Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Road Cycling
Reload this Page >

Weightlifting Lifting And Endurance Cycling

Notices
Road Cycling “It is by riding a bicycle that you learn the contours of a country best, since you have to sweat up the hills and coast down them. Thus you remember them as they actually are, while in a motor car only a high hill impresses you, and you have no such accurate remembrance of country you have driven through as you gain by riding a bicycle.” -- Ernest Hemingway

Weightlifting Lifting And Endurance Cycling

Old 10-29-18, 02:09 PM
  #76  
OBoile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,580
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 916 Post(s)
Liked 224 Times in 132 Posts
Originally Posted by cyclintom View Post
Firstly it gets a little tiresome to hear people make false comments such as "I lied". What part of "Although all fiber types have a similar single fiber force" did you not understand?

As PaulRivers noted, you face no negative consequences for anything you say concerning these things so it doesn't bother you at all to make any claims that are totally outside of your expertise. The medical establishment has another responsibility altogether and they say different than you. They are actually interested in people's health and lives. You on the other hand are not.

So unless you actually have some reason for arguing about this perhaps you can explain to us why you are making these claims?
Your message conflicts with that of the "medical establishment".
OBoile is offline  
Old 10-29-18, 02:15 PM
  #77  
cyclintom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: San Leandro
Posts: 2,891

Bikes: Eddy Merckx Corsa Extra, Basso Loto, Pinarello Stelvio, Redline Cyclocross

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 321 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by redlude97 View Post
The fact they had to group weightlifters and people doing pushups in their initial study to convice themselves that of the possibility I think says a lot about the prevelance. Sure its possible to give yourself an aneurysm while lifting heavy and its prudent to have your heart checked before starting weight lifting or even cycling but its not as much a danger as they make it out to be.
Can you explain what the difference is in lifting half or more of your body weight in a pushup or with deadweights? The muscles being actuated with virtually all of the weight are the biceps and shoulders. What would lead you to believe that these doctors are stupid and do not understand what they are doing? Now granted, there are some specialties that are poorly understood but muscles are certainly not one of them.
cyclintom is offline  
Old 10-29-18, 02:21 PM
  #78  
redlude97
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,656
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1924 Post(s)
Liked 177 Times in 129 Posts
Originally Posted by cyclintom View Post
Can you explain what the difference is in lifting half or more of your body weight in a pushup or with deadweights? The muscles being actuated with virtually all of the weight are the biceps and shoulders. What would lead you to believe that these doctors are stupid and do not understand what they are doing? Now granted, there are some specialties that are poorly understood but muscles are certainly not one of them.
Thats the thing, they are fitting their definition of "heavy weight" to the limited cases they found, not the other way around, because of what they found in people doing pushups without quantifying the relative risk or prevelance, they biased their own recommendation when it could have easily been a statistical anomoly. Calling that a heavy weight when a lot of people can easily do 50+ pushups without stopping doesn't really compare with what most would actually consider heavy weights and its a bit disengenious to group their relative risk in the same category without any type of statistics to back it up.
redlude97 is offline  
Old 10-29-18, 02:35 PM
  #79  
cyclintom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: San Leandro
Posts: 2,891

Bikes: Eddy Merckx Corsa Extra, Basso Loto, Pinarello Stelvio, Redline Cyclocross

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 321 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by OBoile View Post
Is this a serious question?
My serious question is why are you stating that people can actually improve their joints by lifting heavy weights? This causes a lost of fluids from the disks, this in turn allows the bones to rub together in the thinned disks wearing the disks through and causing arthritis. It isn't as if this isn't one of the most common aging diseases. If you wish to lift weights go right ahead. You might be one of those genetically lucky enough to have thick enough disks that you will not have ill effects from it in your lifetime. And you can be also have the genetic make-up to not overstress your circulatory system, generate blood clots and have a stroke or pulmonary embolism.

