Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 1, 2007 22:38:57 GMT
Be careful with that bowflex so that you are pushing and pulling the way that the joints are suppose to work. You do not want to be doing any sort of arm-wrestling movements. Keep the stress on the muscles, not the ligaments. I know two guys, in there 50's, who hurt themselves while trying to pull the bars into position. That is what you need to be careful about. Other then that, you should get a good workout. Try to work all the muscles of the body. Don't favor certain ones more then other.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2007 12:31:14 GMT
Thanks Tsafa, I will keep that in mind. My 13 year old son hurt himself armwrastling with a buddy at school. It took a long time for that to heal up. FB
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2007 1:01:33 GMT
Try to work all the muscles of the body. Don't favor certain ones more then other. Excellent advice! A theory that I think has merit is to balance movements... rate of perceived exertion is probably a good indicator to go by (i.e. effort out of 10, trying to balance load isn't always a good starting point) and then work (volume * load) seems like the next best option. (I think I stole this theory from Alwyn Cosgrove.) For example with the scapula; balancing protraction with retraction (balancing load can be useful here) and elevation with depression, for the arm; balancing internal with external rotation (load can be balanced here), flexion with extension and abduction with adduction, for the elbow; balancing flexion with extension. The lower limb is a bit different and I wouldn't balance hip flexion and extension, but I would try to with abduction and adduction and also flexion and extension of the knee (load can be balanced here). These ideas have some limited support in evidence from isokinetic and injury analysis studies. For movement terminology check out exrx.net/Lists/Articulations.html (but ignore the part about muscle contributions... they are sometimes innacurate).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2007 5:45:54 GMT
Just a note on cardio... I just saw a news article with a highly regarded trainer, who used to sing the praises of cardio for weight loss - he now says that cardio for weight loss should only be about 10% or less of your total workout - This does not apply however to strength training, which most of us here are discussing, but I thought it may put some new info out there for you guys. I too have had some injuries with my hip, back, ribs and shoulder, all on the right side that I am in the gym trying to work out. Physio people seem to be stuck after giving me a few local workouts, so I'm taking it upon myself to work the entire body, and focus on symmetry- something I have been lacking for a while. My Tai Chi has helped me keep muscles limber and painless, and the weight training has helped with the Tai Chi - Ican focus on the muscle groups I am using it seems... Coming back from injuries at the gym is a good lesson in humility - I am the farmboy Hank was talking about - I have big legs from years of horse riding, and some Bull riding. Now, I'm 6'1", pressing an empty bar, surrounded by girls throwing weights around like air.....Good thing I already have a girlfriend, I'm not making any impressions there.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2007 11:20:27 GMT
Hi sandman, Research is showing (what many people have known from experience, sans quantification) that the oxygen debt or 'excess post exercise oxygen consumption' from intense training is very beneficial for weight loss. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed&Cmd=ShowDetailView&TermToSearch=11882927This study estimated (using the data averages) that an extra 773 calories were burned over 39 hours post exercise. This study differs from others as it continued to measure oxygen consumption until it returned to the baseline. It is still a good idea to do aerobic exercise as there are many health benefits.
|
|
|
Post by Brendan Olszowy on Jun 5, 2007 12:48:34 GMT
I agree vyapada. I interpret it this way. Hi Intensity training really cranks up your body's metabolic fire and takes longer for it to return to the normal compared to cardio exersizes. Thus in the following 39 hrs (for example) you burn heaps more callories metabolically, even at rest.
Training with cardio burns some more calories during the workout, but as you return to normal much quicker, the overall effect is less calories burned, compared to high intensity weight training.
Also as you say, cardio has its benefits to the cardio-vascular and pulmonary systems, and should not be overlooked as an integral part of training. I call my dirt bike riding cardio.
So yeah, wot he said.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2007 15:09:55 GMT
Since I hit 30 I just can't lose any weight. I need to lose about 30 lbs of gut and face fat.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2007 2:14:45 GMT
Hey Jason, Over the years I tried everything; never did anythign but gain. But since I simply cut out 95% of my carbs and sugars, I have lost about 30lbs in the last few months. That is all I did. Dave
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on Jun 6, 2007 2:20:46 GMT
I used to be getting a little pudgy at 6'0" 180 lbs. Now I'm 170 and finally gettting some muscle definition just by cutting down a little on what I eat. Almost no effort whatsoever. I'm still kinda muscle-less. At least in my right arm.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2007 2:59:51 GMT
I work evenings so I have a tendency to eat late at night(a large meal) and then hit the sack. I am also a Coke addict(the cola guys c'mon). I am 6'1" and weigh in at 250 lbs. I stopped working out after I left the Army and have put on 30 lbs. I need to get back down to 220 lbs where I am most comfortable. Hey, but I am only a 36 in the waist and if I can get to about 230-235 I can get back in my 34's.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2007 3:01:18 GMT
I used to be getting a little pudgy at 6'0" 180 lbs. Now I'm 170 and finally gettting some muscle definition just by cutting down a little on what I eat. Almost no effort whatsoever. I'm still kinda muscle-less. At least in my right arm. I have a feeling I know what workuot you pull to keep the left in shape.......
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on Jun 6, 2007 3:03:21 GMT
You sick little man, no! Well ok, not "no" but I...um...Wow.
I'm a left handed person and my right hand is just about useless. It just seems more extreme on me than others I guess.
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on Jun 6, 2007 3:06:45 GMT
I'm a 34-36 in the waist, but I've got a large pelvis. Little of that is fat, although I probably should be a 32. Ah well, give it another 3 weeks or so and I'll be back down to 32. Problem is, then none of my pants will fit in the waist, and they already don't fit in the legs (I'm tallish).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2007 3:13:21 GMT
I'm a 34-36 in the waist, but I've got a large pelvis. awesome. jason
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2007 9:13:50 GMT
Pelvis, yes that's what I thought he said ! Really ! ;D ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2007 10:13:46 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2007 10:23:38 GMT
Nice one vyapada. Karma for the link, just between you and me apparently Rammstein has big hips, oh no ..... ;D ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2007 12:54:24 GMT
Whee! I have positive karma! Well chopchop, we'd better keep it just between us - we wouldn't want the whole internet to find out about his little 'problem'.
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on Jun 6, 2007 13:37:55 GMT
Hey that was confidential information!
Last time I tell YOU anything juicy!
My hips aren't really "big" it's tht they aren't small...It's not really noticable.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2007 13:44:20 GMT
I'm a 34-36 in the waist, but I've got a large pelvis. Little of that is fat, although I probably should be a 32. Ah well, give it another 3 weeks or so and I'll be back down to 32. Problem is, then none of my pants will fit in the waist, and they already don't fit in the legs (I'm tallish). Mate you should have said semprini not pelvis. I would have karma'd you for that. ;D ;D
|
|