|
[ Exercise Archive ] [ Main Archives Page ] [ Glossary/Index ] [ FAQ ] [ Recommended Books ] [ Bulletin Board ] |
Search this site! | |
I posted earlier about tendonitis in my elbows.I'd like to start working out.Would it be harmful to use light weights?
In Reply to: Ask Walt posted by Debbie [20.847] on January 24, 2004 at 17:27:01:
Hi, Debbie.
This is NOT the time to start high reps of light weight lifting!
You would be wise to get this resolved with massage, Rolfing/Hellerwork, SR and stuff like Omega 3s and glucosamine FIRST and THEN start with light weights and build up to high reps.
Walt
In Reply to: Re: Ask Walt posted by Walt Stoll [9.8] on January 25, 2004 at 06:42:29:
Walt,
Why is it that doctors recommend higher reps/low weight as the strength training protocol for EVERY SITUATION? Why is it they NEVER say, "You are going to have to increase the weight and decrease the reps"? NO MATTER WHAT THE GOAL? Really, someone at medical school is teaching doctors that the solution to ALL strength training problems is to reduce the amount of weight and increase the number of reps. WHY ISN'T LESS REPS (and therefore higher weight) SOMETIMES THE ANSWER? Wouldn't less reps be less likely to either cause or aggravate an overuse syndrome than more?
I mean, you've got doctors who think that 30 cycles of the knee per week with a heavier weight (e.g. squatting, deadlifting, leg presses) is more damaging than 15,000 cycles per week with a light weight (e.g. running, swimming, cycling) Yet it is quite clear from the literature than 30 reps at a heavier weight is more effective in building strength than 15,000 reps per week with a light weight.
In Reply to: Ask Walt posted by Debbie [20.847] on January 24, 2004 at 17:27:01:
I'm going to disagree with Walt. Tendonitis is an overuse syndrome. It seems to me the way to aggravate an overuse syndrome is with more use. Light weights implies higher reps. (Light weights with low reps is tatamount to not working out at all.) Heavier weights implies fewer reps. I would go with heavier reps - relatively speaking - and therefore a lower number or reps. You will get more gains in strength while subjecting your elbow to fewer repetitions.
Start relatively light to begin with and then add WEIGHT, not reps. I'd keep the reps to 5 reps per set or fewer. If you can do more than 25 total reps in a workout, then increase the weight next time.
In Reply to: Re: Ask Walt posted by Lincoln [32.20] on January 26, 2004 at 13:41:50:
I actually do lift heavy furniture at work and while taking Aleve my elbows don't really bother me as much at work as they do when I'm home. I really need to get in shape and the work-outs I need require weights should I wait till there's no pain in my arms? Although that seems like it will never happen so should I never workout ever?
In Reply to: Re: Ask Walt posted by Debbie [20.847] on January 26, 2004 at 14:21:23:
You ask some tough but good questions.
Of course taking Aleve is no long term solution.
I think the best solution would be to build up strength in the elbow (NOT endurance), increase the circulation in order to speed healing, and reduce the inflammation.
To build strength, lower reps and higher weight work best. Higher reps I think will just tend to aggravate the elbow more. Aim to increase the raw strength of your elbow muscles while keeping the total volume of lifting down.
You should do some research to determine the choice of exercises that will best build strength in the elbows of the muscle. Consider forearm strengthening, grip strengthening, triceps and bicep strengthening exercises.
To increase the circulation, you should perform at LEAST some sort of workout. To do nothing I think would be counter-productive. You could also try alternating heat/ice/heat in order to stimulate circulation. Massage followed by icing would be good too, I should think.
Gentle icing several times a day, followed with light mobility drills, might help with the inflammation. If this doesn't work, you can discuss treatment options such as cortisone shots, prolotherapy, SHORT-term use of NSAIDS, etc. with your doctor.
In Reply to: Re: Ask Walt posted by Lincoln [32.20] on January 26, 2004 at 13:36:37:
Thanks, Lincoln.
That is because people like you know a lot more about this than the average doc who has had NO training in this area.
However, because we have a "license" we assume that we are the only experts (and get away with it especially becasue we have had no training).
Educate us and refer us to some studies.
Walt
In Reply to: Re: Ask Walt posted by Walt Stoll [9.8] on January 27, 2004 at 08:47:10:
Most studies on strength training are of little or no use, being very poorly designed and funded. They typically use a few untrained, college-age males and hardly ever go longer than a few weeks of study. This is fine if you are an untrained college age male who only has a few weeks to get stronger, but most of us do not fit that very narrow criteria. Studies RARELY take relatively fit people and examine them for significant periods of time. In addition, since most strength training studies re-hash the same old same old time after time, little is learned. Especially lost is the valuable experience of people who are strong. Surely one would think that in order to learn how to achieve something (strength in this case), one should examine those who have already achieved it (trained individuals) to see how it was done? But apparently the science community that funds studies doesn't think so - they keep examining people who are out of shape.
Emperical evidence is actually much more powerful. An 8-week study of 12 college-age untrained males (the usual case with such studies) can sometimes be interesting, but it does not compare to decades of hands-on experience. Strength coaches I like to read about, the kind that have read all the studies AND actually worked with flesh-and-blood trainees for decades include coaches such as Charles Poloquin, Charles Staley, Louie Simmons, Mike Burgener, Art Dreschler, Harvey Newton, Paul Chek, J.V. Askem, others.
Authors I DON'T like, because they take fitness experience and armchair book reading and try to act like they are strength training experts, are people like Matt Bryzcki, Ken Hutchins, Fred Hahn, all football coaches, Yoga instructors, aerobics instructors, endurance athletes, and most any PhD in a white lab coat. Fitness training and strength training are field that have some overlap, but they are not the same. A general fitness expert is NOT the most highly qualified strength training expert. Strength training is a much more specific pursuit than general fitness training. Anyone can get SOME results in strength training as long as they are working with unconditioned trainees, even if the strength program they use is brutally inefficient. (This is the problem with most strength training studies.) A strength training expert is someone who has demonstrated they can achieve the best increases in strength levels.
In Reply to: Re: Ask Walt posted by Lincoln [32.20] on January 26, 2004 at 14:35:31:
Thanks Lincoln
In Reply to: Re: Ask Walt posted by Lincoln [32.20] on January 27, 2004 at 13:56:17:
Thanks, Lincoln.
Walt
In Reply to: Re: Ask Walt (Archive in exercise.) posted by Walt Stoll [9.8] on January 28, 2004 at 07:16:12:
And THANKS WALT! Thakns for giving people a great place to learn!
|
[ Exercise Archive ] [ Main Archives Page ] [ Glossary/Index ] [ FAQ ] [ Recommended Books ] [ Bulletin Board ] |
Search this site! | |