Weights

"Curt James" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

J M Well-isn't-that-interesting? <[email hidden]> wrote:

<snip>
http://www.rustyiron.net/trollfaq.htm
<snip>

Attention is good.

Quoted message said:

and those who are just here to solicit attention.

Yes, and how much attention would you like?

For those who haven't clicked around his troll faq:

"Elementary school art teacher; perceives himself as unconvential, a
rebel and an outsider; perceives trolls as kindred spirits; not so
much a troll as a defender of trolls; frequently becomes agitated when
he or his associates are challenged; has similar posting history in
rec.arts.bodyart."

I offered that I don't appreciate the I'm-the-center-of-the-universe
types. You're obviously that type. And your description of me is
telling. Are those your sentiments or did you go line-by-line over my
posts in an attempt to create a description based on words I've posted
to Usenet? (Taking only a minute or two of your time, of course.)

But you're not a troll. Noooooo.

Perhaps you should review the definition of Internet troll available
at Wiki. You're a troll based on the text available there.

And, based on your own text, you contradict yourself. To wit:

On the one hand you offer that I am, "not so much a troll as a
defender of trolls" <http://www.rustyiron.net/trollist.htm> while on
the other hand (and on the very same page) you list me as one of the,
"Known MFW Trolls". Now which is it? Do you contradict yourself as a
standard practice?

For someone who states that /I/ become agitated upon being challenged,
*you* seem agitated based on other patrons of MFW having their own
opinion. How's that working out for you?

And when he gets agitated, you get this screaming sound - (reminds me of a
banshee)

OmManiPadmeOmelet said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

JRH said:

Have a great weekend - I always do! ;o)

TFIF!

I'm going to a New Years party for the first time in about 5 years, so I
anticipate a good weekend as well. <G> It's nice to have weekends off as
this year, I got 2 major holidays off by sheer default!
Will be visiting a very nice couple that we've not seen in a year or so.

What are you doing for NY Chas?

We have a houseful of guests for the long weekend, including a dinner
party tomorrow night and lots of 'Bolly' to see the New Year in.

Despite the alleged foxhunting ban, most of us will be hunting on
Monday, which is a lawn meet and not too strenuous, with a party on
completion.

It will be: Ugh! it's Tuesday next week, but I have the rest of the
week off, and will start back at the gym the following Monday somewhat
de-toxed and ready to fight the flab until Easter if necessary.

Have a great party Om mate - you know I intend to! ;o)

TFIF!

In article <[email hidden]>,

JRH said:

OmManiPadmeOmelet said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

JRH said:

Have a great weekend - I always do! ;o)

TFIF!

I'm going to a New Years party for the first time in about 5 years, so I
anticipate a good weekend as well. <G> It's nice to have weekends off as
this year, I got 2 major holidays off by sheer default!
Will be visiting a very nice couple that we've not seen in a year or so.

What are you doing for NY Chas?

We have a houseful of guests for the long weekend, including a dinner
party tomorrow night and lots of 'Bolly' to see the New Year in.

Despite the alleged foxhunting ban, most of us will be hunting on
Monday, which is a lawn meet and not too strenuous, with a party on
completion.

Sounds like a good start to the New Year.

Quoted message said:

It will be: Ugh! it's Tuesday next week, but I have the rest of the
week off, and will start back at the gym the following Monday somewhat
de-toxed and ready to fight the flab until Easter if necessary.

I heard that!
I've been off for a couple of weeks taking advantage of the cooler
weather to get quite a bit of yard work done. Lifting rocks and cleaning
up the property leaves me nearly as sore as a good workout but I look
forward to going back.

Quoted message said:

Have a great party Om mate - you know I intend to! ;o)

TFIF!

Back atcha mate! :-)

Cheers and Happy New Year!

Om -> who will be making a caviar coated cheese ball to take to the
party.......
--
Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-[censored]." -Jack Nicholson

email hidden said:

Thank you.

I am interested in your question and look forward to reading
information that you and others post on this subject.