Why have you misrepresented my postings which plainly said that moderate exercise is good for you? Your belief that extreme exercise is good for you is contradicted in every emergency room In the world ever single day. 70% or more of the elderly population is suffering from some form of arthritis and this is NOT helped by exercise though it can relieve some symptoms in some people.
cyclintom is offline  
Old 10-29-18, 02:51 PM
  #80  
StanSeven
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Delaware shore
Posts: 13,315

Bikes: Cervelo C5, Guru Photon, Waterford, Specialized CX

Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 741 Post(s)
Liked 284 Times in 229 Posts
This is an interesting thread with lots of different opinions. However some posts include insulting language towards other members. Stop! if you can’t respond without respect towards others posts, don’t.
StanSeven is offline  
Old 10-29-18, 03:19 PM
  #81  
Dan333SP
Serious Cyclist
 
Dan333SP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: RVA
Posts: 9,208

Bikes: 2013 Madone 3.1

Mentioned: 97 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5618 Post(s)
Liked 111 Times in 58 Posts
Originally Posted by PaulRivers View Post
I think it's a combination of lifting being a little dangerous moreso if your body isn't suited for it, and just abysmally terrible advice given out as to how to lift. The "popular" lifting programs I see are like equivalent to suggesting people bike by dressing up in all black and riding on the street at 01:30am in front of the worst bar in town. When you see actual professionals who both train people and also face consequences if they injure people talking about how they train, it's almost always the exact opposite of the "popular" advice you read about lifting online.
Dan333SP is offline  
Old 10-29-18, 03:40 PM
  #82  
cyclintom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: San Leandro
Posts: 2,891

Bikes: Eddy Merckx Corsa Extra, Basso Loto, Pinarello Stelvio, Redline Cyclocross

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 321 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by redlude97 View Post
Thats the thing, they are fitting their definition of "heavy weight" to the limited cases they found, not the other way around, because of what they found in people doing pushups without quantifying the relative risk or prevelance, they biased their own recommendation when it could have easily been a statistical anomoly. Calling that a heavy weight when a lot of people can easily do 50+ pushups without stopping doesn't really compare with what most would actually consider heavy weights and its a bit disengenious to group their relative risk in the same category without any type of statistics to back it up.
I understand what you're saying but question whether it's relevant in this study. You think that being able to do 50 repetitions means that it isn't "heavy". By their definition it is. Remember that they are attempting to have somewhat identical conditions under which these heart attacks occurred to young people. And that is what led them to define "heavy lifting" as 50% of your bodyweight or more.
cyclintom is offline  
Old 10-29-18, 04:24 PM
  #83  
redlude97
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,656
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1924 Post(s)
Liked 177 Times in 129 Posts
Originally Posted by cyclintom View Post
I understand what you're saying but question whether it's relevant in this study. You think that being able to do 50 repetitions means that it isn't "heavy". By their definition it is. Remember that they are attempting to have somewhat identical conditions under which these heart attacks occurred to young people. And that is what led them to define "heavy lifting" as 50% of your bodyweight or more.
I mean I could probably find 5 "healthy" people who have had an aneurysm sitting up from the couch, but I'm not sure if suggesting everyone get a extensive heart checkup before doing so would be that useful
redlude97 is offline  
Old 10-29-18, 04:25 PM
  #84  
gl98115
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 631
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 140 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by cyclintom View Post
"Scientists are calling for widespread heart screening of people before they begin weight training. That's based on new evidence that lifting more than half your body weight could put you at risk of sudden death.

Yale New Haven Hospital surgeon John Elefteriades and colleagues report in an advance online study in the journal Cardiology that they've documented a link between heavy lifting and torn aortas—the heart's main artery—in young, healthy patients who had previously undiagnosed aneurysms, or enlargement of the aorta.

In a group of 31 patients who had an undetected aneurysm and subsequent torn aorta from heavy lifting, 10 of them died. Elefteriades defines heavy lifting as lifting more than half your body weight."
.
The key phrase in this is "young, healthy patients who had previously undiagnosed aneurysms, or enlargement of the aorta". These weren't normal, healthy people, they had cardiovascular abnormalities before they started lifting. Even if they didn't lift, they could have had an aortic tear from any sort of physical or emotional stress, including vigorous sex.

https://medicine.yale.edu/aorta/news...e.aspx?id=4082

"
Elefteriades, who enjoys weightlifting, notes that he and his team strongly encourage weight training to maintain muscle mass and bone health."

https://discovermagazine.com/2006/jul/weightlifting

Last edited by gl98115; 10-29-18 at 04:44 PM.
gl98115 is offline  
Old 10-29-18, 04:36 PM
  #85  
cyclintom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: San Leandro
Posts: 2,891

Bikes: Eddy Merckx Corsa Extra, Basso Loto, Pinarello Stelvio, Redline Cyclocross

