
• Moissanite 4y ago
  So, what, am I supposed to get my butler to lift the weights up for me so that I can just lower them back down?
  • pwinnski 4y ago
    As the article says, feel free to use two hands to raise the weight, but only one to lower it.
    • Moissanite 4y ago
      Sounds like you'd just have to do twice as many reps, one for each arm. I get that those reps would notionally be more effective, but enough to balance out? Seems unlikely.
    • bigDinosaur 4y ago
      This sounds like a very quick way to gain an injury. I've usually had negative experiences with doing things in this manner.
  • lunatuna 4y ago
    Similar thought. Article states you can use both arms/legs to lift and one to place down. Both arms to do the curl up, one arm to bring down. Both legs on the the leg press machine up, one down. Butlers likely would also work, but wasn't studied ;)
  • altgeek 4y ago
    There's a physiology lab that built out machines for negative-only exercise -> https://news.drgator.ufl.edu/2010/02/24/the-negator-muscle-building-science/ https://news.drgator.ufl.edu/2010/02/24/the-negator-muscle-b...
  • superfrank 4y ago
    I had a personal training for a while and he would mix in what he would call "negatives" that were exactly that. For example, we'd set up in a bench press and he'd assist in lifting the bar up, then it was on me to slowly lower it back down. According to him, you're able to use your strength more effectively going down, so I was actually able to do more than I could normally bench this way. Similar story with concentration curls.
• dnissley 4y ago
  Sounds great if you've got an assistant who can raise the weight back up for you! "...each participant in the CON group was instructed to lift a dumbbell for the concentric phase in 2s, and each participant in the ECC group lowered a dumbbell in 2s, and the investigator set the dumbbell in the starting position (0° for CON, 50° for ECC) after each contraction"
  • partiallypro 4y ago
    Someone brought it up here, but you could also do something like pullups, where you use your legs to lift you and use your arms to lower yourself down slowly.
  • Alt4Alt 4y ago
    Or you can do it while hanging upside down with a lighter weight - 'lifting' is no longer an effort. /s
• mancerayder 4y ago
  > The team, which also included researchers from Niigata University and Nishi Kyushu University in Japan and Brazil’s Londrina State University, had groups of people perform three different types of dumbbell curl exercise and measured the results. First of all, I've been lifting for many years and I haven't done dumbbell curls in a decade. And to be honest, you probably shouldn't be doing isolation exercises unless you don't mind risking injury and joint inflammation in the long-term. For those who don't do bodybuilding but real training (that's going to be squat, press and deadlift, pullups and variations of these), this is sort of junk science. No one serious uses a "leg press" - another injury-prone nightmare (do you value your lower back and are you something other than a football player?). He mentions (overhead / strict) press and perhaps there's something to try there with negatives, if one is extremely conservative and not an olympic weightlifter. Negative pullups are a thing, that's been known by the calisthenics community for ages, but only as a variation. >It found those who only lowered a weight saw the same improvements as those who raised and lowered weights — despite only performing half the number of repetitions. No shit. That's because eccentric exercises are far more fatiguing for the muscles. It's not something you can do all the time without burning yourself out and damaging your training progress long-term ("long-term" not being a key feature of this junk science study).
  • hn_throwaway_99 4y ago
    I don't think your arguments are a fair critique of this study: > First of all, I've been lifting for many years and I haven't done dumbbell curls in a decade. The study authors aren't arguing that dumbbell curls should be the center of your workout. And they are are presumably using an isolation exercise because it is more straightforward to test improvements to strength when you are just examining the effect on a single muscle group. > >It found those who only lowered a weight saw the same improvements as those who raised and lowered weights — despite only performing half the number of repetitions. > No shit. That's because eccentric exercises are far more fatiguing for the muscles. It is a giant pet peeve of mine when scientists run a diligent study and then the response is "No shit, that's common sense" with the audacity to call it "junk science." Putting actual data and numbers behind a "common sense" belief is what science is all about - it is not "junk science". I think there are other fair critiques about the applicability of this study (for example, another commenter mentioned that they were dealing solely with untrained individuals), but the fact that they used dumbbell curls isn't one of them.