When I work out, I use rubber bands alone and free weights alone as
distinct from using a combo of rubber bands and free weights when
doing specific exercises, like squats. Not that there's anything
wrong with doing that! There's a big difference between using rubber
bands and free weights for strength conditioning, but anyone who
thinks that rubber bands must be easy is in for a shock if s/he tries
them.

My unsolicited advice to you if you choose to continue to post to mfw
is not to get involved in the juvenile and endlessly boring
name-calling tirades that plague this ng. (You haven't done so to
this point.)

The chest expander though helpful is not as effective as weights. How
often do you work out with the expander and how has your body changed?
Just curious.

email hidden said:

The chest expander though helpful is not as effective as weights. How
often do you work out with the expander and how has your body changed?
Just curious.

Have you used rubber bands for any length of time?

I haven't done the classic front-of-chest "chest expander" exercise
more than a couple of times. The behind-the-back press out is pretty
cool. Lifeline's Power Pushup 2 and TNT cables (standing press) can
provide a grueling workout when the resistance is tough enough.

II wouldn't recommend using rubber bands to the exclusion of free
weights, but they've helped me make gains when using free weights

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

The chest expander though helpful is not as effective as weights. How
often do you work out with the expander and how has your body changed?
Just curious.

The main problem with spring exercise is incrementation -for instance with
a chest expander - after you progress from say 2 springs you need to add 50%
resistance to get to 3 springs. It's like benching 100 lbs and then going
straight to 150 lbs You would need to progress in increments of 5%

JMW said:

You indicated that your concern was bone loss. Although I am a big
proponent of free weights, I don't believe that heavy resistance
training counteracts bone loss as much as impact exercise. I have
previously discussed my views on that:

http://tinyurl.com/bbu78

Recently I've been hearing and seeing news clips on studies showing that
resistance exercise does not aid in the increase of bone mass or
counteract bone loss. I haven't found reference to them on the net yet
since there are massive amounts of hits that prepertuate the idea of
resistance training being an aid to bone density.

Does anyone have a link to any of them?

Stephen Nishio - don't care, still going to train...

Stephen said:

JMW said:

You indicated that your concern was bone loss. Although I am a big
proponent of free weights, I don't believe that heavy resistance
training counteracts bone loss as much as impact exercise. I have
previously discussed my views on that:

http://tinyurl.com/bbu78

Recently I've been hearing and seeing news clips on studies showing that
resistance exercise does not aid in the increase of bone mass or
counteract bone loss. I haven't found reference to them on the net yet
since there are massive amounts of hits that prepertuate the idea of
resistance training being an aid to bone density.

Does anyone have a link to any of them?

A recent study of 35 students at Hong Kong Polytechnic University,
using ultrasound techinques to measure bone mineral density (BMD),
found that high-impact, weight-bearing exercise was the key. The
finds of the highest BMD, as might be expected, were in the following
order:

Soccer players (high-impact, weight-bearing exercise)
Dancers (low-impact, weight-bearing exercise)
Swimmers (low-impact, non-weight-bearing exercise)
Sedentary (no exercise)

The soccer players and dancers had substantially higher BMD than the
other two groups, but soccer players were still the highest.

Yung PS, Lai YM, Tung PY, Tsui HT, Wong CK, Hung VW, Qin L. Effects of
weight bearing and non-weight bearing exercises on bone properties
using calcaneal quantitative ultrasound. Br J Sports Med. 2005
Aug;39(8):547-51.

There are a few studies that involve resistance training and elderly
people, and they do show that resistance training improves BMD, but
none of those studies appear to address high-impact exercise, probably
because that type of regimen would be risky within that population.

On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 09:33:55 +1000, "David" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

The chest expander though helpful is not as effective as weights. How
often do you work out with the expander and how has your body changed?
Just curious.