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 321 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by redlude97 View Post
I mean I could probably find 5 "healthy" people who have had an aneurysm sitting up from the couch, but I'm not sure if suggesting everyone get a extensive heart checkup before doing so would be that useful
I agree with you completely on that point. These are supposed undiagnosed aneurisms for a reason - if indeed they were there to begin with, they weren't detectable under normal screening methods.
cyclintom is offline  
Old 10-29-18, 04:44 PM
  #86  
cyclintom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: San Leandro
Posts: 2,891

Bikes: Eddy Merckx Corsa Extra, Basso Loto, Pinarello Stelvio, Redline Cyclocross

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 321 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by gl98115 View Post
The key phrase in this is "young, healthy patients who had previously undiagnosed aneurysms, or enlargement of the aorta". These people had cardiovascular abnormalities before they started lifting. Even if they didn't lift, they could have had an aortic tear from any sort of physical or emotional stress, including vigorous sex.

https://medicine.yale.edu/aorta/news...e.aspx?id=4082

"
Elefteriades, who enjoys weightlifting, notes that he and his team strongly encourage weight training to maintain muscle mass and bone health."

https://discovermagazine.com/2006/jul/weightlifting
I would agree with you save for the fact that normal screening would reveal an enlarged heart. And you cannot say that they have an undiagnosed aneurism simply because of a aortic tear from physical stress. That is a supposition after the fact.

My point is that I believe in training and I believe that training strengthens the entire body. But I also believe that, like physical therapists do, weight training should be limited to lighter weighs and building up your repetitions from scratch. I do a lot of heavy climbing and pulling on the bars is more than enough weight lifting for me.
cyclintom is offline  
Old 10-29-18, 05:21 PM
  #87  
gl98115
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 631
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 140 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by cyclintom View Post
I would agree with you save for the fact that normal screening would reveal an enlarged heart. And you cannot say that they have an undiagnosed aneurism simply because of a aortic tear from physical stress. That is a supposition after the fact.
.
An enlarged heart and an aortic aneurysm are two different medical conditions on two different parts of the body.

Normal population based screening for aortic aneurysms is only recommended for "men aged 65 to 74 years, particularly in those with a history of smoking." Naturally, a doctor can recommend any patient with appropriate symptoms or family history be screened.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3379169/

Aortic tears require surgical intervention, and the surgeon can see the aneurysm in the surrounding tissue. The aneurysm is there, and it wasn't previously diagnosed.
gl98115 is offline  
Old 10-29-18, 05:45 PM
  #88  
cyclintom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: San Leandro
Posts: 2,891

Bikes: Eddy Merckx Corsa Extra, Basso Loto, Pinarello Stelvio, Redline Cyclocross

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 321 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by gl98115 View Post
An enlarged heart and an aortic aneurysm are two different medical conditions on two different parts of the body.

Normal population based screening for aortic aneurysms is only recommended for "men aged 65 to 74 years, particularly in those with a history of smoking." Naturally, a doctor can recommend any patient with appropriate symptoms or family history be screened.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3379169/

Aortic tears require surgical intervention, and the surgeon can see the aneurysm in the surrounding tissue. The aneurysm is there, and it wasn't previously diagnosed.
Huh? The Aorta is essentially the left ventricle of the heart. So what gives you the idea that an enlarge heart and an aortic aneurism are in two different parts of the body?

As the heart pumps the aorta, which is directly connected to the heart, expands and contracts reducing the surge of pressure from the heart. Without this pressure reduction all of the capillaries in the brain and eyes would explode. And aortic tear is often fatal. Please remember that I've worked on this for medical instruments.

And aneurism is typically a swelling or even a balloon like structure on the aorta and it can be detected usually with a stethoscope. Not to mention most people have chest X-rays often enough that they would show.
cyclintom is offline  
Old 10-29-18, 05:58 PM
  #89  
Carbonfiberboy 
just another gosling
 
Carbonfiberboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 16,389

Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004

Mentioned: 101 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2399 Post(s)
Liked 468 Times in 346 Posts
This discussion, like so many on BF, has gone all crazy. About the cardio danger of exercise, I'd just mention that the American standard heart disease diagnoses method is called a heart attack. It's just to expensive to screen everyone. If you want to pay for it yourself, go for it, but it's several thousand dollars for a full workup. I got lucky and had an minor heart issue, which combined with a sympathetic cardiologist, got me that workup. My cardio says, "Don't worry about it. Do what you want." And that's for a guy (me) with known heart issues. So there's that.

