Excercise question.

[Zelig]

Funny because people who have had injury problems when given the right footwear have seen those problems reduced, a lot depends on the person, their weight and the feet.

And people who have had injury problems have also seen those problems reduced when continuing with the same footwear.

Neither event is notable if you don't have control groups of an appropriate sample size.

Contains links to a couple relevant studies: http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/21/phys-ed-do-certain-types-of-sneakers-prevent-injuries/

 

[Leifmk]

I'd rather remove squats from my workout (replaced with lunges, split squats, step ups) than use a Smith machine again.

Or pistol squats, those should be challenging enough for most purposes. Especially if you have some dumbbells or kettlebells so you can work on doing them weighted.

 

[LucyDuke]

My point about the proteins is that there is science showing us at the very least that we'd want different protein sources for different things.

As for the "meaningless" way to quantify, how is that meaningless? Do you know why I gave those numbers? If you don't then are you sure it's meaningless?

Yeah, I don't know why you were telling that to me specifically.

Go ahead and explain your numbers, then.

 

[del62]

Different running shoes are designed for people who have different feet, this reduces injury problems, there are 3 basic shoe types, for those who over pronate, those who under pronate and those who are neutral.

For more information follow the link



Personally I need a neutral shoe.

 

[Zelig]

Different running shoes are designed for people who have different feet, this reduces injury problems, there are 3 basic shoe types, for those who over pronate, those who under pronate and those who are neutral.

For more information follow the link

My last post contained a link debunking this.

 

[Hygro]

Yeah, I don't know why you were telling that to me specifically.

Go ahead and explain your numbers, then.

Because you asked if there was any science to back the idea of different delivery of different proteins having different value. I know you meant it regarding why "food products" could be better than "food" and I agree with the sentiment of your question.


The numbers are pretty straightforward given the premise that fructose = alcohol to your body (almost gram per gram). The figures I gave were the figures of what's healthy consumption of alcohol, i.e. one drink a night, upward two for men. The premise is scientific, but the values I gave are not. However it's far from randomly arbitrary and I suspect fairly accurate.

 

[sophie]

Warning: Do make sure you don't actually fall in the machine trap. If there's a thing with a barbell stuck on rails that can only go up and down, it is a smith machine and it is the devil. (Not simply the devil's work, but the actual devil.) Do not use such a hellish contraption except as a towel rack (well, actually, it can be useful as an adjustable-height bar for inverted body rows or leg-supported pull-ups and such, but it's hardly cost-efficient). What you want is a squat rack or a power cage; that is, something onto which you can place a free bar at just below shoulder height so you can step under it and lift it off. A gym without a real squat rack is not a place you want to be in.

Yeah, that's what I meant. Rack not machine. Those machines are bad for multiple reasons. Because it only goes up and down the range of motion is actually a lot different than just using plain old barbells for deadlifts and squats, and if you try to use normal range of motion you can really mess yourself up. Squats are doable on those machines, you just need to throw your feet a lot further out from your body (rather than just keeping your feet beneath your body as per usual). It's doable but I don't like doing it because it just feels really awkward. I see a lot of people do it for bench press too, but I also don't like this. It can be safer in the sense that the machine can be your spotter (you know, if you don't have any friends and are socially awkward), but again range of motion issues and I really don't like it because the bar is different than your standard 45 lb barbell. It either weighs nothing or a lot less, I can't remember, but either way it throws off your usual weights if your used to something different. Either way don't do it. If there isn't a squat rack at your local gym (as is inexplicably the case at my gym) you can get by just fine using the leg press machines and then supplementing those with other exercises such as calf raises (which you can do on the leg press machines by putting your toes on the bottom of the plate, keeping the range racked and just pushing up with your toes, that or just use a regular calf machine, but I don't really like those), weighted knee-downs, and, if you're a true badass, something like pistol squats.

And everybody should do deadlifts who plans on lifting weights. It is excessively important.

 

[GoodGame]

I'd say avoid running more than 60 minutes at a time and eat a snack/shake right afterwords, and you should get both a good immediate fat burn, some muscle development, while minimizing serious muscle mass changes.

If you want more serious advice, try googling some serious exercise physiology research.

 

[AdamGM]

Cardio (running) will cause you to lose more weight than strength training, but it won't be muscle mass.

In my experience, doing both in tandem is most beneficial actually. Strength training (of the whole body, no California workout!) will build muscle which will increase the rate at which you burn fat while running.
Cardio will burn more fat and ease your strength training over time, for example, pull-ups will get easier.

 

[wilycoyote]

I'd say avoid running more than 60 minutes at a time and eat a snack/shake right afterwords, and you should get both a good immediate fat burn, some muscle development, while minimizing serious muscle mass changes.

If you want more serious advice, try googling some serious exercise physiology research.

I don't think so. You should eat within 30 minutes of lifting, you must (here is a great time to drink a shake since it is so quickly absorbed), but you don't eat within an hour of running (if you are running in the morning on an empty stomach, which you should). You want to be burning off fat, not the contents of your stomach.

With weight loss, you always want to lift. The basis of weight loss is increasing your metabolism, more so than it is about decreasing caloric intake, though that is needed as well. Muscle requires upkeep and so becoming stronger burns more calories even while you are sitting down or whatever.

 

[Hygro]

He actually meant TO eat a snack, not to avoid it, as you do.

Careful not to overdo it. Twice in the past couple months I way over exerted myself, the first time running 150 flights of stairs and the second 4.2 miles in 95 degree weather. While both broke my previous limits of physical achievement (the prior destroying my preconceptions of my limitations) they also wrecked me for days.

 

[Leifmk]

Workouts (as opposed to powerlifting meets, marathon runs or similar tests) need to be repeatable. Not necessarily the very next time, but with some frequency greater than quarterly. Dan John has an anecdote I read somewhere about a squat workout he did in 1979, with some completely insane combination of intensity and volume (I forget the details, but it was a lot). He says he intends to do it again as soon as he recovers.