• mrob 4y ago
  I used eccentric muscle contractions to gain enough strength to do pull-ups when I was too weak to do even one. I stood on a chair to get into the top position, then lowered myself as slowly as I could. The exercise was effective, and after a few weeks I could do full pull-ups without the chair.
  • malshe 4y ago
    Thanks for this tip! I am trying to build upper body strength and pull-ups kill me
    • BFLpL0QNek 4y ago
      Bands help. You get the most assistance at the bottom and the assistance decreases as you pull up to your strongest position.
      • malshe 4y ago
        Thanks
    • nordsieck 4y ago
      > I am trying to build upper body strength and pull-ups kill me IMO, the best thing is if you have access to an assisted pull up machine or lat pull down. Bands can work alright (and they're cheap!), but assisted pull ups and/or lat pull down allow you finely tune your progressive overload. The general problem with bands (and spring type resistance in general) is that the non-linear resistance makes it more difficult to judge your progress.
      • wnolens 4y ago
        I'd have to disagree. To me a negative is worth more than an assisted rep because you get to practice the real range of motion and activate all muscles (incl. stabilizers). Assisted forms ultimately "assist" you at some fixed point which alters the path you would take if hanging, often removing your core entirely. Also, I'd take the non-linear resistance of bands over the absence of core activation from a pull-up machine or the very different lat pulldown motion.
• loveparade 4y ago
  This article is a perfect example of 1. An academic publishes an extremely limited study, group size is 14 people that haven't exercised much, they do a single exercise, and they mention eccentric-only is particularly useful for rehabilitation. They make no outrageous claims whatsoever, they just put more numbers to something that is widely known and has been measured before. 2. Some popular news outlet wants to get clicks and runs away with it by making super general fitness advice out of it that's total nonsense. But you know, it's backed by Science (!) now.
  • deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  • malshe 4y ago
    It's not a popular news outlet. It's one of the university's PR website.
• altgeek 4y ago
  The "negative" or eccentric component's contribution to hypertrophy has been well known since the 80's. I took a look at the linked journal and zeroed in on the cohort. "A total of 53 (25 male and 28 female) healthy university students ... who ... had not performed a structured resistance training in the past 6 months, participated in the present study." Ok; so, totally untrained/detrained individuals. This lends less credence to the usefulness of this study. This study doesn't contribute to the advancement of exercise science and ignores neuromuscular adaptations, the stretch-shortening cycle, and/or lactate threshold effects of non-eccentric muscle contractions. Depending on your sport or personal goals, a mix of different time-under-tension parameters and rest periods will get people closer to their desired health goals. The eccentric phase is just one part of the equation. Saying this is "all you need to do" is wrong. The curious should examine the syllabus of the NSCA CSCS program.
• tiku 4y ago
  To lower the weights, you first have to lift them..
• bamboozled 4y ago
  I find Japanese society to be adverse to weight training in general, weight lifting (Olympic) is almost exclusively practiced in college only. Women are on average afraid they will be seen as too masculine / strong so wouldn't touch weights. Things are certainly changing thanks to cross fit becoming cool Given all that, I find it interesting this study is partyl published from researchers based in Japan :) It's almost like it's their "opinion".
  • rjh29 4y ago
    About 10 years ago pretty much nobody was jacked, but things have changed. There are a LOT of very muscular Japanese people nowadays, deep into steroids, protein, etc. It's not yet as commonplace as in Western society but it's pretty common.
  • danielscrubs 4y ago
    It's not a coincidence the Japanese live as long as they do. There is a big focus on being thin which goes against any kind of bulking and even getting muscle can make a guy look fat without properly fitting clothes. I find it kind of refreshing coming from a part of the world where we would at the office talk about what kind of training we did that week to one up each other. That said, go to Golds gym and you will see plenty of Arnolds.
