Maggie's FarmWe are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for. |
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Categories
QuicksearchLinks
Blog Administration |
Wednesday, March 9. 2022Big muscles?
Rippetoe speaks mainly to men, but I think his strength-training advice applies just as well to women. His focus on strong=big, however, is only for guys who want to get "big." Most guys who pursue general fitness have no major desire to look conspicuously jacked, and women can't do it if they try. When it comes to appearance alone, it seems to me as if men and women want to look athletic. When it comes to general fitness for life, muscle hypertrophy is unimportant although some amount of muscle growth will occur with any balanced fitness program. (As our readers know, our recommendations are 1/3 HIIT cardio, 1/3 mixed calisthenics, and 1/3 stressful weights for strength. This is a recipe for looking, and being, in athletic shape.) Two pieces from Rippetoe: The Biggest Training Fallacy of All
Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
Just to clarify a bit, Rippetoe has on numerous occasions said he doesn't really care about the high school or college male athlete, who will get strong pretty much no matter what they do (the Starting Strength linear progression being the most efficient way to do that, though). He is much more concerned with the moms and dads, and grandmothers and grandfathers of those guys, making them strong so as to continue to have a good quality of life. And yes, as you noted, the advice applies just as well to women as men, with just small adjustments to the exercise routine (sets of 3 instead of 5, for example).
His focus is on strength alone, big just comes along for the ride. Virtually any healthy male can, with some work, achieve a 400-pound squat and a 500-pound deadlift. When they reach those milestones, they will not be small. And, for the record, I think body building is weird. I have been a gym rat for about 50 years and my belief now is that high level bodybuilding is now one of the most risky sports ever. There were a number of deaths among the pro and amateur ranks last year for various causes, but a lot of them are PED abuse in my opinion.
Some of these guys are on stacks of 10+ drugs at way over the recommended dosage for way too long. The "pharmaceutical" level has been ramped up exponentially over the past few decades. Diuretics, in particular, can cause a whole host of problems.
>Rippetoe speaks mainly to men,
Rippetoe speaks to whomever will listen. It's just that it's mostly men who listen. Which choice is better for your health? Distance running training or weight lifting? Or both? Not marathons but simply 5-6 days a week running 3-6 miles a day? In my opinion the last option is the best, running 6 days or so a week and lifting weights too. But in moderation.
Interestingly enough, Rippetoe addresses that question: Why you should not be running .
Very strange don't you think? Running may well be the single best exercise ever. Builds your cardio vascular system, controls weight, builds stamina. maintains flexibility into old age. Very strange indeed. I would not advise taking exercise or health advice from anyone who doesn't understand the value in running. Every other exercise is artificial while running is the only one you were actually designed to do. God didn't design your body to squat 500 lbs or dead lift 600 lbs and in fact those two exercises with weights that heavy are the worst things you can do for your health. Very strange. I'm going out on a limb here and guessing he doesn't like to run so therefore no one should run. What other biases is he pushing?
It appears that you didn't actually read the article.
And I would say that we are actually pretty well designed to pick stuff up off the ground, to squat down and stand up again, and to push weight overhead. Don't worry, no one is going to make you deadlift 600 lbs. That is indeed well above the threshold of lifting purely for health reasons. There is a huge difference between getting your deadlift from 400 to 500 pounds, compared to adding that extra 100 pounds to 600. Get to 300 or so and you'll be good. I got there, found I enjoyed the experience and haven't stopped, recently deadlifting 528 pounds and squatting 434 in a competition (I'm 61 y.o., 210 lbs bodyweight, BTW). I think this quote of his would expose all his biases: "Physical strength is the most important thing in life. This is true whether we want it to be or not." "Physical strength is the most important thing in life."
Really. All the women are out of luck. All the indigenous people from our history too. They had conditioning not great physical strength. Anyway I disagree with that as stated. Maybe with more context and definition I would see it differently. Strength training is useful but should be in moderation. Running too is useful but in moderation. IMHO you never need to use more weight than 135 lbs. More than that and you are showing off and risking injury. If 135 is easy than do more reps and sets. Same for running; moderation, run 5K to 10K a day 5 to 6 days a week. Less if you like and longer runs infrequently are fine. Obviously if you are competing your training will vary consistent with your specific goals. But for health and wellness consistency and moderation are key. But as with all things it is all a matter of opinion. I'm not trying to change your mind I'm simply stating my opinion. I too over did the weights at times. Here is the problem most people have with running/jogging. It isn't easy! Simple as that. it literally takes 6 months to a year (unless you are 18 or there abouts) to get into the condition where you can run 5K in 20 minutes and not need an ambulance. This is because it doesn't simply add muscle it literally transforms your heart, your circulatory system, your lungs and the ability of your muscle to store glycogen. Once you build this all up you can run 5K in 20 minutes and 10K in 45-50 minutes and after you cross the finish line your breathing is back to normal in 20 seconds. No other exercise can give you this. If you can't do this no matter how much you can press or how big your biceps are you are only a fraction conditioned.
As an added bonus it you run everyday and can run 5K in 20 minutes you will not be overweight. You can eat whatever you like and you will not be overweight. Well, a 20-minute 5K puts you close to, if not in, the elite category, especially for women. So, yeah, getting to the elite level requires dedication, reagrdless of the sport. If you want to just finish a 5K in decent condition, the Mayo Clinic says you be prepared in just two months: [url=https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/fitness/in-depth/5k-run/art-20050962]5K run: 7-week training schedule for beginners[\url]. Doesn't sound that hard to me. That's the way cardio fitness works; easliy obtained, but just as easily and quickly lost. Muscle mass is different, as you are actually creating new tissue in your body. It takes time (and hard work) to develop, but after you acquire it, it is a very lasting and beneficial change.
And, no, running doesn't build muscles. Sprinting does a bit, but distance running? No. If anything, you lose muscle mass. Just look at elite level runners, all very skinny. Sorry for the janky link: 5K run: 7-week training schedule for beginners
You obviously just read all that and believe it. 5K in 20 minutes is not elite. 18 minutes, maybe. If you run everyday, at least 5K and occasionally 10K you will in time easily be able to do 20 minutes.
Running doesn't build muscle mass it conditions muscle. But as I said mor importantly it builds up the heart, lungs, venous system and the muscles ability to store glycogen. THAT is not easily obtained. It requires substantial changes in your internal organs. Your lungs increase in size to 1 & 1/2 that of a non runner. Your heart too. your veins and arteries can carry substantially more blood. It can take 1-2 years for most people and even then continued running will continue to expand your cardiovascular system. Runners are thin. Mostly because they lose fat. That particular fact is a mixed blessing. It is easy to fall below the desired body fat level especially for women. This can be a problem for the ultra-marathon runners. As to cardio fitness being easily lost I haven't run in over 20 years and I still have to tell the X-ray tech to put the film in the machine sideways because my lungs are so large. My heart too is larger than normal. I think what you mean thee is you lose the edge, the peak. Generally it takes years and years for a lifetime runner to lose that cardiovascular fitness to where they are back to the average. But they lose that edge in a matter of months to a year or so. |