Next, I'd like to address the issue of lifting to failure. I definitely do not squat to failure. That's just stupid. There are youtubes of that. However when I rep out my last set of squats, I go until I can tell that doing one more would be a bad idea. I've been sick and for three weeks hadn't been in the squat rack until yesterday. I did my first two sets and did not do a third. My hams told me to quit while I was ahead. I also don't do leg extensions to failure because I do them after squats and my legs hurt so bad that I have no need to hurt them more than just enough. But everything else to failure. Sled is fine going to failure. Anything where you can set the weight down on a stop or drop it. Benches always to failure. Dumbbell work not always to failure, sometime just to adequate pain. That said, dumbbells and cables are good places to have a try for that last rep.

Next, that silly discussion about joints and their injuries: What keeps your joints in good condition is keeping them in good alignment. It's when they go out of alignment that they get injured. That's the reason that weight training helps prevent joint injuries.

Powerlifters don't have to train to failure because they spend the whole afternoon in the squat rack doing endless sets. They have plenty good fiber recruitment. They "only" go to 90% of 1RM because they do sets, not 1RMs. Which reminds me: don't do barbell squats except in a rack.

All the above said, I work out with a guy who's been lifting heavy all his life. He says, "Never squat over 500 lbs. It's just not necessary. Going too heavy will mess up your joints in time." However, this is a thread about weight training for cyclists. I don't think any of us should be squatting more than double their body weight. BW X 1.5 is probably plenty.
__________________
Results matter

Last edited by Carbonfiberboy; 10-29-18 at 06:05 PM.
Carbonfiberboy is offline  
Old 10-29-18, 06:03 PM
  #90  
colnago62
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,976
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 521 Post(s)
Liked 180 Times in 109 Posts

Originally Posted by cyclintom View Post
Can you think of any way I could prevent you from doing whatever you want or even desire to? You are free to follow your dream. Arnold Schwartzenegger can be your dream. Oh, wait, someone else said that your muscles don't grow from weight training. So I guess he was born that way and you're out of luck unless you were born that way.
Dr Hatfield (PhD in exercise physiology and competitive power lifter) has an interesting take on weight lifting and body size. His position is that athletes whose body composition is largely slow twitch, need to do high rep, lower weight programs to maximize the benefit of a weight program. Athletes with body composition of mainly fast twitch need to do low reps and heavy weight to optimize their lifting. He believes that body composition informs the lifting.
colnago62 is offline  
Old 10-29-18, 06:09 PM
  #91  
Carbonfiberboy 
just another gosling
 
Carbonfiberboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 16,389

Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004

Mentioned: 101 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2399 Post(s)
Liked 468 Times in 346 Posts
Originally Posted by colnago62 View Post



Dr Hatfield (PhD in exercise physiology and competitive power lifter) has an interesting take on weight lifting and body size. His position is that athletes whose body composition is largely slow twitch, need to do high rep, lower weight programs to maximize the benefit of a weight program. Athletes with body composition of mainly fast twitch need to do low reps and heavy weight to optimize their lifting. He believes that body composition informs the lifting.
Either way. But whichever, just train to failure except as noted by me above. The result is the same in terms of increase in 1RM, i.e. force production. I've had good results doing it both ways.
__________________
Results matter
Carbonfiberboy is offline  
Old 10-30-18, 12:24 AM
  #92  
PaulRivers
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 6,299
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 453 Post(s)
Liked 7 Times in 6 Posts
Originally Posted by OBoile View Post
Ugh... not this again. The "I got hurt, therefore it must happen to everyone regardless of what actual studies say" argument doesn't fly.
This is exactly what I said -

From the "whatever I say won't hurt me" group you get loudly pushing all kinds of over the top positive claims about lifting and health benefits. When you get injured and talk about it they get very angry and attack you.