  • dredmorbius 4y ago
    There are some female bodybuilders out there. Unsure if she's Japanese though there are others: <https://i.imgur.com/2i6HNcR.mp4 https://i.imgur.com/2i6HNcR.mp4>
• c7b 4y ago
  > Professor Nosaka recommends using two hands to help with the concentric (lifting weight) phase, before using one arm for the eccentric phase (lowering weight) Technically, that's not doing 'half as many reps', as the article claimed, it'll take you exactly the same amount of reps. If you care about minimizing time rather than reps, that's even going to take you (roughly) twice as long compared to using two dumbbells at once.
• robomartin 4y ago
  Yeah, well. Here's a concept: Every single researcher who wants to conduct these kinds of experiments needs to, as a prerequisite, read Starting Strength [0] and then go to a certified gym for a year or more before even remotely being able to say anything useful about the subject. Yes, sure, Starting Strength isn't perfect. I am not presenting it as the sum of all knowledge and the one-and-only true anything. However, there is a vast difference between someone who think they understand strength training and someone who reads this book and actually does it (under trained supervision) for as little as a year. Someone mentioned dumbbell exercises being harmful and unnecessary. Absolutely agreed. The isolation exercises and machines are dangerous gimmicks for almost everyone going to the gym. There are people for whom they might have value. For the average person who wants to get fit and strong, these exercises and machines are a horrible idea. My own story: I thought I knew how to lift. I was frustrated because I was not able to make progress. Someone at work introduced me to Starting Strength. I read the book and found a local certified trainer. The difference was like night and day. I remember the first time I went back to a regular gym after about a year on Starting Strength. I had not touched a dumbbell in probably two years, if not more. Not once. I decided to see what I could do. Long story short, I got all the way up to the 120 lb dumbbells and could not go further 'cause that's the heaviest they had. Anyone looking at me would not, in a million years, have guessed I could go pick-up two 120 lb dumbbells and workout using them. I had guys coming to ask "WTF?", because they were struggling with weights less than half that much. This goes with my favorite quote: "A man holding a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way" - Mark Twain. These researchers need a cat to hold before they think they know what they are talking about. [0] https://startingstrength.com/ https://startingstrength.com/ PS.: Rip is an interesting character. Trained with him. Even had discussions about the use of his approach in space travel applications. Nice guy.
  • hhmc 4y ago
    You're just presupposing the researchers don't know anything about strength training, any basis for that other than some lazy guess?
    • robomartin 4y ago
• Octabrain 4y ago
  From my personal experience, for the majority of people, I would recommend to stay away from classic body building weight trainning. I trainned that way for several years in my early twenties (back then, I was even a certified body bulding trainner) and the overload in my joints was a recipe for disaster + the kind of body I developed was disfunctional for activities other than weights themselves. The excercises I've been doing for years now (apart from other activities (climbing, gymnastics, martial arts etc)) are mostly own-weight ones (pull ups, push ups, dips, squats etc with variations). Every now and then I perform them using a weighted vest with a maximum of 20 kilos. This has kept me in very good shape, injury free and agile.
  • humanlion87 4y ago
    May I know what you are referring to as the "classic body building" exercises. To me the classic ones are squat, bench and deadlift. I am curious why you think it's a disaster.
    • nordsieck 4y ago
      > To me the classic ones are squat, bench and deadlift. IMO, those are classic powerlifting exercises. From what I can tell, the pro body builders typically do a lot more machine work and other isolated movements because it has a better stimulus:fatigue ratio than large compound movements.
      • ehnto 4y ago
        We're getting confused I think, these are typical powerlifting movements now. But classically, by which I mean in the past, those compound movements were big in bodybuilding circles as well.
    • runnerup 4y ago
      Those aren’t very classic for bodybuilding, rather they are the ones for powerlifting. Bodybuilding uses a very wide variety of movements incorporating dumbbells, barbells, and machines to train every single muscle periodically (even focusing on little tiny ones no one else would care about). Here’s a good example of a bodybuilding training routine: https://thinksteroids.com/community/threads/first-bodybuilding-contest-prep-log.134397177/post-2436648 https://thinksteroids.com/community/threads/first-bodybuildi... That said, I’m also curious what GP was referring to, specifically. Was he saying like “don’t do dumbbell curls”?