The main problem with spring exercise is incrementation -for instance with
a chest expander - after you progress from say 2 springs you need to add 50%
resistance to get to 3 springs. It's like benching 100 lbs and then going
straight to 150 lbs You would need to progress in increments of 5%

Incremental progression is possible with rubber bands although not to
the same degree as with weights. Mike Samson's cable set can be
adjusted incrementally by combining black and amber bands.
http://www.mikebrownsolutions.com/cables.htm
http://www.mikebrownsolutions.com/cablechart.htm

I don't own Samson cables; I have Lifeline-USA's Power Pushup 2
http://www.lifelineusa.com/products.cfm?categoryid=4&productid=12
It's an ingenious lilttle system as one can use 1, 2, or 3 rubber
cords per side. One R2 cord per side provides APPROXIMATELY
20 pounds of resistance at maximum extension; 3 R2s per side provide
60 pounds. R4s provide 40, 80, 120 lbs. R6s provide 60, 120, 180 lbs.
R8s provide 80, 160, 240 pounds. (I have blacks which I don't think
are made any longer; I think these are 100, 200, 300 lbs. (No, I was
never able to do a pushup with 3 blacks - not even close!) The point
is that incrementation is possible by changing the number and the
resistance level of the cords

TNT cable handles can also accommodate 3 per side. Mix and match
and you can make relatively small adjustments.

http://www.lifelineusa.com/products.cfm?categoryid=2&productid=6
thttp://www.lifelineusa.com/faq.cfm?categoryid=6

Quoted message said:

http://www.lifelineusa.com/products.cfm?categoryid=2&productid=3

When I use iron, I add weight in small increments. When I use rubber,
the increments I select are workable too.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 09:33:55 +1000, "David" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

The chest expander though helpful is not as effective as weights. How
often do you work out with the expander and how has your body changed?
Just curious.

The main problem with spring exercise is incrementation -for instance
with
a chest expander - after you progress from say 2 springs you need to add
50%
resistance to get to 3 springs. It's like benching 100 lbs and then going
straight to 150 lbs You would need to progress in increments of 5%

Incremental progression is possible with rubber bands although not to
the same degree as with weights. Mike Samson's cable set can be
adjusted incrementally by combining black and amber bands.
http://www.mikebrownsolutions.com/cables.htm
http://www.mikebrownsolutions.com/cablechart.htm

I don't own Samson cables; I have Lifeline-USA's Power Pushup 2
http://www.lifelineusa.com/products.cfm?categoryid=4&productid=12
It's an ingenious lilttle system as one can use 1, 2, or 3 rubber
cords per side. One R2 cord per side provides APPROXIMATELY
20 pounds of resistance at maximum extension; 3 R2s per side provide
60 pounds. R4s provide 40, 80, 120 lbs. R6s provide 60, 120, 180 lbs.
R8s provide 80, 160, 240 pounds. (I have blacks which I don't think
are made any longer; I think these are 100, 200, 300 lbs. (No, I was
never able to do a pushup with 3 blacks - not even close!) The point
is that incrementation is possible by changing the number and the
resistance level of the cords

TNT cable handles can also accommodate 3 per side. Mix and match
and you can make relatively small adjustments.

http://www.lifelineusa.com/products.cfm?categoryid=2&productid=6
thttp://www.lifelineusa.com/faq.cfm?categoryid=6

Quoted message said:

http://www.lifelineusa.com/products.cfm?categoryid=2&productid=3

When I use iron, I add weight in small increments. When I use rubber,
the increments I select are workable too.

Yes I can see that incrementation would work- I was thinking of the basic
chest exercisers that I have seen in the past

Thanks for all the info. I looked at some of it, and added others to my
favorites to look at later. There were a few questions asked. Here are
the answers: I am 50. I do do some impact exercise, running only about
4 miles, once a week now. I've worked out with a chest expander for
about 10 years, for about 5 days a week, and have put on about 15
pounds of muscle. I am going to experiment with the combination of
strands and weights, unless anyone has some suggestions. I was thinking
today that since I do 2-3 exercises per muscle group per sesion, I
would just, for now, substitute one of the strand exercises with a
weight exercise. That way, I am still doing the same number of
exercises, just changing what it is done with.

What I meant was substitute one of the strand exercises with a weight
exercise for each muscle group that I workout each day. For example, If
I was doing 2 biceps, 2 triceps, 2 shoulder exercises with the
expander, then I would do 1 each with the expander, and one each with
the weights.

