Why strength training? A programmer's perspective
fhur.me
fhur.me
Even though in the early days you don't notice much physical difference (other than the steady increase in weight you're able to lift), I've just watched all my stats in my fitness tracker going in a positive direction constantly (including sleep). Which is great early feedback.
It's had a real positive mental impact too. I'm a pretty optimistic person in general, but now my 'inner voice' has additionally been saying "I feel great" to myself all the time. Just like a permanent high.
Obviously, you'd probably get this from any exercise, but I never felt I was moving the needle with other regimes and would tend to early out, so it's been quite an eye opener.
People who do weight training always leave out the fact that you feel sore after a lift. Even the next day.
This can feel like pain to the unaware and can be scary or off putting enough to become a deterrent to keep at it.
It can leave you feeling weak, but often the soreness is surface level and in fact you are still stronger even with the soreness and fatigue.
> (other than the steady increase in weight you're able to lift)
“Steady” is doing a lot of heavy lifting here.
Maybe you could argue that in the beginning, but adding more and more weight is more logarithmic than linear; otherwise, everyone in the gym would be benching 3 tons.
I recommend ramping up weight after you can do a full 3 sets of 10 reps at your current weight.
Introducing the new weight to the first set, then dropping the weight for the next two.
Once comfortable with that try the new weight for 2 sets and then finally 3; then repeat.
It's absolutely normal to feel sore after any kind of exercise?
If you don't you're in top shape for it, congratulations. But it ain't going to happen when progressing.
I Ctr-F’d the linked article and found 0 instances of “sore”.
Assuming any knowledge is “obvious” is detrimental to education, encouragement, mentorship, or simply cultivating a welcoming environment.
I could still feel that I had worked out the day before, sure, but as long as I was getting enough protein, getting enough sleep, doing warm up sets, etc., the soreness was incredibly minimal. Missing any of those things could cause a pretty significant increase in feeling it the next day, though.
It's not sudden, but can feel that way sometimes when you wake up!
> You should be able to add 2.5kg to your major lifts every week
When you couple progression with a time frame but fail to address the time frame of the workouts it is more dangerous than helpful.
This would be bad advice for anyone who only trains once a week or twice a month.
> if you're recovering well
I’ve been strength training for 20 years and even I’m unsure what this means. Do I recover “well”?
When it comes to education avoiding ambiguity is essential.
>> if you're recovering well
>
> I’ve been strength training for 20 years and even I’m unsure what this means.
Recovery in strength training means eating, sleeping and resting worked muscles for at least a day (i.e., don't work the same muscle on consecutive days). I think it's safe to assume they meant "if you're eating and sleeping well, and resting muscles appropriately".
Okay, but only if we agree on what is “standard”?
My standard routine is every other day. (And that’s just my regularity, I’ve yet to even mention what lifts I do)
Is that what both you and the op meant for your “standard”?
Just read this thread. I’ve seen other people in this thread say “once a week” and “three to four time a week”, and “for 30 minutes”, and on and on.
Let go of this assumption that anything is “standard” and simply explicitly state your own advice. It is more helpful.
> Recovery in strength training means eating, sleeping and resting worked muscles for at least a day
In truth when op said “recovering well” I thought they meant the autonomic side of things.
Your interpretation of it being solely about my active efforts to recover being the definition of “recovering well” was completely lost on me; further making my point that the op was ambiguous.
But all good advice on aiding recovery! I’d add, stay hydrated!
I’ve read studies that show via biopsy that ingested proteins are already present in the worked muscles 10 minutes after ingestion!
I’ve also found in my own practice that using a hydrating powder in 32oz of water after a lift aids in recovery.
This seems rather arbitrary as rep ranges will heavily depend on what type of exercises/routines a person is running.
3 sets of 10 reps doesn't really fit the bill for a strength training program. That is more of a "bodybuilding" routine focused on hypertrophy.
"Strength" in weightlifting is measured by the one-rep max (1RM) [1] of a given movement. Most starting strength training programs recommend starting off with 5 reps. (For example, Starting Strength [2], Stronglifts 5x5 [3], or Wendler 5/3/1 [4] were common recommendations for beginner routines when I first started lifting).
This is why most strength training programs focus on basic lifts like squat, bench/overhead press, and deadlift.
Some of the intermediate programs will also use "linear periodization" [5] that (iirc) is supposed to help prevent plateaus as a trainee acclimates to their routine.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-repetition_maximum [2] https://startingstrength.com/about [3] https://stronglifts.com/stronglifts-5x5/progress/ [4] https://www.jimwendler.com/blogs/jimwendler-com/101065094-5-... [5] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4637911/
This feels like too much information to the point it confuses me. You gave 2 (3?) different pieces of actionable advice.
I’ve always hated the 1 rep max mentality. Mostly saw it in high school with kids trying to out do each other, but it fails to promote strength.
I’m all for going slow. If 5 reps are better for you then great, do 5!
> I’ve always hated the 1 rep max mentality. Mostly saw it in high school with kids trying to out do each other, but it fails to promote strength.