• thewizardofaus 4y ago
  This is extremely common in the triphasic training approach. "Each block focuses on a particular portion of the main lifts—the eccentric (down) phase, the isometric (static) phase, and the concentric (up) phase." Another common technique for force production in elite sport is to use weight releasers that overload the eccentric phase of a movement. For example; squat eccentric 200kg, weight releases, concentric with 100kg.
  • ehnto 4y ago
    I am enjoying seeing so many different training styles in the comments, and the commonality in some of them. We train using pause sets which sounds like what you mean by the static portion of a lift? Unless you mean the squeeze at the top of a lift? Squat down, pause for a few seconds, then up.
• cashsterling 4y ago
  A set of gymnastic rings for 50USD is a great investment if you can find a good place to use them. I have a set that I take with me to the gym. Ring dips and push-ups are awesome pushing exercises. Ring dips especially put a lot of load on the chest in way that almost no other exercise does. Ring pull-ups and rows are great pull exercises. Rings allow you to do a lot of interesting movements and variations on these exercises. FitnessFAQs on youtube has a lot of good videos on ring exercise form and routines.
  • penjelly 4y ago
    pull-up bar and rings and you're set. these days 80-100$ on Amazon
    • gligorot 4y ago
      Not quite…the door bars will all result in “low” rings - which heavily limit your vertical movement range. If you can attach them to your ceiling you’ll have better experience. I’m lucky to have a thicker concrete ceiling though.
      • penjelly 4y ago
        just bend your knees? Ring sets are usually adjustable so ive never had issues before, but yeah i had to bend by knees of course.
• freediver 4y ago
  How effective are push-ups as an average Joe's muscle exercise?
  • loeg 4y ago
    I'd recommend squats instead.
  • meltyness 4y ago
    Lot of a average Joe's can't do them. I'm probably in good company to say you really only need 6 exercises. From light to heavy: Chinups, Shoulder press, Rows, Bench, Squat, Deadlift Or, roughly, in calisthenics: Chins, shoulder push-ups, pull-ups, push-ups, squat, sit-ups. Probably the most useful of these movements is deadlift, nothing will make throwing office furniture around more fun than the strength you can train with deadlifts. Front raising a TV off the wall is pretty cool, too.
    • randoglando 4y ago
      Can you link to a sit-up? Is that a crunch? I don't understand how it is a parallel for deadlifts.
      • meltyness 4y ago
        They're similar moves, but with different range of motion. Deadlifts are the heaviest move I listed and it works the abdominal muscles via isometric contraction, which is considerable tension at very high weights. I'll cede that deadlift is more similar to an abdominal plank than a sit-up.
  • alxmng 4y ago
    Push-ups are great for strength, muscle growth, and health. But their usefulness for strength and muscle growth drops off once you are able to perform many standard push-ups. At that point you’d need to do harder variations (like archer push-up) or weighted push-ups to keep seeing muscle growth and strength gains.
  • 4y ago
• tanbog6 4y ago
  In weight training this is also referred to as "tempo" and can be expressed as a set of 4 numbers. Eg: 2 - 0 - 4 - 0 Which would mean: 2 second up, pause 0 seconds, negative for 4 seconds, pause 0 seconds start again. Adjusting the tempo is a big part of most advanced training schedules. If you do any training beyond simple resistance training I feel like you would encounter the concept. It's very old.
  • tanbog6 4y ago
    I also have fond memories of my highschool weights coach yelling "fast up, slow down!!!" At us over and over again.
• ipcress_file 4y ago
  I read on a bodybuilding site years ago that you'd get good results by slowing your eccentric movements to make sure that your muscles are actually lowering the weights. It's one of the practices I've tried to maintain. That and lifting to failure.
• trentgreene 4y ago
  Hi, worth mentioning that you should explicitly ignore this advice if you’re lifting heavy deadlifts. Eventually you will get to a point on that exercise where your concentric pull can put up vastly more weight than you can safely lower to the ground in a slow manner. Above 3-4 plates and you probably should be dropping the weight. Maybe even less. Your lumbar will thank you.
