Pretty much just copying and summarizing some from my course reader but I thought it might be useful: Myths Heavy Weights cause injury Light Weights are safer and more effective than building muscle Resistance exercise increases maximal aerobic fitness significantly One set is as beneficial as multiple sets [Insert Exercise or diet here] is the best - Different people respond to different stuff so what works for some may not work for you. Weight belts are useful - Weakens trunk muscles and making one more susceptible to poor posture and back problems. Paradigms -Training Programs work for as long as the time it takes the body to adapt to it (i.e. Progressive Resistance) -Workouts shouldn't last longer than 1 hour for muscle strength training -Recovery from workouts is essential for adaptation -Train large muscle groups first -Vary your workouts -There is no magic number of reps and sets and any program must be individualized for maximum results There's more but I think this is a good starting point for now.
Hardly. There've been studies that show this (you'd have to pay for the journal though). Your body, back specifically, adapts to using weight belts and becomes weaker when it's off. This is because when you wear it, you no longer rely on your abdominals to support your weight. With less use of them, they deteriorate and go weaker. Weight belts are simply not necessary for most exercises.
Sorry, I don't care what the "journal" says. I am going by my own experience over the last 20 years, having used and not used weight belts at various times. It's an awful big and silly assumption that someone who used a weight belt wouldn't work out their abs separately.
Both of those are statements are false. Some studies to back up my claim: http://baye.com/high-intensity-strength-training-more-aerobic-than-aerobics/#more-85 *More mentions studies than anything, but still valid points. http://www.asep.org/files/OttoV4.pdf I understand you simply copied them from your textbook, but textbooks have proven to be wrong before-especially in the areas of history and exercise science. Look at the abstract for the second article (link). It hast to do with American College of Sports Medicine's stance(s) on resistance training. If one of the national boards is that wrong, with all the evidence at their disposal, how much more wrong do you think a textbook writer(s) has the opportunity to be??? This is very sad, and in no way am I coming down on you for this, Regan, but it burns me to no end some of the fallacies being perpetrated by our colleges in this area. Also, I can't find a link to it, but the West Point Study done in 1975 by Arthur Jones and verified by Dr. Kenneth Cooper (independently) refutes the first 'myth' as well. And to touch on something Rick complained about: I would say weight belts have their place. While you are correct in that not wearing one will increase strength in lumbar and lower abdominal region, wearing one will help aid in correct posture during exercise(no arching), as well as allow one to lift slightly more weight than would be possible without the support of a weight belt. Personally, I don't see the point unless you are in powerlifting or WSM, but there are benefits to wearing a weight belt.
I wear a weight belt for military presses and other overhead lifts just to give my back a little extra support. I've injured it in the past and it seems to give me a little extra support. I have to say, that is one of the funniest pics I've seen in awhile Jcow.
how? I have seen plenty of people do serious workouts without doing serious ab work outs. It isn't baseless. They are different work outs with different ideals.
You've seen people do serious workouts without doing serious ab workouts...so? That wasn't the question. I said it was not a good assumption that just because someone used a weight belt that they didn't do ab workouts to strengthen their core.