From the "if I get someone else hurt it will be bad for me" group you get basically the opposite advice - a lot more isolation lifts for training athletes, a lot more "we tried squats and deadlifts but the injury rate was to high so we do something different now", and even from coaches that train people to powerlift and compete you hear a long list of boring things they do like not going above 85%-90% of your max in training, spending the first year at smaller weights to get the body used to doing it, and that there definitely are people who because of their genetics or physical condition should never be lifting heavy weights with compound lifts because their body just cannot handle it.
PaulRivers is offline  
Old 10-30-18, 01:05 AM
  #93  
Campag4life
Voice of the Industry
 
Campag4life's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 12,572
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1187 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy View Post
This is true, but begs the question. Do you believe that Zinn has increased his risk for "all-cause mortality" in the next 10 years? That study says "no". Remember that people die from all sorts of things. But the more you ride, the longer you'll live - statistically. I'm a member of the largest bike club in the nation, some 13,000+ members. It has had free daily group rides for decades. I know of only 2 people who've died from a coronary on these rides. TdF winners tend to be long lived.

You mention " countless endurance athletes who would push their hearts for 8 hr. straight," yet you don't see studies showing that these countless athletes met an early death, do you? The zonatandem couple are still riding in their mid-80's and they did a heckuva lot of miles.
Fair counterpoint and no solid rebuttal to you Carbonfiberboy,. My personal view is the heart muscle like all muscles change in the body with age due to loss of elasticity.
The heart muscle is arguable the hardest working muscle in the body and what keeps us alive. With combination of muscle degradation and prolonged high intensity usage, it stands to reason this combination maybe problematic. Perhaps you feel what happened to Zinn is merely based upon his genetics. Maybe right. Or...and interaction with his genetics and how he treated his body through prolonged endurance riding.

I take studies with a grain of salt perhaps like you for the simple reason a study doesn't necessarily capture true cause and effect as control parameters tend to be a bit localized.

At the end of the day, people will believe what they like. To me it makes sense that as a heart muscle weakens with age on some level and prolonged high intensity effort is not a good nexus. Lennard Zinn is perhaps the most knowledgable cycling guru we have today in America...our latter day Sheldon Brown. It happened to him and it has happened to others as well. But you make a compelling argument that there isn't real proof.

On the weight lifting front, I have a single data point to share. My cousin. My cousin and I are close genetic equals. We have sought different paths in our fitness goals. He has always been vigilant about his health, diet and lifting. He has a body like a bronze statue into old age. I have never developed my musculature like he has...me pursuing sports more like cycling, swimming, tennis golf, etc. I am not a gym guy...I hate gyms but I am a pool guy. Now in his early 60's, he is starting to have his joints replaced. He knows what he is doing and does not go for size. Again, he looks like an Adonis statue in body shape not like Arnold in his prime though he had a similar shape. Now it could be argued that his joints wore out due to lifting. I know he backed off on weight a lot in later life because we talked about it. He said his joints wouldn't take it. I do light lifting. I know if I push more weight, like 45lb per arm in a curl, my elbow joints rebel and injure easily. So I don't do heavy weights. Even pushups into older age can damage shoulder joints. My shoulders are a bit sensitive based upon too much swimming throughout my life.

The body ages and the joints are the first thing to go. My knees are still hanging in there pretty good. I have never done squats. I am in the camp that if you overload your body with weight, pretty easy to harm joints and less likely to tear muscles but latter still happens. Yes, proper technique is huge.

Last edited by Campag4life; 10-30-18 at 01:20 AM.
Campag4life is offline  
Old 10-30-18, 07:12 AM
  #94  
OBoile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,580
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 916 Post(s)
Liked 224 Times in 132 Posts
Originally Posted by cyclintom View Post
My serious question is why are you stating that people can actually improve their joints by lifting heavy weights?
Because that is what the current prevailing scientific opinion is.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21625048
Thicker, stronger tendons from lifting.
Originally Posted by cyclintom View Post
his causes a lost of fluids from the disks, this in turn allows the bones to rub together in the thinned disks wearing the disks through and causing arthritis.
Disks? Most joints don't have disks. Your spine isn't a joint. Furthermore, do you have any evidence of this? Can you post a link to a study that says this?

Originally Posted by cyclintom View Post
It isn't as if this isn't one of the most common aging diseases. If you wish to lift weights go right ahead. You might be one of those genetically lucky enough to have thick enough disks that you will not have ill effects from it in your lifetime. And you can be also have the genetic make-up to not overstress your circulatory system, generate blood clots and have a stroke or pulmonary embolism.
Until you present any evidence to the contrary, I'm going to go ahead and say that the vast, vast majority of humans belong "lucky" group. Again, lifting weights is one of the most highly recommended things you can do to fight aging.
Originally Posted by cyclintom View Post
Why have you misrepresented my postings which plainly said that moderate exercise is good for you?
Where did I say moderate exercise was bad?
Originally Posted by cyclintom View Post
Your belief that extreme exercise is good for you is contradicted in every emergency room In the world ever single day.
I said intense exercise, not extreme. But the number of people who are actually doing "too much" exercise are few and far between.