  • MichaelDickens 4y ago
    > Eventually you will get to a point on that exercise where your concentric pull can put up vastly more weight than you can safely lower to the ground in a slow manner. I'm not particularly qualified to speak on this, but this does not match my experience. I can deadlift 455 lb with great difficulty, but I can lower 455 lb to the ground fairly easily. And I don't see any physiological reason why this would be true—if your back muscles can support the weight on the way up, then they should be able to support it on the way down, when your body is subjected to less force.
    • atchoo 4y ago
      I think I'd agree with the OP, the eccentric is more precarious. Weakness on the pull and the bar slows/stops but there is still control, weakness on a slow lowering and the weight runs away from you breaking your form. When you are at 4+ plates then your strength on the day can be a little unpredictable and your 5 rep max can be lower than it was last week and you don't want to discover that in a precarious position. It's like comparing driving up a steep hill vs. coasting down a hill with just the brake, a slight bump or misjudgement and things get hairy quick because gravity is compounding your mistakes.
    • ehnto 4y ago
      Gravity acts over time, if you are slowly lowering it you could be expriencing the same force practically as on the way up. The reason you don't do it for powerlifting is because you're more likely to injure yourself after a max effort lift (like a one rep max lift in competition). Since you exerted maximally on the way up and may struggle controlling it on the way down it while exhausted. All the other compound lifts in powerlifting end at the finish of max exertion so don't have that issue. If you are only training for general reasons you might not run into it, but if you are a powerlifting athlete doing 5, 3 or 1 rep sets for comp then this is good advice.
• rkapsoro 4y ago
  A great way to be terribly sore all the time.
• gagabity 4y ago
  They should develop some sort of conveyor belt machine that takes the weights up so you only have to lower them! Otherwise gym pulley style machines seem perfect for this.
  • water8 4y ago
    [dead]
  • davidvarela_us 4y ago
    There is a technique known as "cheat reps" in strength training. The idea is to recruit more/stronger muscles to cover the concentric motion and to isolate the muscle you are training in the eccentric. It is an excellent tool when used intelligently. I wouldn't recommend it for beginners because it can make it easy to injure yourself and is not really needed until your strength starts to plateau anyway.
• 90d 4y ago
  Food for thought, someone who struggles to fit a gym routine into their life is not someone who knows how to train their muscles efficiently. Thanks for the article, Australia.
• MichaelDickens 4y ago
  As is often the case with these sorts of studies, I'd be wary of over-extrapolating. The study specifically looked at the dumbbell curl only among untrained individuals. If you did a similar study on trained individuals, or on a compound movement like a squat or a bench press, I'd expect to see different results. (In fact, it's effectively impossible to only perform the eccentric portion of a squat or a bench press unless you're only doing a single rep.) Another concern is that they increased intensity at the same rate for all trainees: > The training intensity was increased progressively from 30% (1st session) to 50% (2nd and 3rd sessions), 70% (4th and 5th sessions), 80% (6th and 7th sessions), 90% (8th and 9th sessions), and 100% (10th session) (Note: I was unclear on how they determined training intensity) It's plausible that the trainees who are doing concentric+eccentric could tolerate a faster increase in intensity than the eccentric-only trainees, but because they didn't increase intensity as fast as they could have, they didn't show any extra strength gains.
  • galangalalgol 4y ago
    I'd like to see a study of people who do slowed negatives on deadlifts vs just barely controlling it on the way down.
    • grvdrm 4y ago
      Absolutely - I understand there are some practical reasons for doing it that way but I’m always surprised to see people wasting that lowering portion simply by dropping the weight. Serious control on the way down helps too! Another way I think about it: the weight shouldn’t bounce on the floor. If it does, slow it down.
    • MichaelDickens 4y ago
      I'd also like to see that. Might be hard though--if you're studying untrained individuals in a 6 week program, they're going to see such massive gains in their deadlift that I don't think programming will make much difference. I would rather see a study on experienced lifters over 6 months, but that's probably not going to happen.