Stephen said:

JMW said:

A recent study of 35 students at Hong Kong Polytechnic University,
using ultrasound techinques to measure bone mineral density (BMD),
found that high-impact, weight-bearing exercise was the key. The
finds of the highest BMD, as might be expected, were in the following
order:

Soccer players (high-impact, weight-bearing exercise)
Dancers (low-impact, weight-bearing exercise)
Swimmers (low-impact, non-weight-bearing exercise)
Sedentary (no exercise)

The soccer players and dancers had substantially higher BMD than the
other two groups, but soccer players were still the highest.

I have seen numerous studies that indicate significant differences in
BMD for groups of people with lifestyles with vaiours levels of
activity. From much of what I have seen, though, there is not the same
definition of differences in gains of losses between the various groups
DURING a study period. For example, significant differences in BMD were
noted between, say, rugby players and swimmers but less significant
differences in NET gain of BMD during study periods were quoted for
different groups. When a study quotes a diffrence of 1-2 percent for
groups of 20, I tend to think that is within a margin of error.

Perhaps the study period was not long enough and the net difference
would continue to diverge for years.

Exactly. There has been at least one large longitudinal study. It
also has much to do with serum levels of testosterone and its
subsequent conversion to estrogen.

Stephen said:

When a study quotes a diffrence of 1-2 percent for groups of 20, I
tend to think that is within a margin of error.

These sorts of statements are only true for distributions where the
variance is a well defined function of the mean. Bone density is
probably not one of those.

If the true means for 2 normal groups are 99 and 100, with the common
variance of 1, there will be 87% power to detect that 1% difference at
the 5% level, using samples of only 20 people for each group, i.e. 87%
of p-values will be smaller than 0.05.

But if both means are precisely 100, then no matter how big the sample
size is, only 5% of p-values will be smaller than 5%.

In article <[email hidden]>,

JMW said:

Stephen said:

JMW said:

You indicated that your concern was bone loss. Although I am a big
proponent of free weights, I don't believe that heavy resistance
training counteracts bone loss as much as impact exercise. I have
previously discussed my views on that:

http://tinyurl.com/bbu78

Recently I've been hearing and seeing news clips on studies showing that
resistance exercise does not aid in the increase of bone mass or
counteract bone loss. I haven't found reference to them on the net yet
since there are massive amounts of hits that prepertuate the idea of
resistance training being an aid to bone density.

Does anyone have a link to any of them?

A recent study of 35 students at Hong Kong Polytechnic University,
using ultrasound techinques to measure bone mineral density (BMD),
found that high-impact, weight-bearing exercise was the key. The
finds of the highest BMD, as might be expected, were in the following
order:

Soccer players (high-impact, weight-bearing exercise)
Dancers (low-impact, weight-bearing exercise)
Swimmers (low-impact, non-weight-bearing exercise)
Sedentary (no exercise)

The soccer players and dancers had substantially higher BMD than the
other two groups, but soccer players were still the highest.

Would be interesting to see where bodybuilders or strength athletes
would fall in that last. I have a hard time seeing them below say
dnacers and swimmers. Do we have such data?

Quoted message said:

--
Will Brink @ http://www.brinkzone.com/

WillBrink said:

JMW said:

Stephen said:

JMW wrote:
> You indicated that your concern was bone loss. Although I am a big
> proponent of free weights, I don't believe that heavy resistance
> training counteracts bone loss as much as impact exercise. I have
> previously discussed my views on that:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/bbu78

Recently I've been hearing and seeing news clips on studies showing that
resistance exercise does not aid in the increase of bone mass or
counteract bone loss. I haven't found reference to them on the net yet
since there are massive amounts of hits that prepertuate the idea of
resistance training being an aid to bone density.

Does anyone have a link to any of them?

A recent study of 35 students at Hong Kong Polytechnic University,
using ultrasound techinques to measure bone mineral density (BMD),
found that high-impact, weight-bearing exercise was the key. The
finds of the highest BMD, as might be expected, were in the following
order:

Soccer players (high-impact, weight-bearing exercise)
Dancers (low-impact, weight-bearing exercise)
Swimmers (low-impact, non-weight-bearing exercise)
Sedentary (no exercise)

The soccer players and dancers had substantially higher BMD than the
other two groups, but soccer players were still the highest.

