11 May 2011 16:32
I've talked about the athlete fallacy many times. This fallacy is related to exercise guilt and the feeling that if you are not "going all the way" you are doing something wrong, wasting your time, may as well not bother, etc. and so on.
Also related to this idea, intrinsic to it really, is the idea that you must regularly go to the gym and engage in an exercise program or training plan in order to derive any health benefits from exercise. So, in other words, it takes a few weeks to a month to see any true benefit because that benefit is always from the cumulative results of regular exercise.
30 Apr 2011 23:19
I was just reading a review of Mark Young's new "How to Read Fitness Research" product. A few questions occurred to me. One, what in the heck is fitness research? There are so many different types of studies and different types of subjects, all of which could fall under the "fitness" umbrella. Many of these have their own specific pitfalls and unique challenges. A person would need to have a more thorough background in the sub-disciplines before simply "learning how to read a study".
20 Apr 2011 19:46
One of the most common questions out there is what muscle group you should predominantly feel working during the deadlift. Also related to this is where you should expect to get DOMS (Delayed Onset Muscle Soreness) after they deadlift.
The question occurs because many trainees have been told, rightly, that the deadlift is not a "back exercise" but a hip dominant exercise that utilizes the entire posterior chain. So, when trainees feel that most of the work seems to be centered in the lower back they become concerned that they are not performing the lift correctly.
Should I Lift Fast or Slow? Training to Failure, Single Sets versus Multiple Sets, Non Sequitors and False Dilemmas
19 Apr 2011 22:07
Apparently there is a debate about whether training to failure is better than doing one single set of exercise. Well, okay, no there is not really a debate about this but sometimes those who do a lot of "research" about resistance training while simultaneously not having a clue about resistance training think that these kinds of debates exist. The actual debate is about multiple versus single sets to failure. That is a bit different than training to failure versus training with single sets, is it not?
14 Apr 2011 16:00
Chances are if you are a beginner to strength training you've heard about "newbie gains". Newbie gains are what we call the easy and all but automatic results that beginners to strength training (or bodybuilding) get. When you first start out you get a period of easy strength increases. This extends to performance physiology in general. Early gains in performance come easy and there is also a period of general adaptation wherein the same general adaptations tend to occur to different exercise stimuli. So it seems that not only do strength gains come easy at first but they come "regardless".
These easy gains do not mean there are not better and worse ways to train and the phrase newbie gains should not be taken to be an excuse to train stupid! Really we just use it to shout down 15 year olds who think they have some kind of innate talent because the plates just keep piling on so fast. Lots of us started out thinking we found the magic fruit tree of strength training. But as they say in the East: Soon Ripe Soon Rotten!