  • brailsafe 4y ago
• anonymouswacker 4y ago
  Reminds me of the Blood Flow Restriction / Kaatsu method [0], which I've added in my own routine and had great results with lower weights and less pain. I regularly do BFR negatives and see great results, given I spend very little time in the gym. 0 - https://bengreenfieldlife.com/article/fitness-articles/workouts-exercise-articles/kaatsu/ https://bengreenfieldlife.com/article/fitness-articles/worko...
  • davidvarela_us 4y ago
    Thanks for sharing this. I'm a huge nerd when it comes to optimizing training programs. This seems like it could be as big of a hack as Zone 2 training [0] was when I discovered it. It is amazing how little we know about our bodies given that we all have one! 0: https://www.howardluksmd.com/zone-2-hr-training-live-longer-less-injury/ https://www.howardluksmd.com/zone-2-hr-training-live-longer-...
• nsxwolf 4y ago
  Ok so do you have to get someone else to raise them for you
• up2isomorphism 4y ago
  I don’t think you become the woman in the picture by just “lowering weights “
• rd11235 4y ago
  From the actual paper: > Methods Non-resistance-trained young adults were assigned to one of the four groups: CON-ECC (n= 14), CON (n=14) and ECC (n= 14) training groups, and a control group (n=11) that had measurements only. Not sure why this is getting so much attention. Evidence wise it’s only a hair stronger than the anecdotal stories / advice in the top comments.
  • virtual_void 4y ago
    N is not the only thing that matters here. It is important but if you’re disregarding results solely on that basis then it’s unfounded. I noted from reading the paper that they based their sample size on a previous paper that shows the effect size for contractual muscle strength to be 0.6 and turned that in to a sample size estimate (in that paper). The same technique was used here and they nearly doubled the sample size from the previous study. It seems from a first reading that they have the statistical power to make the conclusions they do. The study that shows 0.6 for effect size was a meta analysis that i do not have access to via my institution, but I’m curious as to why you think this paper is no better than anecdote. Perhaps some other part of their methods? Their results show at the very least that it might be worth a bigger study (more N) but there’s nothing outrageously wrong with their methodology, is there?
    • rd11235 4y ago
      My comment isn’t about the paper. It’s only about the surprising response it’s getting from HN. This small level of evidence can be found in some paper for almost any fitness claim one can imagine. (And that is not at all a knock against the paper - as you said, it can e.g. warrant larger studies.)
• dehrmann 4y ago
  > Using a dumbbell, Professor Nosaka recommends using two hands to help with the concentric (lifting weight) phase, before using one arm for the eccentric phase (lowering weight)... The two-hand approach just feels like a headache. There's a common trick people do to take advantage of how you can handle more weight in the eccentric phase of the motion. You "cheat" to get it up, then lower it controlled with strict form. Push press up, military press down.
  • nkozyra 4y ago
    Cheating used to be super common to focus on eccentric for a lot of exercises but it seems like it fell out of favor since I first started lifting. There's also chains and other equipment to help in this regard but I've found that going 2x or 3x as slow as concentric increases difficulty a lot.
• smiller473grand 4y ago
  [dead]
• flamebreath447 4y ago
  So there’s a few really good resources on what we would now call minimalistic training. Most people who go to the Gym do not need to squeeze out every ounce of progression. Unlike the fitness industry which is obsessed with small percentage gains because they are already in the 90+ percentile. The study sighted really doesn’t do it justice to explain how much is enough to get the balanced, healthy long term impacts of going to the gym. Go watch Jeff Nippards video on minimalist training, he also has a video interviewing someone whose PhD research is in this area. tl;dr weight training for 45 minutes to an hour 3 times a week is often enough to gain 80% of the benefits from going to the gym (this excludes cardio vascular capacity and health)
• wellthisisgreat 4y ago
  What are some quality strength oriented YouTube channels fitness channels that you’d recommend? Kneesovertoesguy was mentioned already, I also like clarence0 Anyone else who puts out quality content and not memes/ tricks?