I agree. There is a difference between the mentality of high school lifters chasing a 1RM to impress people (often called "ego lifting") and the use of the 1RM as a baseline for measuring a person's strength for the purposes of developing a strength training regimen.
The 1RM also takes into account comfort of the lift. If you feel like your spine is going to snap, but you complete the lift then the weight is probably too heavy, for example. Some lifters use the Rate of Perceived Exertion (RPE) as a heuristic for this [1].
Knowing your 1RM is a fundamental necessity in non-RPE based strength training programs. It's how you safely and efficiently progress in your lifts. RPE programs are based on perceived exertion for a variety of reasons, but I've never met an RPE lifter who didn't also have a very good idea of their 1RM, and most still regularly tested it.
And if you're not doing a program, you're not training. Which could be fine! But training is different than just exercising.
> I’m all for going slow. If 5 reps are better for you then great, do 5!
There's lots of underlying science around this - it's not just "what works for you," but instead what works best for the overwhelming majority of humans. If your goal is strength training, biasing towards fewer reps of higher weights is basically settled science. If your goal is bodybuilding, higher reps of lower weights is basically settled science. Though, 10 reps is in-line with plenty of strength training programs, particularly for intermediate lifters - it's in a range where you get solid results for both strength and hypertrophy. And, frankly, most powerlifters are lying if they say they don't want at least some hypertrophy.
Heavily depends on the movement. 3x10s are fine for accessory exercises but will be too much volume for compound movements (if strength is the focus) and can actually retard progress in later stages (because training for strength is incredibly taxing once you go heavy enough).
That said, literally anything will work when you're just getting started, so this retardation won't show up until later (when you're unbelievably sore all of the time but are not progressing on the lifts).
Most strength programs are developed around 3x5 for the core lifts, as this is a good balance between strength and recovery. In fact, you will likely do even less than this once you're advanced enough (1x5 super heavy deadlifts, once a week, for example) so that your muscles have time to recover and build.
I’m an old man and 3x10 is “how I was taught” but I’m open to new research and see how 3x5 would be easier on someone new to it.
But what y’all all seem to omit is the core of my suggestion: how and when to add more weight.
Would you say the weight increase signal I suggest is good, just go 3x5 rather than 3x10, or what does your literature say on that?
Once that does not work anymore, one leaves the novice phase by definition and is now considered "intermediate".
Eric Helms wrote a metaanalysis of the current state of exercise science in "The muscle strength pyramid". In that, the recommended periodization for intermediate lifters is "wave loading". So one would do 3x8 at weight x, then 3x7 at x+5, 3x6 at x+10, 2x6 at x (DeLoad), then 3x8 at x+5. All sets performed at RPE < 10, meaning, one could do at least one more rep.
The rep ranges and weights here should be modified to suit the goals at hand, so for deadlifts the increase may work, but for overhead press it should be lower. If training for strength the reps should also tend to be lower.
Also, technique gets more important at higher training ages. It's worthwhile to drop the weight if it increases ROM or the stretch at the bottom, as it leads to more muscle growth this way.
My advice: completely ignore the X by X stuff.
Focus on time under tension, form, control and how your body feels. Lifting with a goal to hit numbers causes sloppy form and cheats (and injuries) to just try to hit X reps.
Every day is different, how you slept, what you ate, whether you're training fasted, where your muscles are in recovery, and a million other variables.
As an example (bragging a bit), as a ~50 year old, 165lb, 5' 7" guy, I'm able to lift 100lb dumbells on flat bench chest press, one in each arm.
I can hit around 10-12 reps with that, most of them BS cheat reps where I'm powering with my shoulders.
It also causes me all sorts of problems with tendon issues, etc...
I find when I do 50-70lb weights, and forget about hitting numbers and just feeling the workout, I get way better results. Fewer injuries, better focus on the muscles I'm targeting, and real progress with strength.
It's hard to do, because I'm always comparing my performance with my last workout, trying to compete with myself.
I have to constantly remind myself that small things, even a couple inches in variation of form have a massive impact on volume.
So, I try to throw out the numbers. I vary my rep speed, vary explosiveness, and try to feel what's hardest to do, and then do that.
Basically, what I'm trying to get better at is learning to lift with my muscles, not my ego.
Beginner lifters don't know what their max potential is and might overtrain by accident (because they are naturally strong and might do more reps to try and get to failure) or might not do enough volume to trigger the musculoskeletal adaptions needed to lift more weight (because they are not naturally strong and might tap out early).
> As an example (bragging a bit), as a ~50 year old, 165lb, 5' 7" guy, I'm able to lift 100lb dumbells on flat bench chest press, one in each arm. I can hit around 10-12 reps with that, most of them BS cheat reps where I'm powering with my shoulders.
I personally never recommend cheating reps.
Bodybuilders do them to localize hypertrophy in specific regions, like the upper pecs or shoulders, to improve physique during competition. Most people aren't bodybuilding though and would not benefit from this style of training.
At best, you're short-changing the development of primary and secondary movers this way in the name of moving more weight (like not engaging the lats enough when you do a bent-elbow pull up).