Originally Posted by cyclintom View Post
70% or more of the elderly population is suffering from some form of arthritis and this is NOT helped by exercise though it can relieve some symptoms in some people.
https://www.arthritis.org/living-wit...ercise/how-to/
Funny, this arthritis website doesn't seem to agree with you.
OBoile is offline  
Old 10-30-18, 07:14 AM
  #95  
OBoile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,580
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 916 Post(s)
Liked 224 Times in 132 Posts
Originally Posted by PaulRivers View Post
This is exactly what I said -
We've had this discussion before. That is exactly what you said. You ignored all the statistical evidence in favour of your own anecdotal experience.
OBoile is offline  
Old 10-30-18, 07:24 AM
  #96  
OBoile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,580
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 916 Post(s)
Liked 224 Times in 132 Posts
Originally Posted by gl98115 View Post

"Elefteriades, who enjoys weightlifting, notes that he and his team strongly encourage weight training to maintain muscle mass and bone health."

https://discovermagazine.com/2006/jul/weightlifting
Do keep in mind that the anti-weightlifting crowd don't care that the health benefits (including lower blood pressure) far outweigh the risks.

People should NEVER ride a bike. I know someone who got "doored" by a car. That's just far too dangerous. Plus, I hear cycling can wreck your bone density and lead to things like arthritis and back pain. You'd have to be crazy to do that. It also like, destroys your muscle mass. Look how skinny some of those guys are! Totally not a functional activity!

I recommend just lying in bed all day. Clearly the safest way to spend your life.
OBoile is offline  
Old 10-30-18, 07:39 AM
  #97  
OBoile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,580
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 916 Post(s)
Liked 224 Times in 132 Posts
Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy View Post
This discussion, like so many on BF, has gone all crazy. About the cardio danger of exercise, I'd just mention that the American standard heart disease diagnoses method is called a heart attack. It's just to expensive to screen everyone. If you want to pay for it yourself, go for it, but it's several thousand dollars for a full workup. I got lucky and had an minor heart issue, which combined with a sympathetic cardiologist, got me that workup. My cardio says, "Don't worry about it. Do what you want." And that's for a guy (me) with known heart issues. So there's that.

Next, I'd like to address the issue of lifting to failure. I definitely do not squat to failure. That's just stupid. There are youtubes of that. However when I rep out my last set of squats, I go until I can tell that doing one more would be a bad idea. I've been sick and for three weeks hadn't been in the squat rack until yesterday. I did my first two sets and did not do a third. My hams told me to quit while I was ahead. I also don't do leg extensions to failure because I do them after squats and my legs hurt so bad that I have no need to hurt them more than just enough. But everything else to failure. Sled is fine going to failure. Anything where you can set the weight down on a stop or drop it. Benches always to failure. Dumbbell work not always to failure, sometime just to adequate pain. That said, dumbbells and cables are good places to have a try for that last rep.

Next, that silly discussion about joints and their injuries: What keeps your joints in good condition is keeping them in good alignment. It's when they go out of alignment that they get injured. That's the reason that weight training helps prevent joint injuries.

Powerlifters don't have to train to failure because they spend the whole afternoon in the squat rack doing endless sets. They have plenty good fiber recruitment. They "only" go to 90% of 1RM because they do sets, not 1RMs. Which reminds me: don't do barbell squats except in a rack.
Lots of good points here. It's funny, I've actually trained with Sheiko lifters (members of the Russian national team) as well as several people who followed his programming, yet people here are trying to explain to me what they do. Few people anywhere go above 90% of the 1rm. The vast majority of "bros" lifting in gyms are doing sets of 6-12 which means less than 90%. In training, I might go over 90% once or twice in a training cycle. Mostly to convince myself that I could do the weight I was expecting to do at an upcoming contest.

