5 ms·

Evidence is mixed on weight lifting and bone density. Some studies see no benefit at all. The idea that it is "crucial" isn't supported by any evidence at all.

Evidence is mixed on weight lifting and bone density. Some studies see no benefit at all. The idea that it is "crucial" isn't supported by any evidence at all. Most people have bone density that is fine without any weight lifting. On the other hand the evidence on running and bone density is very consistent.

klipt 3y ago
So for good bone density you need to pursue a high impact sport that might destroy your joints? Unfortunate if true!
- scp3125 3y ago
  Try taking a look at high intensity resistance training. It's the weight lifting equivalent to high intensity interval training. It's very effective, and it's low impact relative to the amount of time spent exercising.
- foxyv 3y ago
  There is a lot of evidence that high impact sports like running actually improve joint health. Especially if they practice appropriate resting and nutrition. I suspect that a lot of the injuries we associate with high impact activities are from people who have lost conditioning from inactivity, attempting to resume exercise without knowing their new limits. https://www.nm.org/healthbeat/healthy-tips/fitness/is-running-bad-for-your-knees https://www.nm.org/healthbeat/healthy-tips/fitness/is-runnin...
  - red-iron-pine 3y ago
    same idea as building a callous on your hands or feet. lots of use tends to toughen your joints.
scp3125 3y ago
You are incorrect. There is a consensus among scientists who study this subject that /skeletal/ muscle mass is directly associated with bone density. There are specific arguments and disagreements about what exercise is most beneficial for increasing overall skeletal muscle mass index efficiently, but the relationship between skeletal muscle mass, blood flow and nutrient distributions, the downstream effects on hormone regulation systems, and how all of those improve bone density are very well studied.
- jplusequalt 3y ago
  Neither you or the above commenter have provided sources.
  - fatfingerd 3y ago
    AFAIK resistance training would beat aerobic sport (for this problem); the correlation is right in the headline. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31797417/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31797417/

klipt 3y ago

So for good bone density you need to pursue a high impact sport that might destroy your joints? Unfortunate if true!

scp3125 3y ago
Try taking a look at high intensity resistance training. It's the weight lifting equivalent to high intensity interval training. It's very effective, and it's low impact relative to the amount of time spent exercising.
foxyv 3y ago
There is a lot of evidence that high impact sports like running actually improve joint health. Especially if they practice appropriate resting and nutrition. I suspect that a lot of the injuries we associate with high impact activities are from people who have lost conditioning from inactivity, attempting to resume exercise without knowing their new limits. https://www.nm.org/healthbeat/healthy-tips/fitness/is-running-bad-for-your-knees https://www.nm.org/healthbeat/healthy-tips/fitness/is-runnin...
- red-iron-pine 3y ago
  same idea as building a callous on your hands or feet. lots of use tends to toughen your joints.

scp3125 3y ago

You are incorrect. There is a consensus among scientists who study this subject that /skeletal/ muscle mass is directly associated with bone density. There are specific arguments and disagreements about what exercise is most beneficial for increasing overall skeletal muscle mass index efficiently, but the relationship between skeletal muscle mass, blood flow and nutrient distributions, the downstream effects on hormone regulation systems, and how all of those improve bone density are very well studied.

jplusequalt 3y ago
Neither you or the above commenter have provided sources.
- fatfingerd 3y ago
  AFAIK resistance training would beat aerobic sport (for this problem); the correlation is right in the headline. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31797417/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31797417/