At worst, the risk of injury goes way up (shoulder blowouts are super duper duper common in bench presses; doubly so for dumbbell bench presses, since there isn't a bar to stabilize your arms).
In my experience, I've found that it's better to go lower in weight and use an assistance exercise and/or increasing rest/recovery time and, if needed, decreasing volume instead of cheating reps when you're stuck.
Anecdotal example. When I was struggling with getting to 225x5x3 on the bench, I dropped back 20%, added weighted dips to my rotation and decreased bench press volume. Dips engage the pectoral and tricep muscles more directly, which contributes to forward progress on bench. I can do 250x3x6 now at around 9.5 RPE.
> Beginner lifters don't know what their max potential is and might overtrain by accident (because they are naturally strong and might do more reps to try and get to failure) or might not do enough volume to trigger the musculoskeletal adaptions needed to lift more weight (because they are not naturally strong and might tap out early).
I don't agree with most of your points here. I think listening to your body and training to failure with a focus on good form is appropriate at any training stage, and superior to any sort of X by X program.
Varying volume, exercise, weight, explosiveness and rest periods is all you really need. Your body will tell you when you're doing things right and wrong, I think it's most important to learn how to listen to it.
> I personally never recommend cheating reps.
I agree.
> it's better to go lower in weight and use an assistance exercise
Yep, that was kind of my whole point. Note the following sentence where I call out all the problems with BS cheat reps. And the sentence after that where I recommend decreasing weight.
Sounds like we're in vehement agreement on this.
For example, lifts that work small muscles, like the military overhead press or power cleans, might only go up by 1 lb/session, as a +5 lb progression might cause premature failed lifts. (You need to buy micro plates if you are serious about strength training; gyms won't have anything lower than 2.5lbs and if they do, they don't have many of them.)
Re: programming. anyone can make progress on 3x10 at first. The problem is that recovery will outrun your program as your training gets more advanced, which will eventually stall your progress early. See this article that talks about this: https://startingstrength.com/training/3-sets-of-5.
Now, 3x10 or more can be good for hypertrophy if you're using light weights. I use 3x12s in my program for big assistance lifts, like dips and pull/chin-ups, but you can't get big without getting strong, so why not do it right the first time? Elite physique bodybuilders can usually move insane weight for this reason.
I'm a big fan of double progression + RPE / RIR (rate of percieved exercion / repititions in reserve) for people who don't want to bother with percentages and complicated training cycles and platemath. You do 2-4 sets of an compound exercise with a setXrep goal in mind, i.e. 3x8 on bench with 135lbs. you start with 3x5, then add 1 rep to 1 set, i.e. 5/5/5 then 6/5/5 then 6/6/5 until you get to 8/8/8 with a RPE/RIR in mind, where RPE/RIR is how many reps you can still do after that set. Usually you start with 2-3 RIR = you pick weight you where you can do 8 reps but only do 5 (3 reps in reserve), and maybe at the end of the cycle you can do all 8 reps but still feel you can do another 2, so theoretically you went from 8 rep max to 10 rep max. Then add 5/10lbs and repeat. It's slow, it's boring, but it's simple, it's systematic and works pretty well, since +1 rep means you're always accumulating more volume each session until you reach the end where build up to doing 40% more volume/work @3x8 vs @3x5, and then you reset back to 3x5 and ramp up at a slightly higher baseline with slightly mroe weight.
(I do strength training in the gym.)
Something just clicked for me.
Maybe the reason I like weightlifting is because I can play with my phone in between sets. The actual exercise part is only a few seconds at a time, and only a fraction of the total time spent. Most of it is sitting around feeding my ADHD with the Internet while I recover between sets.
I tried swimming, for example, but it's just too boring. You can't do anything during the exercise other than stare at blurry blue tiles.
A fellow adhder.
For some reason, I can't hit the same state with running, I don't know why.
I don't have access to a pool where I live now, so I've recently started running 3 miles a day. I still haven't reached the point where I enjoy it, it feels like work the whole time.
I'm hoping that as I build more endurance and skill this will change, but so far I just really miss swimming.
Good suggestion though, thanks.
But still, I find strength training extremely boring and going to the gym annoying. I tried a few times but it never clicked for me – what am I missing?
Does anyone have other ideas for incorporating exercise into my daily routine? I enjoy a bit of walking, cycling, and doing 5-10 minute mobility exercises, but is that enough? Maybe I could find one or two strength exercises I can do quickly without getting boring or too difficult, ideally without any gear.
going with a friend maybe?
100% this can be replicated without a trainer - but having a clear and exact excercise plan for each session and someone to talk shit with between sets makes a world of difference.
Bodybuilding has certain vanity to it that I appreciate but don't participate in.
Every now and then I switch it up into functional stuff, usually aimed at mountain biking and climbing muscles.
But I always miss and come back to the compound lifts, the personal, sporting nature of powerlifting.
In a few minutes you can do some swings and Turkish get ups.