Would be interesting to see where bodybuilders or strength athletes
would fall in that last. I have a hard time seeing them below say
dnacers and swimmers. Do we have such data?

The vast majority of studies involving BMD are directed at elderly
populations. I don't imagine one can easily get funding for studying
the BMD of bodybuilders.

chest.expander said:

I've worked out with a chest expander for the last 10 years. I just
bought a 200 pound weight set. I bought it because I read that weights
strenghten the bones better. I'll now be able to compare the two
methods of working out.

You'll be able to do many more exercises with free weights than a
machine/contraption can.

http://www.exrx.net/Lists/Directory.html

email hidden said:

What I meant was substitute one of the strand exercises with a weight
exercise for each muscle group that I workout each day. For example, If
I was doing 2 biceps, 2 triceps, 2 shoulder exercises with the
expander, then I would do 1 each with the expander, and one each with
the weights.

I Experiment.

There are quite a number of exercises that can be performed with
strands.

View product instructions for
TNT cables
http://www.lifelineusa.com/products.cfm?categoryid=2&productid=6

Power Pushup 2
http://www.lifelineusa.com/products.cfm?categoryid=4&productid=12

other Lifeline products
http://www.lifelineusa.com/products.cfm?categoryid=4
http://www.lifelineusa.com/products.cfm?categoryid=13
and others

Check out
http://www.lifelineusa.com/products.cfm?categoryid=30&productid=92

and

Strength Band Training by Phil Page and Todd Ellenbecker Copyright
2005 Human Kinetics

If you're trying to get stronger, a small number of very productive
exercises will get you there

An important consideration for you is how to combine elastic
resistance training/progressive variable resistance with isotonic
exercise.

See Mike Mahler's article http://www.mikemahler.com/store/TNTcable.htm
for an example of how one's standing press with free weights might be
improved by adding a cable press. The basic idea is that forced
acceleration can help you learn to blast through your sticking points.

On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 15:12:49 +1000, "David" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 09:33:55 +1000, "David" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
> The chest expander though helpful is not as effective as weights. How
> often do you work out with the expander and how has your body changed?
> Just curious.

The main problem with spring exercise is incrementation -for instance
with
a chest expander - after you progress from say 2 springs you need to add
50%
resistance to get to 3 springs. It's like benching 100 lbs and then going
straight to 150 lbs You would need to progress in increments of 5%

Incremental progression is possible with rubber bands although not to
the same degree as with weights. Mike Samson's cable set can be
adjusted incrementally by combining black and amber bands.
http://www.mikebrownsolutions.com/cables.htm
http://www.mikebrownsolutions.com/cablechart.htm

I don't own Samson cables; I have Lifeline-USA's Power Pushup 2
http://www.lifelineusa.com/products.cfm?categoryid=4&productid=12
It's an ingenious lilttle system as one can use 1, 2, or 3 rubber
cords per side. One R2 cord per side provides APPROXIMATELY
20 pounds of resistance at maximum extension; 3 R2s per side provide
60 pounds. R4s provide 40, 80, 120 lbs. R6s provide 60, 120, 180 lbs.
R8s provide 80, 160, 240 pounds. (I have blacks which I don't think
are made any longer; I think these are 100, 200, 300 lbs. (No, I was
never able to do a pushup with 3 blacks - not even close!) The point
is that incrementation is possible by changing the number and the
resistance level of the cords

TNT cable handles can also accommodate 3 per side. Mix and match
and you can make relatively small adjustments.

http://www.lifelineusa.com/products.cfm?categoryid=2&productid=6
thttp://www.lifelineusa.com/faq.cfm?categoryid=6

Quoted message said:

http://www.lifelineusa.com/products.cfm?categoryid=2&productid=3

When I use iron, I add weight in small increments. When I use rubber,
the increments I select are workable too.

Yes I can see that incrementation would work- I was thinking of the basic
chest exercisers that I have seen in the past

I had a spring cable set as a teen. All I can remember is "Ouch!"

Quoted message said: