Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Even the stuff at the gym seems to have that effect. Amino acids, this booster, that booster, this multi-complex-physio-enhancer, that L-carni-tetra-blahdeeblahdeeblah, etc. You know, the stuff you find at every GNC in the country.
Sometimes, lifting weights can be like playing NFL football. As I said before, it depends upon what you do and how you do it. There's much to be said for form.
I've tried most of the stuff on the market over the years and it does very little except give you lots of gas.
With the assertion that it's possible to get "incredibly strong" with calisthenics and the mention of discovering "advanced calisthenics," it sounds as if Del Boy may be talking about workouts sometimes called old-school calisthenics or prison calisthenics. These are the exercises where you do variations on standard calisthenics--one-armed push-ups, handstand push-ups, pistol squats--that make them more difficult and turn them into low-rep exercises that can build significant strength. No doubt this is possible with these strenuous versions of the exercises. There are people who tout advantages they claim are associated with calisthenics, such as getting a good feel for how to move your body, and maybe there is something to this.
However, I wonder whether anyone has any thoughts on why these strenuous exercises should strain the joints any less than a similar level of exertion when lifting weights. I happen to believe that lifting will not place undue strain on the joints if done properly, but since the issue has been raised, I'm curious about what difference anyone might claim there is between any strain that lifting might place on the body and doing "advanced calisthenics."
Suppose you weigh 180 lb. If you do pull-ups, why will this place any less stress on the arm and shoulder joints than lat-pulling 180? Why would pistol squats strain the knees any less than 360-lb. leg presses? Is there any reason to believe that a handstand push-up would stress the joints any less than a 180-lb. shoulder press? It seems to me that there is a flaw in criticizing weight training for supposedly stressing the joints if the person doing the criticizing advocates calisthenic exercises that involve a level of exertion similar to pumping some fairly heavy iron. If I'm missing something, I'd be interested in thoughts and information on what the difference might be.
+1
I believe you can strain the joints as easily with calisthenics as with weights. I think it all depends on the intensity. If you are pushing too hard, or performing an exercise with bad form, whether with weights or bodyweight it is possible to over extend, strain or sprain a joint.
To me this is the best argument for using weights. For example, say you can't perform a pullup or can only do 1 rep. Why not start with lat pulldowns and similar exercises at a proper intensity. Use the principle of progressive resistance to build your strength until you can?
It is one thing when you are in your teens and twenties. But in my forties and fifties it is a lot easier to over do it.
Many ex bodybuilders have hip replacement because of all the stress they put on their bodies over the years of living. It is unnatural to be as muscular as body builders make themselves (thanks to all the synthetic "natural" suppliments on the market) and the body is not supposed to be designed to lift 200-300lbs.
What is bad though, after these body builders build so much muscle over the years and their bones are no longer able to handle the weights they lift that muscle they built turns into fat. That is why so many ex body builder are fat with short legs. At one time they used to do serious lifting that stressed out the body over time.
However if you are Arnold Schwartzeneggar (of however you spell his name) you can some how go from body builder to being slim, but I have never seen anyone else do that. The muscle usually turns into fat.
Last edited by Johnny Smith Walters; 10-19-2012 at 02:41 PM..
Many ex bodybuilders have hip replacement because of all the stress they put on their bodies over the years of living. It is unnatural to be as muscular as body builders make themselves (thanks to all the synthetic "natural" suppliments on the market) and the body is not supposed to be designed to lift 200-300lbs.
What is bad though, after these body builders build so much muscle over the years and their bones are no longer able to handle the weights they lift that muscle they built turns into fat. That is why so many ex body builder are fat with short legs. At one time they used to do serious lifting that stressed out the body over time.
However if you are Arnold Schwartzeneggar (of however you spell his name) you can some how go from body builder to being slim, but I have never seen anyone else do that. The muscle usually turns into fat.
Humans are designed with an unlimited capacity for capability. Those that choose to put limits on human potential are sacrificed to the death throes of mediocrity.
Many ex bodybuilders have hip replacement because of all the stress they put on their bodies over the years of living. It is unnatural to be as muscular as body builders make themselves (thanks to all the synthetic "natural" suppliments on the market) and the body is not supposed to be designed to lift 200-300lbs.
What is bad though, after these body builders build so much muscle over the years and their bones are no longer able to handle the weights they lift that muscle they built turns into fat. That is why so many ex body builder are fat with short legs. At one time they used to do serious lifting that stressed out the body over time.
However if you are Arnold Schwartzeneggar (of however you spell his name) you can some how go from body builder to being slim, but I have never seen anyone else do that. The muscle usually turns into fat.
Lift how? That is a blanket statement which leads me to conclude you have no idea about lifting and exercising.
The OP stated all weight lifting as the OP has an agenda against weight lifting. Now you are doing a subject drift and talking about body builders, who lift weight for vanity, and drugs, which are different subjects.
I believe you can strain the joints as easily with calisthenics as with weights. I think it all depends on the intensity. If you are pushing too hard, or performing an exercise with bad form, whether with weights or bodyweight it is possible to over extend, strain or sprain a joint.
To me this is the best argument for using weights. For example, say you can't perform a pullup or can only do 1 rep. Why not start with lat pulldowns and similar exercises at a proper intensity. Use the principle of progressive resistance to build your strength until you can?
It is one thing when you are in your teens and twenties. But in my forties and fifties it is a lot easier to over do it.
Just my 2 cents.
Two excellent points here: first, that good form is important with any exercise in order to minimize the risk of inury; and second, that there is an advantage to lifting weights because you can adjust the weight to precisely the right amount, while with body weight you have only that one amount of weight to work with, no matter whether it's above or below the optimal weight for you with a given exercise.
I actually think that a mix of weights and body weight is especially good if your goal is all-around fitness. That's a good way to gain a mix of strength and endurance, and to be able to work all the muscles with a good variety of exercises, so you keep the muscles from adapting to the same few motions. Certainly lifting weights works fine if you use proper form and lift the correct amount of weight, and the ability to fine-tune the amount of weight makes lifting weights especially useful as a staple part of a fitness program, as Locolobo points out.
What is bad though, after these body builders build so much muscle over the years and their bones are no longer able to handle the weights they lift that muscle they built turns into fat. That is why so many ex body builder are fat with short legs. At one time they used to do serious lifting that stressed out the body over time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Smith Walters
However if you are Arnold Schwartzeneggar (of however you spell his name) you can some how go from body builder to being slim, but I have never seen anyone else do that. The muscle usually turns into fat.
Muscle does not turn to fat. Some people may get fat after quitting any kind of exercise, if they don't adjust their food intake to compensate for the reduction in the calories they're burning when they exercise less, but muscle and fat are different kinds of tissue, which cannot turn into each other. Muscle can't turn into fat any more than hair can turn into bone.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