It’s the thing I’ve stuck with most consistently over the years. I think I heard about it from Tim Ferriss [0], and also found the book ‘Kettlebell Simple and Sinister’ by Pavel Tsatsouline to be a solid resource.
The idea that I could do something for just 10-20 minutes per week was appealing. From the link below:
”I…purchased one 53-pound kettlebell. I did nothing more than one set of 75 swings one hour after a light, protein-rich breakfast, twice a week on Mondays and Fridays. In the beginning, I couldn’t complete 75 consecutive repetitions, so I did multiple sets with 60 seconds between until I totaled 75. Total swing time for the entire week was 10–20 minutes.”
FWIW during the pandemic I bought a set of PowerBlocks [1] and a reasonably cheap folding bench, and I've never gone back to the gym.
I also do Myo reps for all my lifts except for the compound leg lifts: they're a lot faster to get through. The result is that most of my workouts are half an hour or less, 5-6 times a week, with no travel time.
As far as boring -- for one, between having a kid and working from home, that's about the only time I have to listen to podcasts or audiobooks. For two, I find the focus of having to push really hard to go to failure for a set requires a focus something like meditation. And there are so many different kinds of exercises you can do, I never really lose interest.
NÜOBELL is sold under the name SMRTFT[1] in the US, and as NÜOBELL in EU[2].
Nothing really, I think it's just a personality trait.
I have tried picking up pretty much every single form excercise the article mentions plus some more, and I just couldn't bring myself to keep on doing it. I even tried of really forcing myself and it made me feel more miserable. Now I essentially gave up and stopped trying to change myself in that area. Though I'm aware that it's not impossible that getting older might somehow put me mentally in a different state which doesn't make every repetitive excercise feel like an incredible chore.
Instead I just keep on doing what I like, but since I'm getting older I do in a slightly different way than I used to, to mimimize risk: excercise which requires technique, skill, creativity. Be it frisbee, skating, bmx, bouldering, ... A good session of those keeps my spirits up for several days. And it keeps the body in shape. But I do think twice before attempting things above my level, and usually just don't, and will back off in case something starts to feel wrong. Recovering from injuries takes waaay longer when you're 40+ than when you're 20 and it's just not worth it anymore for me. To be clear: sure, strength training has some skill to it, but let's be realistic here: it's not exactly in the same ballpark as what one needs for bouldering for instance.
Also nowadays bouldering is my main excercise and the thing is that unlike the OP I have a very good experience with it when it comes to health: I don't have pain, plus I have the impression that unlike typical strength training and basic yoga/pilates/... routines climbing at a somewhat decent level will make you use a ton of mostly upper body muscles you don't use otherwise (ok, you can do that with strength training but you're going to have to do quite a lot of different things to hit them all). And that seems to make the body more resilient against injuries. Anecdotal though.
Anyway, and now to the point: I'm convinced that as far as your body goes it's possible to make climbing akin to the mentioned 'boring tech' but without actually being boring. Do it long enough and become super aware about the moves, and there's no unknown failure mode.
Good tracking is the best way to make it interesting. If I know I did 120kg for 7 on the bench last week, I know I need to beat it either by increasing weight or increasing reps. I remember how hard it was but I've done it, so I need to beat it. It's fulfilling in ways that I find other workouts just can't be.
In terms of intensity, this video is great for working out if you're quantifying it correctly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77nX_bMe5fA
This is the case for some of us, yes, and for us, this is obvious.
What I've found, however, is that most normies don't actually have an internal drive to monotonically increase stats. For 90% of people, vanity is the only driver that works.
I don't think there's a fitness discipline out there that can put you in as much 'injury-free' pain as strength training does - at least, not acute pain like after a heavy leg press. It's almost sadomasochistic, which is why I think calling strength training boring is a little off the mark.
Again, I still don't think you understand the normie mind. They don't want a challenge. They don't want to suffer. They don't want to put in any effort at all. There is a very large market for anabolic steroids, SARMs, and GLP-1 agonists, and it's not because normies care about the struggle.
The only time I've ever seen a normie care about their fitness is when it's been connected to their vanity.
I like using the calorimeter on the cardio equipment because it can precisely quantify my progress (which is one of the few motivators I have). I've heard criticism that these aren't accurate, but as long as they are precise (I'm sure I'm mixing up the two, apologies) then they can measure progress.
Quantifying everything helps me count down, so I just keep saying "3 sets of 10 and I'm done on this machine". If I feel bored I'll go walk around the track and then do another 3 sets.
All of this is anecdotal noob drivel to anyone who seriously exercises, but I definitely speak from authority as someone who consistently struggles with motivation and has broken through it and relapsed into laziness multiple times.
You definitely don't have to force yourself into the gym. It'l just frustrate you, and you won't progress as much as you could if you enjoyed it.
I've been weightlifting for 12 years now, but I HATED the gym for a long time before it clicked for me. (Doing the Starting Strength program was "it" for me. It was something I could progress with that didn't feel like bro-science, and I could do it alone, as I HATE working out with other people. I'm not saying this to push SS on you; the point is that you are much more likely to do something consistently if you enjoy it!)