  • davidvarela_us 4y ago
    - mostly science based strength: Jeff Nippard, The Bioneer - athletic movements/ injury prevention: overtimeathletes, AthleanX - mobility: Tom Merrick, GuerillaZen - overall health: FoundMyFitness (highly recommended)
• dirtyid 4y ago
  Dumb study with: >Non-resistance-trained young adults As long as novice lifters fuck around consistently with challenging weights they'll milk their beginner gains within a reasonable time frame (months), being slightly suboptimal will make the process slightly longer. "All you need" is just finding a routine that you can stick to consistently / sustainably that leads to your goals. Sure you can do only negatives but just about everything works for beginners, so do something you enjoy. In my experience most people don't like negatives, they're challenging/fatiguing vs normal reps work. Exception being bodyweight exercises like pullup/dips where slowly moving in space (forgot technical term) works very well for building groove.
• cameronh90 4y ago
  Has anyone else had a complete lack of success with any kind of weight lifting? I find that whenever I try to lift, it starts well, but after a few weeks, the amount I can lift over time begins to decrease and I start getting pain in my tendons. I've tried low reps low weight, high reps low weight, 1 day a week 3 days a week, etc. had my form checked by a personal trainer and there doesn't seem to be any obvious reason for it. It seems like any time I put more load on my body than it experiences through normal day to day life, it just slowly accumulates damage quicker than it can heal.
  • xwdv 4y ago
    I don’t know you but everything you’ve described sounds like symptoms of suboptimal nutrition. tl;dr: Eat a gram of protein per pound of body weight daily, eat carbs and good fats. Supplement with creatine 5g a day (improves ATP). Drink a lot of water.
  • switchupcb 4y ago
    Track your calories (eat more) and get more sleep for your Central Nervous System. Take more rest days between workouts, even if it sounds counterintuitive. Engage in non-static stretches and don't sit so much at work. Source: Check my Instagram.
  • marcusverus 4y ago
    Are you getting enough protein? According to the meatheads, optimal protein intake (while trying to add muscle) is ~1.2-1.5 grams of protein per kg of bodyweight per day.
  • faithcsc 4y ago
    I had the exact same experience and have recently given up. Tried to lift less, eat better, etc. No matter what, I would randomly get really exhausted for 3-4 days. It just wasn't sustainable. My new years resolution is to quit lifting and find any exercise routine that's sustainable and doesn't drain my energy.
    • j33zusjuice 4y ago
• bsder 4y ago
  1) I thought the current science is that "knee extensions" and "leg curls" were considered to be particularly bad for you and highly prone to injury. 2) Did this go out of style and come back? I remember hearing about the benefits of "isometric overload" like this the whole way back in the late 1980s.
  • Mouse47 4y ago
    Conventional wisdom says leg extensions are bad for your knees but I think the science is shaky at best. I used to believe this also until I tore my ACL about 6 months ago (I'm currently 3 months post-reconstruction). For a long time physical therapists wouldn't recommend knee extensions for ACL reconstruction rehab due to forces through the graft, but that has changed recently. My PT recommends them to me. Read this: https://theprehabguys.com/is-the-knee-extension-machine-safe-to-use/# https://theprehabguys.com/is-the-knee-extension-machine-safe... TLDR: 1.Squats place a similar force through your knee, except the force peaks when your knee is bent rather than when it's straight (as in leg extensions) 2.Leg extensions are the only reliable way to rebuild quad strength post surgery, and quad strength is by far the strongest predictor of reinjury to the ACL. I believe my lack of quad-specific training contributed to my initial injury. I did tons of squats and deads and my hamstrings/glutes were strong, but I think my quads were behind. I had trouble slowing down from a sprint during soccer/walking down stairs prior to my injury, and I think those were warning signs
• throwawayoaky 4y ago
  doesn't just build muscle-- heals cartilege. fixed my tendonitis
• thefz 4y ago
  > It found those who only lowered a weight saw the same improvements as those who raised and lowered weights — despite only performing half the number of repetitions. But you need to get the weight back up, don't you?
• amai 4y ago
  I‘d rather recommend https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-intensity_interval_training https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-intensity_interval_trai... like https://www.12minuteathlete.com/ https://www.12minuteathlete.com/ Because you should not forget to also strengthen your heart muscle and endurance.