Both of those turned out to be huge fallacies. I'm 40 now and not very serious about working out, but I do it reliably (on an irregular schedule) and I don't target specific muscles etc to try to make myself look a certain way. The result is that I am just plain healthier and feel great. That has many second order effects.
Most people would be better off lifting a 10 lb weight 50 times instead of lifting a 50 lb weight 10 times. High weight, low reps is a great way to injure yourself if you're like 99% of people out there.
Also train less.
Yet strength and mass have gone up.
Most people can't do 10 reps at 85% intensity, it's closer to 70-75%.
Most males can probably do that with a tiny bit of practice.
If you lose balance and the weight swings back, your shoulder is fucked, especially at that weight.
For most adult men lifting the bar (44lbs, so almost 50) above their head after studying the form is not "injurious".
You don't do shoulder presses using momentum (unless you're doing something specialised, in which case you know what you're doing).
> as you need enough strength to safely bring it back to the ground
You don't, you can do them in properly configured squat rack and just drop them.
If you do start off the ground, it's going to be a weight you can clean up into a front rack position; if you can clean the weight you can certainly lower it back down.
Part of lifting weights is raw strength, another is proper form. If I can't perform a lift 'the right way', I take off weight until I can. It took a fair bit of practice to
That's absolutely not what they said.
50lbs is only just over the weight of the bar anyway. Weakness is never a strength.
When training for muscle size the important thing is to fatigue the muscle itself, which is easier to do with 5-20 reps, maybe 30 at the most if exercising small muscles.
Regarding "low reps", that usually refers to sets of 1-3 reps very close to your maximum potential. Once you go above 5 reps or so, the risk of injury is much lower. There are lots of beginner programs using sets of 5 reps, and people aren't getting injured left and right on those.
One way to measure perceived exertion is how many additional reps you think you can do - if you're doing 10 reps at a weight where you can only do 10, then you're obviously at some risk of having worse form / injury; if you're doing 10 reps at a weight that you can lift 12-15 times, you'll probably get stronger, if you're doing 10 reps at a weight you can lift 25-30 times, you likely won't make a lot of progress.
For most people, exercise is about health and about being functional in their life. If you have a baseline level of fitness and an exercise habit that supports it, it is OK to plateau at that level and just live your healthy life.
Much better to start with a lot more than the minimum so you have a decent safety margin (and lifelong habits that will keep you healthy for as long as possible).
Besides, I don't think your body is going to be any different from your clone doing massive reps to failure with the same conviction.
And 10 reps is not low reps either. It's on the upper end of what people usually use in their workouts.
Either way, I don't see the issue with doing 50 reps of something if you're failing at the end. The main issue is that it's boring and more mentally taxing than 6-10 reps I think.
There's a Huberman Lab podcast with some expert who also says the ideal rep range is anywhere from 6 reps to 30+ reps to make the point that we overly fixate on it. Lifting something until you can't is the operative goal.
I personally like drop sets for this purpose (decreasing weight until failure) because you end on a lighter weight that won't hurt you if something goes wrong, but you aren't stuck lifting one weight for too long.
> "Days of are still good."
Have a look (or rather listen) here: https://hubermanlab.com/dr-peter-attia-exercise-nutrition-ho... Interesting discussion.