I would say that 30m of activity per day is enough for most people as long as it's consistent and your food diet is balanced. Believe it or not, Americans work out much less than this on average! (Average Exercise minutes have been going up over the years, fortunately.)
To the latter part of your question, I would look into bodyweight compound exercises. These don't require gear (resistance bands at most) and can be WAY more challenging than loaded weight training. You can also fit a circuit into 10min/day easily. This is how I kept my strength levels from regressing too much during COVID.
For me weightlifting is somewhat fun to figure out how to get control over my will to get my body to do things it doesn’t want to do. But it’s also rewarding in that I see changes in my body over time that make me feel good, and can only be achieved by putting in the effort; and it feels responsible long term since health outcomes in general are much better in people with muscle mass.
For me weightlifting is somewhat fun to figure out how to get control over my will to get my body to do things it doesn’t want to do. But it’s also rewarding in that I see changes in my body over time that make me feel good, and can only be achieved by putting in the effort; and it feels responsible long term since health outcomes in general are much better in people with muscle mass.
To be honest I don’t think there is any sport or physical activity that you can fully replace strength training with. All the fit-looking athletes you can imagine, also strength train to become that way.
> All the fit-looking athletes you can imagine, also strength train to become that way.
These are two flagrantly false assertions; to think they are actually true you have to be living inside a weight-lifting bubble.
(If you think he’s a quack and his message is wrong then I’d love to see some research pointing to the contrary, that having muscle mass is detrimental or at least does nothing significant for your long-term prospects)
The point about athletes is really more about pros, I should have been clear. I can guarantee you that almost every accomplished pro athlete in most sports, from running to swimming to cycling to basketball to gymnastics to soccer and the list goes on, incorporates a significant amount of strength training into their lives; there are probably some genetic freaks or sufficiently ‘roided mutants who don’t need to, but I assure you that Michael Phelps and LeBron James didn’t get their physiques purely by swimming and playing basketball.
And in case you think I’m talking about weight lifting for the purpose of competing at a bodybuilding show or strongman competition, that is not what I am referring to; I am referring to doing strength training to the extent that you have a reasonable amount of muscle mass. I don’t care if it’s traditional weight training or if it’s calisthenics or something else, so long as you don’t end up with no muscle tone and probably experiencing or prone to significant metabolic disease like most unfit people these days.
[1] https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/705161/outlive-by-p...
I agree that muscle tone is vitally important for human health and maintaining 'fitness' into middle and old age. However muscle tone and strength can come from many things, a lot of which don't need to deliberately include any form of 'strength training'.
I also agree that many modern professional athletes include specific strength training in their training regimes but this is a fairly recent phenomenon (e.g. tennis and swimming really only from approx. the 80s/90s on) and I don't see this as critical to them being 'fit-looking athletes'; it's only become necessary in a kind of arms race type of way, and in my opinion, with an unfortunate impact of modern competitive sport favouring 'power' over grace and technique. (I personally prefer the physiques of previous generations of athletes to those of most of the top athletes today, particularly the female ones.)
Why I responded fairly forcefully to your original comment is because it was a reply to someone who hadn't found strength training appealing and I perceived your reply as shutting down their thinking that some other option could be found that would build some strength and give other positive benefits of exercise to the questioner, including enjoyment and fulfillment.
Nothing, TBH it's just not for everyone. I like how boring strength training is. I like listening to podcasts for a couple hours and taking long rests between sets with little bursts of dopamine rush getting the perfect reps. But IMO there's also big genetic component, some people don't respond well to strength training, and after a while, unless you dedicate inordinant time to progression it does feel like pushing rope. Some people hit the wall very early, and the rewards feel meagre. Alternatively, if you build a good base after a few years of training, you can do fuck all to maintain and accrue all the beneifts (look good naked, increased metabolism).
nah, you still have to eat like a bird.
You have to eat more to lift more.
Doesn't mean you have to go full NFL Combine mode and eat 7000+ calories/day. But 1800 cals/day won't cut it (unless you are trying to cut weight, wherein progress will stall for a while).
I take it very seriously- I hired a professional online coach, lift 4x/week for 1-2 hours, do strength competitions several times per year, and carefully track my diet.
First, it isn’t boring in the least- I do mostly strongman, and it is essentially a martial art with a lot more complexity and diversity than plain barbell training. It takes all of my mental effort to do a complex movement with the right form under a heavy load- it is more mentally taxing than math, coding, etc. for me. It takes so much focus I never get bored, and I don’t use a phone or media between sets. I usually get into almost the same sort of flow as with coding, and can really "attack" the workout with all of my mental and physical effort... which feels amazing.