I differ a bit with respect to going to failure. I pretty much never go to failure on big lifts (squats, deadlifts, bench press). Sometimes it happens by accident, but that would be, at most, once or twice a year. Smaller, isolation, exercises I often take to failure. The cost (in terms of recovery) is much lower in this case.
Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy View Post
All the above said, I work out with a guy who's been lifting heavy all his life. He says, "Never squat over 500 lbs. It's just not necessary. Going too heavy will mess up your joints in time." However, this is a thread about weight training for cyclists. I don't think any of us should be squatting more than double their body weight. BW X 1.5 is probably plenty.
Lots of good points here.
I got up to 2.3 times my bodyweight at my best and I generally agree with what you say here. For lifting, like any sport, there comes a point where it stops being healthy. I never had any serious injuries (they're pretty rare actually), but I did pretty much have to revolve my life around lifting and I did get some aches and pains when really training hard.
OBoile is offline  
Old 10-30-18, 08:28 AM
  #98  
cyclintom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: San Leandro
Posts: 2,891

Bikes: Eddy Merckx Corsa Extra, Basso Loto, Pinarello Stelvio, Redline Cyclocross

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 321 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by colnago62 View Post



Dr Hatfield (PhD in exercise physiology and competitive power lifter) has an interesting take on weight lifting and body size. His position is that athletes whose body composition is largely slow twitch, need to do high rep, lower weight programs to maximize the benefit of a weight program. Athletes with body composition of mainly fast twitch need to do low reps and heavy weight to optimize their lifting. He believes that body composition informs the lifting.
The problem with this is that the bodily composition of skeletal muscles (from memory) is something like 80% slow twitch muscles and the rest a mix. I have a lot of fast twitch in the remainder which made me a descent fighter but although I've been doing almost entirely climbing at relatively mild rates it doesn't seem to have changed the composition at all. Those rollers on many of my courses: I can barely improve my times by attacking them. But my overall time is actually a little better if I don't attack the rollers and ride over them normally. And in the group I ride with on the heavy climbs I find I can keep up with them if I do not try to go hard. But if I go harder I tire so rapidly that I actually lose time. So I do not believe that you can change your body muscle type composition as many resources tell us but are stuck as we were created.
cyclintom is offline  
Old 10-30-18, 08:37 AM
  #99  
colnago62
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,976
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 521 Post(s)
Liked 180 Times in 109 Posts
Originally Posted by cyclintom View Post
The problem with this is that the bodily composition of skeletal muscles (from memory) is something like 80% slow twitch muscles and the rest a mix. I have a lot of fast twitch in the remainder which made me a descent fighter but although I've been doing almost entirely climbing at relatively mild rates it doesn't seem to have changed the composition at all. Those rollers on many of my courses: I can barely improve my times by attacking them. But my overall time is actually a little better if I don't attack the rollers and ride over them normally. And in the group I ride with on the heavy climbs I find I can keep up with them if I do not try to go hard. But if I go harder I tire so rapidly that I actually lose time. So I do not believe that you can change your body muscle type composition as many resources tell us but are stuck as we were created.
Dr. Hatfield is not advocating the changing of an athletes body composition. He believes the amount of weight and number of reps. are based on the bodies predominant muscle structure.
colnago62 is offline  
Old 10-30-18, 10:26 AM
  #100  
Carbonfiberboy 
just another gosling
 
Carbonfiberboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 16,389

Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004

Mentioned: 101 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2399 Post(s)
Liked 468 Times in 346 Posts
Originally Posted by cyclintom View Post
The problem with this is that the bodily composition of skeletal muscles (from memory) is something like 80% slow twitch muscles and the rest a mix. I have a lot of fast twitch in the remainder which made me a descent fighter but although I've been doing almost entirely climbing at relatively mild rates it doesn't seem to have changed the composition at all. Those rollers on many of my courses: I can barely improve my times by attacking them. But my overall time is actually a little better if I don't attack the rollers and ride over them normally. And in the group I ride with on the heavy climbs I find I can keep up with them if I do not try to go hard. But if I go harder I tire so rapidly that I actually lose time. So I do not believe that you can change your body muscle type composition as many resources tell us but are stuck as we were created.
The bolded part is called "blowing up." That's normal. Everyone experiences it. Training the aerobic system increases the pace at which one blows up. Meaning 2 X 20' at LT, longer intervals in the sweet spot, HIIT, that sort of thing. You can both push it up from below and pull it up from above, meaning LT power or FTP.

Muscle fiber type is not that simple. See: https://renaissanceperiodization.com...ounded-debate/
The takeaway:
All fiber types change with training, and it happens quickly.
__________________
Results matter
Carbonfiberboy is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.