Secondly, it has radically transformed my health and personal life. Being physically strong is surprising useful in modern life- I can fix/move furniture, move appliances, push a stranded car out of the road, carry kids on my shoulders up a mountain, etc. easily. Also, I look strong and fit which does cause people to treat me better, and generally notice me more. I am an introverted, even shy person that when younger had a lot of trouble making friends, and especially talking to women. I generally despite 'vanity' and hate being judged on how I look, but the fact is people do, and I can't control it. Being fit, people approach me and start conversations more, and I have even had women I don’t know approach me, and ask me on dates, something that absolutely never happened before I was into lifting. I am happily married and not interested in that, but it is good for my overall social confidence and my marriage to generally be more attractive. Lastly, I also have a lot less pain- no more lower back pain, leg pain, etc. which I think were mostly caused by weak muscles from being so sedentary. The main downside is it does take a lot of time, money, and space for gym equipment- although the increased health/energy/well being are more than worth it IMO.
But as I got more busy I became less active. And especially after the first lockdowns, I remember that walking was somewhat hard.
And so, after burning out and quitting my job last year [0], I went to travel and focus on myself. I started to lift regularly. After eventually settling down, I now lift 4 times a week and box one time a week.
I feel way better. I look great and even my wife gives me compliments. And more important, no matter how bad I feel, going to the gym and lifting always seems to improve the mood and generate new ideas.
1 set 4kg, 1 set 10kg. With this you can do a lot of arm and shoulder exercises at home, and some (low weight) squats.
You won’t reach Olympic level fitness, but it will put you on track for a proper routine.
I’m a firm believer that doing something is better than making a perfect plan and not starting.
2-3 visits to the gym each week
Barbell squats or deadlift, and bench press per visit
5 sets of 5 reps, typically increasing weight each set such that the last set is really difficult (or you can only manage 2-3 reps)
Other activities which give you cardio, heart health, endurance, and mental stamina (a busy mind goes nuts on a drawn out activity like distance running :X, and that’s a sign that the mind needs some attention too)
The weight plan is if you have a proper facility. Real, free weights are ideal. But they aren’t always available, which is why I also like to practice various bodyweight exercises. Calisthenics can build a gorgeous body while making you very flexible and capable.
But my preference will always be relatively big/heavy free weights. This training raises my general sense of capability and power, as well as my energy level. Plus, when the rare situation comes along where you do actually need to move heavy thing (like a bulky rack server in its box!), you just do it without risking your back or even feeling very challenged.
Also, the minimalist 5x5, 2 exercise routine takes little time to complete. If you only went to the gym two days a week and did this, you would get very strong for about 1 hour of work per week. This is a big return on investment. Just make sure you try to increase your protein intake as well, because that can greatly reduce the recovery time where your muscles feel sore.
It's all tech bros that are like this.
>Finally: it should have not just a physical component, but also a skill component. Like many software engineers out there, I fell in love with the practice of software engineering. Bouldering had this too. It wasn't just about brute strength. There was a lot of skill in being a good climber and that keep it interesting.
I chuckled a little bit, because this stereotype, depicted wonderfully in this skit [1], is the single most reliable stereotype I've been able to rely on internationally when bonding with new researcher/programmers.
And I think if there's any value in "programmers perspective" it's just that. You have a certain "type" of passion you're drawn to. Some sports and exercises have that, and just as "waiting for motivation to do something boring" is harder than "doing things that motivates you / you think is cool." is often a better way to get things going [2], you should start with exercise with the perspective of following the trail that motivates you the most. You can optimize for efficiency later.
[1] If American Psycho were about programmers https://youtu.be/uHt01D6rOLI?feature=shared
The one they missed is the benefits to bone strength.
Having larger and larger muscles constantly trying to snap your bones in half causes them to build up as well.
Absolutely life changing for the elderly.
Apparently to do "proper" strength training you need to focus on the free weights, or compound lifts, rather than gym machines that guide your movements. I.E. squats, deadlifts, bench presses, etc.
The problem is that these are EXACTLY the type of exercises that an untrained, anterior pelvic tilted computer long-time dweller will do wrongly as they don't have the right flexibility or skills or knowledge about how to do them right.
I remember how close I was to messing up my back permanently with deadlifts, and that was in my 20s. Thinking about going to the gym and starting doing them again unsupervised at my age is, to me, madness.
I really wish if someone could give me some advice in this matter...
You can also check out "The Barbell Prescription" by Andy Baker. This book is like Starting Strength but for the 45+ demographic. (Interestingly, Starting Strength can be used for this demographic also.)
There have been documented instances of older folks reversing degenerative conditions after picking up strength training. You're also never old enough to get stronger!
That said, finding a trainer that knows what they are doing is the fastest way to progress. I'm biased towards the Starting Strength community as these trainers undergo an intensive program before they are certified to be an SS coach (on top of their past intensive training), but there are many other qualified trainers out there.
It's very rare to start doing a set of squats for example and all of a sudden have a catastrophic back tweak because of your bad form. Lifting is safer than most sports!
Check out this article on barbell medicine about pain and their other stuff too:
https://www.barbellmedicine.com/blog/pain-in-training-what-d...
Start light, take a class (or get a trainer if you're rich) to correct your form issues. I went to a class, and the coach literally had me doing dead-lifts on a broom-handle while others were stacking the 100# plates on the sides of their bars. Everybody was super encouraging too.
There are some specific dangers to free weights that aren't there with machines, e.g. if you are bench pressing outside a rack and you drop the weight on your throat, that's not the sort of thing that can happen with a machine, but... just bench press inside a rack if you don't have a spotter.
Either way, I'd recommend you get a trainer. Find a gym focusing on free weights. There's Starting Strength and affiliated gyms all over the country, there's barbell focused gyms everywhere, etc. At the very least when starting out, having someone that can help you get into proper form is really beneficial. You don't need to keep them long term, but they can be invaluable starting out.
There's also lots of places where you can record yourself working out and post a video and get feedback. You're not going to sever your spinal column squatting the bar or deadlifting with a pair of 10lb plates even if your form is garbage, so you can start light and have people help you get your form fixed.
Strength sports are statistically among the safest. They are significantly safer than team sports or even cycling.
If you ease into it, progress slowly, make sure pain does not go above 5/10, you are unlikely to injure yourself. In fact, you will likely prevent future injury. You're not going to injure your back lifting your nephew when you are deadlifting over 100 kg.
If you check out barbell medicine, Alan Thrall, or Dr. Mike Israetel on YouTube, you will find simple form tutorials.
Finally, of course you can get stronger using machines. Compound movements may be the most efficient ones but as long as your muscles are generating force close to their maximum capability, they will get a training impulse.
On the other hand, nothing like desire to improve numbers to drive one to unfuck their their body.
I don't lift weights to compete, I lift to be healthy, strong and generally fit. That means maximizing different aspects of my physical fitness overall, even if that means a particular aspect might be weaker than if I only focused on that exclusively.
My major struggle is the weight. I don't look in bad shape, but even eating very healthy, I just eat too much. I'm always hungry. I wish I could fix that, because I do have strength and I'm active now. Yet, my stomach still looks too big for the amount of activity I'm doing. I also walk 40 minutes per day very fast (bring kids to school and back) so the problem must be how much I eat, not the physical activity. Fought with that my whole life. The only time I mananged it I was 16 doing waterpolo 4 times a week, so I burned a lot of calories between growth and sport.
Btw What's going on with the "st" ligatures on this page??
So I've come to learn about hypotonia. Basically a lot of children with autism has lower percentile muscle mass [1]. I'm not sure anyone really knows why.
I would posit that the percentage of engineers or programmers with autism is higher than the general population. That shouldn't be a controversial statement.
So I wonder if one of the benefits here of strength training or just building muscle mass in general is that it counters hypotonia. Also, I suspect that the rules, rigidity and structure around workouts and diet probably appeals to a lot of neurodivergent people.
I had previously trained in powerlifting a decade or so earlier, so I was a _little_ prepared, but honestly the combination of the two was absolutely lifechanging.
I cannot recommend it enough.
My recommendation would be to rent a rowing machine and try that first.
Large numbers of reps are for looking good, not actually being strong. This leads to the rather fun paradox that body builders are quite weak for how much effort they spend on training, while someone looking like a fat mechanic will be much strong than you'd expect.
You should probably talk to someone who knows what they are doing.
Chances are you're doing damage to your body.
They should definitely get multiple expert opinions before continuing on this dangerous path a moment longer.
As long as you're training to the point that you are getting close to failure and you don't have efficiency in one particular area in mind, sure.
>as if magically you stop benefiting because you did 10 reps instead of 5
There are different methods of action that come into play doing low reps at very high weights vs. moderate reps at lower weights. Being strong isn't just about muscle gain - your central nervous system has to adapt when it comes these higher weights in a way that it doesn't with moderate weights. And if you're training properly, you're not doing the same weight if your sets are only 3-5 reps than if they're 10.
> There's particularly less of a case for low reps if you're not specifically training for powerlifting and competing in powerlifting.
Not everyone wants to be strong specifically for powerlifting competitions.
I fundamentally agree that most people are perfectly fine doing 10 reps and plenty of very effective strength focused programs will have sets of 10 being a common component.
In reality if you want to be serious about weight training, be it for strength or hypertrophy, these numbers aren't consistent anyway. You might primarily target one or the other, but basically everyone benefits from periodization.
Actually all forms of sports are always a personal perspective. Why ? Because we are all unique biologically and psychologically.
Your own perspective to sports changes over age and other factors (sickness, weight, private life ...etc). That's why you won't run 15 km tomorrow the way you did today.
In short I have used just as buggy crappy software as anyone, and I'm a programmer who has been hyperfocused for a day in all sorts of uncomfortable positions, for bonus points I have also worked intense physical labor in jobs where people died, just in case someone was going to play the manual labor card.
I have as yet encountered nothing worse than programming when it is going very badly. When it's going easy it's a piece of cake of course.
He even wrote about that if you had the time to read the article before commenting:
As a software engineer I though, If I should "pick boring tech", maybe I should also "pick boring sports". So I decided to pick something boring. Something old, 1000s of years old. My rationale being that for older sports there would be more easily available knowledge, failure modes would be better known, and I would be able to better understand if I was doing it wrong.They all have different effects, neither should be forgotten.
I do that and only enough cardio to get me into zone 2 during my lifting sessions.
I generally dislike article like this because they don’t tell you what their protocol is like so you can’t really know what they did.
For most people, hypertrophy specific protocol is better than strength protocol. Zone 2 cardio is better than HIT. But people tend to do the opposite. They want to break personal record every session, run fastest every run.
Source on this?
It's not that simple. For example, there is evidence that cardio does not impact pericardial adipose tissue mass, while resistance training does, while only being slightly less efficient than cardio for epicardial adipose tissue mass.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/article-abst...
Depending on what your primary risk factor is, it's possible that strength training is more beneficial.
Studies have shown people that engage in strength training tend to gain less age related visceral fat vs. people who solely engage in cardio, as well. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/oby.20949
But yes, the real answer is people should do both.
10 rep range still provides plenty of strength gains as long as you are pushing to near failure. It is less CNS adaptation than going much nearer to your 1RM or 10RPE for a fewer amount of sets, but it's not going to put you into the "weak bodybuilder with gigantic muscles" meme
https://www.strongerbyscience.com/powerlifters-should-train-... - tldr is periodization is good, and people should spend more time in the range considered hypertrophic than they do, even for strength training.
I don't really follow this advice because I don't enjoy bodybuilding style lifting or using machines, but it's led Nuckolls and others to a multitude of world record powerlifts.
Anyway, any forms of lifting weights that can elicit stress will see an increase in strength. Even running, at the highest level. The point I was trying to make is, for an average human being who wants to be just be healthier. Cardio has tremendous benefits and should be prioritized. They should also considered weight lifting, but choose protocol that emphasizes on hypertrophy than strength. That way, they get the benefit of strong enough and have more muscle tissue for inevitable decline when old age comes.
Lots are. Lots aren't. There are a variety of leagues and federations that test frequently, both in-competition and out of season.
We know they're almost certainly keeping these clan because many weight classes in Olympic weightlifting have had significant drops since the steroid era, being unable to overcome them even with significantly better training knowledge, processes, etc. - the testing is catching them. Many of those olympic lifters lag only slightly behind the similar tier of powerlifters in the drug tested leagues on squats, with the difference there being largely because for olympic lifters the high bar squat is an accessory exercise and for powerlifters they get the benefit of the low bar squat + it being their primary exercise, and a significant component of strength is part of your nervous system adapting to specific movements. If these powerlifters were all at supraphysiological levels of testosterone through gear, they'd be blasting way past the olympic lifters.
I also still don't totally agree with you on the other aspects, either. We have studies that show weightlifting and cardio are equally important for a very broad variety of risk factors. For example, preventing or managing type 2 diabetes is better done via weight training vs. cardio, way better blood sugar levels, etc., and being diabetic significantly raises your all cause mortality for a huge number of things. Do both. And most of the basic health benefits for lifting are at volumes that are pretty easy to achieve even on limited time, both for strength and hypertrophy based loads. And you'll get plenty of hypertrophy even on a strength-focused plan when you match for volume, you just won't be maximizing it the way bodybuilders are. As for age related decline, you still have to lift either way - it's not like you build up a large enough reserve to lift through your 50s on a super hypertrophy fixated program and then stop and still have muscles through the end of the decade. If you stop training, a bodybuilder isn't going to last much longer than a powerlifter on the having muscles part. If you keep training, both should be able to maintain proper amounts of muscle mass for their age and genetic makeup, and if you have concerns around joints or similar you can always move to a more hypertrophy specific workload when you get to that point. It's not like you've got to learn a whole new skillset.
I don't understand your arguments.
1) Exercise is good for you. The adaptations from exercise are good for you regardless of what kind of exercise you do.
2) Strength and cardio provide different adaptations. Neither is better or worse.
The most important thing is to do whichever one you enjoy the most, or both, or neither if you would enjoy some other exercise more.
Once you get bored, if you think you like the strength aspect of it, buy a power rack with a pullup attachment, a bench, a barbell and some weight plates. No shortage of those on second hand marketplaces.
With those items there is nothing you cannot train strength wise. Look up powerlifting programs and start your journey.
If you think you prefer the bodybuilding/aesthetic side of things, do the same as above but also get some dumbells for isolation stuff, and again look up programs online.
I will say that long term a gym is pretty good for bodybuilding, you just have more variety of machines that target specific muscles.
But for strength you can honestly do your whole strength program at home with a barbell, rack and bench.
If you find it all boring but still want to be fit, then sport will have longevity. Bikes, team sports, climbing, there are so many options. Callisthenics is surprisingly popular lately and builds great muscle while still being fun.
- do bodyweight fitness (https://reddit.com/r/bodyweightfitness), this does not require equipment except a pullup bar and maybe some gymnastic rings
- do a linear progression barbell training program, like starting strength https://startingstrength.com/get-started/programs this is definitely easier in the gym because you need a rack, barbell, bench and weights. But if you want to buy it yourself, just make sure you get the "real" barbells, which weigh 20 kg and have rotating "sleeves" at the end which have 50 mm diameter. This is the standard size, the thinner ones are crap.